Certainly not every measure of every piece written with the expectation that improvisers will elaborate on the material should adhere to some kind of modal exactitude. Let's imagine a scenario where in a measure the harmony spells out a Dº triad with the tone G, the 4th, added. The melody, however, contains both a b7 and an enharmonically spelled major 7th (Db), neither being in passing. This really suggests the simultaneous superimposition of different harmonies. This kind of superimposition occurs spontaneously in advanced improvisation as well.
There are occasions where no chord or modal symbols are present at all. The possibilities for improvised solos include freely improvising over the pedal tone that’s implied throughout.
Sometimes it's preferable to use the modal name in addition to chord symbols, especially if you envision the chords coming from the same modal source and they could easily imply more commonly used modes. If we have repeated alternating measures of Ebsus2/A and F(add2), a knowledgeable improvisor may assume Eb Lydian over the Ebsus2/A and F Lydian over F(add2)/A. The composer may want to project a specific harmonic atmosphere and sees these two sonorities as being derived from A locrian. Yes, A locrian is identical to Eb lydian (as it would be with F mixolydian), but in this case the A bass note is the unifying factor between these two chords and it give a single reference point to the improvisor.
Even in those rare instances where a composer gets to write music for improvisors that he/she knows well, where it may be possible to indicate less in a chart to that individual, written music should be created for any future performances that clearly shows what the composer has in mind for the harmonic, melodic and rhythmic atmosphere of a piece of music.
Next: Philosophical considerations
Copyright © 1993-2010 Jack DeSalvo
Copyright © 1993-2010 Jack DeSalvo
No comments:
Post a Comment