I don’t play steel, but read the forum to help me understand and communicate with my bandmate John Russell, Zum U-12. (And for other reasons). My use of chord scales is oriented towards guitar and bad fiddle playing.

My question for you country and swing steelers is: Do you think scales, or do you just grab a bar and pedal or lever position that gives you the scale as an extended chord? I know you raise and lower notes in the course of holding that position, but do you really think dominant scale, or major pentatonic scale?

------------------
Steelin' away in the ozarks and life,
Scott
www.scottyhenderson.com

quote:

---

i also use a therory called vertical and horizontal improvization

---

As I thought about this topic last night, I thought it is kind of a stupid question, because, as Dr. Jeffreys said, ultimately, if you extend a chord to the 13th, you have an entire scale, so its all the same thing.

But it is different on six string. On the steel, as I understand it, you grab your position, change some notes with pedals and levers as necessary, but basically play arpeggio’s across the width of the neck, which amounts to playing scales. Also, as I understand it, the strings on the steel are tuned to smaller intervals, so you really get a scalar sound. On the six string it is physically a much different task. You cannot grab a chord with more than three or four notes, and playing across strings with a flat pick, as is usually done, is much harder than rolling along with thumb and fingers as on steel. To play scales on the six string, you have to learn finger patterns and have an awareness of scale structure to a degree more than steel players may find necessary. Maybe six stringers are more aware of the differences between scales because we play these very similar patterns, with one or two notes difference, thus making us aware of those differences.

Obviously, any steel player who plays the melody is showing awareness of scales, but it seems like that steel players must have a different approach to thinking about it than six stringers.

Therefore, maybe my question ought to be: How would you players who play both steel and six string describe the difference in your approach or thinking about the instruments? I find that on fiddle for instance, my thinking is much different, and thankfully unencumbered or unconfused, by my guitar thinking. On the guitar I think chord grips and scales, and on fiddle, I seem to think more in terms of pure melody.

One thing that makes a big difference is whether you're talking about C6 or E9. Traditionally anyway, while not trying to be dogmatic, C6 playing can come very close to how a jazz guitarist thinks; a lot of bar movement playing single-note lines based on scales. That type of playing isn't as common on E9, although a typical E9 scale has notes derived both by pedals and bar movement.

My objective when playing is to not think about the structure (chords and scales) at all. I only concentrate on the emotional feeling of the tune and building ideas for themes to base my solos/licks around. One things for certain, If I have to think about too much I will most likely screw it up. I feel the time to learn the tune is during practice, not on stage.

When I practice new songs I work on everything within the song, Arpeggios, scales and chord and scale substitutions.

The vertical and horizontal approach I use has to do with the natural movement of the chord and scale intervals instead of focusing on vertical and horizontal patterns found in the pockets located on the instrument. My goal is to get beyond the pockets.

I am also more concerned with playing through chord progressions instead of over them. There is a big difference in that sound. For an example of what I am talking about listen to Coltrane's original version of "Giant Steps". Coltrane wrote the tune based on a very awkward chord structure and took it to the session. With thorough practise he knew how to play linear lines through those changes. Now listen to the keyboardist struggle because he was not given the same advantage and was not familiar with those unusual changes. Because he was learning those changes on the session date the best he could do was to play mostly arpeggios over the progression. His solos were not as fluid and he was an equally brilliant jazz musician.

No matter how great musicians are they will always need to practice until they can figure out the musical shortcuts through the changes.

To sum it up, chord notes and Scale tones, along with triads and arpeggios of chord substutions gave Coltrane the edge he needed to sound linear through those complicated changes. The same holds true for ALL musicians no matter if they are into Jazz or not. The more that can be studied about playing through changes will make the bandstand a piece of cake.

In contrast, I can name a number of players who were my blues and rock idols in the 70's, who said very profound things to me (and millions of others, making them rich) but who have since failed to grow much beyond what they were (if they're still playing at all). I don't say this judgementally, and I love them all. I understand that once someone is famous, it's difficult to get people to allow you to explore new things (even if you want to), or mess with a formula that has worked. Really, I think everybody comes along in order to say a certain thing, and once they've said it... For some it may be a few years of intense fame, for others, a more modest but longer period of advancing contribution.

A funny thing- once I realized what I needed to do in order to get beyond the usual blues-rock way of playing out of the same boxes and licks over the whole progression, in order to create over changes that don't really allow that, learning scales and stuff wasn't really boring. Instead, I had the deep satisfaction of working toward a profound goal. It's the same feeling I get when I now struggle trying to get comfortable with a whole jazz tune.

I'm not really a natural jazz musician. I see myself as best suited to use more advanced techniques in simpler forms.

I can honestly say that everday I pick up the guitar, I play at least some stuff to fit over a three-chord progression. There are so many ways of addressing those three chords, now that I've put the background work in. This feeling of limitless possibilty and joy exists in sharp contrast to the emotional place I had arrived at in my early 20's, before I had done much work with theory. The way I then felt about my playing was very akin to banging one's head against a wall.

Sure, it can be less than totally enriching to work on this stuff, but the unpleasantness of that is pretty minor compared to the deep dissatisfaction I felt back then.

I have to support what Paul said about Giant Steps. I spent a few years studying with a very heavy jazz pianist here in Seattle (yeah I know it's not New York, but then again, it's not New York). After a couple of years studying with him, the subject of Giant Steps came up. Or specifically, why did Tommy Flannagan's solo suck so bad in the Coltrane session. Now Tommy Flannagan was an amazing player, one of the best bebop pianists of all time, but he was clearly lost in this session. And the reason was that he was thinking in bebop/standard jazz terms (of scales and chord progressions). Looking at his solo from this way he did a great job, but he had no chance of pulling it off, because Coltrane (IMHO) wrote the song as a kind of excercize for playing fluid lines in a sonic environment where the tone centers and modes were constantly shifting, so that there was no 4 or 8 bar segment where the player could relax into a tone center.

Now in terms of what I think about when I play jazz, I try to think of neither scales nor chords when I play. Those concepts are useful when practicing (to understand the parameters) but when I improvise, the solos I take that make me and those around me smile are those where I come up with musical lines that somehow fit in the progression, but are entities unto themselves. They are their own creatures. Now I am not a great or even competent jazz musician, but when I play something that kills it, it's because I came up with something that tells it's own story over the backdrop of the changes.

------------------
www.tyack.com

[This message was edited by Dan Tyack on 17 July 2003 at 12:04 AM.]

I won't say quit your bread and butter gigs, but you are the person most likely in a position of talent, exposure and viable music industry connections,
to take the steel to that next level of musicality AND recognition...
and not lose anything on the bargan.

Also you can work up some material and in NYC hire some smoking big name session jazz players for reasonable money.
2 or 4 standards, and a few originals that push your personal envelope a notch forward.

Also it would be faster to get known in the jazz world if you did a record with a few band leaders as equals rather than just well respected sidemen. Sure they will ask more for the session, but when you play with the best you learn more, and they read you and push you the right way better.
That's why they are leaders.
And chances are you would get several sit in gigs from them later too, when your around town etc.

Oh man I just can imagine the band possible for you in that town. It could send your picking into overdrive fo sho.

Any player who isn't working towards a long term goal, is idleing. I just can't imagine Paul on idle...

Great thread. I try to think in both scales and chords, and then improvise on the middle ideas of all the parts.
The C6 modes discusion of Andy Volk, Denny Turner, Jesse Pearson,Rick Aiello et al, has been very helpful in combineing both aproaches on C6.
But I am not yet fluent enough on PSG to get it ALL out of my head yet, but it is coming.

Scot please start a thread about vertical and horizontal improvization. It's always good to have another way to look at things.

Viva la PSGF!

[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 17 July 2003 at 02:17 PM.]

Charlie Persip for one,,probably one of the finest jazz drummers. Charlie Persip and myself were on a session some years later,when he himself praised Buddy to the limit. This was many years ago that Buddy sat
with those great jazz players and held his own and then some.

Imagine what Buddy could do now with these same Jazz musicians if he were here located and living in New York.

Buddy's biggest problem would be finding a place to park . Buddy has been there and back,
so what are we talking about here?.

Buddy himself said that if he were part of the NY Jazz scene he could have made an indentation.I take issue with Buddys comment,he did more than make an indentation
he made himself a GIANT among Jazz musicians
who looked upon steel guitar as a "hillbilly instrument" but not after hearing Buddy play
they had and still have the utmost respect for Buddy and that will last a long,long time
in their respect for Buddy Emmons. Buddy himself commented that being a true Jazz player was NOT doing one session..but to live among the Jazz community to make the grade regardless of what Instrument is played

Toots Theilman another friend of mine did it
with his Harmonica,what patterns did he follow? This is only my opinion and dont try
this at home edited for the finest steel player ever to sit behind a steel guitar.

Buddy Emmons.oops I got carried away,,when I hear steel guitar related to Jazz I think of Buddy..What was the question??

[This message was edited by Jody Carver on 18 July 2003 at 05:43 PM.]

quote:

---

I would selfishly love to hear him
doing just what was suggested though

---

But continuing with the guitar analogy: It did take awhile before guitarists caught up with horn players and pianists technically, and were accepted as a legitimate lead voice. But further, it's taken awhile for the solid body electric guitar with distortion to be accepted in jazz alongside the big hollow-body guitars. (Actually, they don't really exist alongside each other. They probably represent different idioms.)

Drums, steel, bass, soprano sax, trumpet or flugelhorn
DD
Still lost in the south of France

[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 19 July 2003 at 09:24 AM.]

i had a similar problem with giantsteps, playing it with a bunch of berklee musicians and an awesome piano player with perfect pitch. but i went home and studied it and found the common relationship of the song and it pretty much revolves in three keys G B And Eb

As for your dream, I too, would love to see the steel as a mainstay in Jazz, heck! I even want it a mainstay in ALL other forms of music. A legit Jazz record is high on my list of things to do. Session playing is the best diving board!

This is my opinion and as Jody pointed out Buddy gave a more than excellent performance on his Jazz record just as you suggested. Has anything changed in the Jazz world for our instrument? John's one liner sums it up for me. Toot's is respected worldwide as a great Jazz musician but, his instrument is not widely used, The same is true with the steel and Buddy's musicianship.

When anyone expresses an interest, I do the best with what God gave me to educate players about the pedal steel. Isn't that really ALL we can do to knock down barriers of misconceptions?

Paul

Edited for the wording. I think my opinion is more clear written this way. Hopefully it reads as a positive statement and not a negative one.

I like Jeff's vision. A duet with steel and Tony Bennett. Now that's cool!

"The love of Jazz inspires me to practice everyday!"

[This message was edited by Franklin on 19 July 2003 at 04:32 PM.]

Buddy Emmons live at Scotty's recorded in about 1977 brought the thing to fruition but by the end of the decade, popular music took off in other directions and the steel guitar became a country music instrument again.

Well, we're due for more experimentation. How about Paul F. with Nora Jones? Diana Krall?

~To play over complex changes you need to to think what SCALES are built out of the chords progressions. Then you must think of the alternatives of those possible lines.

To write a jazz piece you must look at a scalare root motion overlayed with chords, but yet this is also several stacked parallel scales. And each of those can be played over the changes, or parts of several parallel lines grabed for another line design.

So as Jeff says it's impossible to seperate the two. But how you LOOK at the song at any given time can change depending on your understanding of the under lying logic of the piece.

The book, available at georgerussell.com, is expensive, $125. But if all someone got out of it were an understanding of the Twelve Tone Order of Tonal Gravity, and the Chordmodes on Chart "A" in the book, it is worth many times the cost.

If anyone were to decide to do this study, I would be glad to assist them through personal e-mail.

[This message was edited by Mike Delaney on 20 July 2003 at 05:23 PM.]

John Steele, Now that Nora has money she can hire guys like Paul if she wants steel so, well, I know who I would hire ! I'm busy hackin it out in the clubs on the jazz side of things playing early jazz and Hawaiian music on my Stringmaster when I'm not on the road. Its hard to focus on a long term personal musical goal when I need to keep it together with the gigs that are paying the bills.

Bob

[This message was edited by Bob Hoffnar on 22 July 2003 at 10:02 AM.]