Another Triad Pairs Lesson
ScotGormley
Tim Cummiskey and I filmed this yesterday--more exploration of the use
of triad pairs over a standard chord progression. Tim discusses this
topic in great detail and gives advice for adding this to a daily
practice routine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atY7Uu6jo2s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmsbDDEbOdM
Tom Walls
Thanks! I'm looking forward to giving it some attention.
heat...@gmail.com
This is great stuff. Thanks!
Joey Goldstein
Hi Scott
Nice videos.
But can you please explain to me where this notion comes from that the
IVmaj & Vmaj triad pair is applicable to every diatonic chord in the key?
Walt Weiskopf explains it the same way in his book, and frankly, based
on the way I learned about triad pairs from Charlie Banacos, it doesn't
really make much sense, at least not to me.
The way that Charlie laid it out was that usually (but not necessarily
always) the notes comprising the triad pair should be "chord-sound" on
the chord you are using the triad pair over.
(Chord-sound is the sum of all chord tones plus available extensions
that fit a given chord.)
I.e. There normally should be no avoid notes on the chord being played
within either of the two triads.
So on a Cmaj chord, as I in C, I'd look to using Gmaj & Am triads,
certainly not Fmaj & Gmaj.
I.e. Any triad that contains the note F won't be wholly suitable on Cmaj7.
On Dm7, as IIm7 in C, *any* pair of adjacent triads from within the C
major scale will work because there are no avoid notes in this
chord-scale-relationship.
Eg. Charlie liked using Em & Fmaj on Dm7 when D dorian is called for.
Etc.
Etc.
Then they go on to say things like, the triad pair for minor keys is IVm
& Vaug as found within harmonic minor, and for a mel min flavour it's
IVmaj & V+.
First of all, the tertian V chord from both those scales is Vmaj, not Vaug.
To my way of thinking those triad pairs are really bIIIaug & IVm and
bIIIaug & IVmaj.
So they're not really IV and V chords anyway.
I'm sure that seems like semantics, but IMO details count.
And this, dare I call it, "key-centred" approach to triad pairs seems to
be predicated somehow on using the IV and V triads of the key.
And if there is any validity to thinking of IVmaj & Vmaj as somehow
blanketing any and all major scale harmony, then it seems to me that in
minor keys it would be bVImaj and bVIImaj (IVmaj & Vmaj of the relative
major key) which don't involve the artificially raised 6th or 7th scale
degrees, or IVm & Vmaj which are the norms for the chord types on these
scale degrees in minor keys.
So what's your and Tim's take on this "IV & V fits all" thing?
If you guys are going to do anymore videos focused the maj triads a
whole step apart sound, then you might consider these other usages as well:
F & G works over:
Fmaj7#11
F7#11
G7sus4
Dm7
Em7sus4b9 (Technically speaking, the Cnat in the Fmaj triad is an avoid
note on this chord. Use carefully.)
Cm6 or Cm(maj7)
D13sus4b9
Ebmaj7b5
Ebmaj7#5 (Careful with the Cnat.)
F7#11
Am9b5
B7alt
Db7alt, as SubV7 in C (Note: There is an avoid note here, Cnat. It needs
to be treated with sensitivity. The resolution of C to B is usually
called for, if the C is heard for a significant duration on this chord.)
Db7alt as V7alt in Gb (Again, careful with the Cnat.)
G7 as SubV7 in Gb.
So if I was playing through Autumn Leaves in A minor and I wanted to
solo over the entire form using only triad pairs consisting of 2 maj
triads whose roots are a whole step apart, I'd be thinking about things
like this:
Dm7 (F & G) |G7alt (Db & Eb) or (Cb & Db)|
Cmaj7 (C & D) |Fmaj7 (F & G) |
Bm7b5 (F & G) or (G & A)|E7alt (Bb & C) or (Ab & Bb) |
Am (D & E) |A7alt (Eb & F) or (Db & Eb) |
Etc.
Technically speaking, Cnat is an avoid note on Bm7b5, so be careful with
the F & G triad pair's Cnat..
The G7 chord, if played unaltered, works well with F & G, but the effect
will make it sound more like G7sus4.
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT primus DOT ca
Bryce
Thanks for the great analysis !! Very impressive and I didn't analyze
it but I don't see much point in playing triadic pairs just to hit
notes by some formula. The concept of "taste" comes into play as
explained with your avoid note issues that others may "hear" as off
tones. Love your posts.
Bryce
ScotGormley
Thanks, Joey. Let me think this over bit before I respond in detail. I
initially posed a similar question to Tim regarding the IVs and Vs.
ScotGormley
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks, Bryce!
Bryce
Thank you for the great videos !!
ScotGormley
>
> - Show quoted text -
Joey, the approach you described is what comes most naturally to me,
too, but I have not worked with the concept enough for it to become a
natural part of my playing. Your previous posts on this topic were
excellent and very comprehensive. That's a lot of work, and I
appreciate it.
What I've seen Tim do, and some other players like Rick Peckham, is
start with a more diatonic approach (minimizing notes not contained in
the key center) before introducing notes like #11 over the I chord
(e.g., C and D triads over C Maj.7). I think this really is geared
toward avoiding information overload by allowing a student to work
with a finite concept and get comfortable with that before moving on.
Tim mentions how you can get away playing with a more harmonic
generalization approach over almost the entire progression, but as you
point out, there will be avoid notes.
I'll send your question to Tim and also ask if he'd like to do a demo
of alternative triad pair choices, as you suggested.
Thanks,
Scot
thomas
Triad pairs practice is best used as an ear-training exercise, not a
lick-generating exercise.
Docbop
Where I heard about triad pair is on Modal comp'ing. Play the 4 and
5 chord triads of the parent scale over them over bass note of the
mode. Example D dorian play F and G triads.
Joey Goldstein
>
> Joey, the approach you described is what comes most naturally to me,
> too, but I have not worked with the concept enough for it to become a
> natural part of my playing. Your previous posts on this topic were
> excellent and very comprehensive. That's a lot of work, and I
> appreciate it.
>
> What I've seen Tim do, and some other players like Rick Peckham, is
> start with a more diatonic approach (minimizing notes not contained in
> the key center) before introducing notes like #11 over the I chord
> (e.g., C and D triads over C Maj.7).
Right.
But my example was designed to show a way of using maj triads a whole
step apart on that progression.
On a maj7 chord, the only such triad pair that works is the one that has
maj triads on the root and on the maj 2nd above the root.
One of the things that's cool about this technique is that you can
control the level of "outness" you want. Introducing non-diatonic tones
that are chord-sound on the chord-of-the-moment is one way to introduce
some spice.
If I was writing an example of how to use triad pairs more generally on
that progression, then I could choose to keep completely diatonic, but
I'd have to use various different triad pairs.
Eg
Dm7 (C & Dm) |G7 (Dm & Em) |C (G & Am) |F (Em & F) |
Bm7b5 (Dm & Em) |E7 (C & Ddim) |Am6 (Am & Bm) |A7#9 (F & Gdim) |
Etc.
The advantage of my original example is that there's a type of textural
homogeneity to the sound of using maj triads a whole step apart through
the whole thing. It amounts to being a type of thematic development
based on using the same intervallic structures over all of the original
chords.
The disadvantage is that doing so, as it did in this case, may generate
some chromaticism.
The advantage of the example above is that the sounds are all "inside"
of the key.
The disadvantages are that the textural homogeneity of using triad pairs
over all of the given chords is much less likely to be perceived,
because I'm using different triad pairs over each chord. And there's a
bit thinking involved for the player, at first.
There's something about the triad pair types that involve two of the
same types of triads within the pair (i.e. 2 maj triads, or 2 min
triads, or 2 dim triads or 2 aug triads) that lends a type of aural
familiarity to the endeavour which is useful for making things sound
coherent.
Here's the same prog using pairs of min triads a whole step apart, but
I'll be using some altered extensions on the dom7 chords and some #11's
on the maj chords:
Dm7 (Dm & Em) |G7 (Abm & Bbm)|Cmaj7 (Am & Bm) |Fmaj7 (Dm & Em) |
Bm7b5 (Dm & Em) |E7 (Fm & Gm) |Am6 (Am & Bm) |A7 (Bbm & Cm) |
That's all pretty "inside" to my way of thinking/playing/hearing.
If I try to use min triads a half step apart on that progression, it'll
start getting more "out" there, but with an intervallic homogeneity that
might still lend some coherence to it all.
Dm7 (C#m & Dm) |G7 (Gm & Abm) |Cmaj7 (D#m & Em) |Fmaj7 (Abm & Am) |
Bm7b5 (C#m & Dm) |E7 (Em & Fm) |Am6 (G#m & Am) |a7 (Am & Bbm) | etc.
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
> I think this really is geared
> toward avoiding information overload by allowing a student to work
> with a finite concept and get comfortable with that before moving on.
I know how odd this will sound to many of you, but I usually take the
opposite approach in my own teaching where I usually try to give the
student some sort of an overview of the entire big picture as soon as
possible. And then we gradually chip away at things trying to assimilate
small chunks of it into our playing.
Eg. As I'm teaching a student to play one or two easy position
fingerings for the major scale, I'm also explaining the rules of
position playing to them, which will ultimately lead them to the
realization that there are really 12 possible position fingerings for
the maj scale.
Etc.
It's not for everyone, and there are lots of students who don't learn
well this way. But it's still my way, and if they stick with me
eventually they get it. If they don't stick with me, then theoretically,
I've already given them all the info they really need to continue their
own self-study, and they can use their own time to assimilate various
aspects of it into their playing (or not).
> Tim mentions how you can get away playing with a more harmonic
> generalization approach over almost the entire progression, but as you
> point out, there will be avoid notes.
Well, yeah, that's the big advantage to treating the IV & V triad pair
as being sacrosanct in that you use a single triad pair over an entire
progression.
But to my way of thinking *any* triad pair consisting of wholly diatonic
notes could serve the same purpose.
I.e. In C major *any* of the following triad pairs could be used over
that entire chord progression:
C & Dm, Dm & Em, Em & F, F & G, G & Am, Am & Bdim or Bdim & C
I just haven't figured out yet what these guys see as being so special
about F & G.
> I'll send your question to Tim and also ask if he'd like to do a demo
> of alternative triad pair choices, as you suggested.
>
> Thanks,
> Scot
ScotGormley
Great stuff, Joey.
Just curious--do you find the work ethic of most of your students is
on par with your expectations? The main comment I hear from university
professors around here is that they are frequently disappointed that
students just don't want to focus enough on fundamentals, and it takes
a real effort to get them to study anything seriously. I've always
been baffled by that, considering that a music student's job for four
years of college is to acquire these tools.
Joey Goldstein
>
>
> Great stuff, Joey.
>
> Just curious--do you find the work ethic of most of your students is
> on par with your expectations? The main comment I hear from university
> professors around here is that they are frequently disappointed that
> students just don't want to focus enough on fundamentals, and it takes
> a real effort to get them to study anything seriously. I've always
> been baffled by that, considering that a music student's job for four
> years of college is to acquire these tools.
>
Only a small handful of my students, when I taught at Mohawk College,
had anything resembling a clue about what it would take to become
professional players.
Some of them have indeed gone on become good players and are out there
making a living as guitar players.
The rest of them didn't have that clue and shouldn't have been found
anywhere near the vicinity of a college that teaches jazz music.
But the vast majority of my first year students at Humber College
already know the stuff that my 3rd Year Mohawk students were just
beginning to struggle to learn.
The culture at Humber is much different. More serious. More competitive.
College guitar students have to deal with "fundamentals" or they fail.
My private students have to learn their fundamentals too, or they simply
won't be my students for very long.
BTW
I hope I haven't given you or Tim the impression that I'm somehow highly
critical of those videos or anything like that, or that I'm just trying
to show off that I think I know some supposedly superior take on triad
pairs from you guys.
That's not it at all.
I just really don't understand the IV & V thing and have often wanted to
ask someone who's into that concept to try to explain it to me.