bII Chord in Blues?

[gunksman]

A major blues in the key of C. The turnaround is Ebm9, Ab13, Dm9, G13. Without that Ebm it looks like I, VI7, ii, V7. Is the Ebm just sub for the I7?

[Jonah]

Basically it's Just G7 with Ab7 as approach chord from above then relative II added respectively to Ab (Ebm) and to G (Dm7)

Quite common way of using ii-v in jazz context

[gunksman]

Basically it's Just G7 with Ab7 as approach chord from above then relative II added respectively to Ab (Ebm) and to G (Dm7)

Quite common way of using ii-v in jazz context

Three cups of coffee... still not getting it. Anyone willing to dumb it down some more? Or point me to a good explanation?

[matt.guitarteacher]

A major blues in the key of C. The turnaround is Ebm9, Ab13, Dm9, G13. Without that Ebm it looks like I, VI7, ii, V7. Is the Ebm just sub for the I7?

Check out forum lessons on tritone substitution. There are myriad variations for basic back cycling while subbing with tritone subs. This is a 625 with tritone subs basically.

[Jonah]

G7 is basic V in C major blues...

You can use Ab7 as chromatic approach chord from above - kind of embelishment...

There's common turnaround ii-v ( classical cadence Dm - G in C major)... in jazz context these turnarouds are often used on microlevel... you consider any dom7 chord as V, then you can insert its relative ii before it.

So ii to Ab7 is Ebm7 (in this case you look at it as if it is in Db major - Db7 is triton sub to G7)
and ii to G7 is Dm7

By the way you wrote

The turnaround is Ebm9, Ab13, Dm9, G13. Without that Ebm it looks like I, VI7, ii, V7.

There's no Vl7 - It would be A7 in that case.
If you want to put it all in C major it would be I-IIIb-Vb-II-V...

[matt.guitarteacher]

Also, extensions can be tricky as indicators in blues, because it's not standard functional.

[christianm77]

Yeah I concur... it's Ab7 G7 embellished by turning the dom7s into 2-5s.

It's a common sight in bop.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Do people prefer to think of Ab7 as an approach chord to G7 from above, or as a tritone sub for D7? Don't say "yes".

[Noah D'Innocenzo]

Either thought process is acceptable and both are used.

Often times in theory there is more than one accurate way to describe something because of the fact that it is a "theory" and not a "law."

I recommend using Ab Lydian b7 as your scale choice IF you choose to play over that chord (it could certainly be ignored.)

If you're unfamiliar with it, there are two easy ways to create it:

1) Take your stock Lydian mode and as the title implies, flat the 7th from a major7 to a b7. (Ab, Bb, C, D, Eb, F, Gb)

2) Take your stock Mixolydian mode and raise the 4th degree (in this case from a Db to a D.)

If you ever come across a dominant7 in a tune that doesn't have a diatonic root to the current key, your best bet is to always choose Lydian b7 as your mode of choice. The reason being, like the example in the C blues, is that the D natural grounds the scale more to the key because it has 3 common tones to C major (C, D and F) as opposed to just having two in common if you chose Mixolydian (C and F.)

Hope this helped!

Noah D'Innocenzo

[pingu]

In that blues situation ...I'm thinking maybe
Its like G7alt type sound would fit ok

Or Fmin to G7 type feel

[matt.guitarteacher]

Do people prefer to think of Ab7 as an approach chord to G7 from above, or as a tritone sub for D7? Don't say "yes".

Ha! But the answer is obviously "yes". The former among players - casually communicating, and the latter when someone asks "what is this?". At some point, it's helpful to understand what it is or where it comes from. Kind of like a V7 of ii. Doesn't mean you're going to refer to it that way day-to-day.

[Jonah]

Do people prefer to think of Ab7 as an approach chord to G7 from above, or as a tritone sub for D7? Don't say "yes".

any... the way you think of it is the way you play it...

Embelishment is always secondary and supplementary, triton sub is a harmonic tool (equal to main harmony of a tune in importance) that effect your melodic ideas etc.

I like having harmonic explanation... that gives some material, some new stuff to use... my hearing is first harmonic in general.. but it's just me.

But thinking something like an embelishment - can be also useful:. nothing specially serious - just a grace to make light accent, smooth connection... sometimes it's needed.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

I recommend using Ab Lydian b7 as your scale choice IF you choose to play over that chord (it could certainly be ignored.)

Back to my approach-chord/tritone-sub-for-D7 comment: note that Ab lydian dominant has the same set of notes as D altered.

[christianm77]

Well, that Ab7 chord in the key of C has a long history going back to the classical era. I don't see it as a tritone sub, because it is kind of as common as the D7 chord, especially in a minor key. Firstly, these chords drop out the minor key quite naturally if you raise the 4th degree to tonicise the V chord, and you see them a lot in that context.

The other thing is very often this bVI7 chord (augmented 6th in classical theory) as we might call it today does not necessarily resolve to the V7 chord...

Melodically it's useful because the Ab7 chord has the blue note F#/Gb in it and it's often used to harmonise that blues melody note.

The Ab7 chord can resolve either to G7, or very frequently to Cm or C (by modal interchange). I'll give you some examples

bVI7 to V7
Darn That Dream
Just Friends
Stablemates
Bernie's Tune
Minor Blues
Round Midnight
Invitation

bVI7 I
Out of Nowhere
Lullaby of the Leaves
Mood Indigo
I'm Beginning to See the Light
Skylark (middle 8)
And a tune I wrote for my forthcoming album... *ahem* sorry.

I'm sure there's loads more.

Now because of the practice of replacing V's with ii-V's during the later bop era and beyond, you often see stuff like this:

Ebm7 Ab7 Dm7 G7

Also, it's very common to make an Ab7 going to C or Cm7 an Ab7#11

Soloing wise, well if it's a ii-V the easiest thing is just to use your usual ii-V language a semitone apart - this is called 'sideslippping' or 'planing'. Very bebop, and can be used to dress up simpler progressions once you learn the sound.

However, if often play either lydian dominant or whole tone over the bVI7 chord (I think of it as bVI#11) and a minor dominant or altered tonality over the V7 chord (creating a minor tinge on that chord.)

In this sense, you can play Eb melodic minor, Ab melodic minor on Ab7 G7. This sounds smoother to my ears then using the altered dominant or lyd dom, say, on both chords, though your ears may disagree and there's no rules (sometimes V lyd dominant I minor sounds great.)

Hope that makes sense.

[pingu]

Either thought process is acceptable and both are used.

Often times in theory there is more than one accurate way to describe something because of the fact that it is a "theory" and not a "law."

I recommend using Ab Lydian b7 as your scale choice IF you choose to play over that chord (it could certainly be ignored.)

If you're unfamiliar with it, there are two easy ways to create it:

1) Take your stock Lydian mode and as the title implies, flat the 7th from a major7 to a b7. (Ab, Bb, C, D, Eb, F, Gb)

2) Take your stock Mixolydian mode and raise the 4th degree (in this case from a Db to a D.)

If you ever come across a dominant7 in a tune that doesn't have a diatonic root to the current key, your best bet is to always choose Lydian b7 as your mode of choice. The reason being, like the example in the C blues, is that the D natural grounds the scale more to the key because it has 3 common tones to C major (C, D and F) as opposed to just having two in common if you chose Mixolydian (C and F.)

Hope this helped!

Noah D'Innocenzo

Hey Noah , you teach great man !

[matt.guitarteacher]

Well, that Ab7 chord in the key of C has a long history going back to the classical era.

Thought about this sporadically while about my day yesterday. I wonder about the notions of "function" versus common practice and common sense discussion of what we actually play. At some point, you need to understand both, in a practical way, in dealing with music, I would think?

I think it's fine to talk about common progressions and standard practice, maybe pointing out that something is very vanilla and basic, at least in a jazz context. But there's also a point at which you need to understand Harmonic functions, and the most "standard" progressions are probably the best place to start in explaining them. They're the easiest to hear, and they provide the most numerous examples.

If someone asks me about chords which resolve downward by halfstep, they're probably ready for the first mention of the concept of tritone substitution. To me that doesn't seem to be overly theoretical or navelgazing gobbledygook. If you can't be down with understanding basic tritone substitution, I don't know... I DO think it's worth having a teacher to know when you actually need to KNOW something versus when you need to just PLAY something , but I don't think the answer is "never".

Anyway, I would generally view Ab7 resolving to G7 in this example, to be "functioning" as a tritone substitution. The fact that you wouldn't talk about it that way on the bandstand, doesn't change that fact, especially when talking to somebody who is ask ing the "why" question in the first place. I don't know that explaining that Ab7 can basically resolve any number of places is helpful, when you're looking at a specific progression where it resolves in one of the most STANDARD ways.

Jazzers don't talk on the bandstand , necessarily, about "borrowing" from minor or Secondary dominants either, but literate musicians need to know about them at some point, and I would think, especially jazzers. Anyway, these kind of conversations are very natural on the individual student basis, and I know you're an excellent teacher. I just wonder about providing larger contexts when talking about these things in this format.

Always appreciate your thoughts. Thanks.

[christianm77]

Thought about this sporadically while about my day yesterday. I wonder about the notions of "function" versus common practice and common sense discussion of what we actually play. At some point, you need to understand both, in a practical way, in dealing with music, I would think?

I think it's fine to talk about common progressions and standard practice, maybe pointing out that something is very vanilla and basic, at least in a jazz context. But there's also a point at which you need to understand Harmonic functions, and the most "standard" progressions are probably the best place to start in explaining them. They're the easiest to hear, and they provide the most numerous examples.

If someone asks me about chords which resolve downward by halfstep, they're probably ready for the first mention of the concept of tritone substitution. To me that doesn't seem to be overly theoretical or navelgazing gobbledygook. If you can't be down with understanding basic tritone substitution, I don't know... I DO think it's worth having a teacher to know when you actually need to KNOW something versus when you need to just PLAY something , but I don't think the answer is "never".

Anyway, I would generally view Ab7 resolving to G7 in this example, to be "functioning" as a tritone substitution. The fact that you wouldn't talk about it that way on the bandstand, doesn't change that fact, especially when talking to somebody who is ask ing the "why" question in the first place. I don't know that explaining that Ab7 can basically resolve any number of places is helpful, when you're looking at a specific progression where it resolves in one of the most STANDARD ways.

There are two standard ways for the bVI7 chord to resolve and I have given both of them above. It's clear if you learn enough tunes actually, just being empirical, which is kind of what I did before realising how it ties in with the books I have read. The theory is just a name.

As a theorist I mainly dislike the tritone thing because it implies the Ab7 is a sub for some other chord, which most of the time it is not. These chords are vanilla to the songs.

That said in a broader sense it really doesn't matter and everything I say will become clear if you learn enough standards. You just need to recognise the different harmonic modules and become conversant with them.

People have different names for it. Conrad cork calls bVI7 a 'nowhere' for instance after out of nowhere.

As a teacher I might point out similarities between tunes and also what progressions can be swapped for others.

Jazzers don't talk on the bandstand , necessarily, about "borrowing" from minor or Secondary dominants either, but literate musicians need to know about them at some point, and I would think, especially jazzers. Anyway, these kind of conversations are very natural on the individual student basis, and I know you're an excellent teacher. I just wonder about providing larger contexts when talking about these things in this format.

Jazzers don't discuss theory on the bandstand on the whole.

Maybe in rehearsal very occasionally.

In general I feel many jazz musicians in general have a pretty limited and stereotyped understanding of compositional functional harmony (I have heard others who understand classical theory and also play jazz say the same thing.)

This is not a problem most of the time when playing tunes (although people do occasionally say things like 'Jobim's harmony is non-functional') There's more to functional harmony than backcycling progressions and 2 5 1s - although you can get a long way knowing just those two things.

Composition and its relationship to harmony interests me personally. I write music though, and I am fascinated by standards.

[christianm77]

Come to think of it the important things are these:

learn or look at as many tunes as you can (transpose to all 12)

find what the recurring chord movements are

Examine what your favourite players do on any modules you find difficult

Apply theory as required

Find convenient labels for these modules that make sense to others

Don't ask questions on jazzguitar.be because you will get 100 answers from those who have done this work and all understand it slightly differently.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Don't ask questions on jazzguitar.be because you will get 100 answers from those who have done this work and all understand it slightly differently.

mmmkay

There's a vetting process. Acclamation period, to see who's what here, but this? I've gotten a tremendous amount from being here for many years as a student. Living in a jazz desert, I wouldn't trade anything for it.

Anyway, agreed re a teacher...

[Jonah]

I don't knowChristian...
I admire your erudition and interest in history... you probably know that I am interested in historical stuff too...

but however they played that in the past.. whatever context it was, when I come up to the tune I hear just what I hear and it's the only thing I trust...
I am always interested to know how others hear it or how it was heard in the past (supposed)... but it is nothing for me before I hear it too (which is possible sometimes... eventually)..

You mentioned 'Darn THat Dream' - long after I learnt it I still thought about this Vlb7 chord... I kind of cannot have it as just 'embelishment' or just 'passing' - whatever you call it... that's how my hearing works.. I just can hear it is something more than (whatever other jazz players think say dance dream about it)

[christianm77]

I don't knowChristian...
I admire your erudition and interest in history... you probably know that I am interested in historical stuff too...

but however they played that in the past.. whatever context it was, when I come up to the tune I hear just what I hear and it's the only thing I trust...
I am always interested to know how others hear it or how it was heard in the past (supposed)... but it is nothing for me before I hear it too (which is possible sometimes... eventually)..

You mentioned 'Darn THat Dream' - long after I learnt it I still thought about this Vlb7 chord... I kind of cannot have it as just 'embelishment' or just 'passing' - whatever you call it... that's how my hearing works.. I just can hear it is something more than (whatever other jazz players think say dance dream about it)

I don't remember saying that. The bVI7 chord is often very structural.

Nuages! There's another one. Also in G. Can't be played without the Eb7, can it?

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

You've convinced me, Christian. It's borrowed from the parallel minor, not a tritone sub.

[christianm77]

Not just the parallel minor, but the "bluesified" parallel minor, for me (i.e. AbMa7 vs Ab7). Kind of like briefly stepping into the IV chord of an Eb blues.

Sure, especially since the #4/b5 is also the b7 of the bVI7 chord.... Obviously there is the relative minor/major blues thing as well which is worthy of a vid, I think.

Just to illustrate the chords importance to minor key harmony, the bVI7 chord, understood as a bVI #6 5 3 chord in figured bass notation would be the default choice in harmonised descending scales according to 18th century harmonic practices.

And that's why Pergolesi sounds bluesy sometimes :-)

[rpjazzguitar]

If I see an Ab7 going to G7 then C, I'm likely to think of it as an approach chord -- that is, sliding into G7 from a half step up. Unless, of course, I'm used to playing a D7 at that point in the tune and I decide to substitute the tritone.
Same thing. My thinking is just inconsistent.

But, if it's Ebm7, Ab7, G7, C, then I'm thinking guides tones. That is, Ebm7 contains a Db. Ab7 contains a C, G7 contains a B. In that situation I'd probably think about it as a chromatic approach.

But, in reflecting about this, in reality I probably wouldn't think about it at all. I know what Ab7 sounds like in that situation.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Sure, especially since the #4/b5 is also the b7 of the bVI7 chord.... Obviously there is the relative minor/major blues thing as well which is worthy of a vid, I think.

Just to illustrate the chords importance to minor key harmony, the bVI7 chord, understood as a bVI #6 5 3 chord in figured bass notation would be the default choice in harmonised descending scales according to 18th century harmonic practices.

And that's why Pergolesi sounds bluesy sometimes :-)

That's cool. I read something about this today.

Bert Ligon has a couple of pages dedicated to "traditional augmented sixth chords" in his theory book along with tritone subs. Basically ends a long summary with an explanation that although it's not a true tritone sub in the normal sense, it may be labeled as such in jazz chord analysis, where chord symbols default to their sound, as opposed to voice leading/figured bass etc.

"The augmented sixth chord could have presented simply as a dominant seventh chord that may resolve down a half step to the dominant chord, but it is important to understand the historical background and relationship of jazz music styles to those of other eras."

Ligon has a lot of respect for the aural traditions associated with jazz. Anyway, I thought it was cool that he apparently does with classical traditions as well.