Name this sequence and win a prize

[doc w]

I stay awake nights, tossing and turning over the name of this chord. Ok, that's actually a lie, but I do have some minor curiousity.

Take this very common sequence:

Cmaj7 C#dim7 Dmin7 G7

Now if we abstract it a little from any particular key, the last two chords are ii7 and V7, the first chord is I7.

But what does one call that little dim7 passing chord in-between?

Is it a dim7 of the flattened supertonic? bii dim7

Or maybe a dim7 or the raised tonic? #Idim7?? Gee, that looks stupid.

In any case, I have vowed not to play "Til There Was You" ever again until I learn the proper name of this sequence.

[christianm77]

I call it a leading tone diminished or a sub for VI7b9

with that in mind raised tonic makes more sense. Sharpened notes tend to resolve upwards, flat notes tend to resolve down.

[pauln]

Technically you may resume playing "Til There Was You" because your sequence is mistaken... fourth chord is Fm6.

The old style of voicing (Django) minor sixths like that - A9/F
e.g., 1 x 0 1 1 1

I think the Roman numeral system convention ignores key signature and enharmonically assigns accidental labels to non-integer key scale degree chords' roots as flats.

biidim (diminished is considered minor)

[grahambop]

I think Barry Harris calls it flat two diminished, at least that’s how it’s described in Alan Kingstone’s book.

[doc w]

Technically you may resume playing "Til There Was You" because your sequence is mistaken... fourth chord is Fm6.

The old style of voicing (Django) minor sixths like that - A9/F
e.g., 1 x 0 1 1 1

I think the Roman numeral system convention ignores key signature and enharmonically assigns accidental labels to non-integer key scale degree chords' roots as flats.

biidim (diminished is considered minor)

Paul, I should have made it clear that I was only showing the introduction, the little ii V7 I that precedes so many songs. It is the second chord in that sequence about which I am curious, but only the Roman numeral system.

[doc w]

I think Barry Harris calls it flat two diminished, at least that’s how it’s described in Alan Kingstone’s book.

That makes sense to me. I guess that I almost had it right. It does look odd when described in Roman numerals though, doesn't it?

Thanks Graham

[ragman1]

It's called anything you want to call it, obviously. Prize please

[christianm77]

I would have to disagree with Barry’s enharmony... (Braces for incoming.) although is it possible you are confusing it with the bIIIo7?

This is traditional functional harmony; according to my classical theory textbook the chord is written as for instance C#o7 going to Dm in C. Leading tones (major/natural sevenths) resolve upwards in common practice harmony; same with 1st inversion major and dominant chords.

(Leading tones are basically any note a half step below a chord root. In this case we are tonicising Dm - treating it as a temporary key centre, so we think of the chord as if it belonged to D minor, not C.)

This stuff all comes from continuo realisation practices etc.

however classical theory would probably just term a learning tone diminished seventh of the II degree rather than writing #Io7. It’s a sub for V/II

However jazz musicians have never been terribly interested in enharmony. With that in mind perhaps the correct conclusion is that it doesn’t actually matter :-)

[pcjazz]

I would have to disagree with Barry’s enharmony... (Braces for incoming.) although is it possible you are confusing it with biiio?

No, Barry does call it flat-two dim and it is clear what he means by it. You may be correct in identifying it as #1o in classical theory, but Barry’s nomenclature often departs from that norm, e.g. in his use of ‘arpeggio’.

[doc w]

I would have to disagree with Barry’s enharmony... (Braces for incoming.) although is it possible you are confusing it with the bIIIo7?

This is traditional functional harmony; according to my classical theory textbook the chord is written as for instance C#o7 going to Dm in C. Leading tones (major/natural sevenths) resolve upwards in common practice harmony; same with 1st inversion major and dominant chords.

(Leading tones are basically any note a half step below a chord root. In this case we are tonicising Dm - treating it as a temporary key centre, so we think of the chord as if it belonged to D minor, not C.)

This stuff all comes from continuo realisation practices etc.

however classical theory would probably just term a learning tone diminished seventh of the II degree rather than writing #Io7. It’s a sub for V/II

However jazz musicians have never been terribly interested in enharmony. With that in mind perhaps the correct conclusion is that it doesn’t actually matter :-)

I almost understand what you are saying but not quite. What would the figured bass notation look like, assuming that the root is C#?

[Reg]

Hey Doc... the label would reflect your analysis or how you call the function of the chord... the reason for the movement.

If your analysis is... Ima7 #Idim7 II-7 V7. Would be ascending passing or approach chord.

The leading tone chord implies that the root of the Dim. chord.... is the leading tone to the root of the diatonic chord of resolution. The C#dim7 chord can represent the upper structure of the possible secondary Dom. of a Diatonic chord In your example... the Key of "C" .... II-7 chord, or D-7 is Diatonic. so....

C#dim above.... "A"... is A7b9 and can be the secondary Dominant of the target of D-7 (V7b9 of II-7) Secondary Dom. chord.

But your analysis or how you hear or want the chord .... to work would define the label and rest of notes, extensions or common scale used to create your melody etc...

Pretty easy for me... I hate Diminished chords and scales, I also don't like BH concepts. Especially on guitar. Works great for solo work or trios etc...

[Jonah]

I almost understand what you are saying but not quite. What would the figured bass notation look like, assuming that the root is C#?

b5 or crossed 5... I do not think it was possible to apply immidiately b5 and bb7 at a time.. if it ever happened my idea in those days it would have been sunsequent... first C# appears then probably 7th move down half step... or vice versa..
It is posibble in some flowing chordal polyphony (like Bach'a 1st prelude in WTK for example).. when it is possible to have major 7th showng up as a result of voices moving around..

But I can hardly imagine it as a harmonic turnaround (like comping some Handel style air for example)... they would just work with a triad or first A major (or A7) inversion.. that Bb is too harsh for harmonic sound... it is only possible in the flowing polyphonic texture...


I also think this turnaround is not possible in classical per se like in jazz -- in the same role... lke opening changes of the piece and so on..

I will also add that C#dim7 in classical music would hardly be resolved to Dm7... it goes to the D minor triad (there is not liead fo rthe 7th).
Also in classical lead 7th chord is usually diatonic and it is half dim no dim... to it would be most probably B natural and sould not sound that harsh as with Bb and B nat could be move on to C (7th of Dm7) if needed - though in classical I would still prefer to resolve to A and to lead to D minor triad.. at least in harmonic context


In other words Bnat and Bflat would have been strictly passing tones going from C nat down to A nat (D minor triad)

[Jonah]

In jazz I treat it simply as melodic bass move supported with contrary motion in one of the voices -

in jazz you can resolve it to D minor triad smoothly if you double C# and resove it in opposite directions

[christianm77]

No, Barry does call it flat-two dim and it is clear what he means by it. You may be correct in identifying it as #1o in classical theory, but Barry’s nomenclature often departs from that norm, e.g. in his use of ‘arpeggio’.

I’m sure he has a good reason for calling it that, not that I can see it at a casual glance.

I’m a bit surprised because Barry tends AFAIK to view dim chords as being named from the third of the dominant. The C#o7 relates so clearly to the A7 I’m surprised he’d call it a biio7

But as I say, there must be a reason for it.

[pcjazz]

I’m sure he has a good reason for calling it that, not that I can see it at a casual glance.

I’m a bit surprised because Barry tends AFAIK to view dim chords as being named from the third of the dominant. The C#o7 relates so clearly to the A7 I’m surprised he’d call it a biio7

But as I say, there must be a reason for it.

perhaps by analogy to the biiio7 which is more important in his thinking

[pauln]

I’m sure he has a good reason for calling it that, not that I can see it at a casual glance.

I’m a bit surprised because Barry tends AFAIK to view dim chords as being named from the third of the dominant. The C#o7 relates so clearly to the A7 I’m surprised he’d call it a biio7

But as I say, there must be a reason for it.

Because of wanting to express the bass line moving C Dd D? That would be my reason, but also because generally the root note is the most informative of the parts of the name (about how it sounds, not necessarily how it was constructed).

It looks like the parsing hierarchy of chord naming convention was designed to reveal how they sound as quickly as possible, with a descendingly informative series of symbols, emphasizing the sound as quickly as possible rather than how they might have been constructed. Wiki has the naming construction order as below, which looks like each step is adding less "urgent" information:

- the root note
- the chord quality
- whether the chord is a triad, seventh chord, or an extended chord
- any altered notes
- any added tones
- the bass note if it is not the root

[Isfahan]

The C#dim7 functions as a VI7b9 without the root. Rhythm changes. Call it a bIIdim7. No need to over-think it.

[grahambop]

perhaps by analogy to the biiio7 which is more important in his thinking

For what it’s worth, on the same page of Alan’s book (p. 26) he talks about the flat three dim, the sharp four dim, and the flat two dim.

[Reg]

Yea... you need to decide on what you call it ....the label or notation...generally from some type reason, generally an analysis. In jazz either a deceptive voicing of V7 chord of target or just chromatic passing or approach chord. The choice reflects the rest of the notes or extensions you would have access to and how you might actually play. All those details Pauln mentioned. Eventually you just don't play basic vanilla lead sheet changes or chord tones with embellishments. (Or maybe that's what you do). Don't get stuck in a Loop and get in a situation in which there is no way-out and in which the same things keep repeating themselves over and over again following the same order or process.

[pcjazz]

For what it’s worth, on the same page of Alan’s book (p. 26) he talks about the flat three dim, the sharp four dim, and the flat two dim.

But have a look at p.28 where he uses a different naming scheme. I think this is Alan, not Barry. Barry talks about the diminished of the key (found on the 3rd of the dominant chord and equivalent to the major seventh of the key), the biio and the biiio. Alan's #ivo is an inversion of the biiio.

[christianm77]

Doesn’t really matter. But I won’t be able to sleep.

[pcjazz]

Doesn’t really matter. But I won’t be able to sleep.

Au contraire, mentally reviewing all this stuff beats counting sheep.

[doc w]

I have learned a lot from this thread. Among other things, it has reinforced my "hearing" of the chord. I always thought of it as simply a dim7 on the flattened supertonicc, but that was never a really satisfactory explanation. I always heard it as a some version of VI which would make sense in the progression I - VI - ii - V7, a pretty common change. So now my problem is solved. The progression, in Roman numerals is:

I7 - VI7b9 - ii7 - V7

Play it starting with the root of the I7 on the 5th string, 3rd fret. Play it again without the Bb (so, just an A7/c#) and the change from A7 to Dm is downright baroque

I guess I could also still call it biidim7 but that seems a little awkward now.

Thanks guys.

[pcjazz]

I have learned a lot from this thread. Among other things, it has reinforced my "hearing" of the chord. I always thought of it as simply a dim7 on the flattened supertonicc, but that was never a really satisfactory explanation. I always heard it as a some version of VI which would make sense in the progression I - VI - ii - V7, a pretty common change. So now my problem is solved. The progression, in Roman numerals is:

I7 - VI7b9 - ii7 - V7

Play it starting with the root of the I7 on the 5th string, 3rd fret. Play it again without the Bb (so, just an A7/c#) and the change from A7 to Dm is downright baroque

I guess I could also still call it biidim7 but that seems a little awkward now.

Thanks guys.

Is your I chord major (as in post #1) or dominant (as here)?

[doc w]

Is your I chord major (as in post #1) or dominant (as here)?

I = major triad
I7 = major triad with a major seventh added
Ib7 = major triad with a minor seventh added which would be a dominant 7

Is that correct?