Theory behind using M7 chords as dominants?

[brwnhornet59]

But how can they function as tonics?

The example that was given to me was in a tune like "Corcovado".

The tonic switch's between Fdim and FM7. That was the explanation given to me. You see it used a lot in older tunes... Early versions of Stella was mentioned as well...

[brwnhornet59]

I DIDN'T know however that G7 and Fm7 are interchangable in the same way. Don't know why that didn't occur to me since both Fm7 and Dm7b5 are both members of the subdominant family in the key of C minor.

Right out of the HM handbook. Great example of superimposition for G phrygian dom sans G, giving that sus4 b9 b13 or B dim.

[Prome]

@ aniss

Your point about the word "substitute" is a good one.

Let me focus my point a little. The DbM7 is not subbing for a G7 at all. It is elaborating, expanding, prolonging (use whatever synonym you want) the sound of the Dm7b5. It is not taking the place of a G7. Think of the progression in question like this:

| Dm7b5 | Dm7b5 | Cm | Cm |

The DbM7 in measure 2 is prolonging/expanding/elaborating on the subdominant quality of measure 1:

| Dm7b5 | DbM7 | Cm | Cm |

[aniss1001]

About the semantics of the word "function"...

In my field, computer science / programming, there are tons of words with VERY specific meanings. For intance "structure", "object" and ..well.. "function". But these are also very common words so half the time they are used in a completely different manner even among programmers. Now we don't fall on out butts or start semantic wars every time that occurs. It would be pretty hard to avoid all of those words all the time except for when we're referring to the specific meanings they have in computer science.

Also since computer science is an area that has to operate in pretty much all aspects of life we have to comunicate with all sorts of specialists. For instance I worked a couple of years for a biotech company where I was working closely with chemical engeneers most of the time. They off course have their specialized lingo too and they knew about as little about computer science as I know about chemical engeneering, but we had to find a way to comunicate efficiently about the system I was building which was dealing with matters of their expertise.

Needless to say this would have been impossible if we had focused too much on semantics. Sometimes you have to make an effort to try and understand what people are saying rather than focusing how they are saying it.

To come back to music theory... I DO understand that in chord theory the function of a chord is determined by the notes it contains in relation to the tonal center. So in that sense a G7sus4(b9) cannot be a dominant in the key of C since it doesn't contain a B.

However when I read in Levine's book or on Wikipedia that a V7sus4(b9) chord functions as a dominant I don't think it is a completely wrong way of putting it even though it may be incorrect.

Just a couple of cents on that matter

[Prome]

Aniss: "I DIDN'T know however that G7 and Fm7 are interchangable in the same way. Don't know why that didn't occur to me since both Fm7 and Dm7b5 are both members of the subdominant family in the key of C minor. But it didn't."

This is my point about you looking for tricks -- G7 and Fm7 are not interchangeable. In certain situations you can use an Fm7 where you might have used G7, but the Fm7 is doing something different. You're exchanging the quality of an authentic cadence (V7 -> I) for a deceptive minor plagal cadence (ivm7 -> i, deceptive -> I). This is what I mean about detail, and the details are important if you want to use this device effectively.

Have you heard of the "backdoor" iim7-V7 progression? That's when you sub ivm7 -> bVII7 for iim7 -> V7. For example:

Dm7 -> G7 -> C becomes Fm7 -> Bb7 -> C

What we're substituting is one type of cadence (authentic) for another (minor plagal), not one type of dominant for another.

[JensL]

OK! So I presume that you agree with Prome that talking about function in relation to substitutions is completely wrong? I mean my original idea that the substitution has to somewhat function/act like the substituted in the given progression.

For instance it is simply wrong to say that a V7sus4(b9) chord functions as a dominant as mentioned in the Levine and Wiki quotes? I presume yes but I'd still like to hear it from you.

I do agree with Prome that it is noy handy to use the word function like that, but as you already pointed out it is often a term that is used quite liberally. I have to admit that I am not a big fan of Mark Levine as a theory teacher (though I only know his piano book). He is a nice guy though I have jammed with him and had some lessons from him.

The whole sus4 thing is tricky. Gsus4 - C:

If I hear Gsus4 in a context I hear a G root and a C suspending a B so I already hear it going to B so the B is there or you hear it as being on the way. With the Dbmaj7 you cannot hear a B in the context because there is already a Db and a C so I don't get the feeling that the C is suspending a B.

With the Gsus4(b9): To be honest I am not sure if I hear that as a dominant or more as a sub-dominant. It is very much a minor sub sound with a funny bass note (ie. the dominant bass note) I think that when I encounter them they almost never resolve so I probably hear them more as subdominant floating sound. I never really came in touch with them before I started playing jazz so it's a bit harder to say what they sound like for me.

"I used Dbmaj7 as a sub for G7 when soloing quite often it is a very distinct and useable sound"

Yes I stumbled across that too and have played around with it. I must admit I never thought of it as having anything to do with a dominant being subbed for a subdominant. I kind of just thought of it as creating tension that resolves well to the tonic that follows.

Which it is, I guess strictly it is sub-dominant tension and not altered dominant tension, but who cares when you are playing

And also I read that in the old days before the use of melodic minor became common they would play a major chord/scale half a step above the dominant to create an altered sound (eg. playing Ab major over G7). This of course is very similar to playing the altered scale (Ab melodic minor over G7) allthough the latter sounds somewhat smoother.

Anyway I though it perhaps was a derivation hereof. Either way it IS a very distinct and usable sound as you say no matter how you look at it.

I don't know that anecdote? What old times would that be? I don't thinkt that there are that many examples of Parker really playing altered or side slipping like that, he did play parallel minor chords on rhythm changes quite a lot.

I think the chord came from the classical stuff or is found somewhere in a standard. That or if you have to harmonize a cadence with the root in the melody and you want a descending bass line you'll come up with it by your self.

"I think it is more useful to look at how it is to resolve and how you get there than how it is derived from a II V I."

I think I get your meaning but could you elaborate a bit on that?

"Jazz theory often is putting to much into that simple cadence as if it is the only one that exists."

Haha.. That sounds very likely

Well Instead of thinking how every chord is related to II V I, then remember that you can also go IV IVm I and IV #IV I and those progressions have all sorts of variations too. If you play and analyze a lot of standards you'll come across them in there and they did not come from jazz, they were written like that to begin with.

"Sorry for the long post"

On the contrary thank you for a great reply

Well here's another one

Jens

[Prome]

However when I read in Levine's book or on Wikipedia that a V7sus4(b9) chord functions as a dominant I don't think it is a completely wrong way of putting it even though it may be incorrect.

The thing is, unless we change what the meaning of "dominant function" is, V7sus4b9 cannot be a dominant function. Levine is using the word incorrectly, and out of line w/ both legions of CPP and jazz theorists. I mean, if you voice/invert V7sus4b9 certain ways, it just sounds like a iim7b5(11) anyway:


(hard to play)

[CHORD]

||---|---|-*-|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|-*-|---|---|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|-*-|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|-*-|---|---|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|-*-|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

[/CHORD]


[CHORD]

||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|-*-|---|---|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|-*-|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|-*-|---|
||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|-*-|
||---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|-*-|---|

[/CHORD]

[Prome]

aniss: G7sus4(b9) = Fm/G
DbM7 = Fm/Db

Actually, G7sus4b9 = Fm6/G

The operative sense of these chords though, you've hit on the head! Fm

[JensL]

Diminished chords can function in three ways as I understand it. Tonic, dominant and passing...

Maybe I am being pedantic, sorry for that, but this came back in a few posts later.

Diminished are dominant or sub-dominant. A diminished chord is always leading somewhere and can not be a tonic (which is a resting point in the harmony.)

Dominant dim chord: Bdim - C

Sub dominant dim chord: F#dim/C - C , F#dim/Eb - Dm

I write them as F#dim because they are considered #IV dim in inversion. The resolve to IV but can also go to I.

The Basie ending is IV #IV I

I would not consider passing a function.

Jens

[Prome]

io7 and vo7 are called "common tone diminished" chords in CPP harmony/theory, and the prolong the sound of a tonic and dominant chord respectively. So, if you have:

| I | I | I | I | V | V | V | V |

You can make it:

| I | io7| I io7 | I | V | vo7 | V vo7 | V |

or some such other variation.

[Prome]

Back to the beboppers -- they always realized diminished chords as V7b9 of either ii, iii or vi, regardless of whether the chord was descending, ascending, or just staying on the root like in the common-tone diminished examples above (with the exception of the viio7, which can work two different ways). So, the three families of diminished chords, in major keys, are simplified to the following:

io7 #iio7/biiio7 #ivo7 vio7 = viio7/iii aka V7b9/iii

#io7 iiio7 vo7 bviio7 = viio7/ii aka V7b9/ii

iio7 ivo7 #vo7/bvio7 viio7 = viio7/vi aka V7b9/vi or viio7 aka V7b9/I (modal interchange)

[Prome]

Maybe I am being pedantic, sorry for that, but this came back in a few posts later.

Diminished are dominant or sub-dominant. A diminished chord is always leading somewhere and can not be a tonic (which is a resting point in the harmony.)

Dominant dim chord: Bdim - C

Sub dominant dim chord: F#dim/C - C , F#dim/Eb - Dm

I write them as F#dim because they are considered #IV dim in inversion. The resolve to IV but can also go to I.

The Basie ending is IV #IV I

I would not consider passing a function.

Jens

While I agree that #ivo7 is prolonging the subdominant sound, much like DbM7 was doing to Dm7b5, I disagree w/ your reasoning about Ebo7. As I explained in detail earlier in this thread, Ebo7 is really D#o7, a back-relating dominant of Em7. Chords don't always point forward, they sometimes point backward to define or elaborate on the chord that preceded them. Even in your #ivo7 chord example, that's what's happening, though the chromatic motion from F# to G does give the chord forward momentum, I will admit:

IV <- #ivo7 - I

iiim7 <- viio7/vii - iim7

As far as how great jazz musicians approach improvising over those two chords, everyone from Bird to Bud to Dexter to Dizzy to Trane thought of them as viio7/iii, which is why, in Rhythm Changes, for example, you find a lot of A Major triad stuff where the Eo7 chord comes in in measure 6.

[Prome]

Sorry, last post for a while, lol -- lots to think and talk about!

Let's look at D#o7/Ebo7/F#o7/Ao7/Co7 in the key of C. Where do the notes go, properly voice-led (bolded notes are one tritone pair, the non-bolded are the other)?

F# -> G
A -> G
C -> B
D# -> E

When a chromatic chord happens in a key, like with diminished chords, whenever possible we should resolve the chromatic tones by 1/2 step (common sense). We should also aim to have tritones push apart, one pitch going up 1/2 step, the other down 1/2 step (if possible). In the voice-leading above, you'll see the diminished chord resolves accordingly, with the A -> G being the lone exception to the 1/2 step resolution rule.

If we try the same with the other diminshed chords, their resolutions become very interesting:

C#o7/Eo7/Go7/A#o7

C# -> D
E -> F
G -> F
Bb -> A

G#o7/Abo7/Bo7/Do7/Fo7

G# -> A
B -> C
D -> C
F -> E

As you see in all the examples, the resulting chords for each of the diminished chords in the key of C, are minor chords, namely the ii, iii and vi (Em, Dm and Am respectively)!

Accordingly, it's probably best to think of all other resolutions of diminished chords as deceptive, moves like #ivo7 - I, #iio7 - iim7 being the most common and difficult for people to handle. In both cases the most functionally appropriate way to improvise on those diminished chords is as if they were V7b9/iii. Don't underestimate the beboppers!

[JensL]

While I agree that #ivo7 is prolonging the subdominant sound, much like DbM7 was doing to Dm7b5, I disagree w/ your reasoning about Ebo7. As I explained in detail earlier in this thread, Ebo7 is really D#o7, a back-relating dominant of Em7. Chords don't always point forward, they sometimes point backward to define or elaborate on the chord that preceded them. Even in your #ivo7 chord example, that's what's happening, though the chromatic motion from F# to G does give the chord forward momentum, I will admit:

IV <- #ivo7 - I

iiim7 <- viio7/vii - iim7

A whole discussion on dim chords would be completely off topic so let's please not get in to that i a thread on neapolitan sub-dominants.

I know the back-relating explanation. I always found it a poor explanation, but then again I never played rhtyhm changes backwards.
It is also only used for this kind of dim chord (so the one that is not dominant)...

On the other hand it is a very common explanation and for that is good to know so regardless what you think about it, it is good to know it is there.

Jens

[Prome]

@Jens

Wait a second, this thread is as much about diminished chords as anything.

[pingu]

Let's look at D#o7/Ebo7/F#o7/Ao7/Co7 in the key of C.

Hey Prome did you mean that first D#o7 chord to be there ?

[pingu]

in |iii |biiio7 |ii type progressions
I'm loving the decending dim7 passing chord functioning as V7/iii .... thing
ie staying with the iii sound , not leading to the ii sound

Like the second chord of Corcavado
(never knew what to do with that till now!)
Thanks Prome that's really great

Going hmmm a bit on the Eo7 (#ivo7_) in Rhythm Changes tho
I mean functioning as A7b9 (V7 of iii) I don't hear that
unless its going to the iii Dmin7 I guess which it well could

Great stuff tho man ,
I'm weak on Dim stuff .......just playing arps really
(can't usually make the HW or WH scale thing work for me either)
so this is a great thread for me

I got a lot of assimilating to do now !

[aniss1001]

@All

I have no problem with folks talking about dim chords or any other off topic subject. As far as I'm concerned this thread has pretty much run it's course anyway I believe.


@Prome

The thing is, unless we change what the meaning of "dominant function" is, V7sus4b9 cannot be a dominant function. Levine is using the word incorrectly, and out of line w/ both legions of CPP and jazz theorists.

There is no need to keep mentioning that it is incorrect in that sense of the word. I got it. And in fact I never argued against that.

What I'm saying is that "function" is a common word that has existed and had a meaning long before some music theorist got a hold of it and decided to give it a specific meaning in that particular field. It really isn't a matter of changing the meaning of the word but rather allowing the common meaning of the word to coexist with the special meaning it has in chord theory.

In other words getting used to the fact that it is OFTEN used with it's common meaning even when talking chords. For instance I'm afraid that it is quite common to say that a V7sys4(b9) chord functions as a dominant. Being aware of this will seriously improve ones ability to comunicate IMO (hence my analogy with computer science).

This is my point about you looking for tricks -- G7 and Fm7 are not interchangeable.

My bad. I shouldn't have used the word "interchangable". What I meant was this:

I didn't know that it is in line with common practice to sub a G7 for a Fm7 in the key of C minor.

But then again you came to your conclusion before I wrote that so it can hardly be because of that.

And again I'm not ignoring anything nor looking for formulas/tricks. I AM trying to understand the COMMON PRACTICES of substitutions and chord use in jazz in general. That's it.

So I am still clueless as to what you meant, and I hope you'll forgive me if I don't take it too seriously, given that you rather consistantly have misinterpreted pretty much everything I've said.

Either way thanks for your contribution to this thread. I did learn quite a bit from your posts after all.

[JensL]

@Jens

Wait a second, this thread is as much about diminished chords as anything.

I still don't think it is but that is apparently just me
Sorry Prome!

Then let's talk about dim chords (It is almost like every discussion about harmony ends with people talking about this progression: Em7 Ebdm Dm7 G7

Jens

[aniss1001]

@Jens

Thanks for clearing that up

And sorry I really can't remember where I read that anecdote at this point so I can't tell you which "era" we're talking. But I did read it. Whether or not it's true I can't say.

[aniss1001]

Ah I do have one more in topic question: Does anyone know of any other jazz tunes where this neapolitan subdominant chord is used and / or where a subdominant occurs where one seemingly would expect a dominant?

[Prome]

Hey Prome did you mean that first D#o7 chord to be there ?

I did -- was just putting in all the enharmonic equivalents/spellings/etc.

Sometimes you see, in the key of C, this:

Dm7 -> D#o7 -> Em7

Other times, you may see this:

Em7 <- Ebo7 - Dm7

Which I'd personally spell like this (following Bert Ligon and others), to preserve the sense of the harmonic function:

Em7 <- D#o7 - Dm7

[Prome]

in |iii |biiio7 |ii type progressions
I'm loving the decending dim7 passing chord functioning as V7/iii .... thing
ie staying with the iii sound , not leading to the ii sound

Like the second chord of Corcavado
(never knew what to do with that till now!)
Thanks Prome that's really great

Going hmmm a bit on the Eo7 (#ivo7_) in Rhythm Changes tho
I mean functioning as A7b9 (V7 of iii) I don't hear that
unless its going to the iii Dmin7 I guess which it well could

Great stuff tho man ,
I'm weak on Dim stuff .......just playing arps really
(can't usually make the HW or WH scale thing work for me either)
so this is a great thread for me

I got a lot of assimilating to do now !

No, thank YOU for backing me up! Glad it's working out for you, and it has opened up a universe for me. For years I didn't know what to play in those spots (whole/half diminished never fully sated me, and nothing else made sense).

To hear the Eo7 as V7b9/iii, transcribe some Bird and Bud. Look at the head to "Shaw Nuff," or the head to "Fool's Fancy" aka "Wail."

[Prome]

And about me going off on the diminished chord stuff:

I brought the diminished chords into the discussion to illustrate the concept of back-relating chords. Sometimes harmony doesn't make sense when you think every chord is pushing forward to another. The Dm7b5 <- DbM7 sequence is very similar to Em7 <- D#o7 in that the second chord elaborates upon the first, rather than explicitly leading our ear to whatever the third chord will be. It is also true that the root motion of each leads our ear down chromatically to the eventual resolution chord, creating a dual purpose and ambiguity that is very interesting. Still, though, in both examples, we find back-relating chords, which given their relative rarity, are often difficult for improvisers to deal with and/or recognize.

[Prome]

I still don't think it is but that is apparently just me
Sorry Prome!

Then let's talk about dim chords (It is almost like every discussion about harmony ends with people talking about this progression: Em7 Ebdm Dm7 G7

Jens

LOL, how about this, from "Night and Day":

| F#m7b5 | Fm7 | Em7 | D#o7 | Dm7 | G7 | C | C |

Fire away, Guys!