Cycle 4/Cycle 5

[thesnowinmyhand]

After all these comments I have seen about cycle 4/5 progressions, I wondered about a couple of things. First of all is this cycle thing just an excercise tool or is it used for composing/writing as well? And if that is the case then do you adjust the quality of the chord to match the key you are in or are you cycling keys as well (if that is a possible concept...).
In other words if I have a cycle 5 progression starting with C:

Is it C-G-D-A or C-G-Dmin-Amin?

Or do I miss something completely here? (after all I am only a rock/blues guy who never thought about this before....:)

ready for the weekend,

Robert

[szulc]

First of all is this cycle thing just an excercise tool or is it used for composing/writing as well?
It is both.
And if that is the case then do you adjust the quality of the chord to match the key you are in or are you cycling keys as well You do both depending on the circumstance.
C-G-Dmin-Amin is a diatonic type cycle meaning within a major scale or particular key.
C-G-D-A is a non-diatonic meaning the chord quality remains constant and it passes through many keys.
By the way Cycle 4 is much more common.
(A D G C)

[thesnowinmyhand]

Thanks for your quick answer,

I understand the diatonic way of using this, but to the non - diatonic example:

Could you say anything about what kind of scale to use solo over something like that without playing the actual changes.

and second is it a common thing in actual musical applications such a non-diatonic cylce 4 progression or only of 'academical' interest?

thanks again,

Robert

[szulc]

Could you say anything about what kind of scale to use solo over something like that without playing the actual changes. Sorry Charlie (Robert) you must play the changes! No scale is going to get you through this!and second is it a common thing in actual musical applications such a non-diatonic cylce 4 progression or only of 'academical' interest? Very common in jazz and standards. ( All of me, etc.....)Did you se my post on motives?

[thesnowinmyhand]

Yes I did, this is wat brought out the questions: I was looking at the patterns you posted, but I think I undestand thanks!
I also think if i wanna use this type of knowledge it is time to learn how improvise over chord changes....

grzt

Robert

[Bongo Boy]

Thought I'd post this here because it's fairly well related.

In reviewing my The Complete Guitarist, a book that gives me no end of grief, I'm going over a section of jazz progressions and specifically, a 'standard' II-V-I progression, which you can see is a nice little cycle-4 thing.

The example is based on C maj. First 4 bars do a II-V-I-IV, which of course is Dm7 G7 CM7 FM7. Second 4 bars start with a II-V-I as well, but based on the relative minor of C maj, A min. Book shows Bm7b5 E7 Am7 A7.

So I get out my pencil and paper to check this (ignore the A7 for now), and I get that II-V-I in A min should be: Bm7b5 Em7 Am7.

The book specifically states that the 6th bar is "the V of the relative minor". And the E7 is repeated several times. please take a shot at explaining this to me if you can--I'm pretty pissed right about now--but I'm all ears. My first impression is that someone wants a "V" to be a dom7 so badly that they make the V of a minor scale a dom7 even when it isn't.

Have I not done my homework? Am I not working hard enough at this crap? Are the guitar gods punishing me for that crack about not liking solos?

[szulc]

The Natural (Aeolian) Minor scale has a minor v chord. The cadence from v to i is WEAK but the cadence from V to i is strong. So some brillant Baroque or pre-Baroque composer came up with a compromise, replace the G in an A minor scale with G# ( which, by the way, gives a strong leading tone, as well) and now you have the strong V to i cadence, someone then coined the term 'Harmonic Minor' because the V to i cadence was strengthened.

Now in a similar fashion, the Dorian Minor has a WEAK v to i cadence, so we perform the same trick make C a C# and now the cadence becomes V to i which once again is strengthened, this is the scale we all know and love as the 'Melodic Minor' technically the Ascending Melodic Minor, more commonly referred to today as the 'Jazz Minor'

[Bongo Boy]

This is what rankles my butt...the author simply wanted to display a 'standard jazz sequence' without getting into the whys and wherefores. But there are two issues I have with this: first, he does a good job of explaining the natural, harmonic and melodic minors elsewhere in the book (earlier in the book, in fact). So, he COULD have taken the time to say something like you just did. Second, (in my opinion) he makes a blatantly incorrect statement: E7 is NOT the V of the relative minor.

Okay, so it could be a typo. In any case, when we refer to the jazz minor, is this a case where ascending and descending are identical? I think I've picked up that it is now mostly in classical only where ascending/descending are distinguished--is that what you've found also?

[szulc]

E7 is th V7 of A Minor Harmonic and Em7 is the v7 of A Natural minor, I don't think his statement is technically incorrect.

It is entirely possible that the author of your book is not aware of the origins of the Harmonic Minor scale, many people aren't.

The Jazz minor is the same up and down. The traditional Melodic minor is different up and down.

Chill, just breathe the music.

[Bongo Boy]

Ah! I think I've just learned something--sorry, it was an accident. The author used V and relative minor, so I assumed he wasn't using case sensitive notation to mean major/minor degrees. In ANY case, it doesn't matter--I understand what you're saying.

Originally posted by szulc
Chill, just breathe the music. I hesitate to--I'm in Burbank right now.

However, in about 2 hours I expect to be sitting in a club listening to John Pisano and other great musicians, enjoying a delightful beverage, and chillin'.

[nateman]

Bongo Boy- are you capitalizing everything the same way it is in the book? i.e., is it possible they said "ii-V-I-IV" in Cmaj and "ii-V-i" in Amin? if so, that could have been their way of indicating they wanted a E7 rather than an Em7 (by using a capital V instead of a lower-case v). if not...then they probably just thought it would be obvious. ;)

[nateman]

once again, i may be a little behind the times. ;)

[szulc]

Nateman,
You live in the same town where they make Warmoth guitar parts!

Cool!

[nateman]

is that in puyallup? i knew it was somewhere in this area. Bizarro bought a Warmoth neck for the guitar he is building, and he was ticked off because they won't let you pick stuff up directly from the factory. even though it's practically right around the corner, i think he had to get it shipped to him.

either way, i am more than happy to bask in their coolness. :D

[szulc]

I have three Warmoth Strats.
They are great.

[Bizarro]

Actually, JFK bought the Warmoth neck. I went with the USA Custom Guitar products which is based in Tacoma.

USA is sort of like Warmoth used to be. They're a small company and you can just walk right in and talk to everyone, get a tour, ask a bazillion questions, and on and on and on... They were really helpful so I figured they earned my business.

A buddy of mine from UW went to Warmoth when it was in the original factory. He said it used to be the same way with them. Warmoth is HUGE now!

Both companies put out very high quality product.

[nateman]

my mistake! i still seem to recall that you were ticked you couldn't just walk in and buy something from Warmoth. i guess the end result, was that you didn't buy anything from them at all!

[Bongo Boy]

Originally posted by nateman
Bongo Boy- are you capitalizing everything the same way it is in the book? i.e., is it possible they said "ii-V-I-IV" in Cmaj and "ii-V-i" in Amin?Yes...he uses caps exclusively. But I was a little harsh, and I'm a little embarassed: had I recognized b5 as equivalent to a tritone interval, in the context of substitutions I wouldn't have had a problem. Even after you (or someone) said that the author was probably using these interchangeably, I STILL didn't get it. I had to write it out on paper. Main reason is that the mental image I have had of tritone (until now) has been, mistakenly, that of an M3 (3 note names, not 4).

So..to recap, he used the phrase "the V of the relative minor", but nowhere in the book does he use upper- or lower-case to mean major or minor. So, I got confused. In addition--I was also under the mistaken belief that a "V" would ALWAYS be a major/dominant, and that 'v' would be self-contradicting. This is mainly because so far, I've spent almost all of my time thinking in terms of major only. But wait, there's more! The idea that you can take the v of a major Aeolian mode, change an interval as required and then say that you now have a V was not a natural idea to me--you know, as a beginner I'm in the mode of "it is what it is" and that's that.

Finally, although the book is by no means perfect and glosses over some important points that are critical for a beginner (at least mine), I should have calmed down before criticizing the poor guy. I think the 2nd or 3rd edition will make the book a top recommendation--it's a beautifully graphic thing, but really needs some work with the narrative.

I learned quite a bit in this thread--sorry about kicking and screaming through it all!!

[szulc]

Main reason is that the mental image I have had of tritone (until now) has been, mistakenly, that of an M2 (3 note names, not 4). What do you mean by this?

[Bongo Boy]

M2 was a typo--I've corrected the original post.

I meant that, when I'd read 'tritone' (until now), in my head I'd actually picture THREE adjacent note names, not six adjacent semitones--I never corrected that mistake (or, apparently, did the math!) until this b5 issue came up. So, when I saw, in writing, the "5", it really shoved a wrench in the wheels.

Thank goodness it got cleared up, eh?