Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical Red Garland pick-up to "If I Were a Bell"

I like to know how you would analyze this pick up to his solo. I'm especially interested in the line of the D7b9.

I'm no expert on this, but it looks like a I-VI-II-V, which is a standard turn around, but the V is missing. The D7 (which has a #5 and b9) is an altered VI chord. The only odd thing, as I mentioned, is that the C7 chord should end the sequence. Maybe the bass player does something to fill that in.

Nobody is playing a D7b9 at that point so solo break doesn't have to have anything to do with that chord. Maybe Red is thinking of a C7 altered in the 2nd bar judging by his note choice, but who knows?

For what sort of analysis are you hoping?

It is a sincere question. If you are sort of expecting the notes Red Garland plays in his right hand to match chord tones from the chord symbols, that is going to happen less than 40% of the time.

In front of me as I write, there is an accurate transcription of one of his solos on the Cole Porter classic WHAT IS THIS THING CALLED LOVE. Both his right hand improvisation, and the accompanying extended chords, plus the bass, to my ear, are faithful to the recording. But, when one comes to analyze what Mr. Garland was doing, big problems arise:

Example: There are 2 measures where the harmony sits on a simple F minor. During those two measures, his solo line covers the following DIFFERENT notes: Bb, C, Eb, E, F, Gb, G , and Ab (playing several of them more than once). Of those 8 different notes, 5 are “outside the chord”.
.
Red Garland’s style was to “circle around” chord tones, frequently hitting the note above, AND the note below, before landing on a chord note proper. Or he would slide up to it, or down to it chromatically. This sort of embellished playing almost defies analysis, unless one wants to treat each one-half beat as its own extended or altered chord. Even if that were practical, such segmented analysis completely misses the point of harmonic drive characteristic of bebop.

If I missed the point of your question, I am sorry for that. But this is an on-going struggle for those attempting to categorize what the great improvisors are doing.

Ed

Just wanted to see how people's mind differ and hopefully learn something from it, as well as others also benefiting. Transcriptions are a great tool to improve one's playing but to access phrases, don't you think having some sort of order to categorize them can be useful? I've already altered my conception of that phrase over the possible D7b9 chord being the first beat could be a continuation of a phrase from the FMAG and the 2-4th beat from either C7alt or G.

There's no right answer or even if it's useful but I think it's important to think about to free up one's own thinking about the infinite choices you have from keeping your improvisation "safe."

Thanks, 36251,

Now that I understand what you are after, it makes perfect sense. Just like with any other music theory, categorization in Jazz is essential for teaching, and useful for learning – absolutely. And, as we both know, the “downside” of the categorization in teaching is that it often leads to mechanical playing: “Here is THE scale that you play over this chord”. And that eventually leads to the necessity of your point, about freeing up the performer’s thinking in keeping her/his improvisation “safe”.

So here’s my take on those two-and-a-quarter measures:

|| Fmaj7 / / / / | AØ7 / / D7b9 / / | G7 / . . . . .

Is this what you think Red was thinking? I know nobody can answer that question but that's the heart of my question. Sure, he probably wasn't thinking at all, but at some point of his training he might of and that's the real essence of my question. Thanks for contributing - it all helps

I believe most of these exceptional people were (are) REACTING to the moment, rather than doing much thinking. In a sense, Mr. Garland played what he heard, rather than what he thought. If there was any subconscious "thinking", it was probably along these lines: "What will sound good here?"

Then, it is you or I who is doing the thinking by attempting to analyze after-the-fact.

We discuss this stuff constantly on the Teachers' Forum: The vast disparity between what the composer (in this case, the improvisor) wrote, the inadequate tools we have for analysis, and our attemps to categorize and impart the material to students.

Based on the notes in measure 2, I might guess Red was thinking Ab7, the tritone substitution for D7 and the same rootless voicing. The line makes more sense over Ab7 than D7 and is in a Ab mixolydian scale. Anybody agree?

+1

The Ab7 suggestion makes a lot of sense.

Just want to add that this brings to mind the fun turnaround, used I think in the Intro to Blues for Alice:
Fmaj7
Ab7
Dbmaj7
C7

I uses this in a lot of intro and turnarounds.

And the turn around in Lady Bird in C

That 16th note cell of 4 notes on the D7 I would analyze as being a fragment of the Ebm melodic minor scale. On the triplet, I think Red just liked the *rub* or sound of the Db... or like J+ mentioned, almost an Ab7 type sound.

If you listen carefully at 4:23, he plays an Ab13 rootless voicing during the Db-Eb-Db triplet, just before the G7 (G13 as played by Red) that is printed in your score, so we must conclude from this that Red is definitely soloing temporarily over Ab dominant 7. On the piano, this line falls nicely from black-key usage over Ab7 to white key usage over the G7. Red was probably thinking or feeling this higher (black-key usage) falling to lower white-key usage 'in the moment' of his solo break, rather than scales:

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=36wafFjFdYs[/video]


Hope this helps!

O.K. Willing to show my obvious ignorance for all the world to read: Precisely how does one so emphatically determine a "tri-tone substitution", "rootless voicing" from a single voice, melody line?

I don't think people here are determining that solely on that one melody line. You can also take into account what the LH is playing and whether the soloists does similar harmonic substitution on the same parts of tune at different times. Figuring out the LH voicing(which may be tricky) can obviously give you great deal of info on what may be happening. It's just matter of making educated guess based on what you know. Most substitution of this type are fairly common.

I think I can give you a better example of determining rootless voicing/harmonic substitution on this tune

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zM8obFt5d8g

I'm specifically listening to the passage from 5:25

If you can figure out what the LH is playing+and the line he's playing, you'll most likely come to conclusion that the chords are being changed to Ab7/Ab7 Abmin/Gmin7 C7/C#min7 F#7(Tritone of Gmin7 C7).

Btw I agree with everyone else that it's mostly likely just a passing Ab7 chord before G7

Hi LoPresti,
I meant what was going on in the Left Hand, not the right. The right hand in this instance is just blending with and some could say a "slave" to what is going on in the left hand. And what is going on in the left hand is (from the bottom up) during the 2nd measure on the 'and' of beat 2 is:
F#-C-F . This can be one of 2 things:
1. A D7(#9) chord, acting as a temporary dominant of G, thus leading to G7. In this case the voicing is spelled F#-C-E# (3rd, 7th, #9)
2. A Tri-Tone substitution of D, which is Ab7, which also leads to G7. In this case, we spell the voicing enharmonically: Gb-C-F (7th, 3rd, 13th), thus making this voicing an Ab13.

The right hand in this instance almost doesn't even matter. I think it's safe to say that when analyzing player's intents during improvisation of jazz standards, the hierarchy goes something like:
Bass (most important)
Chords or Harmony (very important, sometimes just as important as explained below)
Melody (less important)

When you add different band members each playing a different role (Bass player, piano chords, sax), then the bass player might decide to do a tritone sub in the moment. Or, in this case, the pianist also has free reign to do a tritone sub without the bass player knowing or agreeing on before hand. Then we are left with guys and gals like us on the forums trying to figure out what the heck happened. Happens all the time.

I have again listened to the actual Miles’ tune that erichlof was kind enough to locate and post above, and at the point where Mr. Garland starts his solo, which seems to match the transcription also posted above, I hear NOTHING but the piano RH, single voice, melodic line.

Without the benefit of the recording, and looking only at the single line transcription, I took a stab at it:

So the consensus is that there is an IMPLIED Ab7 tonality, without a root, being substituted for the D7. Is that primarily because Mr. Garland typically uses this type of substitution (in a musical situation like this) when he is playing the full chords?

Not trying to be argumentative -- I do not listen to a lot of Red Garland, and I am trying to see (hear!) where the consensus comes from: How do we know that my guess at that measure is not more idiomatic -- a rootless AØ7 followed by a rootless D7b9 (for example)?

And thanks for the Joshua Redman blues, I really loved it. Unfortunately, by the time we arrived at 5:25, Brad Mehldau had worked his way so far out on a limb, my ears lost the harmonic thread. (Maybe that is the problem . . .)

Ed

I am going to have to pipe this through my amp and speakers. Once you have pinpointed that little chord, I hear it, but only as a "blur". However, with an additional point of reference (beside the posted melodic line), all of the agreement here makes better sense to me.