Anyone have this book?
George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization
George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal
-
- KVRAF
- 5175 posts since 29 Apr, 2006
-
- KVRAF
- 4071 posts since 4 Mar, 2008 from Near Pittsburgh
I don't, but it looks interesting thanks for tipping us off to it. Concept seems to make sense at a glance and his body of work and experience leads me to believe he's not full of shart. Thanks again.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5175 posts since 29 Apr, 2006
Cool, I just came across it and wow..
-
- KVRAF
- 4071 posts since 4 Mar, 2008 from Near Pittsburgh
Definitely interesting - if you have a solid handle on theory and improvisation I think this might be a nice way to at least get a fresh perspective and break out of a rut (even if only for a distraction, like picking up a different instrument does for me).memyselfandus wrote:Cool, I just came across it and wow..
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5175 posts since 29 Apr, 2006
Check this out
http://www.lydianchromaticconcept.com/p ... um.php?f=2
some cool info for people who have the book and looks like there
is a bit more interesting stuff on there..
http://www.lydianchromaticconcept.com/p ... um.php?f=2
some cool info for people who have the book and looks like there
is a bit more interesting stuff on there..
-
- KVRAF
- 4071 posts since 4 Mar, 2008 from Near Pittsburgh
I officially really like and really hate you at the same time 
As if I didn't have enough things to occupy my time Thanks again, for the forum link this time. I may have to brush up on the old jazz improv "standard style" first, before climbing on a new horse. I'll ask some of my old music-school buddies if they've dabbled in this too, good coffee conversation at least.
As if I didn't have enough things to occupy my time Thanks again, for the forum link this time. I may have to brush up on the old jazz improv "standard style" first, before climbing on a new horse. I'll ask some of my old music-school buddies if they've dabbled in this too, good coffee conversation at least.-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5175 posts since 29 Apr, 2006
Im in the same boat with not having enough time in the day already!
I love finding this type of stuff but at the same time its like dam..
now another 4 hour night of sleep..
I love finding this type of stuff but at the same time its like dam..
now another 4 hour night of sleep..
-
- KVRAF
- 10286 posts since 17 Sep, 2004 from Austin, TX
Oddly enough I linked LCCTO here a few times and no one seemed terribly interested. Then again I imagine very few of us here come from an improv background.
-
- KVRAF
- 1585 posts since 13 Nov, 2005 from St. Paul
Good god that book is expensive!
Runagate, others--can you explain how this system works relative to regular functional harmony in a nutshell? I've played modal improv for years and picked up the idea of using maj7(11+) as a tonic from transcriptions, but I don't know the formal theory of tonal gravity that Russell advocates.
Runagate, others--can you explain how this system works relative to regular functional harmony in a nutshell? I've played modal improv for years and picked up the idea of using maj7(11+) as a tonic from transcriptions, but I don't know the formal theory of tonal gravity that Russell advocates.
-
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
in a nutshell, it takes off from the general idea in bebop that the I7 b5 and the bV7 b5 chord are equivalent.
then it tries to get you out of the whole ii-V-I circle as the whole basis to work from
then it tries to get you out of the whole ii-V-I circle as the whole basis to work from
-
- KVRAF
- 1585 posts since 13 Nov, 2005 from St. Paul
Jancivil-wow, you said a lot in a very little space there! I don't know why, but that helped a lot of things click for me.
Fortunately, I was able to find a copy of this at the Uni library to look through. I think I sort of get the principle now, it's something close to what I've heard from others in an unorganized way, and that I've been leaning towards. David Baker's book on modern jazz improv has a lot of ideas that I now recognize as being extensions of the Russell approach, but Baker centers his thinking on pentatonic modes.
So far, I've recognized from Russell that you can play everything modally and still have a concept of "home" or "tonal gravity" as he says it, as long as you get the right match between chord and its mode (chordmode). I've constrained my left hand too much to outlining chords but there's a ton of options that seem open when I think the Russell way. I had a very pleasant hour just deforming "Night and Day" by Cole Porter with different root notes and using clusters of tones from the modes that cross barlines rather than always changing harmony on the bar.
The idea of progressively more outgoing modes gives a guide for how to introduce more distantly related tones into one's playing without just playing randomly--keeping things in some sort of system. But I don't know all the implications of this system even though the scales are largely familiar to me from more conventional harmony (e.g., I can see whole tone, diminished, half-diminished, harmonic minor ascending, and mixolydian modes clearly in there).
I'm still not entirely sure what to do if I'm working with a standard, because I get torn between using Lydian vertical concepts and horizontal solos (I suppose both are legitimate), but I can see this having a profound effect on the way one would approach a tune if it's internalized.
Fortunately, I was able to find a copy of this at the Uni library to look through. I think I sort of get the principle now, it's something close to what I've heard from others in an unorganized way, and that I've been leaning towards. David Baker's book on modern jazz improv has a lot of ideas that I now recognize as being extensions of the Russell approach, but Baker centers his thinking on pentatonic modes.
So far, I've recognized from Russell that you can play everything modally and still have a concept of "home" or "tonal gravity" as he says it, as long as you get the right match between chord and its mode (chordmode). I've constrained my left hand too much to outlining chords but there's a ton of options that seem open when I think the Russell way. I had a very pleasant hour just deforming "Night and Day" by Cole Porter with different root notes and using clusters of tones from the modes that cross barlines rather than always changing harmony on the bar.
The idea of progressively more outgoing modes gives a guide for how to introduce more distantly related tones into one's playing without just playing randomly--keeping things in some sort of system. But I don't know all the implications of this system even though the scales are largely familiar to me from more conventional harmony (e.g., I can see whole tone, diminished, half-diminished, harmonic minor ascending, and mixolydian modes clearly in there).
I'm still not entirely sure what to do if I'm working with a standard, because I get torn between using Lydian vertical concepts and horizontal solos (I suppose both are legitimate), but I can see this having a profound effect on the way one would approach a tune if it's internalized.
-
- KVRAF
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities
Lots of these expensive 'programs' are little more than adaptations of symmetrical modes for use in diatonic settings.
The most popular symmetrical modes are the octatonic or diminished scale (alterations of whole and half steps), the whole tone scale (all whole steps), and the sextatonic scale (actually it is called all sorts of things, but it's pattern is an alteration of half steps and minor thirds).
The interesting thing about these modes is that they share harmonies with standard diatonic scales. Both octatonic and sextatonic modes contain standard major and minor chords. The former also contains standard seventh chords and diminished seventh chords, while the latter contains augmented triads. These modes themselves have no strong sense of diatonic tonal center, because they are symmetrical within the octave (which is why Messiaen called them 'modes of limited transposition'). Consequently they can be used to enrich ones tonal palette without disturbing the diatonic underpinnings.
Of course symmetrical modes have thousands of uses, but as they are atonal, and atonality is about as common as 11/8 time in popular music, most of these uses are rather obscure.
George Perle, Elliot Antokoletz, and John Rahn are all authors who have written extensively on the use of symmetrical modes. Their books are often expensive these days, but they are also quite common in libraries.
The most popular symmetrical modes are the octatonic or diminished scale (alterations of whole and half steps), the whole tone scale (all whole steps), and the sextatonic scale (actually it is called all sorts of things, but it's pattern is an alteration of half steps and minor thirds).
The interesting thing about these modes is that they share harmonies with standard diatonic scales. Both octatonic and sextatonic modes contain standard major and minor chords. The former also contains standard seventh chords and diminished seventh chords, while the latter contains augmented triads. These modes themselves have no strong sense of diatonic tonal center, because they are symmetrical within the octave (which is why Messiaen called them 'modes of limited transposition'). Consequently they can be used to enrich ones tonal palette without disturbing the diatonic underpinnings.
Of course symmetrical modes have thousands of uses, but as they are atonal, and atonality is about as common as 11/8 time in popular music, most of these uses are rather obscure.
George Perle, Elliot Antokoletz, and John Rahn are all authors who have written extensively on the use of symmetrical modes. Their books are often expensive these days, but they are also quite common in libraries.
-
- KVRAF
- 1585 posts since 13 Nov, 2005 from St. Paul
Good point, I do think it's not terribly different than some of the other methods for thinking about harmonic relationships outside of the common practice period, but something about this is clicking for me right now. It seems extremely similar to the David Baker method I've written about, or Steven Cormier's book "Modal Music Composition."
I have used the diminished and whole tone scales (too much, probably) but always driving straight into conventional tonic chords. The thing I'm getting from Russell is that I can treat the tonic exactly as freely as if it were one of the non-diatonic modes. So the LCCTO creates gradations of inside and outside playing rather than strict on/off inside/outside dichotomies. But that's pretty much what all music since Debussy (or even Wagner) has been driving at, don't you think? That's the thing that I think is clearer to me now.
I do have one point I'd like to dig into a little deeper. I most certainly do agree with you that symmetric scales are not common in popular music and probably never will be. But I don't think diatonic music based on conventional harmonic practice is common in popular music either. Diatonic music is historically and globally far less common than modal music, as is noted towards the end of Russell's book. The popular music of Europe didn't have clear harmonic progressions until the standardization of Lutheran church hymns, so there's a thousand or more years of documented European practice that isn't diatonic. Even the standard blues progression doesn't really fit into diatonic theory unless you completely deform the concept of diatonic into nothingness. Most contemporary pop music isn't really diatonic either. You could start with the Beatles or Stevie Wonder and move forward demonstrating dozens of musicians who violate common practice rules for harmonic resolution all the time. Movie soundtracks use more whole tone scales for "atmosphere" than all the French composers put together.
Which isn't really to disagree with anything you said. I'm just thinking through an idea.
I have used the diminished and whole tone scales (too much, probably) but always driving straight into conventional tonic chords. The thing I'm getting from Russell is that I can treat the tonic exactly as freely as if it were one of the non-diatonic modes. So the LCCTO creates gradations of inside and outside playing rather than strict on/off inside/outside dichotomies. But that's pretty much what all music since Debussy (or even Wagner) has been driving at, don't you think? That's the thing that I think is clearer to me now.
I do have one point I'd like to dig into a little deeper. I most certainly do agree with you that symmetric scales are not common in popular music and probably never will be. But I don't think diatonic music based on conventional harmonic practice is common in popular music either. Diatonic music is historically and globally far less common than modal music, as is noted towards the end of Russell's book. The popular music of Europe didn't have clear harmonic progressions until the standardization of Lutheran church hymns, so there's a thousand or more years of documented European practice that isn't diatonic. Even the standard blues progression doesn't really fit into diatonic theory unless you completely deform the concept of diatonic into nothingness. Most contemporary pop music isn't really diatonic either. You could start with the Beatles or Stevie Wonder and move forward demonstrating dozens of musicians who violate common practice rules for harmonic resolution all the time. Movie soundtracks use more whole tone scales for "atmosphere" than all the French composers put together.
Which isn't really to disagree with anything you said. I'm just thinking through an idea.
-
- KVRAF
- 10286 posts since 17 Sep, 2004 from Austin, TX
George Russell is why Bitches Brew happened.
And thus a ginormous amount of the rest of the 20th century's good music.
I've never read the book but I've heard him talking about it a ton, and heard musicians' reaction to it way back when he started talking about it...
I mean the frickin' book was published in '53
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Rus ... ge_Russell
And thus a ginormous amount of the rest of the 20th century's good music.
I've never read the book but I've heard him talking about it a ton, and heard musicians' reaction to it way back when he started talking about it...
I mean the frickin' book was published in '53
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Rus ... ge_Russell
-
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
What I was kind of hoping to point to with my brief lick above was along these lines. Bebop, derived from pop songs (Rhythm changes, ii-V-I, cf. I Got Rhythm by Gershwin Bros), uses the device of the b5 alteration to chromaticize it. You get the effect that everything is the tonic (or Target), but there's no there, there, ultimately. No tonic is particularly ENJOYED. I just goes around in circles, and gets to be as predictable as what it hoped to radicalize. Miles et al started moving away from 'diatonic', which I would capsulize as 'ii-V-I' thinking with Kind of Blue, sort of having a truly modal (non-Western practically) culmination in Bitches.jmeier wrote:... I do think it's not terribly different than some of the other methods for thinking about harmonic relationships outside of the common practice period, but something about this is clicking for me right now. It seems extremely similar to the David Baker method I've written about, or Steven Cormier's book "Modal Music Composition."
I have used the diminished and whole tone scales (too much, probably) but always driving straight into conventional tonic chords. The thing I'm getting from Russell is that I can treat the tonic exactly as freely as if it were one of the non-diatonic modes. So the LCCTO creates gradations of inside and outside playing rather than strict on/off inside/outside dichotomies. But that's pretty much what all music since Debussy (or even Wagner) has been driving at, don't you think?
I do have one point I'd like to dig into a little deeper. I most certainly do agree with you that symmetric scales are not common in popular music and probably never will be. But I don't think diatonic music based on conventional harmonic practice is common in popular music either. Diatonic music is historically and globally far less common than modal music, as is noted towards the end of Russell's book.