George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept: Critical Review Part 16 

Thank you for devoting so much time and attention to the concept and for debunking some of the myths and false criticisms surrounding it. I feel though that in trying to salvage the chord scale equivalence part of it without tackling the 'outgoing' side of the concept misses what was so historically important about the concept as heard not only in Russell's own compositions but also in the free jazz and so called "modern creative" sub-genres of the music we find today. So often Russell gets reduced to being the instigator of only modal jazz. What's missing is the sense in which the concept was a 'war on the chord' as sole determinant of the improvised line. The closest sounding scale to each chord was only one of an almost infinite variety of scalar and intervallic resources the concept opened up. It's worth noting how "accompaniment" chords became less 'functional; using sparse, colouristic and ambiguous voicings to help free up the improvisor. Scoring for small and larger groups became more linear and polytonal echoing Russell's own methods. Yet the really important sign of its influence was the kind of music the second great Miles Davis Quintet with Herbie Hancock, which was almost like Ornette Coleman with a harmony instrument at times. It very much contradicted Miles's own misgivings about free jazz and no more so than in the famous 'Live at the Plugged Nickel" sides by the band, which was dubbed, '"Time No Changes" music. To see the Berkeley chord scale method as somehow the natural fulfillment of the concept, into which its discoveries must be made to fit, whilst discarding the rest of it as of no value, ignores what actually happened to modern jazz in the 60s and 70s. It also ignores the ongoing controversy surrounding the Berkeley method. Nowadays even top players schooled in its precepts abjure the idea that improvising over chord changes involves doing something on a particular scale for each passing chord. As the late guitarist, John Abercrombie, said many times that's not how he, and his contemporaries, created lines except in specific modally-based songs, such as his own classic 'Ralph's Piano Waltz". There wasn't time in any case to think that way even if you wanted to. Often, it's more it's a case of developing motivic lines that unfold in a linear or intervallic way outlining the basic tonality of a passage rather than the chords. I urge anyone intersted to try and get hold of the 1964 edition of Russell's opus, by hook or by crook, It has much more of a 'how to' approach to the ideas, especially in the choice of 'outgoing' strategies available to the composer or improvisor.

I had trouble grasping how it was applicable but the last two videos helped a lot. Thank you for the series. Would like to see transformation theory.

After 16 episodes, I wasn't expecting the surprise ending where our hero and Adam Neely get married. Bravo.

This whole series deserves a lot more attention -- it's the only place I've seen on RU-vid that engages with Russell's theories beyond a superficial level.

This is a great series. One thing I would like to put out there: the "fifth" and "fourth" idea. Maybe this will explain Russell's thinking a bit more. For reference, see Schoenberg's "Structural Functions of Harmony." In this book, Schoenberg states that we hear fifths as "tonic on bottom" and fourths as "tonic on top." The fourths are easily demonstrated by playing "Japanese" melodies in fourths. Perhaps this is what Russell is getting at by moving the roots in his "stack of fifths." I am doubtful of the notion that "fourths have a tendency for the top note to be "drawn" to the bottom. This is too much like "resolution", and is actually a "melodic/voice-leading" way of thinking.. It seems more direct to think hamonically about fourths as being "tonic on top." I'll bee interested in your rection to this...and BTW, thank you for your valuable insights into the LCC.

love it!!

Great Work you did. Thank you! You solved my Berklee problem. I just started to use it from the first videos. (It helped me with my Shirley Scott, Timmons, Coltrane Philadelphians approach to music.) Interesting issue is for me mixing accordal (e.g. Tyner stack of fourths) tritones in. I estimate them either stable (blues, upper structure, symmetric) or dissonant (gospel, tension, harmony.) While rehearsing it more thoroughly.

I enjoyed watching your series on George Russell. Yes I’d like to learn more about transformation theory. Also would you make a follow-up to your 16 Part Series on George Russell. I wasn’t always clear about what you meant by your terms such as avoid notes did you mean outgoing tension notes or notes to not camp on. Bill Evans (and other modal Jazzers) camped on a lot of tension notes. This seems to be one of the big differences between tonal and so called modal music. Also, Russell alluded to Pythagorean theory and a lot of things he didn’t elaborate on. For example some of his ideas reminded me of the church modes (ie the plagal hypo-modes in particular) and how these scales predated later thinking that the hypo-dorian mode (for instance) and the aeolian mode are the same. It bothers me how it seems Russell didn’t make any effort (that I can tell) to substantiate his (obviously) intuitive thoughts and ideas.

Yeah I would like transformation theory videos! This series is so good, thanks for explaining this. I was taught this at uni and didn't understand at all. This has been great

Great. I just try it with John Hicks, Pharao Sanders, (who understood Coltrane) and Geri Allen and Betty Carter. Because they made the best not timid Giant Steps Interpretation. And it has to do with Knowledge of Russell in One or Another way.

Yes I’d love to see more on Transformation Theory, I’ve made it thru all the George Russell vids! So you should check out my ‘Krellberg Variations’ videos…there’s only 46 of em…🥹