1959 - Year that changed J*** (doco on Beeb4 now)

Howard,

Imagine planets orbitting round the sun, which at the same time also change in relative position to one another.

The sun = the 'tonal centre'.

The orbitting planets = the music connected to, but not the same as, the tonal centre.

The relative position of the planets = harmonic changes and relationships.

I think.

Good stuff, Fred. Thank you.

Max

quote:

Originally posted by JWM:
Howard,

Imagine planets orbitting round the sun, which at the same time also change in relative position to one another.

The sun = the 'tonal centre'.

The orbitting planets = the music connected to, but not the same as, the tonal centre.

The relative position of the planets = harmonic changes and relationships.

I think.

I understand ii-v-i chord structures, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this, unless you're referring to the "music of the spheres," which is an ancient philosophical concept about the movements of planets, which is described as a kind of inaudible "music." But it has no bearing on what I was illustrating above. Perhaps you meant something else.

Best,
Fred

quote:

Originally posted by Max Bass:
Good stuff, Fred. Thank you.

Max

More than welcome, Max.

Best,
Fred

quote:

Originally posted by mjamrob:

As regards Beethoven did you mean he moved towards this in later string quartets and piano sonatas or more generally?

Hi Mat,

I haven't looked at the question in terms of its place on the timeline of Beethoven's development, so I'm not sure when he first started using the idea, but I would imagine it's something that he explored more fully as his composing matured. It's the kind of thing that once you start looking for it in his music, either in listening or score reading or both, you find it cropping up frequently.

Best,
Fred

quote:

Originally posted by fred simon:

quote:

Originally posted by JWM:
Howard,

Imagine planets orbitting round the sun, which at the same time also change in relative position to one another.

The sun = the 'tonal centre'.

The orbitting planets = the music connected to, but not the same as, the tonal centre.

The relative position of the planets = harmonic changes and relationships.

I think.

I understand ii-v-i chord structures, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this, unless you're referring to the "music of the spheres," which is an ancient philosophical concept about the movements of planets, which is described as a kind of inaudible "music." But it has no bearing on what I was illustrating above. Perhaps you meant something else.

Best,
Fred

Yes, I shouldn't have used an astronomical illustration! I'll scratch my heard to see if I can think of something else. In the meantime, I'll get my coat...

quote:

Hi Mat,

I haven't looked at the question in terms of its place on the timeline of Beethoven's development, so I'm not sure when he first started using the idea, but I would imagine it's something that he explored more fully as his composing matured. It's the kind of thing that once you start looking for it in his music, either in listening or score reading or both, you find it cropping up frequently.

Best,
Fred

Thanks Fred, I am only a novice when it comes to musical theory, but I will certainly be listening to these three composers in a new light. As an artist I love innovation and the desire to seek new form on the route to establishing an individual and 'authentic' voice. I also find it fascinating to find common ground between composers of different eras and styles.

regards,
mat

quote:

Originally posted by mjamrob:

I also find it fascinating to find common ground between composers of different eras and styles.

Me, too. And the more you look for that common ground, the more you find.

Best,
Fred

I'm more confused with the ii-v-i thing.
I'm assuming 2-5-1?
But out of what ? 8 notes of an octave?

Or am I missing some other fundamental of music theory? I admit my music theory is limited.

quote:

Originally posted by BigH47:
I'm more confused with the ii-v-i thing.
I'm assuming 2-5-1?
But out of what ? 8 notes of an octave?

Or am I missing some other fundamental of music theory? I admit my music theory is limited.

You're essentially correct: chords built on the 2nd, 5th, and 1st pitches of the 7 different pitches of the diatonic scale, the 8th being a duplicate of the 1st, except an octave higher. Lowercase Roman numerals denote minor, uppercase major.

The ii (minor) chord is a substitution for the IV (major) chord ... the ii is the relative minor of the IV chord, and vice versa, which means their corresponding scales are essentially the same.

2-5-1 progressions appear with various combinations of major and minor qualities such as: ii-V-I, II-V-I, and ii-V-i.

A less common version is one of my favorites: ii-iv-I. You might hear this more in old English folk music, madrigals, etc., but also in Satie, Ravel, and other composers, including Fred Simon.

All best,
Fred

You explained it so much better than Wikipedia in far less words Fred.

I will try these different chord progessions on the guitar and see how they sound.
I also found for the first time yesterday how some early jazz progressions are based on those of the blues, just substituting the last chord in the phrase providing a different feel to the resolution.

Using these patterns is the key to improvising and composing in the style of preference I would imagine.
Being a self taught novice, over the years I've only learnt chords and scales by names. This thread has opened up something for me

regards,
mat

Thank Fred , I almost understand . I'll get my guitar out and play about and see if I can make sense of it that way .

quote:

Originally posted by Mat Cork:
I would agree Fred. I'm always a bit saddened that Monk didn't hit any great peaks at the time (a favourite of mine).

He was quite productive in the Riverside studios through 1959, so I'm not sure I would concur and this solo album is just an example of that. It could be argued Monk's 1947 Blue Note albums were more groundbreaking than the cited albums from 1959.

quote:

Originally posted by Huwge:
He was quite productive in the Riverside studios through 1959, so I'm not sure I would concur and this solo album is just an example of that. It could be argued Monk's 1947 Blue Note albums were more groundbreaking than the cited albums from 1959.

I would agree that he had already done some brilliant (and maybe pioneering?) work earlier in the decade (Brilliant Corners, Monk's Music, Thelonious in Action & Misterioso, to name a few of these albums). He would also go on to make several brilliant albums in the 1960s with his new quartet including Charlie Rouse.

quote:

Originally posted by fred simon:

You're essentially correct: chords built on the 2nd, 5th, and 1st pitches of the 7 different pitches of the diatonic scale, the 8th being a duplicate of the 1st, except an octave higher. Lowercase Roman numerals denote minor, uppercase major.

The ii (minor) chord is a substitution for the IV (major) chord ... the ii is the relative minor of the IV chord, and vice versa, which means their corresponding scales are essentially the same.

2-5-1 progressions appear with various combinations of major and minor qualities such as: ii-V-I, II-V-I, and ii-V-i.

A less common version is one of my favorites: ii-iv-I. You might hear this more in old English folk music, madrigals, etc., but also in Satie, Ravel, and other composers, including Fred Simon.

All best,
Fred

Fred - for those of us who (like myself) are interested in learning more about these and other similar concepts, are there any references you could recommend (for someone with little or no current knowledge of music theory)?

Thanks in advance.

Michael

Michael
I'm a mere novice on the tenor saxophone with music theory largely self taught, and I've still much to learn. The following links were helpful to me:
http://www.jazclass.aust.com/jazlinks.htm

http://www.petethomas.co.uk/

Cheers,
Colin

quote:

Originally posted by Huwge:
He was quite productive in the Riverside studios through 1959, so I'm not sure I would concur and this solo album is just an example of that.

I'm a Monk fan, so I'd agree his output through 59 was still good. But imo it's a lowpoint in his career (still good). A dip in creativity.

quote:

Originally posted by Bone Machine:
Michael
I'm a mere novice on the tenor saxophone with music theory largely self taught, and I've still much to learn. The following links were helpful to me:
http://www.jazclass.aust.com/jazlinks.htm

http://www.petethomas.co.uk/

Cheers,
Colin

Thanks for the tip - there appears to be a lot of useful information there.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by jazzfan:

Fred - for those of us who (like myself) are interested in learning more about these and other similar concepts, are there any references you could recommend (for someone with little or no current knowledge of music theory)?

Hi Michael,

To be honest, I should be able to refer you to something of that sort, a book or a DVD or a web site or two. In my teaching I don't directly work out of a specific source, but rather multiple sources, listening, playing, and reading, and rely on my decades of experience accumulating information and assimilating it.

Which is what it's all about anyway ... all musical theory is data to be entered into your biological PC, and after years and years of absorbing that data, it disappears, and you are left with only your ears and hands (unless you're a singer, of course).

That said, I do very much like The Jazz Piano Book by Mark Levine. However, it makes the assumption that the reader is not a beginner. Still, very well written with clearly notated examples on every page. Even if the piano is not your instrument (all musicians should have some basic keyboard knowledge), this is the kind of book you could spend a lifetime with.

Other than that, I'll bet these days you could find just about any information you want on the internet. A few minutes with Google should do the trick.

Best,
Fred

Jerry Mulligan and Ben Webster, the 2 saxofhones. 1959. This is the best. Cheslseay Bridge, from Duke Ellington!

Getz Swallow Burton Haynes
now on beeb 4

quote:

Originally posted by jazzfan:

He would also go on to make several brilliant albums in the 1960s with his new quartet including Charlie Rouse.

Hey jazzfan-

just a heads up (follow the link). http://www.thebestvinylshop.co...nfo.asp?number=3001A

Mosaic always does a great job with their box sets. Thinking I may need to spring for this one.


Best,
Max

Max - thanks for the heads up. As it happens, I already have that album (on vinyl and CD) and it was certainly one of the albums I had in mind when I mentioned his great output in the 1960s.

I actually hadn't come across that site before but it looks as though it offers quite a wide range of music from some of my favorite performers. I expect that I will be shopping there regularly in the future.

Thanks.


Michael

Jazz 625. Monk and the The Messengers (Art Blakey) both in one night, this is class. The kind of thing that reminds you that the license fee is worth it.