Tunes using the Coltrane chord sequences

[Free For All]

I wrote a rhythm changes tune this week (by coincidence on Trane's birthday!) using the Giant Steps chord sequence in a few spots. Have to say it turned out pretty nice, I'm looking forward to playing it w/the jazz faculty group. I wanted to write a tune that contained some of the Trane changes but still kept the essence of a "rhythm changes" progression. I like the idea of using the Trane changes as PART of the tune as opposed to ALL of the tune. I tend to like Trane tunes like Moment's Notice and Lazybird more than Giant Steps and Countdown. I've heard some impressive performances of the latter two (by others as well as Trane), but the tunes themselves still seem like basically "modulation exercises" to me and I've never really connected with them musically. Did Trane ever play Giant Steps and/or Countdown again after recording them?

I'm not aware of a rhythm changes-type tune that uses the Giant Steps or Countdown sequences. Anyone come across one? I'm sure there have got to be some out there......maybe someone like Dave Liebman wrote one. Trane's 26-2 is a variation of Confirmation (AABA) and Satellite is a variation of How High the Moon (ABAB). Both are 32 bar tunes but neither is considered a "rhythm changes" tune.

The bridge of Have You Met Miss Jones? contains probably the best known example of that major third modulation and some say that it might have influenced Trane's explorations- I don't know if that's actually true or not. HYMMJ is a very hip tune considering it was written in the mid 1930s.

It's fun to play around with those chords. Modulation by major thirds is a very interesting sound, but it's really hard to do something with it that doesn't sound totally Trane-esque.

[Joe G]

More later, but for now: nice!

[marcello]

I have one right off the top of my head:

Joe Locke - "Appointment in Orvieto" (Part 1)

Part 2

Joe Locke - Vibes

Rosario Giuliani - Alto

Jonathan Kreisberg - Guitar

Jay Anderson - Bass

Joe LaBarbera - Drums

[Free For All]

Thanks for posting that, Tom! An AABA tune using the Giant Steps form for the "A" sections of the blowing changes, very nice.

[7/4]

Nice topic. I wish knew enough to contribute, my elbows hurt!

[Alexander Hawkins]

Not being flippant, but that modulating in 3rds rather than 4ths/5ths is a Schubert-type thing as well...

Yeah...the bridge to HYMMJ is cool...also quite treacherous, depending on what you're expecting!!! (Or is that just me? )

[Michael Weiss]

If you put Countdown changes on the first four bars:

| Bb Db7 | Gb A7 | D F7 | Bb | Bb7 | Eb etc....

Unwieldy! Because you can't rest (harmonically) right after the cycle. You have to keep changing chords every two beats.

I like to put Countdown changes in the first four bars of the bridge of What is This Thing Called Love:

C-7 Db7 | Gb A7 | D F7 | Bb | Ab7 | Ab7 | G7 | G7 |

Edited September 25, 2009 by Michael Weiss

[AllenLowe]

it's been a long time, but I remember Jaki Byard sitting at a piano somewhere and going through the zillion ways to play rhythm changes - and ending up with a Giant Steps thing -

Edited September 25, 2009 by AllenLowe

[Free For All]

If you put Countdown changes on the first four bars:

| Bb Db7 | Gb A7 | D F7 | Bb | Bb7 | Eb etc....

I think you meant Giant Steps there.

I like that What Is This Thing bridge- that's pretty much the same as Trane's Fifth House bridge, right?

You can also use the Countdown sequence on the A sections of that tune:

lG-7 Ab7 l Db E7 l A C7 l F- / / / l D-7 Eb7 l Ab B7 l E G7 l C / / / l

EDIT: Are those also the changes Trane uses/implies for Fifth House "A" sections? I've got to check that out.

Here's my rhythm changes progression:

l F Ab7 l Db E7 l A / / / l G-7 C7 l C-7 F7 l Bb Db7 l Gb / / / l G-7 C7l

l F Ab7 l Db E7 l A / / / l G-7 C7 l C-7 F7 l Bb Db7 l Gb C7l F / / / l

l C-7 / / / l F7 / / / l Bb / / / l Ab-7 Db7 l Gb / / / l E-7 A7 l D / / / l G-7 C7l

l F Ab7 l Db E7 l A / / / l G-7 C7 l C-7 F7 l Bb Db7 l Gb C7l F / / / l

I based my bridge on the rhythm changes bridge that goes to the IV chord.

Edited September 25, 2009 by Free For All

[DukeCity]

I like that What Is This Thing bridge- that's pretty much the same as Trane's Fifth House bridge, right?

You can also use the Countdown sequence on the A sections of that tune:

lG-7 Ab7 l Db E7 l A C7 l F- / / / l D-7 Eb7 l Ab B7 l E G7 l C / / / l

EDIT: Are those also the changes Trane uses/implies for Fifth House "A" sections? I've got to check that out.

Here's my rhythm changes progression:

l F Ab7 l Db E7 l A / / / l G-7 C7 l C-7 F7 l Bb Db7 l Gb / / / l G-7 C7l

l F Ab7 l Db E7 l A / / / l G-7 C7 l C-7 F7 l Bb Db7 l Gb C7l F / / / l

l C-7 / / / l F7 / / / l Bb / / / l Ab-7 Db7 l Gb / / / l E-7 A7 l D / / / l G-7 C7l

l F Ab7 l Db E7 l A / / / l G-7 C7 l C-7 F7 l Bb Db7 l Gb C7l F / / / l

I based my bridge on the rhythm changes bridge that goes to the IV chord.

I've always thought of "Fifth House" as being loosely based on "What Is This Thing", so it's all kinda the same thing.

Nice Rhythm changes!

Slightly off topic: using the "other" bridge that goes to IV, one of my teachers (guitarist Jack Petersen) used to talk about a "Sears & Roebuck" bridge and a "Montgomery Ward" bridge (implying that they were very common). One of them was the actual Rhythm bridge and the other was the "other" one, going to IV (like Honeysuckle Rose).

Anyone here familiar with the terms "Sears & Roebuck" and "Montgomery Ward" for those bridges? Which one is which?

[Free For All]

Slightly off topic: using the "other" bridge that goes to IV, one of my teachers (guitarist Jack Petersen) used to talk about a "Sears & Roebuck" bridge and a "Montgomery Ward" bridge (implying that they were very common). One of them was the actual Rhythm bridge and the other was the "other" one, going to IV (like Honeysuckle Rose).

Anyone here familiar with the terms "Sears & Roebuck" and "Montgomery Ward" for those bridges? Which one is which?

I've heard that terminology used by Jerry Coker in his Hearin' the Changes book. His M.W. bridge is the one that goes to the IV and S.R. is the typical dominant chord cycle of I Got Rhythm. He uses those terms to indicate how common those two variations are. Of course, both MW and SR are disappearing from popular culture, so the reference is probably lost on younger people.

I use that book for my jazz ear training class, I like it a lot.

[DukeCity]

I've heard that terminology used by Jerry Coker in his Hearin' the Changes book. His M.W. bridge is the one that goes to the IV and S.R. is the typical dominant chord cycle of I Got Rhythm. He uses those terms to indicate how common those two variations are. Of course, both MW and SR are disappearing from popular culture, so the reference is probably lost on younger people.

I use that book for my jazz ear training class, I like it a lot.

I've seen that book, but haven't really checked it out. Thanks for the info!

Kids today... don't get me started. I just wish they'd get the hell off my lawn. (we need a "grumpy old man" emoticon!)

[DukeCity]

Back on topic, one of my favorite "Coltrane Changes" tunes is 26-2. I'm able to hear enough of Confirmation changes in it that I can better appreciate how the Coltrane matrix fits over it.

[fasstrack]

I guess I'll be the wet blanket here by saying Giant Steps changes never did much for me. Trane is a great musician and wanted to expand his harmonic vista, and it's all cool---but when I hear that stuff played usually even at its best it's clever music, a labyrinth. I just like more space to roam around in. It's crowded, that's all, and bugs me a bit. The best Giant Steps solo I've heard in terms of pure musicality (other than Trane himself) was by Tom Harrell on Paul Robertson: Old Friends, New Friends.

I think tertial (speaking of pretentiousness modulations are nothing new, maybe they were in jazz at the time. But we've always been like 50 years behind classical music harmonically. And the funny thing is that Trane himself, after reaching his limit with thick chordal structures, opened it up with a much less dense approach---sort of like Debussy after Wagner.

BTW, no diss on your thread intended. But I guess let the ass-kicking begin. I'm a big boy.

Edited September 25, 2009 by fasstrack

[DukeCity]

I guess I'll be the wet blanket here by saying Giant Steps changes never did much for me. Trane is a great musician and wanted to expand his harmonic vista, and it's all cool---but when I hear that stuff played usually even at its best it's clever music, a labyrinth. I just like more space to roam around in. It's crowded, that's all, and bugs me a bit. The best Giant Steps solo I've heard in terms of pure musicality (other than Trane himself) was by Tom Harrell on Paul Robertson: Old Friends, New Friends.

I think tertial (speaking of pretentiousness modulations are nothing new, maybe they were in jazz at the time. But we've always been like 50 years behind classical music harmonically. And the funny thing is that Trane himself, after reaching his limit with thick chordal structures, opened it up with a much less dense approach---sort of like Debussy after Wagner.

BTW, no diss on your thread intended. But I guess let the ass-kicking begin. I'm a big boy.

I hear you. It can get to be a real obstacle course! In addition to 26-2, I really like the tunes where Trane just drops in a little curve ball on otherwise standard changes, like on the bridge to Body & Soul or the bridge of The Night Has A Thousand Eyes. Just enough to catch your ear, but not so much as to become cumbersome. Interesting to me that McCoy would often opt out of those subs on his solos.

[Michael Weiss]

like on the bridge to Body & Soul or the bridge of The Night Has A Thousand Eyes. ... Interesting to me that McCoy would often opt out of those subs on his solos.

He sure plays them on "Coltrane's Sound."

[Free For All]

I guess I'll be the wet blanket here by saying Giant Steps changes never did much for me. Trane is a great musician and wanted to expand his harmonic vista, and it's all cool---but when I hear that stuff played usually even at its best it's clever music, a labyrinth. I just like more space to roam around in. It's crowded, that's all, and bugs me a bit. The best Giant Steps solo I've heard in terms of pure musicality (other than Trane himself) was by Tom Harrell on Paul Robertson: Old Friends, New Friends.

I think tertial (speaking of pretentiousness modulations are nothing new, maybe they were in jazz at the time. But we've always been like 50 years behind classical music harmonically. And the funny thing is that Trane himself, after reaching his limit with thick chordal structures, opened it up with a much less dense approach---sort of like Debussy after Wagner.

BTW, no diss on your thread intended. But I guess let the ass-kicking begin. I'm a big boy.

Hey man, it's no diss at all!

If you read my first post I said I'm not really a fan of Trane tunes that are ONLY about the matrix- I think of those cycles as a MEANS to an end, not the end itself. I think Giant Steps et al were exercises to him, ideas/concepts that led him elsewhere. As I said, as far as I'm aware he never did much with those tunes after recording them, but he did assimilate the harmonic aspects into his advancing vocabulary.

So I'm essentially agreeing with you, Joel! No ass-kicking from me!

(waiting for Sangrey to weigh in on this........ )

Edited September 25, 2009 by Free For All

[JSngry]

Yeah. sometimes he'll superimpose them over the base harmonies of his later "modal" work. But that's just one of many things he does.

As for me, I'm on the record of being in the "been there, tried that, couldn't find a reason to keep trying, anybody who does, go for it" camp. But hell, these days, I feel like even a few notes is still playing too much, so I probably have nothing of merit to add, although on a personal note, I still dig Ornette's notion of letting the melody define the underlying changes rather than doing it the other way around, although there again, it ain't a melody or a changes world any more, even Ornette is "old" now, Trane damn sure is, lord knows I love 'em both, but...it's a rhythm & texture world, so, hell... I'm too young to relate to the then and too old to actually do the now, so...good luck, all y'all!

[DukeCity]

like on the bridge to Body & Soul or the bridge of The Night Has A Thousand Eyes. ... Interesting to me that McCoy would often opt out of those subs on his solos.

He sure plays them on "Coltrane's Sound."

I went back and listened to TNHATE from Coltrane's sound, and yes, the subs are there on McCoy's solo, but to my ears they're just barely there in the first 4 bars, then stronger on the 2nd 4 bars.

On the first bridge of McCoy's solo, it sounds like Steve Davis is a little late getting off the pedal, so that sets the first phrase a little askew, and McCoy leaves some space where those subs happen.

So much for the clarity of my memory! It's possible I may have been...uh...less-than-clear headed during some of my listening sessions in the past.

[Free For All]

TNHATE

Don't be a hater, Glenn!

[JSngry]

Especially against Tennessee!

[fasstrack]

I guess I'll be the wet blanket here by saying Giant Steps changes never did much for me. Trane is a great musician and wanted to expand his harmonic vista, and it's all cool---but when I hear that stuff played usually even at its best it's clever music, a labyrinth. I just like more space to roam around in. It's crowded, that's all, and bugs me a bit. The best Giant Steps solo I've heard in terms of pure musicality (other than Trane himself) was by Tom Harrell on Paul Robertson: Old Friends, New Friends.

I think tertial (speaking of pretentiousness modulations are nothing new, maybe they were in jazz at the time. But we've always been like 50 years behind classical music harmonically. And the funny thing is that Trane himself, after reaching his limit with thick chordal structures, opened it up with a much less dense approach---sort of like Debussy after Wagner.

BTW, no diss on your thread intended. But I guess let the ass-kicking begin. I'm a big boy.

I hear you. It can get to be a real obstacle course! In addition to 26-2, I really like the tunes where Trane just drops in a little curve ball on otherwise standard changes, like on the bridge to Body & Soul or the bridge of The Night Has A Thousand Eyes. Just enough to catch your ear, but not so much as to become cumbersome. Interesting to me that McCoy would often opt out of those subs on his solos.

I like Spiral, Like Sonny, Moment's Notice. Naima, Alabama, and After the Rain are real compositions and beautiful, especially 'After'.

I also meant to add to my original statement that Trane reversed the process----when he went to simpler chord structures on the forms he started hitting you with all kinds of angles on one chord. He was doing that already with Miles and on Prestige but he really brought it out later. This also can wear me out listening. What makes Trane's playing listenable in that phase is that sound, the lyricism, the cry he had in his sound. He was able to make a lot of that stuff sound more melodic than it actually was.

[fasstrack]

I guess I'll be the wet blanket here by saying Giant Steps changes never did much for me. Trane is a great musician and wanted to expand his harmonic vista, and it's all cool---but when I hear that stuff played usually even at its best it's clever music, a labyrinth. I just like more space to roam around in. It's crowded, that's all, and bugs me a bit. The best Giant Steps solo I've heard in terms of pure musicality (other than Trane himself) was by Tom Harrell on Paul Robertson: Old Friends, New Friends.

I think tertial (speaking of pretentiousness modulations are nothing new, maybe they were in jazz at the time. But we've always been like 50 years behind classical music harmonically. And the funny thing is that Trane himself, after reaching his limit with thick chordal structures, opened it up with a much less dense approach---sort of like Debussy after Wagner.

BTW, no diss on your thread intended. But I guess let the ass-kicking begin. I'm a big boy.

Hey man, it's no diss at all!

If you read my first post I said I'm not really a fan of Trane tunes that are ONLY about the matrix- I think of those cycles as a MEANS to an end, not the end itself. I think Giant Steps et al were exercises to him, ideas/concepts that led him elsewhere. As I said, as far as I'm aware he never did much with those tunes after recording them, but he did assimilate the harmonic aspects into his advancing vocabulary.

So I'm essentially agreeing with you, Joel! No ass-kicking from me!

(waiting for Sangrey to weigh in on this........ )

Right, he assimilated it. Well put. You know what record I love, where he really put modal devices to good work: Coltrane Plays the Blues. He could really stack those things on a simple structure like Mr. Knight.