Mysterious tango progression

[Doug Hoople]

Trivia question for all you theory buffs...

My guess is that this will baffe a lot of people, and that some others (I'd be curious how many) will know precisely what this is...

Here goes:

With a tango rhythm and single-note triad arpeggio picking, vamp for while on:

Edim-Fm-Gm-Fm

Once that settles in explore a little and try repeating (changing chords at the same pace) the following for a while...

Edim-Fm-Gm-Abaug-Bb-Abaug-Gm-Fm

Now try the vamp:

Bb-Abaug-Bb-Abaug-Bb-Abaug-Bb-Abaug

Okay, enough of that.

Why does these progressions work? What is it about this "random" collection of chords that is so effective?

And, when you've got the answer, how many of you work effectively (meaning at speed with facility) with what these progressions are based upon? How many can at least struggle through it with time to think?

And how many (let's be honest now) are drawing a total blank and have given up after the third or fourth chord? That's what I did for a very long time. I've been working on this on and off (more off) for years, utterly baffled with how to take it from theory to practice.

But I finally got it this morning. It's exceptionally cool!

BTW, hint: the Edim chords are actually Em7b5, but in triad form they're the same as Edim.

[Jim Broyles]

What do you mean by the progressions "work?" What are we supposed to be seeing or hearing? The parallel motion of the major 6th intervals in the first example? Or the opposing whole tone motion of the major third to the minor 6th of the Bb to Abaug in the third example? Help us out here.

[Doug Hoople]

Sorry, trying not to give up too much too soon.

The chords mentioned above are unified by an underlying thing, which is why, in spite of their sound of being a bit strange side by side (for example, the Bb major vamped back and forth against the Abaug), they work so well, and why alternating notes seem "wrong." For example, after playing the opening vamp, try the Edim as an E minor instead, and notice that it seems, somehow wrong.

When the answer comes, you can be sure it will be a "Doh!" moment for some.

For others, it could be that they're thinking that the answer's too basic, so it must not be the actual answer.

I'll be gone for the next two hours, so can't say any more than that for now.

[Bruce Clausen]

I too am a little mystified as to what the mystery is here. As a classical guitarist many years back I spent a lot of time practising harmonised scales-- all 12 major, melodic minor, and harmonic minor scales played in parallel triads in root position, first inversion, and second inversion. Thirty-six scales each played three ways. That'll be a very familiar routine for pianists. Your progressions consist of fragments of a harmonised scale. Are we supposed to identify the scale?

BC

[Doug Hoople]

Yes!

I guess what I was getting at here was that this particular harmonized scale is as useful in its own way as the mother of all harmonized scales: the Ionian.

A couple of years back, I picked up Mike Marshall's book on either Chords or Improvising ( I think it was Improvising ). In it, he had a very enthusiastic single page on the scale in question, and he described what cool chords could be played off the scale. I tried it at the time, and it seemed like little more than an odd and unmusical jumble. I quite frankly didn't see what was so cool about chords that we already knew. I believed they were cool, but didn't know in my bones quite why.

That same year, Don Stiernberg showed us at the Symposium how this scale worked, and he rhapsodized about all the fantastic possibilities of dominant instabilities. I could definitely hear it when he played it, but I was stumped to find that I couldn't find any musical uses for it. Everything I played sounded mechanical.

But now I've suddenly understood that this isn't just an odd jumble of chords, but a very insteresting system to play as a mode all by itself, and even though the chords have strange and interesting juxtapositions, they all make sense when played together. The harmonized scale in this mode gives us a whole extra pallet of vocabulary to play with.

Or, I should say, it gives me a whole extra pallet. I knew that some people would have this as old hat, and I'm not surprised, Bruce, to find that this is something you had already absorbed during your early training!

So yes, can someone actually name the scale? Bruce.. I'm sure you already know, so I'd like to leave it open to someone else.

[groveland]

The Groveland Scalar Safari (http://www.jazzcittern.com/modeexplorertools/outfitters/ScaleSelector.aspx) says F melodic minor. (w-h-w-w-w-w-h) :)

[Doug Hoople]

The Groveland Scalar Safari (http://www.jazzcittern.com/modeexplorertools/outfitters/ScaleSelector.aspx) says F melodic minor. (w-h-w-w-w-w-h) :)

Hi groveland!

F melodic minor is part of the answer, too, with a couple of caveats.

1) The melodic minor, as defined in most basic harmony texts, has two upper tetrachords, one ascending and descending. The ascending melodic minor is the one that matches here. The altered (lowered) intervals of the descending melodic minor, along with the unvarying minor form of the lower tetrachord, form the Aeolian mode, so it's less interesting because it's already known as a mode of the Ionian.

BTW, The variation on the melodic minor tetrachords is apparently because many composers from the Baroque and Classical periods made a habit of raising the intervals on ascending lines and lowering them for descending lines. I don't actually have data to substantiate that, and I've always thought this precisely specified definition for the melodic minor to be a bit suspect. For my taste, a little too much consistency in the definition implying a consistency "in the wild" that wasn't really there, but I digress...!!!

When the scale is so formed without variants (i.e. as spelled out in the ascending melodic minor) it's generally given a whole separate name. One of them is the Jazz Minor, although I've never seen it authoritatively defined that way (I think Mark Levine uses this term, but I'm too lazy at the moment to look it up in his great book).

It turns out the that Jazz Minor, having its own distinctive sequence of intervals, has developed a couple of modes in relatively common use, and one of those modes is a primary scale for bebop and modern jazz.

So

2) It's a mode of the Jazz Minor (aka the ascending melodic minor). Which mode is it?

[groveland]

Doug!


The melodic minor, as defined in most basic harmony texts, has two upper tetrachords, one ascending and descending.... When the scale is so formed without variants (i.e. as spelled out in the ascending melodic minor) it's generally given a whole separate name. One of them is the Jazz Minor...
I have been corrected enough on this in the past by jazz profs - In short, I paraphrase, "There is no ascending melodic minor in jazz - That's a classical idea." You won't catch me calling it "ascending" any more! :)


...I think Mark Levine uses this term, but I'm too lazy at the moment to look it up in his great book...

Mark Levine sez: "That's the only difference between the major scale and the melodic minor scale - the melodic minor scale has a minor 3rd." He treats it as a single scale and associated harmony, no ascending or descending. I'm pretty sure the name Jazz Minor doesn't appear in his "The Jazz Theory Book". He has written other books.



It turns out the that Jazz Minor, having its own distinctive sequence of intervals, has developed a couple of modes in relatively common use, and one of those modes is a primary scale for bebop and modern jazz... Which mode is it?


I know! I know! Call on me! :grin: I'll sit down and let someone else chime in.

[John McGann]

If you like this sort of thing (and who in this section doesn't) check out Mick Goodricks' Mr. Goodchord books:

Mr. Goodchord's Almanac For Guitar Voice Leading (http://www.mrgoodchord.com/newSite/home.html)

Don't let "guitar" throw you- these books use no tab or notation, and are all based in the key of C. They unlock the secrets of diatonic harmony of the major, melodic and harmonic minor scales in a way that is guaranteed to provide a lifetime of exploration and thought for the curious player.

Some of the voicings would be unplayable as chord voicings, but they can all be played melodically (arpeggiated).

These books will lead the thinking player into previously unimagined territory.

[TomTyrrell]

This is a serious question, I'm not trying to bust anyone's chops...

Do you guys think about this stuff while you are playing or is this more background for you?

I tend to have a bad memory for names. So while I might play some of these things I would have to go back afterwards and analyze what I did in order to know the names.

[groveland]

A serious answer for a good question.

Everyone I know of works out strategies for improv, and over time those strategies become a bag of tricks you apply on the fly in situations you recognize. So at some point you think about it a lot, but at some later point you can reach into the bag of tricks and mix and match and reuse what you worked out before.

I would call threads like this good exercise, and lots of fun. In the end, for me, it's all about playing better stuff.

[John McGann]

I subscribe to the theory that the brain has a left side, processing cognitive function (the 'data cruncher') and the right side (non-verbal/intuitive).

I think of the practice room being the place to have time to think.

The great saxophonist Michael Brecker spoke of writing notebooks full of ideas and lines, because "I'm slow and it takes forever to get new ideas to flow in my playing". (There's a great Youtube clip of him discussing practice strategies).

I 'get off the clock' sometimes as I practice new harmonic ideas and record a single chord looping (usually with an organ sound so it's a true drone w/o rhythm). I will then slowly play through a sequence and really try to hear each individual note in context of the chord.

This sort of slow practice 'sets the table' for the right brain/intuitive side.

At fast speeds, you don't have time to 'think' much; you are tapping into the non-verbal, intuitive side. I have to practice in a way that lets me 'set the table' for the other side of the brain to take over during performance.

:mandosmiley::mandosmiley::mandosmiley:

[Doug Hoople]

This is a serious question, I'm not trying to bust anyone's chops...

Do you guys think about this stuff while you are playing or is this more background for you?

I tend to have a bad memory for names. So while I might play some of these things I would have to go back afterwards and analyze what I did in order to know the names.

That's sort of what I was getting at here. I've been aware of the Pomeroy scale as one of the bedrock tools of jazz improvisation since 2005. That's actually pretty late in the game, since I had some pretty serious theory training back in the 70s, but never mind.

OK, OK, not the Pomeroy (who named it that anyway?), it's the Super Locrian.

OK, OK, not the Super Locrian (who named it that anyway?), it's the Diminished/Whole-Tone.

OK, OK, not the Diminished/Whole-Tone, it's the Altered Dominant.

Yeah, finally, calling it by the name most of us know it by, the Altered Dominant Scale, the 7th mode of the Jazz Minor (which is, itself, also known as the ascending portion of the melodic minor).

And yes, for the last three years, since Mike and Don introduced me to this scale, ti's been a technical structure, a bunch of names, an arbitrary set of intervals, a pile of stuff to describe with words, but something that didn't lend itself to playing automatically, certainly not musically.

As with many things that are technically out of reach, I'd poke it and prod it from a distance, but I'd also set it aside pretty quickly when it didn't seem to be working.

And slowly, a couple of bits of it actually did start working for me. I'd find more and more places for the lower tetrachord, with its potential for cool neighbor tones and such. And I'd occasionally be able to find a place to use the whole-tone tetrachord.

But the whole thing fully integrated? Useful in a way the doesn't require heavy word-based internal processing? No.

It was only yesterday, playing with the harmonized scale, that I finally saw the way to get real expression out of the Altered Dominant. I finally saw how I could apply the harmonized scale to extract harmonic movement and link chords together to create real music.

I think John really nailed it. There is a lot of processing and structuring and concious thinking that goes into internalizing some of these tools. At one time or another, we had to go through the same process with the major scale and its modes (and, actually, are probably still mining that vein).

Here's the thing... when listening to the music that moves us, we'll find things that we really admire, and we'll want to be able to play those things. When Don Stiernberg gives a class on really cool dominant instabilities and then demonstrates some of the things that he can play in that vein, it makes you want to dig in.

Which, in some cases, means a bit of digging through the rough ore to get to the gold. Mine shafts go down for miles, because that's were the good stuff is, and the worthless stuff comes out by the ton before you get to it. And then, once you strike the vein with the good stuff, you still have to drag it up for miles and take it for refining.... you get the point.

So yes, there are a lot of words and there is a lot of processing that goe into internalizing some concepts. Hopefully, you'll get far enough in that you can throw all that away and just play, but that when you play, the stuff you've spent all that time learning will be part of what flows from your fingers.

A big step in that process is what happened to me yesterday. Playing with the harmonized Altered Dominant Scale, I finally heard the way the chords flowed together, and I started recognizing the intervals and how they played off of each other. And I realized how I could work with it in the same way I work with the harmonized major scale, which opens up vast territory for exploration in ways that I already understand. It was a true light bulb for me.

Now I have to get back and practice!

[TomTyrrell]

Thanks for the insight. I'm sometimes surprised reading these theory discussions when I discover the name for something I already knew. I tend to think along the lines of "Oh, I'll bet that thing I did the other day will work here" but with no idea what that thing is called.

[groveland]

A big step in that process is what happened to me yesterday. Playing with the harmonized Alternate Dominant Scale, I finally heard the way the chords flowed together, and I started recognizing the intervals and how they played off of each other. And I realized how I could work with it in the same way I work with the harmonized major scale, which opens up vast territory for exploration in ways that I already understand. It was a true light bulb for me.

Now I have to get back and practice!
Hey Doug - Some thoughts.

If you are soloing over an altered dominant (V7alt) to the I, use Super Locrian, the 7th mode of melodic minor for the V7alt. Practically speaking, go up a half step from the root of the V7alt chord and play melodic minor from there. Like, if you're doing E7alt to Ama7, play F mel.min to A major.

Very similarly, this is the right thing to do on tritone substitutions (sub-fives) as well, like a II7(#11) to the I. Like Bb7(#11) to Ama7. It's typical to use the Lydian Dominant, the 4th mode of melodic minor, for the II7(#11). Practically speaking, go up a 5th from the root of the 7(#11) chord and play melodic minor from there. You would play F mel. min. to A major.

So the net result is, for the V7alt or the II7(#11) sub-five, you play the same set of notes. Those two chords are from the IV and the VII of the melodic minor scale, respectively.

And for the i and ii chords in your tango, I like m6 chords, also diatonic to melodic minor.

Final thought (for now) -

There are no "avoid notes" in melodic minor (like the fourth degree dissonance you find in major scales). So we can use all the notes of the melodic minor scale freely.

[Doug Hoople]

Hey Doug - Some thoughts.



Yes... all good thoughts. And much of it pretty easy to look up in good theory texts. Also available on many of the threads here.

Again, though, all mechanics and concious processing until it gets internalized. So even though I "knew" much of this, I didn't know it in ways that were musically useful (I may still not). But I can see the path to making it useful (and musical) now.

Thanks for the reminders. It will be interesting to try these out again with a real framework in place for working through it all.

[Doug Hoople]

And for the i and ii chords in your tango, I like m6 chords, also diatonic to melodic minor.

Final thought (for now) -

There are no "avoid notes" in melodic minor (like the fourth degree dissonance you find in major scales). So we can use all the notes of the melodic minor scale freely.

Two things come to mind.

1) when you say the i and ii chords in my tango, are you talking about the i and ii in the melodic minor or in the Altered Dominant? I'm assuming you meant the melodic minor, which would make your assertion correct. Those two chords would be the ii and iii in the Altered Dominant, which would also feature the im7b5, invalidating the choice of the minor 6 for a i chord. So I'm definitely assuming you meant the i and ii of the melodic minor.

2) The 5 in the Altered Dominant can be an avoid note, depending on what chord you're playing. Obviously, if you're playing purely modally, then there are no avoid notes. But if you're calling on the Altered Dominant more generally to help you out with dominant chords, many of them don't feature a flatted 5. Again, context is everything.

[groveland]

when you say the i and ii chords in my tango, are you talking about the i and ii in the melodic minor
Yes. I should probably mention that I assess the tango tune as F melodic minor, not E altered dominant.



The 5 in the Altered Dominant can be an avoid note, depending on what chord you're playing. Obviously, if you're playing purely modally, then there are no avoid notes. But if you're calling on the Altered Dominant more generally to help you out with dominant chords, many of them don't feature a flatted 5. Again, context is everything.
Yep, you got me there! To my way of thinking, the altered dominant scale has 7 notes, as does the altered dominant chord: 7(#11 b13 #9 b9) But, there are some (few!) restrictions I guess - Like the "pick one from column A, and one from column B" restriction on the #11 b13 and the #9 b9. I was thinking (again) of Levine: "The lack of 'avoid' notes means that almost everything in any melodic minor key is interchangeable with everything else in that key." I will have to take a closer look at any potential exceptions.

Thanks. :)

[Doug Hoople]

Yes. I should probably mention that I assess the tango tune as F melodic minor, not E altered dominant.

Thanks. :)

One of the really cool parts of this for me is that I hear it in E Altered Dominant, and the Em7b5 was the i chord!

One of the evergreen themes of theory discussions about modes has been that we should hear the modes as they exist on their own without reference to the 'parent mode.'

So, for example, the D Dorian mode should be considered as a tonic on its own instead of as a subordinate mode to the Ionian in C. Never mind that we need to learn and know these modes in their subordinate roles anyway. We're supposed to hear them as parent modes of their own. Thus, when someone asks "What key is this in?", instead of saying key of F minor here, we'd instead say key of E Altered Dominant.

I've actually struggled with this for a while. The Dorian and Aeolian, sharing the minor lower tetrachord, are pretty easy to approach as having their own character, because minor keys are such huge parts of the repertoire. But the others are harder. I mean, when was the last time you played something in Locrian or Phrygian (as opposed to simply playing these modes to match chords and play over changes in Ionian or the minors).

Andy Statman, of course, is the godfather of playing the modes as themselves and not as bit actors in the chordal systems of other modes. And one of the lingering revelations of last summer's Symposium was a class in which he demonstrated over and over how play in a particular mode and how to hear intervals in the context of that mode.

Andy, like many others, is adamant that we know the modes on their own terms, and that we avoid knowing them only as children of the big parent modes.

He played an improvisation (what else?) in Locrian, and showed us how to come to grips with a "m7b5" sonority as the I chord, and how chords might interact and progress differently in that setting, how certain chord choices that would be "wrong" in a major or minor would make perfectly good combinations in Locrian. His improvisation had musical logic and integrity, and oozed Locrian character.

Getting back to my tango for a moment, I'm struck by the combination of the Bb-Abaug as a vamp (really a V-IV seesaw), or by the use of m7b5-minor-minor as a I-II-III-II parallel to maj7-minor7-minor7 quality of the same I-II-III-II sequence.

I'm also struck by the sense of disorientation of the reversal of the relationships between the m7b5 of the I chord and the minor of the II.

For example, vamping the Em7b5-Fmin, over and over kind of gets our heads spinning, especially if the Em7b5 falls rythmically on the strong beats. You can get turned around right there (just like sambas when they're reversed internally before the sourdo comes in), but what's pretty cool at that point is to sail into the I-II-III-II to firm up the departure point and providing a sense that you're departing and returning to the tonic in kind of a wave action, but following a very familiar harmonic rhythm. At that point, landing on the Em7b5 to end the phrase on the tonic will leave you delightfully off balance, but still at rest.

I should actually write and record a tango to demonstrate. Oft-noted, and more often true, words are an inadequate vehicle for conveying musical ideas!

But, circling back to the original topic, let's not forget that all we're doing is picking triad harmonies for the 1st 5 degrees of the Altered Dominant scale! Very simple material! We haven't even added 7ths!