Minor i vi ii V question

[Christian Miller]

Cristian says flat 6 flaming 7th...
that would be E 7th .... completely wrong, discordant flaming cocophany.

F flaming 7th, not too bad, staying true to the F major vibe.

This is doubly confusing

1) we’re in a minor
2) bVI in A minor is F (because we compare it to the major key - if you didn’t know this I can see why you would think it E - F flat. Fine)

BUT, the kicker
3) As we’re in Am E7 would sound perfectly normal.

So ????

[KingKong]

This is doubly confusing

1) we’re in a minor
2) bVI in A minor is F (because we compare it to the major key - if you didn’t know this I can see why you would think it E - F flat. Fine)

BUT, the kicker
3) As we’re in Am E7 would sound perfectly normal.

So ????

Points 1 and 2, yep makes sense, wrong counting on my part.

But 3, no I don't agree. F major 7th is the chord there, as I assume that it will harmonise with that part of the melody.

But as far as I can see,if a section of a melody harmonises with a major chord, take that chord down a semitone under the same melody, that is a recipe for total discord.

[pauln]

Points 1 and 2, yep makes sense, wrong counting on my part.

Join the club; I wrote a long screed early in this thread about the uselessness of m7b5.
I couldn't bear the sound of it and could not find how to get it to work musically in even
weird-ass progressions. Mercifully I discovered I was fooling with some other "chord"(!)
before posting about it. Turns out I have always loved m7b5, never played it by name.

[princeplanet]

Speaking of half diminished, I'm surprised no-one has come in to bat for F#m7b5. I thought it was one of the commonly used options. Any thoughts?

[PMB]

Am7 > F#m7b5 is pretty standard in tunes where the minor's acting as tonic (Parker's Segment for instance). If you think of that move as Am7 > Am6, it has same feeing of release that Amaj7 > Amaj6 provides. In Parker's case, although he wrote next to nothing in minor key, he had a predilection for natural 6 in his minor melodies much like Lester Young so that has to figure into the choice as well. The fact that there are so many possible combinations of b6, 6, b7 and 7 in the minor scales and modes definitely throws a spanner in the works!

[Laurence Finston]

The fact that there are so many possible combinations of b6, 6, b7 and 7 in the minor scales and modes definitely throws a spanner in the works!

I wouldn't say that exactly. It's not random, there's a reason behind it. If you have an ascending melody in a minor key, composers thought it would be nice to have the leading tone, G#, instead of the diatonic minor 7th, G. However, if you do that, you have a leap of 1 1/2 steps from F to G#, which they didn't like. So, in that case, you would play F# - G# - A. When descending, you don't need the leading tone, so they would write G instead of G# and F instead of F#. This is how I was taught to play the minor scale when I was taking piano lessons as a child. As you probably know, Am with F# and G# is called the "harmonic minor" scale.

This was codified as a rule by some people, but de la Motte, who takes a historical approach in his book on harmony, demonstrates that it wasn't a hard-and-fast rule with examples from real compositions where F and G are used while ascending and, I believe, also G# and F# when descending.

[princeplanet]

...
This was codified as a rule by some people, but de la Motte, who takes a historical approach in his book on harmony, demonstrates that it wasn't a hard-and-fast rule with examples from real compositions where F and G are used while ascending and, I believe, also G# and F# when descending.

As has been mentioned, Jazz idioms allow for more variance which are far from random in functional tunes. Your insistence, for example, that F#7 should precede Bm7b5 highlights an important difference between traditional and "Jazz" harmony. Mozart would have a fit if he heard some good Jazz Blues piano players, I reckon... .

[Laurence Finston]

As has been mentioned, Jazz idioms allow for more variance which are far from random in functional tunes. Your insistence, for example, that F#7 should precede Bm7b5 highlights an important difference between traditional and "Jazz" harmony. Mozart would have a fit if he heard some good Jazz Blues piano players, I reckon... .

I never insisted that F#7 should precede Bm7b5. Please review what I actually wrote if you want to discuss this.

[Christian Miller]

I wouldn't say that exactly. It's not random, there's a reason behind it. If you have an ascending melody in a minor key, composers thought it would be nice to have the leading tone, G#, instead of the diatonic minor 7th, G. However, if you do that, you have a leap of 1 1/2 steps from F to G#, which they didn't like. So, in that case, you would play F# - G# - A. When descending, you don't need the leading tone, so they would write G instead of G# and F instead of F#. This is how I was taught to play the minor scale when I was taking piano lessons as a child. As you probably know, Am with F# and G# is called the "harmonic minor" scale.

This was codified as a rule by some people, but de la Motte, who takes a historical approach in his book on harmony, demonstrates that it wasn't a hard-and-fast rule with examples from real compositions where F and G are used while ascending and, I believe, also G# and F# when descending.

Indeed. In the (German?) Baroque it was common to write 'ascending melodic minor' in a descending line. Anyone who has spent a little bit of time looking at Bach with an analytical eye will have noticed that. Here's a nice little example, Allemande from Violin Partita no 2 - music has modulated to A minor at this point (note the B natural)


Bach was quite known for it. Here's an example from Kellner's Phantasia for Lute (guitar transcription), again conveniently in Am.


I've never read de la Motte, but well done him for noticing. :-)

[Christian Miller]

As has been mentioned, Jazz idioms allow for more variance which are far from random in functional tunes. Your insistence, for example, that F#7 should precede Bm7b5 highlights an important difference between traditional and "Jazz" harmony. Mozart would have a fit if he heard some good Jazz Blues piano players, I reckon... .

Um, that's not what he said.

In any case the F7 in that position in the scale (bVI) is common in classical harmony and is termed an 'augmented sixth' for voice leading reasons (the wikipedia article explains it decently)

[princeplanet]

I never insisted that F#7 should precede Bm7b5. Please review what I actually wrote if you want to discuss this.

Hmm, perhaps "insistence" was a bit over stated, but you did state the below:

From #3 - "A common substitution would be F#7, the dominant of B."

From #31 - "The principle of Ockham's Razor states that the simplest explanation that fits the facts is the one that's preferred. In this case, I think that explanation is that F# is dominant of B. The basic idea behind traditional harmony is the sequence of falling fifths."

At any rate, I've not noticed F#maj, or F#7 preceding the Bm7b5 in 2 5 6 1 for minor in a Jazz context. I'm sure it happens, but the fact that it is NOT as common as other forms suggests that Occam's Razor sometimes doesn't play with Jazz the way it might in other forms of music. Don't you find it curious that F#m7b5 instead, is fairly common in this sequence?

[Christian Miller]

Hmm, perhaps "insistence" was a bit over stated, but you did state the below:

From #3 - "A common substitution would be F#7, the dominant of B."

From #31 - "The principle of Ockham's Razor states that the simplest explanation that fits the facts is the one that's preferred. In this case, I think that explanation is that F# is dominant of B. The basic idea behind traditional harmony is the sequence of falling fifths."

At any rate, I've not noticed F#maj, or F#7 preceding the Bm7b5 in 2 5 6 1 for minor in a Jazz context. I'm sure it happens, but the fact that it is NOT as common as other forms suggests that Occam's Razor sometimes doesn't play with Jazz the way it might in other forms of music. Don't you find it curious that F#m7b5 instead, is fairly common in this sequence?

Why would it be curious? It's diatonic to the melodic minor scale? F#7 is not.

[Laurence Finston]

Hmm, perhaps "insistence" was a bit over stated, but you did state the below:

From #3 - "A common substitution would be F#7, the dominant of B."

F# is the dominant of B, which means that it resolves to B. So a common idiom would be to have F#7 before a B chord.

At any rate, I've not noticed F#maj, or F#7 preceding the Bm7b5 in 2 5 6 1 for minor in a Jazz context. I'm sure it happens, but the fact that it is NOT as common as other forms suggests that Occam's Razor sometimes doesn't play with Jazz the way it might in other forms of music. Don't you find it curious that F#m7b5 instead, is fairly common in this sequence?

"Ockham's Razor" or "Occam's Razor" is a philosophical principle and one of the bases of the scientific method. It doesn't have anything specifically to do with music.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

I can't think of any examples of F#m7b5 followed by Bm7b5. It is not an idiom that I've run across, as far as I remember, and I don't know how it could be interpreted. If I saw it in a piece of music, I would try to figure it out. Nothing occurs to me off the top of my head.

[princeplanet]

....

In any case the F7 in that position in the scale (bVI) is common in classical harmony and is termed an 'augmented sixth' for voice leading reasons (the wikipedia article explains it decently)

Yes, we've all heard this sound in classical music. My point though is to the contrary notion - that some Jazz idioms are unique and not found in classical music - surely can not be argued, even by you - and I've seen you arguing against yourself on this Forum more than once! (Did they put you on the debating team in school by any chance?)

[princeplanet]

F# is the dominant of B, which means that it resolves to B. So a common idiom would be to have F#7 before a B chord.



"Ockham's Razor" or "Occam's Razor" is a philosophical principle and one of the bases of the scientific method. It doesn't have anything specifically to do with music.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

I can't think of any examples of F#m7b5 followed by Bm7b5. It is not an idiom that I've run across, as far as I remember, and I don't know how it could be interpreted. If I saw it in a piece of music, I would try to figure it out. Nothing occurs to me off the top of my head.

Yes I know about Occam's razor. I even know how to spell it.

As for F#m7b5, I just googled i vi ii V i and guess what was the first thing that popped up?

https://cdn.learnjazzstandards.com/w...nstruments.pdf

[princeplanet]

Why would it be curious? It's diatonic to the melodic minor scale? F#7 is not.

I don't find it curious that it fits at all, in fact I quite like it. But I thought Laurence may be curious. At least he has given this impression. Or did I get that wrong as well?

[Laurence Finston]

Yes I know about Occam's razor. I even know how to spell it.
As for F#m7b5, I just googled i vi ii V i and guess what was the first thing that popped up?

If you're implying that I don't know how to spell it, the name of the person is William of Ockham and Ockham is spelled Occam in Latin. If you know it, then you know that, generally speaking, if you have two explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest and most direct one is the preferred one. If you took harmony and counterpoint in college, then you don't need me to explain harmony to you.

I don't know what showed up and I'm not going to follow a link to try to find out what you mean. I'm guessing you found something that you think refutes what I said.

I was responding to PMB who I thought might be interested in what I had to say and possibly a discussion. To you or anyone else who thinks I don't know what I'm talking about with respect to harmony: Don't take my word for it, check the facts for yourself and make up your own mind.

[princeplanet]

...
I don't know what showed up and I'm not going to follow a link to try to find out what you mean. I'm guessing you found something that you think refutes what I said.

...

T'was a joke Joyce, hence the emoji. Disappointing, though, that you won't click on suggested links. FWIW, I clicked on your's and found them interesting. But that's because your line of argument is probably more interesting/relevant/important than mine. Thanks for your contribution.

[RunningBeagle]

All these words and not one person actually playing anything.

[PMB]

If you're implying that I don't know how to spell it, the name of the person is William of Ockham and Ockham is spelled Occam in Latin. If you know it, then you know that, generally speaking, if you have two explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest and most direct one is the preferred one. If you took harmony and counterpoint in college, then you don't need me to explain harmony to you.

I don't know what showed up and I'm not going to follow a link to try to find out what you mean. I'm guessing you found something that you think refutes what I said.

I was responding to PMB who I thought might be interested in what I had to say and possibly a discussion. To you or anyone else who thinks I don't know what I'm talking about with respect to harmony: Don't take my word for it, check the facts for yourself and make up your own mind.

Remember the Pope in Brecht's play Life of Galileo who shunned empirical evidence by refusing to look through the scientist's telescope? With respect, Laurence I think it might be a good idea to click on the link, especially after suggesting that princeplanet check the facts.

There are numerous instances of i-vi-ii-Vs (Am7-F#m7b5-Bm7b5-E7b9 or its transposed equivalent) that occur in minor jazz standards. Alone Together, Angel Eyes, Softly, as in a Morning Sunrise, Yesterdays, You'd Be So Nice to Come Home To... Even when the vi chord isn't written into the chart, it's commonplace to add it as a substitution. As I mentioned earlier, the vim7b5 is basically a i6. A major key instance of this would be a rhythm changes chart where the opening bars are written | Bbmaj7 | Cm7 F7 | rather than | Bbmaj7 Gm7 | Cm7 F7 |.

[princeplanet]

Wow, who'da thunk that a little ol' vim7b5 would cause such a stink! Gotta say it's always entertaining when people barge in here and try to pick a fight with heavyweights like PMB and Christian, best fun on the interwebs I reckon!

[Bobby Timmons]

I read the thread and didn't see much that I disagreed with in respect to the 1-6-2-5 progression in minor.

My perspective on handling it was always this.

there’s a lot to be said for randomly choosing chords and then just keeping the ones you like.

I know people might laugh to hear me say it, but there is such a thing as overthinking.

There is the standard functional harmony minor progression of Am - Fmaj7 - Bm7b5 - E7. But jazz uses a lot of chromaticism. Plus minor is awkward if you don't doctor things up like stick different types of chord on the major 6 root and of course a dominant 7 on the 5 root.

The only thing I disagreed with in the thread was that there's no such thing as jazz harmony from LF. There most certainly is. However, yes it's also true to analyze the tunes from their original compositions from a popular or functional standpoint like you've said. But in jazz, it's also important to understand the harmony in how you'll be using it for that style of playing.

[Laurence Finston]

The only thing I disagreed with in the thread was that there's no such thing as jazz harmony from LF. There most certainly is. However, yes it's also true to analyze the tunes from their original compositions from a popular or functional standpoint like you've said. But in jazz, it's also important to understand the harmony in how you'll be using it for that style of playing.

You're free to define it however you like. However, the theory of functional harmony is no different with respect to jazz than it is with respect to classical music or other popular music of the 20th century. Of course, jazz is a different style from classical music. It is a form of popular music and most of the music used in jazz is literally taken from popular songs and music from theater and film. What happens harmonically can be explained using the theory of functional harmony, including the alterations typical of jazz. Most of it is pretty simple stuff. It is fairly rare to find an idiom that is tricky or impossible to classify somehow. Things like this can most often be found, in my experience, in songs by Gershwin, Vernon Duke and Jobim. Things that I have failed to classify are in Kurt Weill's German music. I believe that they are polytonal and will try to interpret them this way when I make another attempt.

If one is looking for advanced harmonic concepts that remain within the realm of tonality, then jazz and popular music are not the place to look. Then one has to go to composers like Stravinsky, Prokofieff and Shostakovich.

[Bobby Timmons]

I didn't say functional harmony operates differently in jazz. There's a set of material unique to jazz is all.

[princeplanet]

...
If one is looking for advanced harmonic concepts that remain within the realm of tonality, then jazz and popular music are not the place to look. Then one has to go to composers like Stravinsky, Prokofieff and Shostakovich.

Motherfuckers, one and all, but we are not in a competition to decide whether Traditional Harmony encompasses all of Jazz Harmony or vice versa. Some of us are just saying that there's stuff that happens in Jazz that confounds classically trained musicians (heck, even Blues confuses them).
Consider when Horowitz,Toscanini or Rubenstein heard Art Tatum for the first time ...