commakozzi

I'm very interested in jazz theory. I'm discovering new ways of thinking about improvisation almost everyday. In fact, there's a plethora of things I discovered in my last improv session that I won't even be able to touch for awhile. I have pretty well founded base in music theory, and standard Bach four part harmony has obviously evolved over the years, and probably one of the most advanced evolutionary effects has been the creation of jazz (and the theory surrounding it). However, is it really that advanced, or am I just looking at things incorrectly, i.e. am I not as well founded in standard theory as I suspected? For instance, I'm using the Aebersold Volume 24 for my scale practice each day. The volume is split into majors and minors on two separate discs. However, you really could just play majors through both CDs. Jazz theory guys will know what that means. So here's the question I guess: I'm finding that when you look at things modally... F min (dorian) is really Eb maj (and all it's related modes)... things become a good bit easier. You start thinking of everything as being major instead of: major here, natural minor there, diminished or half diminished here, so on and so on. You really just look at things as being major with alterations. Am I on the right track, or is there something wrong with this assumption? I mean, one thing that keeps running through my head is "scale substitutions": B minor is D major with (depending on the quality of minor) alterations. I mean, this is standard theory stuff, but is this how you guys are thinkking about it when you're playing? It makes sense to me, and it's making things easier. With Volume 24 Majors and Minors I'm essentially just practicing major scales everyday. I'm just learning to use those major scales in two different ways.