Thanks, Robert. My pleasure.

No problem. My pleasure. And yeah, piano is great for exactly that reason - you can see exactly what notes are being played. Good luck with your improv!!

Me too watching as 'non-Piano Playing Guitar Person', this is great.

Thanks, mate. Glad it helped.

Thanks, mate! Happy to help :)

No worries, mate. Thanks for the comment :)

No worries, mate. Glad it helped!

+TheHologr4m No worries, Hologr4m

No worries, Nick :)

No worries, Susan. Thanks for the message :)

Exactly

Thank you, good sir!

blue my mind haha.....its all starting to make sense now!

+Vanessa Challis Hello Vanessa. You can target whichever guide tone you like. You can mix and match 3rds and 7ths. In fact, it works especially well in a cycle of 5ths progression if you alternate between the two. This way you get a nice, smooth, descending scale. For example: Am7 - target 3rd - C Dm7 - target 7th - C G7 - target 3rd - B CMaj7 - target 7th - B FMaj7 - target 3rd - A and so on. That way the targeted note either repeats or just descends one step. this can create a really harmonically strong and well structured melody. And thank you kindly for the compliment.

Thank you

Yep, piano is definitely out of tune in this vid. Has since been tuned :)

I was about to say the same. It's out of tune. Which is very expected for a "tempered" instrument.

In this case, I would refer to the end of the video when he talks about extensions. Ultimately the goal of playing to the guide tones is to play the notes that most identify the character of a chord. In the case of an X6 chord, it would be the 3rd and the 6th.

Also, as a classical upright bassist, I feel your pain. Just know that X6 chords do not have a 7th unless stated. In which case it would usually be noted as a 7 chord of some sort with add6 at the end of the chord symbol. In jazz this chord is uncommon because a 13 chord would have the 6th voiced nearly an octave upwards from the 7th so there is less clashing. Hope this helps!

You are right that the third in the Em7 chord is G. In the song, the Em7 is usually followed by an E7 chord, with the G moving up to a G#. In a way this completes the circle because the dominant seventh chord likes to resolve to a major or minor chord a perfect fifth below. So in this case E7 -> Am.

You can most certainly target the 7th and create your own 7th chord. You could also target the 9th and create a Cadd9, or target the 6th and create a C6. The 7th and 9th will sound quite jazzy, while the 6th will sound quite pure and consonant.

Very good question, and very helpful answer!

Sometimes the bass also doesn't play the root, so you have a completely rootless chord. The guide tones should be harmonically strong enough for you to follow the chord progression. If you just play the guide tones of one chord by itself, yes, that sounds hollow and like it's missing something, but in the context of a progression the guide tones are enough. Try playing a 251 using only guide tones, and you should hopefully hear that it is in fact a 251 progression. Even without the assistance of the root. Playing with the root note can create a stronger sense of movement, but it really is not necessary. As strange as it may sound, the root is superfluous.

@@WalkThatBass are you sure it's superfluous objectively I mean not just because you personally have an advanced ear and understanding of music so you don't need it, but most beginning musicians would still need to hear the bass in order to define the chords? I would like also to understand how when you hear just the guide tones how do you ensure the ear hears it as guide tones and not as the bass and fifth? thanks again!

Everything in music is subjective. These are just rules that musicians have generally agreed upon. You're more than welcome to disagree. This is an art rather than a science. Beginners may indeed struggle to hear a chord progression using only guide tones. They will also struggle to hear a chord progression using 7th chords. This is why ear training is so important. We've likely just learned to hear chords in terms of their guide tones. I don't think it's an intrinsic law of music or anything like that. In the same way as we've learned to expect a G7 to be followed by a C chord. Or to hear chords as built in thirds. There's no iron law that states it must be so. We've just played those the V-I cadence so many times that we now expect to hear it. That means that it is subjective, but this doesn't mean that it's not real. I don't really want to get too philosophical, but the term 'objective' doesn't really make sense here - we perceive everything through our senses which are by definition subjective. If by 'objective' you mean 'most (jazz) musicians agree that the root doesn't matter' - then it is objective. If by 'objective' you mean 'it must be so and cannot be otherwise under any circumstances' - then it is certainly not that. But try it for yourself. Play a 251 in C using only guide tones. F C | F B | E B The FB creates a tritone which creates dissonance that wants to resolve. Play the same progression using root and 5th. D A | D G | C G It doesn't nearly have the same tension and resolution as when you used the guide tones. That's because it's missing that tritone interval. That is what gives the chord its quality. You can make an even stronger resolution by using the root at the end. F C | F B | E C The root can be useful, but it is not strictly necessary according to the currently accepted theoretical framework/paradigm in which we analyse music.

@@WalkThatBass thank you very much for the detailed explanation

LOL, just because you don’t believe it doesn’t mean it’s not true.

Nah, he lives out in the bush. Takes the piano tuner 7 hours to get there in a single-engined Cessna 🦘🦘

Glad to hear it. Yeah, this whole channel is kind of designed for people who have come from Classical and want to get into Jazz. Turns out, quite a lot of people learn classical but don't get taught many of these fundamental concepts (myself included before I transition over from Classical to Jazz).

P.S. I've never thought about that before. That's an interesting thought...