I've realized there are basically 2 ways that I know so far to make music. My way is to start with a chord progression and make it 4 bars, always making 4 different chords per verse chorus ect.. But I know there is another way that was used in the 90s a lot. A lot of alternative bands I like use this completely foreign method to me. They usually come up with rhythms that sound cool and add melody and effects to make it sound even cooler. Some examples are , Korn, Tool, Coal Chamber. I would like to start writing in this method now but don't know what its called. I'm getting burnt out of the 4 chord method I've always used and don't even know what that is called. It almost seems like Korn does the reverse of what I do. Treat melodies like chord progressions and chord progressions (the guitar rhythm) Like melody's. I would really like to learn how to do the other method too. Here's a couple of my songs, and its always been the way write.
https://soundcloud.com/3rddayraised/by- ... west-songs
https://soundcloud.com/3rddayraised/a-p ... west-songs
https://soundcloud.com/3rddayraised/ete ... west-songs
https://soundcloud.com/3rddayraised/vag ... unications
Whats the process of the way I create music called?
-
Aroused by JarJar Aroused by JarJar https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=191505
- KVRian
- 1048 posts since 16 Oct, 2008
You've discovered for yourself one of the deepest and most important distinctions in music- the essential difference between what are called in Western music "polyphony" and "homophony". "Many voices" or "one voice". The distinction is not actually how many voices (sounds playing at the same time) in a literal sense there are, but in the independence of the voices. In polyphony each part sounds cool, as you put it, own its own, and the overall sound results from the parts coming together. In homophony the parts "fill out" what is essentially one big moving part.
Of course these aren't black and white distinctions- you can have mixed or in between (melody following chords but with distinctly contrasting bass line, for example).
I'll write more later, stuff to do...
Of course these aren't black and white distinctions- you can have mixed or in between (melody following chords but with distinctly contrasting bass line, for example).
I'll write more later, stuff to do...
-
Aroused by JarJar Aroused by JarJar https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=191505
- KVRian
- 1048 posts since 16 Oct, 2008
To continue: from Renaissance choral pieces to Black Sabbath, what makes polyphonic music work pretty much boils down to singable-melodies/riffs. If you listen to the bands you mention, I bet you can sing almost every drum, bass, guitar and keyboard part.
That's the first and most important part. Hard rock musics of the authentic and shaggy kinds are kinds of modern folk music, so that means you're going to have a lot of naturally musical people but mostly without much formal musical education, and not reading from written notes. Each musician has to memorize their parts, and the best way to memorize a part is to make it memorable in the first place. The problem with using a computer is that it will memorize anything you want it to, whether it's catchy or not, or even if it is beyond human capability to memorize.
So in my opinion you should start singing and humming your parts when you're making them.
Well that's my 2 cents.
That's the first and most important part. Hard rock musics of the authentic and shaggy kinds are kinds of modern folk music, so that means you're going to have a lot of naturally musical people but mostly without much formal musical education, and not reading from written notes. Each musician has to memorize their parts, and the best way to memorize a part is to make it memorable in the first place. The problem with using a computer is that it will memorize anything you want it to, whether it's catchy or not, or even if it is beyond human capability to memorize.
So in my opinion you should start singing and humming your parts when you're making them.
Well that's my 2 cents.
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
There is no rule which states a progression has four measures. In fact the opposite is true in popular music from the early 20th century onward to today.
Progressions can have 5,6,7,8,9 up to 32 measures in length. Though more commonly they last only up to 16 bars. Usually repeating with some variation within the progression. I af the progression has an odd amount of measures you can always attach a mini bridge or fill to even it out before going to the next section. This can be as simple as a one measure rest or a build up to the next section. Quite often (if you study sheet music) you'll find ending 1 and ending 2 for a given progression. Not limited to the blues but a common devise is end on the 1 chord if the section is repeated and end on the V chord when moving to a different section.
First time..
|I---|IV--]I--|I--|
|IV--|IV--]I--|I--|
|V---|IV--|I--|I--|
Second time
|I---|IV--]I--|I--|
|IV--|IV--]I--|I--|
|V---|IV--|I--|V--|
The second time is where the classic turnaround lick happens on the 11th and 12th measures. It's a signal that something is going to change like going to a chorus or a solo. It's a way to "cap" the progression. Often times it has a IV chord going to the V chord in bar 12 |IV-V| or [IV-bV-V] Using tritone substation [IV-I-V] or even bVII7-V7 as a half step walkdown to resolve the progression.
The longer your progression the more variance you can have in repeating motives and the more profound the turnaround or resolution will be.
I enjoyed that four chord song however they take liberties with the songs they cover.
A prime example is in the first song they mention. Don't stop Believing.
It's actually 5 chords not four.
E-B-C#m-A
E-B-G#m-A
You can think of it as a single 8 measure passage or as two four measure progressions with different chords (as G#m is not a normal subsection for C#m Although the way the melody is arranged it flows easily from both C#m to A and G#m to A. G#m can be considered as... A substitution for E as C#m can be. And/or it can be considered an "approach chord"
Another thing to ponder is. Not all chord progressions are based on the diatonic scale. A method made popular by Eric Clapton used by The Beatles, Rick Derringer, The Rolling Stones and others is to use the minor pentatonic scale notes as the chords for a progression.
Assume you are working in ... A. Your chord selection would then be. A-C-D-E-G
Make them all major chords and then try to write a progression using them.
Back in the USSR - A-C-D-C (all major chords)
The bVII chord is often used as a substitute for the V chord in Gospel traditional R&B as well as Rock, Funk and melodic metal.
I could go on for pages about various approaches to writing by progression. Suffice it to say if you feel trapped by only being able to write in four measure or four chord progressions you are the one digging yourself into that hole. And you'll need to push beyond a reductionist mentality to explore what other possibilities are available via writing out progressions and thinking about substations alterations and approach chords.
Next up... Writing from melody....
Progressions can have 5,6,7,8,9 up to 32 measures in length. Though more commonly they last only up to 16 bars. Usually repeating with some variation within the progression. I af the progression has an odd amount of measures you can always attach a mini bridge or fill to even it out before going to the next section. This can be as simple as a one measure rest or a build up to the next section. Quite often (if you study sheet music) you'll find ending 1 and ending 2 for a given progression. Not limited to the blues but a common devise is end on the 1 chord if the section is repeated and end on the V chord when moving to a different section.
First time..
|I---|IV--]I--|I--|
|IV--|IV--]I--|I--|
|V---|IV--|I--|I--|
Second time
|I---|IV--]I--|I--|
|IV--|IV--]I--|I--|
|V---|IV--|I--|V--|
The second time is where the classic turnaround lick happens on the 11th and 12th measures. It's a signal that something is going to change like going to a chorus or a solo. It's a way to "cap" the progression. Often times it has a IV chord going to the V chord in bar 12 |IV-V| or [IV-bV-V] Using tritone substation [IV-I-V] or even bVII7-V7 as a half step walkdown to resolve the progression.
The longer your progression the more variance you can have in repeating motives and the more profound the turnaround or resolution will be.
I enjoyed that four chord song however they take liberties with the songs they cover.
A prime example is in the first song they mention. Don't stop Believing.
It's actually 5 chords not four.
E-B-C#m-A
E-B-G#m-A
You can think of it as a single 8 measure passage or as two four measure progressions with different chords (as G#m is not a normal subsection for C#m Although the way the melody is arranged it flows easily from both C#m to A and G#m to A. G#m can be considered as... A substitution for E as C#m can be. And/or it can be considered an "approach chord"
Another thing to ponder is. Not all chord progressions are based on the diatonic scale. A method made popular by Eric Clapton used by The Beatles, Rick Derringer, The Rolling Stones and others is to use the minor pentatonic scale notes as the chords for a progression.
Assume you are working in ... A. Your chord selection would then be. A-C-D-E-G
Make them all major chords and then try to write a progression using them.
Back in the USSR - A-C-D-C (all major chords)
The bVII chord is often used as a substitute for the V chord in Gospel traditional R&B as well as Rock, Funk and melodic metal.
I could go on for pages about various approaches to writing by progression. Suffice it to say if you feel trapped by only being able to write in four measure or four chord progressions you are the one digging yourself into that hole. And you'll need to push beyond a reductionist mentality to explore what other possibilities are available via writing out progressions and thinking about substations alterations and approach chords.
Next up... Writing from melody....
-
thecontrolcentre thecontrolcentre https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=76240 - KVRAF
- 37262 posts since 27 Jul, 2005 from Scottish Borders
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 260 posts since 14 Mar, 2008
Good info. Thanks Jar and Mike. looking forward to what you are going to say about writing from melody. Also. I've realized I cannot go any further without music unless I learn to sing. I currently am horrible at singing. But I was thinking about it. Is there ways to find your natural range and make your songs at that range? Like maybe if I sung at my range my songs wouldn't sound like crap? Any info on this would be appreciated.
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
Oddly no, but it wouldn't hurt too much.
Some of the best arrangers / composers are the worst singers. What learning to sing would do is help you to develop relative pitch. If you hear a note and can identify that note and then you hear another note you ask yourself is it the same as the note you heard prior or is it higher or lower and by how much. That's the essence of pitch training. While it can help you to figure out the notes that someone else is playing to figure out a song it doesn't really help when writing your own.
Okay...
I've alluded to this previously. A vamp is when you focus on a single chord or motive (motif) that is repeated. Like your previous statements about Korn, Tool et all. They work out vamps that are tonally centered. The phrase repeats until a change in the section when a new phrase is introduced. When writing a supporting melody all you need do is restructure the same tonal group in a different order. It's sort of but not quite the same as the way counterpoint works.... Or the way many Miles Davis bebop compositions are formed. He would hand his fellow musicians a small piece of paper with a "line" and then a scale (not always diatonic) In an effort to escape the cliché's used in jazz up to that point.
I'm a big fan of jazz but not Miles work during the bebop era. But it's basically rejecting the chord progression for motif's and reaching outside the box.
It's hard as hell for someone like a bassist to follow and cop a bassline to. Simply because there is no easily identifiable chord progression to latch on to.
Let alone pianists and guitarists. But it does get one out of the box of diatonic structures because you aren't justifying melody to harmony or vice versa.
Some of the best arrangers / composers are the worst singers. What learning to sing would do is help you to develop relative pitch. If you hear a note and can identify that note and then you hear another note you ask yourself is it the same as the note you heard prior or is it higher or lower and by how much. That's the essence of pitch training. While it can help you to figure out the notes that someone else is playing to figure out a song it doesn't really help when writing your own.
Okay...
I've alluded to this previously. A vamp is when you focus on a single chord or motive (motif) that is repeated. Like your previous statements about Korn, Tool et all. They work out vamps that are tonally centered. The phrase repeats until a change in the section when a new phrase is introduced. When writing a supporting melody all you need do is restructure the same tonal group in a different order. It's sort of but not quite the same as the way counterpoint works.... Or the way many Miles Davis bebop compositions are formed. He would hand his fellow musicians a small piece of paper with a "line" and then a scale (not always diatonic) In an effort to escape the cliché's used in jazz up to that point.
I'm a big fan of jazz but not Miles work during the bebop era. But it's basically rejecting the chord progression for motif's and reaching outside the box.
It's hard as hell for someone like a bassist to follow and cop a bassline to. Simply because there is no easily identifiable chord progression to latch on to.
Let alone pianists and guitarists. But it does get one out of the box of diatonic structures because you aren't justifying melody to harmony or vice versa.
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
In early days of progression based music. There was very little need for justifying the melody to the harmony. If the melody was strong enough to stand on its own (as is the idealized dream of melody) Then the supporting harmonic structure is more like wallpaper. So long as it's all in the same key you start on the root and end on the root melodically it's plausible enough. Usually the background instruments took a distant backseat in the mix to the vocalist and or lead instrument.
Now.... Lets talk about different pathways working from melody
(....to be continued)
Now.... Lets talk about different pathways working from melody
(....to be continued)
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
Okay, You've written out a melody line or motif, and you want to support it with a harmony and possibly a bassline. As the bass has two primary functions rhythmic and harmonic support. It's fairly easy to write a bassline from the harmony.
Ahh but where does the harmony come from?
Well the melody is a good place to start. When writing from harmony to melody the easiest way is to use guide tones. Guide tones can be connosant or dissonant but mostly they are connosant.
What's conosant and dissonant?
Conosant means having a tone derived from the chord. If you play a c chord then the notes C,E,G,A will be conosant. If you choose another note not within the chord as played they have varying degrees of harshness like it's fighting the chord so being dissonant. You don't have to obsess over everything must always sound as pleasing as possible. Infact when you move from something that sounds dissonant to conosant it's a resolution in and of itself. You can't have resolution without conflict. If you are working strictly within the diatonic structure notes don't get too out of hand and you can move fairly painlessly to or from consonance to dissonance.
A few words about pentatonic scales. Pentatonic scales are easier to sing then diatonic (major) scales. Each node in the standard pentatonic scale is a mode.
However usually we only use the major and minor varieties.
A minor - ACDEGA
C major - CDEGA
Same scale different starting node or mode. The blues scale is a minor mode and you can use that treatment for your major scale as well.
A minor Blues - A C D Eb E G
C Major (country) Blues - C D Eb E G A
The added note usually serves as a passing tone.
Now when you are play notes from the above scale...you pretty much know it's going to work over a C chord or an A minor. How many diatonic major scales fit with a C major and A minor? Two. C and G. If you but heads with lets say a Dm chord or an F major chord using those pentatonic/blues scales it's going to sound a little rough. That's okay. Because it's not going to be there forever and you can resolve the situation by going back to the C or Amin Chord or justify a G chord by going for the 5th of the G chord and or adding a B note to your basic scale tones.
Ahh but where does the harmony come from?
Well the melody is a good place to start. When writing from harmony to melody the easiest way is to use guide tones. Guide tones can be connosant or dissonant but mostly they are connosant.
What's conosant and dissonant?
Conosant means having a tone derived from the chord. If you play a c chord then the notes C,E,G,A will be conosant. If you choose another note not within the chord as played they have varying degrees of harshness like it's fighting the chord so being dissonant. You don't have to obsess over everything must always sound as pleasing as possible. Infact when you move from something that sounds dissonant to conosant it's a resolution in and of itself. You can't have resolution without conflict. If you are working strictly within the diatonic structure notes don't get too out of hand and you can move fairly painlessly to or from consonance to dissonance.
A few words about pentatonic scales. Pentatonic scales are easier to sing then diatonic (major) scales. Each node in the standard pentatonic scale is a mode.
However usually we only use the major and minor varieties.
A minor - ACDEGA
C major - CDEGA
Same scale different starting node or mode. The blues scale is a minor mode and you can use that treatment for your major scale as well.
A minor Blues - A C D Eb E G
C Major (country) Blues - C D Eb E G A
The added note usually serves as a passing tone.
Now when you are play notes from the above scale...you pretty much know it's going to work over a C chord or an A minor. How many diatonic major scales fit with a C major and A minor? Two. C and G. If you but heads with lets say a Dm chord or an F major chord using those pentatonic/blues scales it's going to sound a little rough. That's okay. Because it's not going to be there forever and you can resolve the situation by going back to the C or Amin Chord or justify a G chord by going for the 5th of the G chord and or adding a B note to your basic scale tones.
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
So lets talk about harmonic justification for a minute. Harmonic justification can be applied to both diatonic and non diatonic notes.
For instance. Lets say you are focusing on or around a D note and you want to play a C Chord. This has a "longing" sensibility about it that it's slightly dissonant. And maybe you want it Less dissonant. Well chords don't stop after the 5th and aren't exclusive to 1-3-5. Consider using an add2 or an add9 to your Chord. If you want to make it sound more mellow consider a 69 chord.
As I stated earlier we don't have just the diatonic or pentatonic scales or scale tones available to us. We also have the chromatic (color) scale using an occasional embellishment from a non diatonic structure. When you have some free time try to construct as many chords from one note.
Lets start with the major scale tones. Your note is ...E
Well you should already know your primary chords that use B
B Major
B Minor
B Dim
G Major
E Major
A Major
Think of a few more.
What about as an extended or an altered chord?
F#7
G6
B sus4
D9
Paul McCartney was a master of this type of voice leading harmonization. Where as if you are playing in the key of E and you are playing an E note you wouldn't think of resolving it to a C chord but often he would.
Two important caveats to remember. The more you extend all of your chords in the diatonic structure to say 9ths, 11ths and 13ths the more they lose their potency. They start to sound like one big mush (my opinion) And you don't have to justify every note you play from the motive with the harmony. It's okay to give the chord a rest.
So that's another way of thinking. Constructing chord progressions based on the motive.
Block Chords aren't so much a progression but a way to create parallel movement.
Too be continued.....
For instance. Lets say you are focusing on or around a D note and you want to play a C Chord. This has a "longing" sensibility about it that it's slightly dissonant. And maybe you want it Less dissonant. Well chords don't stop after the 5th and aren't exclusive to 1-3-5. Consider using an add2 or an add9 to your Chord. If you want to make it sound more mellow consider a 69 chord.
As I stated earlier we don't have just the diatonic or pentatonic scales or scale tones available to us. We also have the chromatic (color) scale using an occasional embellishment from a non diatonic structure. When you have some free time try to construct as many chords from one note.
Lets start with the major scale tones. Your note is ...E
Well you should already know your primary chords that use B
B Major
B Minor
B Dim
G Major
E Major
A Major
Think of a few more.
What about as an extended or an altered chord?
F#7
G6
B sus4
D9
Paul McCartney was a master of this type of voice leading harmonization. Where as if you are playing in the key of E and you are playing an E note you wouldn't think of resolving it to a C chord but often he would.
Two important caveats to remember. The more you extend all of your chords in the diatonic structure to say 9ths, 11ths and 13ths the more they lose their potency. They start to sound like one big mush (my opinion) And you don't have to justify every note you play from the motive with the harmony. It's okay to give the chord a rest.
So that's another way of thinking. Constructing chord progressions based on the motive.
Block Chords aren't so much a progression but a way to create parallel movement.
Too be continued.....
-
- KVRAF
- 6113 posts since 7 Jan, 2005 from Corporate States of America
Holy cow, Tapper Mike... you really have the theory. Every time you post on these topics, i'm impressed. i can't follow much of it, but it's impressive. As a guy that can't process "theory", i sometimes wonder what people see in my music, as far as what i'm doing by feel instead of by intent.
- dysamoria.com
my music @ SoundCloud
my music @ SoundCloud
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
Okay, be we get into parallel motion. Lets talk about contrary motion.
Lets say you have a melodic line, motif ostinato, whatever. And you want to write a counter motif and but it up next to your original idea.
If your melody goes up then down in some sort of stepwise fashion. You can tack on something moving in the opposite direction as a counter to the melody.
Melody - D C B C A
Contr - G F G A G
Anytime that you have two notes not unison or octaves played at the same time you have ....A diad. They aren't chords per say but they could be inferred as such. And yet not have that cookie cutter sensibility of a standard chord progression.
If you space your melody (rhythmically) and or your counter melody differently across the same time landscape. You can develop a "riff" which often implies a chord without being one explicitly. The thing about pads. Is that they have a thickness to them that isn't derived from full chords but usually one instrument split into two or more and then slightly detuning/ Or having two or more instruments slightly detuned then combining and compressing the sound. In some ways it's almost like a power chord (no third) Your riff you can then use as a foundation or make slight changes to or juxtaposition in time as a call and response between the melody and your newly formed riff.
It's all about exploring possibilities.....
Now onto parallel motion.
Lets say you have a melodic line, motif ostinato, whatever. And you want to write a counter motif and but it up next to your original idea.
If your melody goes up then down in some sort of stepwise fashion. You can tack on something moving in the opposite direction as a counter to the melody.
Melody - D C B C A
Contr - G F G A G
Anytime that you have two notes not unison or octaves played at the same time you have ....A diad. They aren't chords per say but they could be inferred as such. And yet not have that cookie cutter sensibility of a standard chord progression.
If you space your melody (rhythmically) and or your counter melody differently across the same time landscape. You can develop a "riff" which often implies a chord without being one explicitly. The thing about pads. Is that they have a thickness to them that isn't derived from full chords but usually one instrument split into two or more and then slightly detuning/ Or having two or more instruments slightly detuned then combining and compressing the sound. In some ways it's almost like a power chord (no third) Your riff you can then use as a foundation or make slight changes to or juxtaposition in time as a call and response between the melody and your newly formed riff.
It's all about exploring possibilities.....
Now onto parallel motion.
-
- KVRAF
- 7837 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
Thanks Jace. I've been around the block many a time. When I was a kid there was this place named "Thomas Music" (Back in the 70's)It was the size of your average supermarket and carried nothing but sheet music, theory, and technique books. I could comprehend a lot of the stuff intellectually but not fully internalize it till I could recognize it when I heard it and when I could work it all out. Which took some very good teachers acting more as coaches to get me there.Jace-BeOS wrote:Holy cow, Tapper Mike... you really have the theory. Every time you post on these topics, i'm impressed. i can't follow much of it, but it's impressive. As a guy that can't process
Recently I had this moral dilemma. I know my stuff but I'm reluctant to share as I have the classical camp who feel that all western music ideas come from that side of things and that side of things alone. And on the other side I have myself asking...What's the point of posting this stuff if someone is just going to graze over it and not try to follow through. And then I think to myself....well it took sometimes a second or even third look at a music theory construct before I applied it. Maybe it will be the same for someone else. Maybe they've read this before and this is the time they will read it and apply it. Or maybe it's the first time they've ever read it because they didn't have access to the books I've read or things I've experienced.
If you are writing and playing using a method that's working for you...That's great. Sometimes we hit a roadblock where we are tired of doing what we've always done or simply need something fresh and new to us, or something we used to know shown in a new light. Some people know how to do things without verbalization call it an innate ability or a borrowed idea. Sometimes when the idea is expressed with words then it becomes manifest.
When we write music it's our personal exploration when we record and perform we are reliving that journey with others as storytellers.
Anyway... back to parallel motion.
-
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
There are a couple too many issues here for me to stay still. That is not the definition of consonant in the first place. Then you contradict your own statement right away. Why is A a consonance per C major chord? It's not a chord tone, so it strays from your definition. In general, G to A, a second, is called a dissonance. Consonance vs dissonance concerns intervals. You could have quite a 'dissonant' 'chord' so what will the meaning of 'consonance' be? EG: C E Bb D#, call it C7#9, but because, let's take the D# as a chord tone it's 'consonant' despite the obvious dissonance? It's not useful, it's not the meaning of the word.tapper mike wrote:What's conosant and dissonant?
Conosant means having a tone derived from the chord. If you play a c chord then the notes C,E,G,A will be conosant.
We cannot form principles from this.tapper mike wrote: How many diatonic major scales fit with a C major and A minor? Two. C and G. If you but heads with lets say a Dm chord or...
Why only these two? You've gone a rising 5th/falling 4th from the key signature to arrive at one other possibility. Let's go that same distance the other way: what problem does 'F major scale' present for either of the two chords that is a problem per se than what 'G major scale' presents? Let's be concrete: Is the Bb in F major problematic? In what case. Why is it more of a problem necessarily than the F# from G major? For that matter, are the notes from C major scale all useful all the time, or all safe all the time? Bb over an A minor is different how than F over a C major? Why is F# ok? What are you saying, what are you proposing by fixing these two chords to these two particular scales? These two chords could comport with a lot more in terms of key or usage than C major, or now G major.
We absolutely need context for this to be useful. Besides lacking that, as we have it now chord and key are confounded, and 'chord tone' determines 'consonance'. It's not really coherent.
-
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
It's hard to construct a bassline from a scale because a person needs chords to think of a line. I think there are people that aren't in that box as if it's necessary or primary.tapper mike wrote: Or the way many Miles Davis bebop compositions are formed. He would hand his fellow musicians a small piece of paper with a "line" and then a scale (not always diatonic)...
It's hard as hell for someone like a bassist to follow and cop a bassline to. Simply because there is no easily identifiable chord progression to latch on to.
Let alone pianists and guitarists. But it does get one out of the box of diatonic structures because you aren't justifying melody to harmony or vice versa.
And this is not Miles vis a vis bebop. Miles' work in the bebop vocabulary is not this outlier.
Miles was arguably in the front of a movement in jazz to approach melody qua melody, and as a general kind of statement we can say people looked to India for inspiration. Where principles of the line are drawn in terms of a scale to begin with, the shape of it serves a mood, a time of day, a personality that belongs with a set of notes, typically given in forms ascending and descending. In western vocabulary, like the melodic minor with 7 and 6 ascending vs. descending. IE: there is a musical reason for that outside of 'justification' vis a vis a harmony, the line is beautiful itself. So when you have two lines, there is no need for consideration of the third part of a harmony, you find happy concord during the process of unfolding melody, there is no ulterior consideration.
You can find harmonies resulting from that, but there is no vertical determinant per se.