Minor vi chord as subdominant?

[Babaluma]

Please refer to my first post on this. It laid out which chords are thought of as subdominant in the major and minor keys.

No, in general major chords are not by their nature subdominant. The IVma and IImi chords in the major scale and the IVmi, IIdim, and bVIma are subdominant in the minor scale.

The article you linked to regarding Neapolitan chords is using the term subdominant in its common period form (pre 20th C)to mean the chord that goes before the dominant. In modern harmony the Neapolitan chord is more commonly thought of as a Tritone substitution of the Vma chord and thus would more likely fall into the dominant category and not subdominant.

Sorry yes I think I missed it in the blizzard of replies, thanks a lot very clear

[Babaluma]

Please refer to my first post on this. It laid out which chords are thought of as subdominant in the major and minor keys.

No, in general major chords are not by their nature subdominant. The IVma and IImi chords in the major scale and the IVmi, IIdim, and bVIma are subdominant in the minor scale.

The article you linked to regarding Neapolitan chords is using the term subdominant in its common period form (pre 20th C)to mean the chord that goes before the dominant. In modern harmony the Neapolitan chord is more commonly thought of as a Tritone substitution of the Vma chord and thus would more likely fall into the dominant category and not subdominant.

@setemupjoe
Thanks for clarifying all this. I am really running before I can walk when I was reading about the Neapolitan chords and was then thrown off by this quote in that article which started all the problems for me.

"The Neapolitan chord has a subdominant function. This means that it basically has the same function as a IV or ii chord in a major scale and as a iv or VI chord in a minor scale"

The internet with the free lessons and articles is an amazing resource but it can be dangerous as it lures me down pathways when I need to really understand the basics! Sometimes I think I have grasped something and I read a post which for all I know maybe wrong or referring to something from what I was looking for and t sends me off on a tangent

[bako]

Perhaps due to the idea of key signatures, people believe that key and scale are synonymous.

The major scale is the certifiable starting reference for a major key.
There are countless musical examples in major keys, using solely the notes
of the major scale. Secondary dominants and minor subdominants are
common expansions that grow the major key note collection.

Minor keys are far messier. More often, minor keys integrate notes and chords from multiple sources.
Although a natural minor key signature is the functional starting reference for a minor key, it is far less
prescriptive of what is likely to happen or not happen. The borrowing of notes and chords is a likely event.

[Reg]

So what is the point of the label? Personally... when one composes or arranges music or even when performing and you have the skills.... analysis creates musical organization.

Learning theory for theory's sake is almost useless. I've given guidelines for going down the traditional functional harmony road... if you have the time... you should, it's required to be able to start the process of understanding Jazz Harmony and the many possibilities of how it's musically organized.

With Jazz analysis.... common practice to is use uppercase numerals. There are more references that just maj/min functional harmony.
So the musical organization behind what traditional analysis implies with use of lowercase doesn't cover...

Function is still harmonically organized, not just internal characteristics...but the role of a chord can have multiple sources for organization... and they tend to be going on simultaneously....

Not everything has Maj for source of organization. The labels do, the roman numerals, but the organization of how and what they imply....with regards to harmonic functions....has possibilities. The same chord, chord pattern can have different harmonic function depending on style, and what the reference is. (style specific) Jazz is generally about creating relationships and developing them... with references. The reference can change.... as well as the relationship. It's not a written...one time tradition....

VI- has any number of sources for analysis.... simple is being part of a common practice chord pattern... (II- V7) of II-... example
Key of "C".... A-7 D7 / D-7 G7 / C... if you start looking at jazz tunes... there are many examples.

And if you use your ears...
When performing tunes... Tunes become Musical organization of Targets. You have a starting analysis from quick analysis before performing, or if you know the music, you already have an analysis.... or from listening to who called the chart or made arrangement... an analysis is implied. The analysis is basically just how one organizes the space of the music... what chords or notes become the targets and how they are organized. The role of those targets within the Larger musical element... the entire tune, the sections..... the more accomplished player you become, the more musically organized your able to perform.

It's not just what you can play... it's being able to hear and understand what the other musicians are playing.

Jazz isn't just about voicings, voice leading, resolutions etc... traditional musical common practice is accepted and understood... it's implied... that's the vanilla, it's always going on, that's the basic music 101 starting reference.

The easiest door to open for different harmonic organization with use of different References is Modal Concepts and then Modal Interchange.... Get past the So What Miles 60's understandings an organizations. That's like Augmented sixth chords being German, French or Italian because of what note is added to the RT, M3rd and Aug.6th....

Take the time to expand Borrowing, relative and Parallel relationships with different references... write them out... that is the modal references... then you can begin to use modal interchange because you know and understand where the chords come from. That is just opening the door, and eyes to be able to see and hear jazz organization for functional organization.

All of this can translate to your playing... you don't need to understand any of this to be able play.... but your abilities to perform Live and with other musicians... without rehearsal or from memorize and play style.... will improve greatly.

[setemupjoe]

There seems to be some infighting here between two different systems of Roman numerals. One system would write the natural minor scale like this:
i, iidim, III, iv, v, VI, VII

and the other system would write it like this:
Imi, IIdim, bIIIma, IVmi, Vmi, bVIma, bVIIma

There’s no point calling each other out for employing one or the other system. Both are valid and are widely used. Learning common period harmony in college I was taught the first method. Now I teach theory at college and I teach the second method.

[Jazzstdnt]

that's just a copy and paste from the "berklee book of harmony", page 89-90.

Exactly. Works for me! That's where I like to study (among a few other places). I like Berklee's approach to jazz harmony. It's solid.

So, if you want to be critical, what do i think of it? What do you think of the previous argument for Harmonic Minor that Ragman1 advanced? What II, IV, and bVI chords would that yield (please spell the tensions and altered tensions as I did). And when you have those chords defined, take stock of their utility (i.e. sound).

Perhaps voice lead them to some minor tonality V chords.

Now we're talkin'.

[setemupjoe]

Why do I feel this thread has wondered away from the OP’s original question and ended up in a Mel Brooks movie?

[Jazzstdnt]

Because we're talking about harmonic theory which is Euro based, while jazz music came from the broken down toothless streets of New Orleans, and therefore we stimulate a clash of cultures?

Just a thought, I could be wrong.

[Jazzstdnt]

There seems to be some infighting here between two different systems of Roman numerals. One system would write the natural minor scale like this:
i, iidim, III, iv, v, VI, VII

and the other system would write it like this:
Imi, IIdim, bIIIma, IVmi, Vmi, bVIma, bVIIma

There’s no point calling each other out for employing one or the other system. Both are valid and are widely used. Learning common period harmony in college I was taught the first method. Now I teach theory at college and I teach the second method.

Agreed, the latter nomenclature seems to be the standard in modern and jazz harmony study. As long as we can tell (1) which tone the chord is built from and (2) its quality...

Julliard-based John Mehegan and his well known jazz piano texts from 1959 forward used upper case symbols, as did Daniel Ricigliano from the 60s, etc. The quality characteristics still had one foot in the classical approach though. I prefer Berklee's nomenclature for quality of chord. Straightforward.

[christianm77]

I’d be likely to say minor key.

Harmonic minor is just an alteration, as is melodic.

Also it 7.4 angels on the head of a pin.

[christianm77]

That said, bVI is a classic place to put a maj7#9 Sound, and that really is harmonic minor.

Anyway, function? The bVI is a good sub for IIm7b5 as well as IVm7, so subdominant seems a good label for it.

Harmonically the note b6 is the one that really divides the function of the minor key chords like the 4 does in major. Write them all out and see what I mean.

I felt like a clever bastard the day I worked that out.

[matt.guitarteacher]

If you want understand what and how to expand traditional usage and definitions of Function start with basic... check out,
Harmonic functions – Open Music Theory ,
Then click on "Style and tendency", then try and get through Schoenberg's Structural Functions Of Harmony. Then some Lukas Foss ... Then read some of the many contemporary composer's publications... like Leon Dallin and other smaller college connections. Now your ready to expand basic concepts into Jazz common practice.

Just caught this. Thanks for sharing. Looks like a great resource. Really like the open source concept. Very reg. :-)

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

[ragman1]

What do you think of the previous argument for Harmonic Minor that Ragman1 advanced?

Holy socks, I don't believe all this.

I'm not old school, new school, or man-in-the-moon school, I just do music. Minor is lower case, major is upper. in C, ii is Dm7 and V is G7, etc, etc.

If you've got a different chord, say Fm6, then it's IVm6 to avoid confusion. Whatever the notation it should be nice and clear what it means, then there's no problem.

As regards the initial question, it's really a simple matter of relative majors and minors, that's all. Like C/Am, F/Dm, Bb/Gm, and so on, which can be substituted for each other due to the similarity of their notes.

In C it's Dm and F. So the ii and IV can sub for each other.

In Am it's still Dm and F although the positions change to iv and VI. They can act for each other. So, yes, in that respect the VI (F) can act as the subdominant chord. But it's not the subdominant, of course, Dm is.

In A melodic minor it's ii and IV and the chords are Bm and D. But that scale isn't used much exclusively.

That's all, there's little mystery about it unless one wants to create it.

Examples:

C - Dm - G7 - C becomes C - F - G7 - C
Am - Dm - E7 - Am becomes Am - F - E7 - Am
Am - D - E7 -Am becomes Am - Bm - E7 - Am

Mind-bogglingly difficult, right? Not.

(All this has nothing to do with Neapolitan 6th chords which are another can of worms entirely).

[Reg]

It's as complicated as you want.... or as simple....... Playing is different from analysis.

Your views on the subject, are simple.... and work, cool etc...

Personally.... your view and approach get boring. I didn't say wrong, bad etc... I said personally boring... when performing.

Analysis is another thing... there is much more..... but who cares.

[ragman1]

I'd be boring whatever, Reg. That's the way it is :-)

[rpjazzguitar]

I just spent some time reading that Berklee harmony book, which I found online.

It was helpful, insofar as it defined some of the language I've been reading on online forums for a while. I hadn't appreciated that some people were getting it from a Berklee education and/or Berklee materials.

That said, the actual chord/scale usages were almost entirely familiar. The materials provide some language/theory to describe harmonic concepts that can be found in other ways. I'd been thinking of a lot of the same things via concepts of tritone sub, relative major and minor, half step approaches, common chord sequences and so forth. Not a surprise -- we're all analyzing the same music.

[Reg]

It's all good Ragman.... we're all boring to someone. Yea rpjazzguitar....berklee is the basic source from which most theory and harmony concepts are somewhat based on... the language and organization. Not the only... but formalized and accredited etc... It's not that they created anything new, just new possibilities, and based much of their teachings on common jazz practice....
Not all the information is printed in their texts.... I'm pretty sure that's part of why their tuition is so stupid etc...

More down the traditional theory/harmony road.... if you take most of those concepts you relate to... tritone sub, relative major and minor, half step approaches, common chord sequences and so forth. And expand the relationships, get past the basic concepts.... ( and all the rest),example... tritone subs.... not just being dominant chord... tritone root motion with different organization of how the tritone sub is derive... anyway you'll get into more traditional composition modern practice which is where most of the theory and harmony is from. I could go on for way too long... but not really that useful etc...

[rpjazzguitar]

tritone subs.... not just being dominant chord... tritone root motion with different organization of how the tritone sub is derive... anyway you'll get into more traditional composition modern practice which is where most of the theory and harmony is from. I could go on for way too long... but not really that useful etc...

I try, but I can't do it. I can't understand this sort of explanation.

Might you provide an example?

A book reference?

[Reg]

Analysis... is generally more useful when arranging and composing.... or BSing on the net...

Once your able to understand analysis and can see and hear what it implies and the possibilities of what it could imply, and do this basically as fast as you can sightread etc... it does become useful when performing.

Maybe an analogy could be sight reading.... I can sight read without really even thinking. Like most read words... or numbers, it's easy, you don't even really need to think about it... you instinctively know where it's going etc... That's how musicians who have spent their life sight reading feel about notation etc... when analysis becomes comfortable.... you can use it also as a tool.... see and hear possibilities of how tune could be performed.
Guitar example... we play pentatonics.... they lay naturally on the fretboard.. so you see that VI-7 chord.
From analysis... it could be a diatonic VI-7 chord... relative minor of Imaj7.... I'll switch to chords...

A-7... could be natural min. If I decider from analysis that that is it's function. I could play typical A- pentatonic and keep expanding on that line of possible relationships... But if I choose to call it Subdominant, more from II-7 chord, maybe... just the II- of a II- V7
Cmaj69 / B-7b5 E7#9b13 / A-7...Ab-7/ G-7. Gb13 / F13

Now I could use 4th degree of Ddominant Pentatonic.. A C D E F#... which opens the door to Amm... now I can go Blue... and not just rock and role embellishment vanilla Blue.

Anyway.... from analysis skills.... I have lots of choices of what harmonic relationships I want to develop. I basically use analysis like Licks... different analogies have different licks and their expansion.

I'm using the term Licks... because most guitarist have them... the licks are not the point... the point is how I use analysis as tool. There many other choices... and none of them take any time... just like sight reading... I'm ahead and see the possibilities coming.

Or if your a melody player... say your playing "Fried Bananas"... Dexters melody... You also can embellish "It could happen To You"... right... Or embellish either melody up a diatonic 3rd.... again All those melodies use same harmonic changes but the result of your solo could have completely different results... and still have an organized relationship.

Personally for me... these concepts help me be able to hear what other players are doing... so I can support them when performing. Even if your more from the memorize, rehearse type of performances... You'll have more possibilities of what to memorize... Melodies, changes, analysis, theory, harmony etc... they're all going on all the time...

[christianm77]

Either Reg is dumbing it down or I'm getting brighter because I'm starting to understand some of this :-)

[rpjazzguitar]

Either Reg is dumbing it down or I'm getting brighter because I'm starting to understand some of this :-)

I was with him on Am7 <g>.

I think I understood it. In my simple way of thinking, it can be tonic minor or something else, for example, a iim.

For tonic minor, I'm playing in the key of Am. No sharps or flats. But, I know, from somewhere, that Amelmin can sound like a Imelmin. And, I know that every chord generated by Amelmin is the same chord -- because I read it in a book by Mark Levine.

So, I can use anything I know consistent with Bsus4b9 Cmaj7#5 D7#11 E9#11 F#m7b5 and G#alt. Or, I could just think, all white keys, and pick F# and/or G#.

I also know, from Warren Nunes, that I can sub in Cmaj Em Am and maybe Gmaj7 (which gives the F#).

If, the Am was clearly a iim, then I know I'm in the key of G. So I think G tonal center and Am7 chord tones. Per Warren, I can sub any II type chord in Gmajor ie Am7 Cmaj7 Em7 D7.

From my own experiments I know that I can play anything that works with D7 -- which might reasonably include D7b9, meaning DHW. And, something I've been working on, integrating the #5, which is a more outside sound that can work.

It can also be phrygian (chord tones and Fmaj tonal center) - which basically means that I can use a Bb.

All of this has to pass the ear test, meaning that it has to sound good, not just be predicted by theory.

Of course, this then expands to so many options as to be potentially overwhelming, but it still comes down to varying just a few notes and learning the sounds by ear.

I assume that others can utilize more theory, because their ears are already capable of hearing it. Since I almost never integrate anything new from a purely theoretical consideration, for me, learning to hear it has to come first. And, I already have a long list of possibilities to work on in my next few reincarnations. I don't need any more, for the moment.

[Tal_175]

I recommend chapter 4 from this book. It covers the subdominant function in minor key harmony.

The Berklee Book of Jazz Harmony: Joe Mulholland, Tom Hojnacki: 0884088919887: Amazon.com: Books

+1 for this book. I have like seven jazz theory books. This is the best jazz theory book there is.

[Jazzstdnt]

It's all good Ragman.... we're all boring to someone. Yea rpjazzguitar....berklee is the basic source from which most theory and harmony concepts are somewhat based on... the language and organization. Not the only... but formalized and accredited etc... It's not that they created anything new, just new possibilities, and based much of their teachings on common jazz practice....
Not all the information is printed in their texts.... I'm pretty sure that's part of why their tuition is so stupid etc...

More down the traditional theory/harmony road.... if you take most of those concepts you relate to... tritone sub, relative major and minor, half step approaches, common chord sequences and so forth. And expand the relationships, get past the basic concepts.... ( and all the rest),example... tritone subs.... not just being dominant chord... tritone root motion with different organization of how the tritone sub is derive... anyway you'll get into more traditional composition modern practice which is where most of the theory and harmony is from. I could go on for way too long... but not really that useful etc...

Very well stated.

I just don't know how to take the new sardonic Reg, as of yet.

[Reg]

What was I before....

[mrcee]

I don't care how good a guy or gal is or how much theory they know if they're playing a style somewhat foreign to them like Latin or Gospel or Gypsy, don't play cliches. It's a deal breaker. Once you get to a certain level as a player it's all about feel.