-
...is a b7-chord that includes the 9.
Since the 9 is part of the scale, a 9th-chord is functionally no different from a 7th-chord, meaning that for the purpose of functional analysis there's no need for it.
"When I blow my solo I just need to know it's a V7-chord and I know my mixo-scale".
With the same logic, 11th and 13th chords are also useless and a 9M-chord is the same as a 7M-chords. We could remove a whole bunch of chords from our library...
...if it wasn't for the fact that they sound different.
"Then play a C9 if you want to, I'm a trombonist and I don't care"
-Who needs to bother?
Everyone, including the soloist, because the color affects the feel.
Jazzers like altered dominants. We dig b5, #5, b9 #9. We even dig #11 and b13, meaning that the chord include a minor 5th (#11) or a #5 (b13) and a perfect 5th at the same time (how about that). Such alterations may or may not have functional consequences (if we care), but a perfect 9 has no function. But it has a sound ,a very distinct sound.
-How come a chord with a distinct sound like a C9 has no function?
Arguably, a C9 is but a voicing of a C7-chord. Alternatively one could think of it as an Em7-5/C or just a hip rootless Em7-5 (vii7-5), leaving the C for the bass player.
Joe Pass says; "some forms (finger settings/voicings) sound particularly good on guitar".
That's true and similarly there are left hand voicings that sound great on piano but that cannot be played on a six-string guitar because the intervals are too close. Voicings obviously matter...
If I like to highlight the 9th, I write C9, not C7. That means that the comp (as well as the soloist) can interpret this information and pick any voicing of the C9-voicing of the C7-chord that they like. If I write C7 that typically means there is no 9 in the chord. (It's in the scale, but not used in the particular context).
-Am I wrong? In old school charts you see 9-chords all the time, today they seem to be less common in writing...maybe because nowadays people "know harmony", or maybe they just like to play solos over some progressions created by a smart phone AI or something, I don't know. But I do know there's more to jazz than altered dominants.
-
01-05-2023 09:32 AM
-
If I’m making a chart, I prefer to write most dominant chords as 7ths and let the player (usually just me!) decide whether to color it with inside notes (e.g. 9) or altered (e.g. b9) when performing. But if the tune specifically requires one or the other (e.g. if the b9 is in the melody) or if the chart is for an ensemble arrangement, I might specify one type of 9th in the chart as a reminder *not* to play the other.
For example, I was analyzing Herb Ellis’s version of “It Could Happen To You” recently and noticed that he plays 9th chords in bars 2 & 4 of the head where most charts call for b9 or dim7. So when I charted his arrangement I wrote in the 9ths which give a much different and brighter flavor. I prefer b9th or dim7 there since the natural 9th seems to clash with the melody, but it’s fun to try it his way sometimes.
Last edited by KirkP; 01-10-2023 at 02:12 PM.
-
Glad to see this topic arise; I've been mystified by "function" for a while.
Have always enjoyed, grasped, learned, practiced, composed, rehearsed,
performed, and recorded studio sessions by ear; where I'm coming from.
The different types of chords not only sound different, but each produces
harmonically multiple directed pressures of varying amounts toward other
chords with respect to various tonics. Originally, I had thought discussion
about function must surely include all the types and pressures, directions
and other things that modified these pressures and directions (preceding
and subsequent chords - those heard or yet to be heard, voicing, melody,
and voicing implied melody, etc.). Whenever I had observed discussion of
function it seemed its scope was limited to a handful of common cadence
often suggesting there were only two, or three functional types of chords.
I guess the rest are the rest of theory, names, relationships, analysis, etc.
-
Don’t people usually write extensions to stop wilful guitarists from clashing with the melody?
unless is some post modal tune in which case it’s a different story.
-
I don't claim to fully understand "functional analysis". I get that, in most situations, you can play C9 where the chart says C7. Or, more generally, if you're playing a dominant sound leading, say, to a tonic sound, you can usually pick what you want, C7, C9, C13 among some more exotic possibilities.
But, C7 and C9 don't sound the same. So, you pick between them based on sound, if you care about the difference.
When I compose, I usually specify the exact voicing I want for the head.
-
For playing jazz standards I've found it's good idea to know what the diatonic extensions are for a dominant in any given position within key, so as to stand less of a chance of clashing; standards melodies stay pretty diatonic by and large even when the harmonies are quite chromatic - Stella is a good example, it only has two notes that aren't in the major scale. This is sometimes a bit less obvious for chromatic dominants. While charts do sometimes give the extensions and an idea of what you can do the base chord, they don't always do this. So if the singer is singing A and you play a G7b9, you may not get the call again.
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
In an ideal world, you just know the melody so you aren't going to play chords that clash with the tune. That's why chord melody arrangements can be very helpful even if you don't plan on playing a tune solo.
In general for blowing things are more relaxed?
I mean it does kind of depend on the kind of music. In bop for instance, we might have an Ab7#11 in the head to Cherokee, but a soloist might well choose ignore the #11 when soloing. Modern players often honour the extensions in their playing - they have more of chord/scale rather than linear conception.
But it's kind of up to the soloist, and I notice even in quite modern charts the blowing changes are often a bit simplified from the head changes. For most jazz tunes I think you want the soloist to feel like they can do their thing.
-
Do you not have to be a little careful with the use of the 9th of a V7 in a minor key?
-
Yeah, natural and melodic minor, all of that Originally Posted by garybaldy
As a soloing option, you can obviously do what you like
-
I think both for comping and soloing, the individual note choices make a difference only when the notes are sustained or rhythmically emphasized. Otherwise the melodic idea of the phrase takes precedence over the individual note choices. This applies to altered vs unaltered notes or variations of chord scale choices (dominant and tonic minor mostly).
The choices for extensions appear more important for comping only because there is a higher likelihood of these notes falling on strong beats and sustained. But when a comper is playing chordal phrases to fill space or create counter melodies, the logic of the phrases take precedence for the listener over the note choices. A very simple example of this is chromatically ascending or descending parallel voicings that move to a target. The listener gets that the idea is the chromatic motion, not the individual notes.
If you transcribe or checkout transcriptions of greats, pretty much everything goes over dominants as long as the there is good voice leading. Natural 5, #4, 9, #9 and b13 can all appear in one bar of dominant voices. Very wild stuff if you try to analyze them with chord-scales.Last edited by Tal_175; 01-11-2023 at 12:14 PM.
-
Hi Paul, Originally Posted by pauln
Always appreciate your perspective.
There are musical ideas that connect multiple elements into a singular concept.
Examples:
Octave equivalency-110/220/440/880 are the same note
Inversions and voicings are different versions of the same chord
These ideas attempt to serve a purpose by streamlining elements
that overlap in some way but also have their differences.
The idea of function is a reductionist idea that has practical merit but as you point out, intentionally looks past differences that are very discernible. Every chord tone/extension, their ordering, register, choice of strings, etc. present a palette of differential colors. Function focuses on operative roles within the tonal arc of a composition. It is a macro viewpoint. Differential beauty lies within all the micro details.
-
Very true. Really, the golden rule is LISTEN... Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
But try playing something other than natural 9ths over Sex Machine ….
-
Yea you can notate anyway... most good jazz players will hear what's going on and adjust etc...
Generally when you notate 9th your implying what the musical organizations are for creating relationships and developing those relationships when expanding what we actually play. Most jazz players use Chord Patterns, when you use 9th your implying what chord patterns to use.
The simple example is when a nat. 9th is notated your generally implying that.....the 1st level relationships, like using the related II- , (F9 would have a related II- of C-7 with a nat. 5th), C-7 F9. And again the 1st level would be C- Dorian, Aeolian, MM etc.... for that related II- of F9.
And you would also be implying how.... where rhythmically to use further extended relationship. By that I mean... on weak beats of the Harmonic Rhythm is where you would use non-target-diatonic notes, scales chords etc...
The expanding of that II V.... C-7 to F9.... making each chord a possible Tonal Target for expanding the chord patterns.... all this can also apply to improv.
I'm probable getting too far ahead.... most are generally just trying to play chord tones or get out the basic changes. But eventually you become comfortable with changes and.... again start creating harmonic relationship and develop them. Which can become... playing Chord Patterns instead of the basic chord, somewhat like adding extensions to simple triads or 7th chords.
Sorry long BS... but no.... the 9th can change the options of Function. I can go on... but no one really cares.Last edited by Reg; 01-12-2023 at 11:12 AM.
-
9th, 11th and 13th chords do not really exist traditional classical music, other than in anachronistic interpretations of nonharmonic tones, you can find late 19th century theorists talking about them, for example Schoenberg wrote:
The ninth chord and its inversions exist today, or at least they can exist. The pupil will easily find examples in the literature [such as Schoenberg's Verklärte Nacht and Strauss's opera Salome]. It is not necessary to set up special laws for its treatment. If one wants to be careful, one will be able to use the laws that pertain to the seventh chords: that is, dissonances resolve by step downward, the root leaps a fourth upward.
Which I interpret as mirroring what others have said about the extensions being color, not function
-
Yes, your ears will guide you. Too often my ear will tell me that was wrong, better would be to tell me what is right before I play it.
Context or function, not sure if those are the same thing. But, often if a dominant chord is resolving to a minor chord the b9 or #9 will sound better than the nat. 9.
-
yea BWV... that is traditional western approach, everything is Maj/Min functionally organizes or contrapuntally organized... embellishments have one functional relationship and that's it. Blues included.
But that is not typically the only way many jazz players play. Is it? I understand that many just use their ears and develop vocabulary etc... and plug and play with trial and error approach.
But there is actually very defined jazz theory developed from results from using that approach which can really speed up the process, (this developing a vocabulary etc...), which allows players to put more time into their technical skills.
Getting to whatever level of performing in a jazz style, playing in general with or without other musicians.
I guess why there is lots vanilla and mud LOL. Not bad or good, right or wrong, no references to anyone on this forum etc...
-
I mean it's quite common to hear the 3rd in the melody against a V7 chord in Romantic music revolving to the root on I by step. Originally Posted by BWV
Eg E-D-C on G7-C
Sounds like Opera to me.
And of course, a VERY common move in standards whether by step or leap.
What do you call that? No idea. But the move is the same by any other name. A passing dissonance in classical. In jazz we would say G13 and the behaviour is actually the same form the point of view of the vanilla song harmony.
I mean in a sense m11th chords don't really exist in standards, but that's how we write them.
As far as what we PLAY on standards, that's different.
-
Sure, and how common is a chromatic approach to a major 3rd? but I dont know how productive it would be to think about it as a #9 Originally Posted by Christian Miller
But this piece starts with 3 11th chords, but Brahms was almost apologetic about the level of dissonance in his letter to Clara Schumann
-
I have long thought that the related iim of F7 (or F9) is Cm7. But this post has it as Bbm7. Can anyone explain the theory behind that, or is it a typo? Originally Posted by Reg
-
You are all clueless! The nine was invented by the Beatles on their "White Album" and served only one purpose: World domination!
Take that jazz community!
Ha!!!!
-
In my big band days I thought of the extensions on chord charts mostly as a reminder of what the horns were doing. I could do anything I wanted with the chords as long as I didn’t clash with the horns. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
I think probably a typo, the only way I've found to make Bbm7 work Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
like that is to really bend the labels of some rootless Bossa changes.
-
"Listen"...when it's only a matter of using our ears, we wouldn't need any chord charts...Question is what information is required to capture the essence in a piece of music? ...That would depend on the music, the player and his instrument. A horn player is primarily interested in chord scales, but the comp is supposed to provide chords.
Many legendary compositions could be reduced to nothing by chord substitution (and it happens all the time because of sloppy notation when people don't know the "right" chords).
For example; the chord G/D is an inversion of the G-chord, but if we would write just "G" or "G- Ionian" essential information would be lost. The guitarist could play a root G-chord, but then must avoid the drone strings. The bass player is explicitly asked to play D.
C7 and C9 share the same mixolydian chord scale, however they are not the same chords. They are different chords that may or may not be interchanged depending on context.
As a soloist I won't appreciate if the comp plays C7 where I expect a C9.
As an arranger I would never write C7 where I explicitly mean C9.
Same thing with C13 (which on a six-string always means "add13"). When I write C13, you're not supposed to play C7. And C9M differs from C7M and so on.
-Why is this important?
Because the essence of music is harmony. In our time of Chord Scale Theory (CRT), people are confusing chord scales with chords. It's gone too far.
-
+/- 5 and +/-9 are regular alterations in jazz. We also accept #11 and b13 meaning we have a perfect 5 and 5b or 5# at the same time.
Having only six strings, guitar players often have to omit notes in a chord (i.e "no 5" is pretty common). That's until you are supposed to alter that 5th and play a C7+ for example. Maybe some of you also anticipate the 9, meaning you hear it whether omitted or not?
To me the difference is that the 5 is part of a basic triad and anticipated in any chord, the 9 is not.
In my previous example G/D may be seen as G-chord stacked on top of some D-chord or possibly as a D7sus4. What if extensions 9, 11, 13 actually is the result of layered harmony, i.e the harmony is made up by two simultaneous chords? If so, then we clearly see that C9 is a complex harmony compared to a basic C7.
If we can have #11 and b13, then why couldn't we have 7b and 7M at the same time? Impossible? What would such harmony be called? C7add14 ?...Maybe this is the point when people start to think of everything as C7 alt5 alt9.
-
I love "Verklärte Nacht", very jazzy. Schoenberg developed a whole new theory, didn't he? Originally Posted by BWV
"The ninth chord and its inversions exist today, or at least they can exist"
How wonderfully ambiguous
Reply With Quote
"Strive" - Guitar / Hybrid Guitar /...
Today, 09:35 PM in Other Styles / Instruments