Any ii-V can substitute for any ii-V

[Nate Miller]

the idea was presented to me that any ii-V will convey the subdominant to dominant motion, and if an "inside" resolution to the original tonic can be made, then its a good substitution.

anybody ever explore this? I am presently in the middle of an expedition to chart these waters for myself. I've got no charts to guide me, they were all blown overboard along with all the celestial navigation, too.

but take for example a ii-V-I in F: Gm C7 | F or by substitution: Ebm Ab7 | F with the Gb of the Ab7 resolving to F or the Ab resolving up to A in the voice leading, or any other smooth voice leading

that's the basic idea

in essence, any ii-V can be substituted for any ii-V

so anybody ever fool around with this?

[Boston Joe]

I have. It works, but you've got to be kind of careful. The resolution back to the original tonic is really important.

[Patriots2006]

What you are implying is not a substitution. It is instead a reharmonization of the tune. The substitution would be c#m7 to F#7. F#7 being the substituion for C7 and C#m7 being it's related two chord. I do however like your thinking process. I have a hard time finding ways to reharmonize tunes and this got me thinking. I will have to try this when I get home and see where it takes me.

[Nate Miller]

I have. It works, but you've got to be kind of careful. The resolution back to the original tonic is really important.

yea, I finding that some of the eleven choices lend themselves more readily than others


what's harder for me than playing them is hearing some of these in the context of tunes I've played since I was a kid

[lawson-stone]

the idea was presented to me that any ii-V will convey the subdominant to dominant motion, and if an "inside" resolution to the original tonic can be made, then its a good substitution.

anybody ever explore this? I am presently in the middle of an expedition to chart these waters for myself. I've got no charts to guide me, they were all blown overboard along with all the celestial navigation, too.

but take for example a ii-V-I in F: Gm C7 | F or by substitution: Ebm Ab7 | F with the Gb of the Ab7 resolving to F or the Ab resolving up to A in the voice leading, or any other smooth voice leading

that's the basic idea

in essence, any ii-V can be substituted for any ii-V

so anybody ever fool around with this?

I don't know about "any" but just noodling on a pad and may guitar, I came up with more than I actually ever use when I play.

For Dm7 G7 C:
Dm7 can sub an Ab lots of kinds; D/F/Ab/B dim7; Am6 will work too
G7: Db (tritone); Abm7 (can resolve to Am7); Ab/B/D/F dim (same as for Dm7); Fm7
C: Also Em7 or Am7 esp. other than at end

What's bizarre is that I never play most of these, but sitting here with my guitar just playing the arpeggios I'm amazed at how apt they can sound. A good example of having the theory knowledge in my head but I just never tried to use some of it, probably because I so seldom get on a bandstand and have to deliver.

Also: those of us who just can't seem to rip out these really fast lines can at least play our slower lines in a richer harmonic vein.

[Boston Joe]

yea, I finding that some of the eleven choices lend themselves more readily than others


what's harder for me than playing them is hearing some of these in the context of tunes I've played since I was a kid

What I like to do is pick one, and jam it into every ii-V I can find (practicing, of course). Eventually it gets into my ear.

[Boston Joe]

Also: those of us who just can't seem to rip out these really fast lines can at least play our slower lines in a richer harmonic vein.

I resemble that remark.

[mr. beaumont]

I don't know about "any" but just noodling on a pad and may guitar, I came up with more than I actually ever use when I play.

For Dm7 G7 C:
Dm7 can sub an Ab lots of kinds; D/F/Ab/B dim7; Am6 will work too
G7: Db (tritone); Abm7 (can resolve to Am7); Ab/B/D/F dim (same as for Dm7); Fm7
C: Also Em7 or Am7 esp. other than at end

What's bizarre is that I never play most of these, but sitting here with my guitar just playing the arpeggios I'm amazed at how apt they can sound. A good example of having the theory knowledge in my head but I just never tried to use some of it, probably because I so seldom get on a bandstand and have to deliver.

Also: those of us who just can't seem to rip out these really fast lines can at least play our slower lines in a richer harmonic vein.

It's interesting, isn't it? It's all about context.

There's only 12 notes...yet, sometimes you play a set of them in a new context and it sounds completely fresh to your ears.

This is why I love jazz. There's always a new context to check out.

[Boston Joe]

Just did a little figuring: Of the 11 possibilities, 7 are covered by common subs:

In C - just listing the dominant chords:

Diminished family: G / Bb / Db / F

Whole tone family: G / A / B / C#(Db) / D#(Eb) / F

Major 3rd (giant steps) family: G / B / D#

So it's really the other four ( Ab / C / D / E ) that need investigating.

[Nate Miller]

What's bizarre is that I never play most of these, but sitting here with my guitar just playing the arpeggios I'm amazed at how apt they can sound.

my exact reaction when I started trying this stuff out last week

this is one of the cooler ideas I've come across in a long time and you're right, its great ammunition for the second and third time through the tune playing solo

[Nate Miller]

Just did a little figuring: Of the 11 possibilities, 7 are covered by common subs:

In C - just listing the dominant chords:

Diminished family: G / Bb / Db / F

Whole tone family: G / A / B / C#(Db) / D#(Eb) / F

Major 3rd (giant steps) family: G / B / D#

So it's really the other four ( Ab / C / D / E ) that need investigating.

I had noticed that the ones where the dominant was a common substitution where the easiest to solve

that's good work Joe, breaking them down in families like that

I have a hunch that each family will have similar voice leading mechanisms in the resolution. That's just a hunch, but that's what I'm going to explore next. If there are common mechanisms, then its that much easier to grab these on the fly

[Boston Joe]

I have a hunch that each family will have similar voice leading mechanisms in the resolution. That's just a hunch, but that's what I'm going to explore next. If there are common mechanisms, then its that much easier to grab these on the fly

That seems likely. I'm pretty good with the diminshed family subs. I should probably work more with some of the whole tone family.

Last night I was messing around with F#-/B7/C. I found a couple of neat sounds (and a few awful ones). I need to work with it in a more organized way.

[pamosmusic]

Christian brought this up in another thread via a sort of roundabout path (understandable because it was coming from a totally different topic).

He was talking about melodic strength and saying that a strong melody will open up a lot of more theoretically unusual options ...

For example a G major triad is a really common choice over a C major7 chord ... a D major would resolve nicely to that G or even an F# major or Ab major triad. They all provide really nice half step resolutions to strong notes over that CMaj7. But I'm pretty sure there are entire chapters of jazz theory books about how you should never play any of those triads over a G7. The major triad, however, is maybe the strongest melodic pattern we have at our disposal so if you use it right then it will sound great.

[NoReply]

Herbie Hancock would do this, all about feeding the ear what it's expecting. The ear accepts it because it's getting the cycle it is expecting just a different one.

[Boston Joe]

He was talking about melodic strength and saying that a strong melody will open up a lot of more theoretically unusual options ...

Herbie Hancock talks about this in his book. He was talking about arranging horn parts, and apparently he went to Miles for advice. Miles told him to make every voice a strong line and not to worry about having to use notes that didn't fit under standard rules.

Edit: Ha! NoReply beat me to it.

[Nate Miller]

the way the voice leading makes some of these far flung substitutions work, it really reminds me of counterpoint exercises

so the voice leading mechanisms I'm looking into are intervallic relationships, just like when I'm solving a 3 or 4 voice counterpoint problem

[lawson-stone]

Just did a little figuring: Of the 11 possibilities, 7 are covered by common subs:

In C - just listing the dominant chords:

Diminished family: G / Bb / Db / F

Whole tone family: G / A / B / C#(Db) / D#(Eb) / F

Major 3rd (giant steps) family: G / B / D#

So it's really the other four ( Ab / C / D / E ) that need investigating.

The Ab is actually the b9 of the G, so it would be an Ab Dim7 chord that subs for the G7. Ab is also the tritone to D, so in a ii-V you conceivably in a "convert to minor" mode could build the line around Ab minor ideas.

[lawson-stone]

the way the voice leading makes some of these far flung substitutions work, it really reminds me of counterpoint exercises

so the voice leading mechanisms I'm looking into are intervallic relationships, just like when I'm solving a 3 or 4 voice counterpoint problem

What I'm seeing playing around with arpeggios in an admittedly mechanical way is that I always seem to end up just one fret away from a chord-tone for the I, which I normally don't see because I'm so blasted "ROOT" oriented. If I could just start seeing these arpeggios and whole patterns and not have to always think "so where's the root, now the 3rd..."

[Nate Miller]

its neat working through an idea like this with no method books, no guidelines or lesson plans or anything

this is how jazzmen figured stuff out on their own before there was jazz education

all the old guys had was their ears and their wits and each other

...those poor bastards

[lawson-stone]

its neat working through an idea like this with no method books, no guidelines or lesson plans or anything

this is how jazzmen figured stuff out on their own before there was jazz education

all the old guys had was their ears and their wits and each other

...those poor bastards

Plus that had an unbelievable range of popular standards to work with. I still am astounded that the tunes we consider "jazz tunes" were pop songs on the radio. I turn on the radio today and... well... popular music doesn't seem to offer as much as it used to offer. I love pop music, but as vehicles for jazz playing it just doesn't fill the bill for me. I imagine more advanced players can do something with it, but I'm not there.

[Boston Joe]

Plus that had an unbelievable range of popular standards to work with. I still am astounded that the tunes we consider "jazz tunes" were pop songs on the radio. I turn on the radio today and... well... popular music doesn't seem to offer as much as it used to offer. I love pop music, but as vehicles for jazz playing it just doesn't fill the bill for me. I imagine more advanced players can do something with it, but I'm not there.

I enjoyed Herbie's "The New Standard" album. Some good arrangements of pop tunes there.

[Boston Joe]

The Ab is actually the b9 of the G, so it would be an Ab Dim7 chord that subs for the G7. Ab is also the tritone to D, so in a ii-V you conceivably in a "convert to minor" mode could build the line around Ab minor ideas.

That would be the basic altered scale type stuff, yes? I've also found that an Ab Maj arp works.

[NoReply]

Plus that had an unbelievable range of popular standards to work with. I still am astounded that the tunes we consider "jazz tunes" were pop songs on the radio. I turn on the radio today and... well... popular music doesn't seem to offer as much as it used to offer. I love pop music, but as vehicles for jazz playing it just doesn't fill the bill for me. I imagine more advanced players can do something with it, but I'm not there.

Starting in the 50's & 60's Pop music started shifting it's focus from melody to rhythm so Pop in general isn't full of the melody and chords of the previous eras.

[NoReply]

That would be the basic altered scale type stuff, yes? I've also found that an Ab Maj arp works.

Don't you mean Ab minor (Maj7) arpeggio?

[Boston Joe]

Don't you mean Ab minor (Maj7) arpeggio?

No. I know the C is a "wrong" note in that context, but as long as you don't emphasize it, it's fine.