PG Music Home
I have about ten fake books, not to mention lots of multiple instances of BIAB tunes. The question is, how do you know version is "correcter"?

To pick just one example ... I was upbraided recently for playing the wrong changes to the bridge of Bernie's Tune. The lead sheet I had used, in Hal Leonard's Ultimate Jazz Fakebook, has formal copyright information, with date and composer, but the guitar player said my chords were wrong.

On the other hand, Real Book 3 has no copyright info on the lead sheet but the chords match what the guitar player insisted were the right ones.

On the other other hand, the lead sheet in Library of Musician's Jazz carries no copyright but the chords match Ultimate Jazz Fakebook. Finally, the chords in Colorado Cookbook match Real Book 3.

I don't want to debate this specific song! I know that a lot of these books were compiled by (semi)casual listeners trying to annotate what they heard, but, short of tracking down the original sheet music for 2500 songs, how does anyone really know which chords are "the real chords" ???
When I need the right chords to a tune I don't know, I might get the basic changes from a fake book and then listen to one of the heavyweights playing the tune and get the better chords from their recording. No one I work with plays the fake book changes as is without changing the chords for better substitute chords. For instance the first 2 bars of "What's New", C///| Bbm9/Eb7/| or Gm11/C7/| Bbm9/Eb7/ or F#b5/B13b9/| Bbm9/Eb7| In many instances the fake book changes are wrong, so listening to recordings is a better source for the best chords. The longer you play, you will recognize the places where you can use substitute chords. It also depends on who you like to listen to. The chords that Bill Evans may play on a given song will probably be different than Oscar Peterson playing the same tune. Later, Ray


My first thought is why you'd concede that the guitar player was right. If you have it on paper and he is pulling out of his head, maybe he has been playing wrong all along.

"Right" parts grow like folklore. "That's the way I have always played it" doesn't trump what is written on paper.
By the way, the changes in Real Book 3 for "Bernies Tune" are what what most people play. Later, Ray
Ray,

That is exactly the process I have used all of my life.

Later,
It's like playing 8 ball. Depends on what bar your in as to what the rules are, nobody plays by the official rules it seems.

Rob
Posted By: Mac Re: Comparing fake books ... how do you know ... - 11/13/12 03:12 PM
Hi Mel,

Out of all instrumentalists, it is almost always the guitar players who seem to be so rigid about which chords are "right" in a tune *grin*.

Here we likely have a case where the Hal Leonard chart uses chord substitution or possibly reharmonization of a standard. Those chords will work with the song, but are not going to be the same as the "original" version of he song, of course.

The idea of whether those chords are "right" or "wrong" is a matter of personal perception, really.

Of course, when there's another rhythm player who is being obstinate on the gig, I just elect to play whatever chords they think are "right" anymore, as those kind of people can prove to be quite obstinate about such rather trivial matters IMO.

When I don't know which sheet contains the chords as played on the original recording where these transcriptions were derived from, I try to find the original recording and compare to find out for myself what the original players did. YouTube often has the song published online where you can dig it for free, just play along with it and see if the chords really match up or not. Often a one-handed situation just to find that out.

Finally, I have noted quite a few instances where NONE of the fakebooks nailed every chord that is in the original performance. That's always a hoot when confronted by the person who thinks that they know the "right" chord or chords, dontcha know...

Side Note: Awhile back I worked with a young jazz guitarist who used his iPhone to display Realbook chords on the gig. This person was typical and was always accusing me of using those "wrong" chords. Of course.

The first thing I told him was that if he still had to use the chart in order to play the tune, well then he did not know the tune and thus wasn't really ready to play a gig!

The second thing I told him was that it was MY daggone jazz quartet, formed to feature my piano playing, and if I wanted to substitute a chord, if I wanted to reharmonize a passage or an entire song, that was my prerogative and the "right" thing to to would be to support the rest of the band in that situation rather than being so darned obtuse about harmonization. After all, it is indeed a JAZZ band.

Of course, he didn't take too kindly to such common sense notions -- and does not get the gig anymore...


--Mac
.
Chord subs seem to come easily and naturally on piano. Not so on guitar. The process of figuring out which finger and fret is doing what, and what to move to spell the new chord seems less intuitive on guitar. A random altered note om guitar just seems to come up discordant more often than on piano.

So I think I understand why a guitar players first reaction would be that a chord sub is the "wrong" chord.
Posted By: Mac Re: Comparing fake books ... how do you know ... - 11/13/12 07:56 PM
Quote:

.
Chord subs seem to come easily and naturally on piano. Not so on guitar. The process of figuring out which finger and fret is doing what, and what to move to spell the new chord seems less intuitive on guitar. A random altered note om guitar just seems to come up discordant more often than on piano.

So I think I understand why a guitar players first reaction would be that a chord sub is the "wrong" chord.




Try playin' a session with a guitarist who knows their stuff, man...


--Mac
In a minnit, mac. Guitarists in that class don't exactly grow on trees, you know.
Thanks, all! That's what I thought. I think.
Quote:

it was MY daggone jazz quartet, formed to feature my piano playing, and if I wanted to substitute a chord, if I wanted to reharmonize a passage or an entire song, that was my prerogative and the "right" thing to to would be to support the rest of the band in that situation rather than being so darned obtuse about harmonization. After all, it is indeed a JAZZ band.




Zackly. And let's not forget what a FAKE book is. It's a FAKE book. They are best attempts to document what might just be good mojo happening at a certain time and date by certain players.

It's jazz. Is there really a right way and a wrong way, as long as it sounds good? Just picked up Miles Davis' The Birth of the Cool, which has both studio and live cuts of the same songs for my 7th grader, who is turning out to be a real Jazz fan. Miles' band didn't play these songs exactly the same way studio to live. Which time were they right?

Maybe the person charting the HLP book was more classically trained, or prefers bebop over hard bop or whatever. Maybe they didn't really know how to transcribe and substituted chords that they knew.

I do this all the time when I have to play very simple worship songs, where the chord charts are very often over-simplified compared to what the guy on the studio or live recording was actually doing. Sometimes it's because the person writing out the chords is a keyboard player listening to a guitar player and they can't perfectly hear the 2nds and 4ths that result from a particular way of chording.

Very common for songs in G with modern worship band music:

G is played as follows, E to e strings: 3 2 0 0 3 3 That is fully G, no fancy oddball notes.
C is played as follows, x 3 2 0 3 3 (this is actually Cadd9 or C2, I think or depending on who you ask)
D is played as follows, x x 0 2 3 3 (this is Dsus4 I believe) often resolving off to what most players play for open D x x 0 2 3 2

But guess how it gets charted? That's right, just G, C, D -but if you play it that way, it doesn't get the ringing D on the b string that makes up the whole vibe of the guitar part in most cases!

Guitar players used to anchoring down their pinky and ring finger on the 3rd fret of the b and e strings to go between the chords know what that sounds like and can immediately 'go there' when they hear it on the recording, while the keyboard player, if that person doesn't play guitar, it's harder for them to hear/visualize it (I know they should be able to do it) and therefore they bang out something that does fit, even though it may not have the right timbre. Easy to write down G, C, D. Which one is right?

While I'm not a jazzer (though I wish I could be), I'm guessing the same happens with 'standards' depending on the perspective and experience of the person who did the charting.
I've done Bernies Tune for years. The only change we made is we do it as a fast samba. Around here anyway, you MUST show up with the original and usually correct Real Books 1, 2 & 3. No Hal Leonard or any of those copywritten crap things. Those are commercial books for students, not for gigging. The Real Books are 'supposed' to be accurate transcriptions of the original recording that made the song famous in the first place. No copyrights, the original Real Books have always been illegal until recently. Now they're available on Amazon for about $25. Just get the Real Books and be done with it.

Mel, it sounds to me like your guitarist was right. It doesn't matter if the chords are exactly correct or not. When everybody has Real Book 3 and it's Bernies Tune, everybody is on the same page.

It's also correct that these are Fake books. You're supposed to at least know how the tune goes and have some idea of what your part sounds like even if you don't have it memorized. When there's a note at bar 16 of the piano chart that says "Latin Feel" you should know if that's pure rhythm or a montuno. If I really don't know I tend to do both, play some latin clave rhythm with some montuno thrown in. Some Real Book charts do say montuno.

No unrehearsed casual jazz band does newer versions that another big name made a hit from, just the original one by the legendary original players like Bird, 'Trane, Silver, Brubeck, etc. If a bandleader has a different arrangement of some standard tune then it's his responsibility to hand out the charts to everybody. If he says it's stock then that means it's out of the Real Book and he'll just call out Book 2 page 273 or whatever. You better not have shown up with some other books. The only exception is occasionally someone will tell me to bring the Latin Real Book. No problemo.

As an aside, I have never, not once, worked with someone guitar player or no, who didn't understand this. But, I'm in LA there's so many solid players around here it's in every musician's DNA I guess.

Bob
I have 4 of Good Ol Mantooth's books. There are the 'normal' chords, and in red, his suggestions. Often there might be a minor 7th then moving somewhere.

I thought he was way up there, not just the normal play a 6th and a 9th type of guy.

That said, jazz piano and I are either me myself and I, or Band in a Box and I. I recently worked on a video not yet done, where I do a voice intro sounding just like a guy from the radio most Canadians who listened to CBC would know, and saying basically here's these 2 guys and John where the other 2 were Band in a Box guys. My wife really laughed at it and I'm going to trick my brother with it. He sings in a gospel trio and they use backing tracks, wireless miss, and man there are some good spots, but a lot of MUD. Lots of MUD. If you didn't know the piece you'd go WhAT??

Anyway, you got to have the basic chord and root right, then the guy with the lead can go wherever as long as the others just forget embellishing.
Quote:

In a minnit, mac. Guitarists in that class don't exactly grow on trees, you know.




Are you sure about that? There are plenty of guitarists who know their stuff around here, however they are not the metal/hard rock or folk players.

If your guitarist can not substitute chords from a fake book then you have the wrong guitarist in your band.
Posted By: Mac Re: Comparing fake books ... how do you know ... - 11/14/12 02:46 PM
Well, if you are still dealing with having to use Realbook on the bandstand, perhaps the real answer here is: LEARN THE SONGS and leave the book at home!

When I was a youngster, the old cats would not let you lug a Realbook nor a cheatsheet onto the stage if you wanted to jam with them. They'd send you home after very embarrasingly pointing out that you needed to learn the tune first. I didn't like hearing that at the time, but there are many things that we don't like to hear but turn out to be very good for us, eh?


Just sayin'...


--Mac
The old illegal Real Books had the philosophy, "If the chord is good enough to be played, it's good enough to be substituted" and unfortunately these changes became the lingua franca of jazz musicians. I'm not fond of many of the substitutions, but that's personal.

Hal Leonard is now publishing legal descendants of those Real Books and they claim to have corrected the errors in the old books. I wouldn't take them as the gospel truth either but I haven't used them very much.

I also sell fake disks with chord changes by Dick Hyman and Frank Mantooth. The books I used to compile these disks listed the "correct" chords in black ink and the substitutions in red ink. Both authors use good substitutions to give the standards a more contemporary sound. I like the Dick Hyman approach better.

Unfortunately many of the older standards didn't have the correct chords notated on the sheet music, but instead simplified the chords for ukelele players. In addition, no slash/bass chords were used, because the music was intended to be read by a pianist from the sheet music, perhaps with the ukelele player looking over his/her shoulder playing the simplified chords.

And to analyze the notes of the original sheet music to denote the chords is no sure way to do it either. After all, was that note in the melody supposed to be denote an add 13 or just a note in the melody over a 7th chord? Was that a passing tone or a short duration chord variation? So many things in music can be interpreted more than one way.

I have a friend with absolute pitch who rarely calls complex chords by their common names, but will call a C11 chord a Bb chord over a C chord or something like that.

Also thought the ages, many of the standards have been re-harmonized for more contemporary tastes.

So there is a lot of play with chord changes. To say any one set of chord changes is correct, is more often than not a false statement. It should be expressed as "These are the changes I use for the song."

If you have more than one fake book, or more than one musician playing chords in the band, decide on which ones you are going to use, which ones sound best to your collective ears, and just go with them.

I tend to avoid playing with people who say "My way is the right way" and are not open to suggestions by other musicians in the band. I use the Count Basie approach, a capable musician with a good attitude is more valuable than virtuosity with a bad attitude.

That's my 2 cents.
On a lot of the old music sheets there are chords that are automatically changed on sight. ie: Dmin6 to E7 is played Bmin7b5 to E7. In many cases a Cmaj7 to Cmin is played Cmaj7 to F13+11. On my trio gigs if I work with a new bassist I have chord sheets written out so we will be on the same page. Mac is right about the old jam sessions. You had better know the tune if you want to sit in. Back in the day I've seen quite a few players who were asked to get off the stage and not so politely either. Depending on who I'm playing with determines whether I can play sub chords or stick close to the original chords. Listen to Tony Bennett's accompanists. They're not playing "fake book chords". I'm only writing this in regard to jazz players. This doesn't apply to other genres (pop, rock). I also work with some very good vocalists and all of them like good chords as opposed to sheet music chords. As I posted earlier, I get a lot of the good chords from recordings of the heavys. Later, Ray
Posted By: Mac Re: Comparing fake books ... how do you know ... - 11/15/12 02:59 PM
Right on, Ray.

But while this thing can seem to be daunting at first, if one keeps working away at it, a little bit each day, or even each week, as time allows, the gray stuff between the ears and the ears keep on learning. At some point, one can start to actually HEAR the various chord substitutions in realtime -- and will find out that they can govern their playing accordingly.

That is the makings of a wonderful session experience, man.

I celebrate the fact that there is always more to learn, wouldn't have it any other way.


--Mac
Quote:

<...>
I celebrate the fact that there is always more to learn, wouldn't have it any other way.


--Mac



It's one of the best things about music. No matter how much you learn, there is always something else to know, a new adventure waits around the next corner.

I think this is what Sergei Rachmaninoff meant when he said, "Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music."

Notes
Posted By: Mac Re: Comparing fake books ... how do you know ... - 11/16/12 05:39 PM
At the reception after the opening performance of "Candide" a lady is purported to have asked Leonard Bernstein how long it took him to write the score.

He replied, "All my life."


--Mac
Ok, I'm gonna call a couple of you guys out, Mac, Ray others. This thread is basically about the Real Books and you guys are saying a good player should have this stuff memorized. There's approximately 500 tunes in each book.

I'm pretty you guys are talking about the top line "classic standards" like Autumn Leaves, Misty, Green Dolphin, As Time Goes By, the Sinatra, Duke, and Parker stuff, My Funny Valentine, Embraceable, things like that. Fine, I agree I know most of those too. But, when I say everybody in LA has to show up with the Real Books it's because of tunes like these from Book 1: Eighty-One pg 134. 502 Blues, pg 153. Forrest Flower, pg 158. Inner Urge, pg 229. Lucky Southern, pg 276. The Sorcerer, pg 398. Trieste, pg 435. Windows, pg 466. Book 2: Be Bop, pg 21. Dindi, pg 75. Groovy Samba, pg 130. In Pursuit Of The 27th Man, pg 167. Mr. Clean, pg 227. This I Dig Of You, pg 367. Watersign, pg 386.

These are just a few I saw going through the indexes that I've played more than once with various pick up bands over the last 10 years or so. There's a lot more. Some of those groups died and I haven't played their tunes for at least five years like Mr. Clean or The Sorcerer. There's others that I did one time and that's it. If you guys can tell me you have all 1,500 songs memorized, somebody can call Book 2, 408 Lunar Tune and you say, no problem I know that, I'll bow and scrape in front of you and allow myself to be thrown off your stage.

See, the thing is around here those classic standards we all know nobody wants to play any more, they're too boring and unless your crowd is over 75 they don't want to hear it either. I can do Ipanema or How High The Moon in my sleep. I'll certainly do them as requests of if the gig was specifically booked with those tunes in mind but otherwise, guys are liable to just open a book at random and say "Oh, Song For Bilbao, I heard this once, it's cool" and start playing. And that's another one, I've done it maybe 10 times in five years. Got it memorized?

Bob
Hi Bob. I do know most of the tunes you cited from Real Books 1 & 2. I have about 8,000 tunes on a Samsung 10.1 tablet, which I can call up at any time. On a jam session though, no one will be calling obscure tunes. Any session I've been at over the years, if you don't know the tune, you get off the stage. I've learned a lot of tunes over the last 50 years. I'm sure that Mac knows most of them also. Later, Ray
Posted By: Mac Re: Comparing fake books ... how do you know ... - 11/21/12 02:04 PM
Well, if the gig in your area requires that you have to take the Realbook onstage with you, so be it.

I am not trying to say that I "NEVER" take a Realbook onstage, I do it all the time. I have to. I take m laptop with the .pdf realbooks stored in it to those gigs, set it on the piano's musicboard and use it any time my stoopid brain needs the reference.

But I'm also here to tell you that there are some of God's children out there who can sit the gig and seem to have invredible memories concerning those Realbook tunes, man.

I have found that different areas of the country, even different venues in a localized area, have their own set of favorites to play. When encountering those songs that are new to me, I also have to use the chart. If I think that there will be repeat performances of that tune in my future, I do try to work out with the song at home and see if I can pound it into this old head so I can enjoy the freedom that comes from doing it that way.

Sometimes I've been called to play a tune that I thought I knew from having played it in the past from memory, only to get to somewhere in the middle and am at a loss. One thing that often gets me out of that situation is the ear. And experience with changes. Also the drill of transposing to the 12 keys when practicing. Of course, if worse comes to worse, SIT OUT for the parts not remembered or not clear and then come back in when you can. Since there are typically numerous repeated choruses in jazz while people "make speech" (solo), it often is the case that the several bars from a middle section that can't be recalled can be "found" or otherwise remembered after a few times through.

Same drill s transcribing, listen to the Bass (or the lowest note being played) which will give you the root of the chord in most instances, that can narrow down what is going on considerably. Learning to always know the Tonic of the chord and at least also the Dominant (5th) tone and being able to sing them or whistle, or just hear them in your head while the song is playing helps as well.

Some of you may not realize that there once was a time, not all that long ago, when Realbook was "illegal" due to copyright laws. Venues were sometimes called to pay fines or even possibly lose their royalty fee agreement for covering live playing of copyrighted works simply because somebody with an interest in such would see Realbooks onstage during performance. I think that situation surely played a role in the old school tradition as well.

But in situations cited such as the one given above by Bob, where the musicians are calling songs that are not familiar to you for whatever reason, by all means use the book if that is what you have to do. "When in Rome, do like a Roman."

Was not making hard fast "rule" or anything of the sort with my comment.

Was trying to say that, over the years I've found out that those songs where I really *know* the changes, the melody, etc. -- well, the performance of them, including the improvisation, takes on an entirely different light. And I've found a FREEDOM in that discipline. (But I'm the FIRST one to suffer memory loss... )

Hope this helps to clear things up.


--Mac
I have seen people read from the old, illegal Real Book for decades. I've also seen people who have stated that everything must be memorized.

Each extreme has its faults.

Generally I'd rather play with the people who keep the book on stage but don't have their eyes glued to it. They generally seem to have a better attitude and at least they are all playing the same changes.

I have no use for the angry musician on stage. It's called "playing" music for a reason. And you don't have to be angry to play jazz. Charlie Parker was very kind to his fellow musicians and he was one of the all-time greatest alto sax players. When I was very young, our rock and roll band played on a telethon right before the Dave Brubeck Quartet. Paul Desmond was very complimentary about my sax playing and very encouraging. Of course he was being very kind as I was 18 years old, playing rock and roll, and in the infancy of my my musical knowledge.

Of course you want to prepare yourself for the gig, you want to practice and be the best you can be, but when it comes time to performing for the public, if you can't have fun, I don't want to be on stage with you.

So back on topic. Any set of changes that the entire band agrees on are the right changes for them. Pick one and go with them. If you are jamming with two bands using two different books/changes, consider it a challenge and variety. And if it isn't fun, do something else.

That's my take on it anyway, YMMV.

Notes
Quote:

I have seen people read from the old, illegal Real Book for decades. I've also seen people who have stated that everything must be memorized.

Each extreme has its faults.

Generally I'd rather play with the people who keep the book on stage but don't have their eyes glued to it. They generally seem to have a better attitude and at least they are all playing the same changes.




I have my feet firmly planted in both camps. There's absolutely no doubt that knowing a tune cold is better than having to read it from a chart. But, there is also no doubt that where I live I have to show up with the books because of the huge number of tunes that may get called. It's standard procedure when I get called by somebody I'm usually told we have a keyboard book for you but bring books 1 and 2 anyway. Many times the charts in the keyboard book are the same pages from the Real Books but other times they're not and those I have to really pay attention to. I may think I know the tune but their chart is different.

I would say I know maybe two thirds of what gets called and have to read the rest. I hate having my face buried in a book on stage so I have the stand as low as possible and tilted away from me so it looks even lower from the audience perspective. I try to use the books only as a part time crutch like Mac said, maybe glance at the 2nd ending I'm not sure of or something. But still every gig, there's something I've either never played before or it's been years.

Bob
© PG Music Forums