jazz players/ looking for input

Here's something that always intrigued me; When soloing over a 3 6 2 5 turnaround (Cmaj; E-7 A7 D-7 G7) do you think of the 3 & 6 chords as a descending 2/5 progression or do you think of the whole progression as being diatonic and the 6 chord acting as a color chord. I've asked many players this question & have gotten many mixed responses.

There seems to be some more people on the board these days interested in jazz so I thought I'd try this one again.

I would probably approach it the same way I would approach a I, vi, ii, V progression. Regarding the iii chord, Em7 (E, G, B, D), I would either base a line around the Em7 arpeggio or the Cmaj7 arpeggio. I look at either as some form of the I chord (C maj9). If you are dealing with A7 instead of Am7 I would probably include a C# in the line, but I still think I would base the overall line on I, vi, ii, V in the key of C. And you could leave the C# out entirely to give that added tension with a line based in C Major as well.

[Edited by trebledamage on 12-15-2001 at 11:35 PM]

You could really look at it either way. If you treated that progression as a descending ii V progression, as a practical matter, you would be using the same finger patterns for the Em7 to A7 and the Dm7 to G7. I prefer looking at it diatonically because from a theory standpoint I know that all of my lines are based from one scale (C Major) with the addition of a few passing tones here or there to add color to the line. (Gee Chris, where did I get that idea from???)

that's what I do too, use a scale, and than us the chord' s tones, so I guess, I'd see it as a coloring chord (and also, I see the E7 as a Cmaj79, am I weird doctor??)

I think that's what Steve Vai does as well. I'll ask him the next time I bump into him. (Lal --That snik guy has some real issues, doesn't he?)

[Edited by trebledamage on 12-17-2001 at 02:03 PM]

You're right trebledamage!!!
But I thought that steve used the technique Satch has made popular, the famous "pitch axis theory", while I color my solos by throwing notes that have to do with the chord change, but still consider my original scale has the structure of the solo...

For years I always approached it as a decending 2/5 progression....but lately I've reveresed my way of thinking and now approach it as a diatonic progression (although this goes against all of theory). But when you think about it the turnaround progression is there to outline the 1 chord, and when you hear the progression used in a song it sounds pretty diatonic. Plus I find I play much more interesting lines this way, were as if I'm approaching it as a descsending 2/5 I tend to play patterns.
This is a great question to throw at a jazz player cause you will always get a different answer each time.

Hey T.D...if you get a chance ask Jimmy the scale he uses over Giant Steps (he made up a scale that works over the 1st 8 bars of G.S...I used to know it, but have since forgotten it. I remember it started on B and was either half major/half diminished or vice versa).

I will try to remember to ask him when I see him next, which probably won't be until after the holidays.

As for this turn around question, Even though there is an A7 instead of an Am7 in the progression, I'm not sure that it actually violates one of the rules. A7 certainly doesn't fit into the C Major on its own, but isn't it considered the V of the II chord? Somehow that's important. However, I'm really not sure how. I'm just learning a lot of this stuff. I think the progression works out to be:

iii, V/ii, ii , V
Em7, A7 , Dm7, G7

Somehow, the placement of the A7 between the Em7 and Dm7 makes the whole thing work, I guess because the Em7 and the Dm7 would be chords contained in both the C Major and D Major scales. Again, this stuff is still way over my head. I just like to think of the A7 as a color chord that "somehow magically" works in place of the Am7.

last time, in a thread, we talked about the picardy third, when you major a 7 chord, it's a cool rule, since you can pretty much major any dominant 7 chord, doesn't it apply here?

T.D. your right, the correct analysation (?) of that would be 5 of 2 to the 2 to the 5 to the 1. The E-7 would be the 2 chord of the A7 (its common practice in jazz to insert a minor 7th chord before a dominant). This is also known as back-cycling, approaching your destination chord (Cmaj7) in root movements of 5ths (G is the 5 of C, D the 5 of G, A the 5 of D,& E the 5 of A). But most jazz players just refer to this progression as a 3 6 2 5.

Lali..a picardy 3rd is when you change the maj4 chord into a minor. Ex; D C C- G

then the guy who told me that was wrong.. He said it was majoring the third of a dominant 7 chord...