In Adam's lesson on his "Mr. Cantrell" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZFQE4_sJ6U), he mentions "don't ask me what the chord background is" (0:52-0:54). That comment inspired me to make the below video response with a jazz (& blues) piano reharmonization using chords that his melody doesn't quite suggest, but I *hope* still fit.
My original plan was to keep it the same length as Adam's (with the improv section, etc.), but between work-related time constraints and my doubts about whether this was 'an interesting theoretical exploration' vs. 'something that actually sounds good', I decided to make it just a 50-second statement of the main melody.
At first listening, I found it weird but didn't figured out why. Your explanation about jazzy reharmonization enlightens the whole stuff...it's clear that the piano renders "jazzy" and I think that this experiment is interesting: after all, have we yet heard harp playing on jazz/blues fusion background music? Anyway, that jazzy tinge is very subtle and requires to be carefully, because we here have close call to something harsh IMHO. I don't know if I'm clear...
Last Edited by on Nov 21, 2012 1:02 PM
TO LAURENT2015: Yes, I understand, and agree. I once heard a quote about good soloing that I feel applies to much of music in general: that for the listener, it should be roughly 50% expected, and 50% unexpected. That is, too predictable = boring; too unpredictable = just sounding weird/chaotic. So when it comes to things like dissonant jazz chords (augmented 11ths, #5s #9s, 13ths, etc.), how "expected" the sounds are varies greatly from listener to listener. So I can understand why my reharmonization--or at least sections of it--might simply just sound harsh to many people.
Back when I was a music major (for piano) in college, I felt that many jazz players delved so deeply into dissonance that their music ceased to sound good to a general audience. And I had concerns that my arrangement was guilty of the same offense!
Anyway, if I had more time, I think I would not only make it longer (with the improv section, etc.), but perhaps reserve the dissonance only for a climatic moment of sorts. (But my damn day job keeps interfering with music.)
I like it! I especially like the series of chords around :24-28. They feel exactly right to me. I've always liked that sort of jazz tonality. I'm less sure around the IV chord (or what feels like a four chord) around :12-16. That feels to me like it should be a cadence returning to the I chord. But overall, a very interesting experiment, well worth making.
Since the melody note on top of the V7#9 is the tonic note, that chord might want to have the sus4 in it. In other words, it might actually be a V11#9, or a Vdom11#9, however you prefer to write it. It could also be a bII13b9. In the key of E, that would be an F13b9.
Last Edited by on Nov 23, 2012 4:50 AM
> I especially like the series of chords around :24-28. They feel exactly right to me.
Thank you. At first I tried to use the timing you did--eighth notes on the 7th (5 draw), 5th, blues 3rd, flat 7th (2 draw) riff--but with the chords I used, it sounded a bit rushed, so I slowed the riff down to quarter notes. Glad to hear it felt "right" instead of dragged out!
> I'm less sure around the IV chord (or what feels like a four chord) around :12-16. That feels to me like it should be a cadence returning to the I chord.
It is the IV chord (IV9 to be exact), and yes, the melody suggested a I chord / cadence to me as well: so I put the IV chord in the "deceptive cadence" category (and I'm a sucker for deceptive cadences). I also would like to think that this deceptive cadence works when it comes around again at 0:28, leading into the flat 6th chord (C9 in the key of E) at 0:30.
> But overall, a very interesting experiment, well worth making.
Thanks again! Here are all the chords I used (for the sake of simplicity, I'll write out what I was doing for each quarter beat):
