m7b5 or Diminished?

[griphon ii]

Progression or progressions is/are probably the most important knowledge all musicians should know and understand. By far, the greatest trick, aurally. It's an abject MUST!!! Music moves within a cycle of 4th/5ths, most often. I, IV, V... C,F,G or A,D,E, etc. An abject must to do, whether, jazz, blues, or just playing. Music moves downward. You have to provoke it to move upward. It's a difficult commodity. There are simple progressions within key that work logically. Down by 5th on average. Look at the cycle or 4ths and 5th, within key and without. Mental, physical work. Most curves in pop or rock, tricks, are the b7 or b3rd change (outside key). It's physical and aural. I IV V, ii V i or I, iv ii V I, iii vi ii V I, vii iii vi ii V I... Note cycle or 4/5... The real interesting... it doesn't matter chord quality. The patterns work. Soloing, can, could and will be daunting. There is a trick between I and V7... Have fun...

[griphon ii]

diminished chord, half diminished or m6ths are a function of harmony.
My view, a simple dominant change. Writers and arrangers of music, especially, non guitar players, write what is compositionally fashionable.
It's not incorrect, but most of the time not logical or functional for a guitar player of the cuff. e.g. Gm6, A7b9... it's a bass motion. Gm6 can be looked at in various ways. (Gm6, Em7b5 or C9) Quickly, it's ii, V... and most of the time in the writing it's ii V. (C7 to A7, rock and roll) But, the composer or arranger writes what he sees, not what he hears out of habit. A very strange problem. And a problem you will see in big band charts. New or old. Guitar players, always, have to make things up on a dime. We're least known, most ignored until it comes down to it. Understand harmony. It's your best weapon against, ignorance and laziness. And, you'll still be treated as illiterate. I've received many apologies. Guitar players know 0. It's still difficult to get through a major university as a guitar player. I and we can DO anything a "pianer" player can do...

[JonR]

Just to clarify a couple of things in case it helps...

1-b3-b5 = diminished triad, dim. Symbol °. Derived from:
Major key: vii
Natural minor: ii
Harmonic minor: ii and vii
Melodic minor: vi and vii

1-b3-b5-b7 = m7b5, or half-diminished. Symbol Ø. Derived from:
Major key: vii
Natural minor: ii
Harmonic minor: ii
Melodic minor: vi and vii

1-b3-b5-bb7 = diminished 7th, dim7, or full diminished. Symbol °7. Derived from:
Harmonic minor: vii
(NB: because the dim triad is so rare in practice, the symbol ° can be assumed to stand for dim7.)

m7b5 = dominant function if vii in major key, but much more often seen in jazz as ii in minor key, ie subdominant function (leading to V7).

dim7 = dominant function, normally as vii in minor key, sometimes borrowed for major key.

Examples:

Bm7b5 (B D F A) = most commonly ii chord in A minor: Bm7b5 > E7(b9) > Am.
Very rarely, vii chord in C major: Bm7b5 > C. (as such, can be seen as rootless G9)

Bdim7 (B D F Ab) = most commonly vii chord in C minor: Bdim7 > Cm. (Can be seen as rootless G7b9.) Can also be used to resolve to Cmaj.
Enharmonic with Ddim7, Fdim7 and G#dim7, so can also resolve to minor or major chords on Eb, F# or A roots.

[baerashbrewer]

I'm weighing in kind of late here and someone else may have already posted this but half diminished and whole diminished are worlds apart. The term "half-diminished" is a really bad name and the chord has nothing to do with diminished.

There are three worlds in music: Major, Minor, and Dominant.

Min7(b5) is in the minor world. Just think of a minor ii-V. Like Am7b5 - D7

Diminished is in the dominant world. A G#dim7 chord is just a G7alt chord with the b9 in the bass. This is why diminished chords resolve nicely, just like dominant chords.

Every chord that you play is either Major, Minor, or Dominant. Take this from Oz Noy to Joe Pass to Mimi Fox. Granted, if you play a Dm chord when you are supposed to play a Dm7b5, it won't sound right, but the same if you play a D13 when your supposed to play a D7b13.

Dominant chords have different options and sounds. Whole tone, diminished, mixolydian, altered, etc.

Think of m7b5 as subtle tonality choice for minor.

However, as all of music, there are exceptions. For example, Bm7b5 can be used as a substitute for G7. Haha. But that's how it goes.

[JonR]

I'm weighing in kind of late here and someone else may have already posted this but half diminished and whole diminished are worlds apart. The term "half-diminished" is a really bad name and the chord has nothing to do with diminished.

It has a diminished 5th; it's built off a diminished triad - vii in major or ii in minor.
It's "half-diminished" in comparison with the dim7 chord, which has two diminished intervals, 5th and 7th.
IOW, there is a logic to the name.

There are three worlds in music: Major, Minor, and Dominant.

That's mixing chord quality terms with chord function terms.

Min7(b5) is in the minor world. Just think of a minor ii-V. Like Am7b5 - D7

Right.
Although it's also vii in a major key, it's used far more often as ii in the relative minor.

Diminished is in the dominant world. A G#dim7 chord is just a G7alt chord with the b9 in the bass.

Sorry, no it isn't. You're right it has a dominant function - in that it resolves to the tonic. But in terms of dom7 chords, it's an E7b9 chord with no root.
G#dim7 = G# B D F = vii in A minor, possible sub for E7.
A G7alt chord will have a Db or D#, not a D.
If you re-spell it as Bdim7, it could stand for a G7b9, but not a G7alt.

This is why diminished chords resolve nicely, just like dominant chords.

Yes, they resolve like dom7 chords, because they share the same tritone - and add another.
E7 and G#dim7 both contain the G#-D tritone. Both resolve in the same way to A major or A minor.
G#dim7 contains the additional tritone B-F (as does E7b9), which is useful for making a stronger resolutio, to A minor in particular. (It's diatonic to the A minor key anyway.)

Every chord that you play is either Major, Minor, or Dominant.

There are actually two kinds of minor in common use in jazz: min7 and tonic minor, usually expressed as min6 or min(maj7). These are very different chords.
Likewise, the half-dim chord is a unique type on its own; different enough from minor.

Granted, if you play a Dm chord when you are supposed to play a Dm7b5, it won't sound right, but the same if you play a D13 when your supposed to play a D7b13.

Yes, but Dm7b5 is not just an altered Dm7. It's the diatonic ii chord in C minor.

Dominant chords have different options and sounds. Whole tone, diminished, mixolydian, altered, etc.

Right.

Think of m7b5 as subtle tonality choice for minor.

The standard diatonic choice for a minor key ii chord .

However, as all of music, there are exceptions. For example, Bm7b5 can be used as a substitute for G7. Haha.

Sure, because it's a rootless G9, and the vii ("leading tone chord") in C major; so it can resolve like a dominant to C major. It's just hardly ever used that way in jazz.
IOW, while a chord player may play a Bm7b5 shape in resolving to C, he/she will think of it as a rootless G9 in that context

[AmundLauritzen]

m7b5 can be the upper structure of a minor 6th chord, usually tonic minor. Bm7b5/D = Dm6. There you have an example of it not functioning as a dominant, which was requested(?).

Theoretically F#m7b5 over a C bass would give you some kind of C6add#11 or however you'd write that, but I don't think the intervallic structure of m7b5 voicings would lend itself good for that harmony in order to be a preferred substitution for most people. I don't know, just thought of that one off the top of my head. I just tried voice leading it to hear it in context. Didn't like it much although it doesn't sound wrong per se.

[baerashbrewer]

m7b5 can be the upper structure of a minor 6th chord, usually tonic minor. Bm7b5/D = Dm6. There you have an example of it not functioning as a dominant, which was requested(?).

Thanks for weighing in Amund. The disagreement is about diminished, not m7b5, being a chord that works as a dominant. My argument is that half-diminished is a confusing name that has nothing to do with diminished theory, and I have gone the same route as other jazz musicians and institutions that are working to get rid of the name.

The difference is, when used as a stand alone chord, the m7b5 is a type of minor chord in function, a minor chord with a b5, while a diminished chord is really and altered dominant chord. Players that have said this include Joe Pass, Allan Holdsworth, Mimi Fox, Oz Noy, Jerry Bergonzi, as well as countless others. This includes the acceptance that every chord is either major, minor, or dominant, in function.

When superimposing, or used as an upper structure voicing, chords are one a second level of analyzation because their function is not longer in a pure context.

The reason for the fuss is that there is a lot of confusion over diminished. The thread is just another example of it. The half-diminished name makes zero, and I mean, zero sense. You can't be half major, or half minor, you either are in a major tonality or minor tonality. Same thing with diminished. Diminished is a beautiful concept, while simple in it's structure, is complicated in its simpleness. It's symmetrical, the inversions are identical, the tensions all lye a half step below each chord tone. It's a whole world, but when it comes down to when and how they are used, they are always used in a dominant fashion. Dominant chords can be substituted by diminished chords, diminished scales have dominant chords in every which way, all over the place, inside of them.

To sum up.

Major Tonality. Include but not limited to:

Major
Lydian
Ionian b6, etc

Minor Tonality. Include but not limited to:

Dorian
Phyrgian
Harm Minor
Locrian, etc (MIN7b5)!

Dominant Tonality. Include but not limited to:

Mixo
Mixo b6
Whole Tone
Altered
Diminished (DIM)!
Lydian dominant, etc


EDIT: Forgot a word and edited for clarity.

[AmundLauritzen]

I hear you. I was just reading through the thread quickly, so I obviously misunderstood the topic.
But, the information I provided can still be useful for those not already familiar with it.

I agree with you, and I personally rarely use the term "half-diminished" myself. m7b5 is more accurate in describing the function of the chord. If it's not an upper structure, it is always part of a minor cadence usually followed by the V7 leading to the respective i-minor. Of course, unless one deals with modal tunes but even then the m7b5 is the least common choice for an extended vamp - it just sounds weird.
Also: upper structures, extensions and alterations don't have a say in functional analysis(based on roman numerals) - only scale degrees and general chord quality do. As you say: major, minor and dominant.

If we consider the root structure and quality to determine the function, then there is really only one possibility for m7b5's in functional harmony and that is being part of a minor cadence as previously mentioned.

Pure diminished chords are rarely thought of as separate entities but either as passing chords or the upper structure of altered dominant chords. Abdim/G = G7b9. Dbdim/G = G13b5#9. The latter example an uncommon chord substitution but often used in single lines.

If we take upper structures into account, there are several occurrences of m7b5.
In the altered scale, there are two m7b5 arps or chords found a whole step away from each other built on the b7th and the root. Personally, these are some of my favored sounds in that scale.

But that again is dealing with upper structures and has nothing to do with functional analysis.

[baerashbrewer]

I
In the altered scale, there are two m7b5 arps or chords found a whole step away from each other built on the b7th and the root.

GOLD! Thanks for sharing. Going to practice these all over the neck today. Beautiful sound. Played one after another, they have an amazing constant structure sound within the altered scale. I have trouble making the altered scale sound "pretty" and this little tip is a big help. Thanks!

[AmundLauritzen]

GOLD! Thanks for sharing. Going to practice these all over the neck today. Beautiful sound. Played one after another, they have an amazing constant structure sound within the altered scale. I have trouble making the altered scale sound "pretty" and this little tip is a big help. Thanks!

You're welcome! If you go up the Gm7b5 and down the Fm7b5, the F resolves to elegantly to E, the third of Cmaj7 or C7 if the harmony goes there.
Down the Gm7b5 and up the Fm7b5 also allows you to resolve like that but in that approaching the E note from the other direction through Eb.

If you play them straight like that in 8th notes, those two arps perfectly fill up one bar of G7alt.

The m7b5's definately smooth out an otherwise very dark sound. People tend to prefer the minor-major7th arpeggios in that scale and although they are a great choice, the minor-major7th sound is very dominating.

I'm glad I could contribute something useful to the thread, although it's slightly off-topic.

[JonR]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how something can be "half-diminished." A minor chord isn't half-major. It can't be used with a diminished function at all.

You're misunderstanding me.

First of all, you did admit previously that you were "weighing in kind of late here and someone else may have already posted this". Indeed. I think we had pretty well answered the original question.
Not that that prevents anyone from pursuing the thread, of course, there's always more to be said; more ways of explaining stuff in case someone doesn't understand the first attempt.

Anyway, I was only pointing out how the term "half-diminished" can be seen to be logical, whether or not we actually like it.
If a 2-gallon jar has 2 gallons in it, it's full, right?
If we take a gallon out, then it's half-full, right?
A diminished 7th chord - which has two diminished intervals (b5, bb7) - is sometimes known as a "full diminished" (and IMO that's not a great name).
So it's easy to see how a similar chord with only one diminished interval (b5) can be called, in comparison, "half-diminished".

Again, not saying this is brilliant example of sensible music theory terminology! . Only that it does make a kind of sense, in those terms.

Modern contemporary theory is often based only on function. The function is the quality.

But that's blurring the distinctions.
A particular chord "quality" or "type" may well be associated with just one "function". That doesn't make the terms interchangeable.

The categories that make sense to me, in my experience of functional jazz harmony, are William Russo's six types, which each have one main function, but other possible ones:

MAJ (maj7, 6, etc) = I or IV in major key; III or VI in minor
DOM (7, 9, 13, 7alt, etc) = V in major or minor key
MIN (m(maj7), m6, etc) = I in minor key
MS (minor 7th) = ii, vi or iii in major key; iv in minor key
LTS (leading tone 7th, aka m7b5 or half-dim) = ii in minor key; or (rarely) vii in major
DIM (dim7) = vii in minor key (normally).

These can be see as built on 3 different triad types (maj, min, dim), each with two different kinds of 7th: maj7 or min7 on maj or min triad; min7 or dim7 on dim triad.

Other chord types are possible of course, but (in functional harmony) they can - AFAIK - all be seen as variants of one of those categories. But I don't think it makes sense to reduce those 6 to 3. (Unless we make them "tonic, dominant, subdominant", not "major, minor, dominant". IOW, we can talk about 3 essential chord functions, but not 3 essential chord types.)

I suggest checking out a concept called "diminished connection." You'll understand why diminished chords are altered dominants in disguise.

I understand the connection perfectly well, but not all "diminished chords are altered dominants in disguise." Not even all diminished 7th chords "are altered dominants in disguise". It's certainly true that most dim7 chords in jazz can be interpreted as 7b9 chords "in disguise". But an "altered dominant", correctly defined, is a different chord from a 7b9 chord. (The functions of all these chords may be the same, but the types are subtly different.)

In any case, aside from dim7s that stand for dom7s, there is also the "common tone diminished", which is not a substitute for a dominant. It's rare in jazz, but quite common in the music of Jobim, eg.
(This is outside Russo's scheme, although he does mention it elsewhere.)

Actually, it looks like you already did. Can you tell me why it's not a dominant function again?

I think we were talking about G#dim7 and E7b9. (Just to remind any readers dropping in here late .)
G#dim7 - technically speaking - is a "leading tone 7th" chord (VIIo7) in the key of A minor. The word "dominant" - in this strict sense - only applies to a chord on the V step (the "dominant" degree).
Of course I'm being pedantic . I agree fully that G#dim7 (in A minor) has a "dominant function", if we understand that term as meaning "tending to resolve to the tonic".
I'm simply teasing out precise definitions of terms here.

We'll agree to disagree.

OK.

And I have never known min6 or min(maj7) to be commonly interchangeable.

As minor key tonics, they are - at least theoretically - interchangeable in the same way as maj7 and 6 are as a major key tonics. I'd agree they are maybe not as common. The m(maj7) chord at least is a tougher chord to use than a maj7.
But the idea is simply that a minor key tonic chord may have melodic minor extensions: 6, maj7 or 9. (Same extensions as a major key tonic.)

Again, pretty much what I was saying, just with more words.

OK - as I said above, sometimes it's good to add more words in case a previous statement was not as clear to some readers as it might be. You and I are doing much the same thing here: explaining things as we see them. Disagreements may simply be a question of emphasis, or of definition of terms. (We're talking about the same sounds after all.) That's why I like to be pedantic (as clear as possible) about the terminology as I understand it.

[JonR]

Thanks for weighing in Amund. The disagreement is about diminished, not m7b5, being a chord that works as a dominant. My argument is that half-diminished is a confusing name that has nothing to do with diminished theory

What is "diminished theory"?
In my understanding the word has one simple meaning:
the reduction of a minor or perfect interval by a half-step, and (hence) the name of a chord containing one or more diminished intervals.
So a "diminished triad" is so-called because of its 5th (its most significant interval);
A "diminished 7th" is so-called because of its 7th (its most significant interval).

I don't think it's worth arguing (any more!) about the term "half-diminished".
"m7b5" is fine with me, and I kind of prefer it anyway.
But - in terms of derivation from the vii of major, or the ii degree of minor - it's a diminished triad with a minor 7th added.
Jazz chooses largely to use it in the latter capacity (ii in minor), as a "subdominant function" chord. As such, it parallels the function of the min7 ii chord in the major key.
I think we can agree on that much, yes?

Where we disagree (I think) is that a m7b5 chord is essentially an altered min7 chord. It looks like that, is named like that, and it can be useful to see it that way. But in its usual context it isn't altered at all - not in the way a dom7 chord can be altered.

, and I have gone the same route as other jazz musicians and institutions that are working to get rid of the name.

OK, good luck with that.

The difference is, when used as a stand alone chord, the m7b5 is a type of minor chord in function, a minor chord with a b5, while a diminished chord is really and altered dominant chord. Players that have said this include Joe Pass, Allan Holdsworth, Mimi Fox, Oz Noy, Jerry Bergonzi, as well as countless others.

Well, in terms of its use as a minor ii chord, it obviously parallels the major key ii chord. But IMO (and I would like some actual quotes from those people rather than assertions), that doesn't mean "it's a type of minor chord". That's starting to blur distinctions unhelpfully.
What it is is a "type of ii chord" - that's the sense in which we can compare m7 and m7b5. (And of course we can borrow m7b5 chords for use as ii in major, and use m7s as iis in minor.)
As I see it, you may as well say a min7 chord is "a type of m7b5" with the 5th raised .

This includes the acceptance that every chord is either major, minor, or dominant, in function.

Does it really?
What about the fact that a "major" chord can have a tonic or a subdominant function? Or that a minor chord can have a tonic or subdominant function (or indeed a mediant or submediant function)?
Only one of those terms - "dominant" - is a term describing chord function.
The others describe chord type.

When superimposing, or used as an upper structure voicing, chords are one a second level of analyzation because their function is not longer in a pure context.

Ah.... now you're talking about something quite different . You're talking (I guess) about seeing the upper structures of extended chords as other chord types - connected with the idea of substitution.

The reason for the fuss is that there is a lot of confusion over diminished. The thread is just another example of it. The half-diminished name makes zero, and I mean, zero sense.

Not zero sense. Zero useful sense, maybe .

You can't be half major, or half minor, you either are in a major tonality or minor tonality.

The argument isn't (wasn't) about tonality.
There is no such thing as a diminished "tonality".

Same thing with diminished. Diminished is a beautiful concept, while simple in it's structure, is complicated in its simpleness. It's symmetrical, the inversions are identical

OK, now you're talking about diminished 7th chords. (Just clarifying, not arguing...)

the tensions all lye a half step below each chord tone.

In the whole-half diminished scale, yes.

It's a whole world, but when it comes down to when and how they are used, they are always used in a dominant fashion.

Not always. Just most of the time.
In fact, I will grant you that when a dim7 chord has the WH dim scale used on it, it's probably acting as a dominant sub.
Common-tone diminished chords are a different thing.

Dominant chords can be substituted by diminished chords, diminished scales have dominant chords in every which way, all over the place, inside of them.

Indeed.

To sum up.

Major Tonality. Include but not limited to:

Major
Lydian
Ionian b6, etc

OK, now you're misusing the word "tonality". You're talking about major scale types, or (some) major modes which can be associated with the major chord type. Nothing to do with "tonality".

Minor Tonality. Include but not limited to:

Dorian
Phyrgian
Harm Minor
Locrian, etc (MIN7b5)!

"Minor tonality" strictly speaking, includes Aeolian (natural minor), harmonic and melodic minor.
At a stretch it might include dorian; and at a further stretch it might include phrygian.
Locrian - while it certainly has a minor 3rd - is not a "tonality", if we use the term in its most useful (conventional) sense.

Dominant Tonality. Include but not limited to:

Mixo
Mixo b6
Whole Tone
Altered
Diminished (DIM)!
Lydian dominant, etc

Again, this is not about tonality. It's about chord type and function - and in this case, the two are pretty much synonymous.

Even so, could be wise to differentiate between Lydian dominant and the rest.
Lydian dominant is not commonly used on V7 chords, ie in a strictly "dominant" context. It tends to be used on dom7-type chords that are not functioning as V7 chords.
Of course I'm being pedantic (again), but these distinctions are important and useful. On V7 chords, you can commonly find all these scales being used:

Mixo (in a major key)
Altered (usually in a minor key)
Whole Tone (major or minor)
HW Diminished (usually in minor)
Mixo b6 (rare but possible, in minor)
(& phrygian dominant? in minor)

Lydian dominant, meanwhile, is rare on V7 chords (although does occur), but standard on bII7s in minor or major keys, and bVII7s in major keys, or any non-V7 dom7 type.
Lydian dominant on a bII7 chord is the same scale as altered on a V7 - that's how tritone subs generally pan out. Altered scale on a bII is as unlikely as lydian dominant on a V7.

[JonR]

If we consider the root structure and quality to determine the function, then there is really only one possibility for m7b5's in functional harmony and that is being part of a minor cadence as previously mentioned.

This is true in jazz, but not in classical harmony.
As mentioned above, the vii chord ("leading tone chord") in a major key is of this type, and - if used as such - will resolve to the tonic. It's a standard move in classical harmony.
In jazz, of course, we see this usage as simply a rootless V9 chord.

Of course, we're on a jazz site here , so given that context I don't disagree with you.

Pure diminished chords are rarely thought of as separate entities but either as passing chords or the upper structure of altered dominant chords. Abdim/G = G7b9. Dbdim/G = G13b5#9. The latter example an uncommon chord substitution but often used in single lines.

Yes, I wouldn't call the latter a "substitution" as such, more a passing chord, or an example of a common-tone diminished. Essentially it's just Gdim7, unless of course you're superimposing it on a G7 chord, which I guess is what you mean.

If we take upper structures into account, there are several occurrences of m7b5.
In the altered scale, there are two m7b5 arps or chords found a whole step away from each other built on the b7th and the root. Personally, these are some of my favored sounds in that scale.

Right. We can see these as the vi and vii of the relative melodic minor scale, of course.
(eg, Fm7b5 and Gm7b5 from the Ab melodic minor scale, on a G7alt chord).
I also think of these as m6 arps - Abm6 and Bbm6, ie the i and ii chords of Ab melodic minor.

But that again is dealing with upper structures and has nothing to do with functional analysis.

Right!

[whatswisdom]

It's spelling. "Half-diminished" is for short, the full name of the chord is a "half-diminished seventh."

The full name of the chord is "Half-Diminished." The Half-Diminished symbol is the correct way to express the chord in nomenclature.

[whatswisdom]

The term "half-diminished" is a really bad name and the chord has nothing to do with diminished.

"Half-Diminished" is the correct name for the chord. The chord has everything to do with diminished. In the chord, the 5th is a diminished 5th from the root.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Am I missing something? People (and books) use both terms, half-diminished and m7b5. They seem to use them interchangeably. If I am to understand these people (and books) I will have to be at least this flexible. Again, am I missing something?

[RyanM]

Both names (half-diminished and minor7b5) are fine and widely used and understood. It has two names and nobody cares. Both names make perfect sense and are self-explanatory (descriptive!).


In Dizzy's book he talks about how him and Monk and the other beboppers in the '40s used to call it a Minor 6th chord with the 6th in the bass.

hope I don't make anyone more confused now

(p.s. There's nothing wrong with a melodic b9 passing over this chord either.)

[cubistguitar]

Benson says he learned to think of it as a m6 inverted as well

don't mind m7b5 or half dim, same difference you ask me