"Misty" Real Book 5th ed. B section question...

[jckoto3]

The Real Book 5th Edition has the B section chords as follows:

| Bb-7 | Eb7(b9) | AbMaj7 | % |
| A-7  | D7 F7 | G-7b5 C7b9 | F-7 Bb7 |
 

The first 4 bars seem to have the Ab Major scale as the tone center. The G-7b5 C7b9 work out well as a minor 2-5 in F minor which subsequently leads nicely into a 2-5 in Eb Maj, but the | A-7 | D7 F7 | is throwing me for a loop. What is supposed to be happening in these two measures? It's the F7 in particular that is throwing me off.

Of course the A-7 D7 is a 2-5 in G Maj, but that darn F7 seems out of place. The melody notes over the F7 are a descending quarter-note triplet of F-D-C

Any ideas? Typo, perhaps?

--John

[peterk1]

Just checked a bunch of charts I have for that one....
Robert Conti's comping book has that tune and he does not have the F7.
The Spaced Out Fakebook and the Hal Leonard Ultimate Fakebook both have the F7.

I don't think it's a mistake. The Hal Leonard usually has very square changes in most tunes.

If you go to the original Garner recording, do you hear it? I'll take a listen after dinner.

[M-ster]

Checked out this one:

YouTube Video

YouTube - Erroll Garner plays Misty

Erroll's in C. The bridge is something like this:

G- G-maj7 | G-7b5 C7(b9) | Fmaj7 G-7/C | Fmaj7 |

F#-7 B7 | A-7 D7 | G7 Bbdim7 | D7 G7 ||

[ksjazzguitar]

I agree that it is not a typo. I think that it is just something that some guy played and it got copied. Plus I assume that they don't have the guys themselves writing out their own sheet music - I assume that it was some nerd in the basement of the publishing house writing out a piano arrangement. Maybe he heard something on some version of it, or maybe he felt creative. There are so many mistakes in printed sheet music. Or maybe it was added later because that was how someone famous played it.

In any case, we come to the question of what is that F7?

Well, if we think about that Am-D7 as a ii-V going to the Gm7b5, then we have a sub of ii-V-bVII. If you check in thread on God Bless The Child you'll see that a very similar question came up, in that case a Gb7 showing up in a ii-V-I in Ab. There is a lot of analysis there.

But in general, these old tunes have been reharmonized so much that you just have to learn to listen. Some songs may have half a dozen versions. This idea that we can capture the "correct changes" in some book is to some extent an illusion. It's good to have a starting point obviously, but at some point, you just have to listen to what is going on in the band.

I remember I was on a gig once and we were playing "Perdido." Afterwords, I turned to the bass player was like, "Hey, what was that turnaround you were doing at the end of the A section? I don't think that that was the right one." He rolled his eyes and said, "Kevin, there are 10 ways to get from a I chord to a ii chord in 2 bars. Go home and figure out what they are. Then sit down and play them over and over and listen so you can learn what they sound like." He was right. Now I don't have to ask - I just listen (assuming no one does anything really bizarre.) I think that listening is a dying (or at least struggling art) - I can't tell you how many times a hear a combo playing and the bass, piano, and sax are all playing a different changes in different spots, chorus after chorus.

Peace,

Kevin

[peterk1]

Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar

Plus I assume that they don't have the guys themselves writing out their own sheet music

Actually the fake book charts were very often prepared by some of the monsters (Miles Davis among others) to pick up some easy extra cash.
Sometimes the "mistakes" were even put in intentionally as little jokes and to separate the "men from the boys".

[ksjazzguitar]

Well, Miles was a different generation. As far as jokes, when I was working on the cruise ship, we did a lot of talent shows with the guests, so I've read through thousands of pop lead sheets. It is amazing how many are wrong, sometimes obviously and horrendously so. On the subject of Miles, I remember seeing a chart for his "So What" that was so bizarrely wrong as to defy description (and for such an easy song.) There is no way Miles would have had anything to do with that - I'm not sure anyone could have gotten paid for it.

[peterk1]

Just looking at this one again...

| A-7 | D7 F7 | G-7b5
You're probably going to want to do a tritone sub on the D7, so Ab7.
Ab, C, Eb, Gb, so if you hang on that it's basically the same as F7b9 with the bass player dropping an F in the root and coming up to the G.

Will fool around with it today in my practice.

[mr. beaumont]

If you gig with me, here's how the chart I give you looks for the B sec.


Bb-7 | Eb7b9 | Abmaj7 ( Bb-7 B-7 |C-7 ) Abmaj7 |

A-7 D7 | A-7 Ab13 |G-7 Gb7 | F-7 Bb7b9|


Never did like the Real Book changes for this one.

[M-ster]

Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar

... This idea that we can capture the "correct changes" in some book is to some extent an illusion. It's good to have a starting point obviously, but at some point, you just have to listen to what is going on in the band.

In my ideal world, a fake/real book would contain the original changes from the original recording, and the chart would include the original intro and outro/ending.

On the page following the original would be some alternate changes from perhaps the best known jazz versions of the tune - maybe even with footnotes as to what recording they are from.

Finally, I'm surprised that no one commented on the changes I took from the man's recording of his own tune. Is it because no one wanted to transpose them back to Eb for a direct comparison? Or, perhaps we just comment and don't read each others' posts?

[peterk1]

Originally Posted by M-ster

Finally, I'm surprised that no one commented on the changes I took from the man's recording of his own tune. Is it because no one wanted to transpose them back to Eb for a direct comparison? Or, perhaps we just comment and don't read each others' posts?

It was probably more fear of making the original poster even more uncomfortable with what he's playing.
Very different in spots.

[mr. beaumont]

Originally Posted by M-ster

Finally, I'm surprised that no one commented on the changes I took from the man's recording of his own tune. Is it because no one wanted to transpose them back to Eb for a direct comparison? Or, perhaps we just comment and don't read each others' posts?

Or because I'm at work and I can't view YouTube?

[M-ster]

Just in case, here:

Erroll's in C in the YouTube vid' I referenced above. But in Eb, the bridge would be something like this:

Bb-  Bb-maj7  | Bb-7b5  Eb7(b9)  | Abmaj7  Bb-7/Eb  | Abmaj7  |
 
A-7  D7  | C-7  F7  |  Bb7  Dbdim7  | F7  Bb7  ||
 

Note that the OP was questioning the F7 in bar 6. It's clear(er) in this recording that it's there functioning as V/V.

Hope this helps.

[M-ster]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

Or because I'm at work and I can't view YouTube?

Er ... aren't you supposed to be working then?

[mr. beaumont]

hence the wink, brother. hence the wink.

I'd work, but there's nothing to do. I'm a teacher, and the kids are off of school, but since I was re-hired late due to a budget cut I've got to put in a few days over xmas break if I want full paychecks...

So I'm "working" today in the Program Office, handling transcript requests if they come in. I actually haven't "worked" all day aside from answering a few emails, so I'm listening to Peter Berenstien's "Monk" on a little portable boombox, surfing the web, drinking a lot of coffee and playing cards with the attendance coordinator, who also has to be here in case someone wants to enroll for the 3rd quarter.

C'mon 3pm!

[jckoto3]

Thanks for all the replies, everyone.

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

If you gig with me, here's how the chart I give you looks for the B sec.


Bb-7 | Eb7b9 | Abmaj7 ( Bb-7 B-7 |C-7 ) Abmaj7 |

A-7 D7 | A-7 Ab13 |G-7 Gb7 | F-7 Bb7b9|


Never did like the Real Book changes for this one.

I'm liking this. The chromatic line in bars 3-4 is a nice touch, plus bar 6 has given me some ideas.

Originally Posted by M-ster

Just in case, here:

Erroll's in C in the YouTube vid' I referenced above. But in Eb, the bridge would be something like this:

Bb-  Bb-maj7  | Bb-7b5  Eb7(b9)  | Abmaj7  Bb-7/Eb  | Abmaj7  |
 
A-7  D7  | C-7  F7  |  Bb7  Dbdim7  | F7  Bb7  ||
 

Note that the OP was questioning the F7 in bar 6. It's clear(er) in this recording that it's there functioning as V/V.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for this too. Definitely helps. At least now I have a better idea what's happening here.

With all this said, I suspect I really need to hone my substitution chops quite a bit more

[M-ster]

You're welcome, jc!

[jckoto3]

Thanks to you all, I've given this change (D7-F7) more thought, and as far as I can tell, the F7 is essentially a partially altered dominant sub of the D7 chord -- D7 = 1 3 5 b7, and F7 = #9 5 7 b9 (compared to D7)

Of course there are other ways of thinking about this, but this makes sense to me, I'm just not so confident that what I came up with is "correct" in this case.

Does this make sense? Am I correct, at least with the notes on this change?

[M-ster]

I think whether you look at the Real Book changes you posted initially or at Garner's changes, the F7 is V/V. Garner goes straight to the Bb7, while the RB changes do a iii - VI7 - ii - V7 turnaround.

The harmonic function of the F7 is the same in either case.

It's probably more interesting to discuss how/why the A-7 D7 works in this context than to question the F7.