-
I've glanced through this thread - my2c - using avoid notes for single line improv over ii V's is great.
1st advantage: you avoid playing unwanted dissonances. No brainer.
2nd advantage: makes the line shape more interesting - and your improv less 'scalar', which is a common problem with guys starting out. This occurs because you're now playing 6 note scales, so the monotony of step wise notes is naturally broken up with the occasional wider interval of a 3rd.
These 6 note scales combined with chromatic embellishment - basically a foolproof way to get around changes and not sound like a clutz.
That's a great foundation to build off - solid. Then after that you can eventually do what you want. If I'm playing over 2 bars of Cmaj, I might play an F but it's because I might outline G7 somewhere in the middle - like:
C (G7) C
// // ////
So I end up using all seven notes from the C Ionian scale, but the line doesn't sound dissonant because there is an underlying structure to what I'm doing.
One approach of many, many...
-
01-29-2015 10:57 PM
-
In short:
Why is playing 4th over tonic (I) major sounds dissonant (or colorful or suggesting movement or ...) but paying 9 over dorian (ii) minor doesn't.
Longer:
Let's take Cmaj7. C E G B. Playing 4th, that is F, creates this special effect as it clashes with the half tone lower E.
Over Dmin7, D F A C, however playing 9, that is E, sounds a lot more stable even though the same relationship exists only this time between the third (F) and the 9th (E).
Is it because of the difference in the order of the two? In other words half step isn't dissonant if it's major seventh interval as opposed to minor second.
-
Avoid Note is a terrible term and there is no such thing. They are notes that require Special Handling usually in how they are articulated. So use them and listen and get a feel for when and where they want to go.
-
I know that very well but that is not the question. That's why I put "( colorful or suggesting movement or ...)" in brackets and placed the term in quotes because I know that saying "avoid note" is a "cheap wisdom" magnet
-
My thoughts about the F over a C major chord:
Let's break it down to just a drone C note and the sound/effects that the different notes have when sounded with that C.
When you play a G note (the 5th) it provides a "support" or strengthens the C as the root tonality.
The E or Eb (3rd or b3rd) this provides a color sound that defines the tonality as either major or minor.
The B or Bb (7th or b7th) gives another defining color.
The 6th notes are another story - like an inverted 3rd that colors the C drone.
We all can have different adjectives to describe what these colors sound like to us....and we should catalog these in our ears/heads.
But, when you come to adding an F note, it almost hijacks the feeling what the root is. Play them together and F sounds like it has now become the root or new home - not C. Other notes can be added to support the C sound and thus make the F sound more like a higher color tone (11th or suspended sound). But C and F played alone will no longer sound like C.
However, if played in passing (F to E), the suspended-resolution thing works and C still rules as the root/home.
So, if you emphasize the F note ("avoid note") on the C major chord, we're moving away from C and going to something else (possibly some F type chord).
I don't think the issue is so much about clashing tones as it is about how the notes color the chord and what effect it has on the overall tonality.
Just my 2 cents. I hope this makes some sense.Last edited by jayv999; 12-06-2017 at 02:24 PM.
-
Exactly and if we wonder why that is, most theory books would say it's because of the presence of E in Cmaj. That's why this won't happen if the chord is Cmin and it won't affect the tonality even if the song is in C minor. I am not too concerned with exact word to describe this relationship between maj3rd and fourth (clash, dissonance, tendency what not). I hear it as a special note, different than other chord tones.
Originally Posted by jayv999
My question specifically is why that doesn't happen (that special effect) when E and F (in this example) are inverted as in Dmin9?Last edited by Tal_175; 12-06-2017 at 02:55 PM.
-
I haven't read all of the responses yet, so someone may have pointed this out already... Originally Posted by Tal_175
But the presumption here that the third (E) and the 11th (F) of a CMaj7 chord have the same relationship as the third (F) and the 9th (E) of a Dmin isn't really quite correct.
When we stack an E above an F note, we get an interval of a major 7th. This is a slightly "dissonant" interval (in the traditional sense... not anymore... for many people) but it's gorgeous. It can be heard as quite stable and even desired. That's what a Dmin9 chord for example sounds so beautiful (one of the reasons).
As a little experiment, let's try ONLY playing the root, the 3rd, and the 9th to really notice how we can still perceive the entirety of the harmony without the 5th or the 7th. Try it as an E-9
0X5X7X
R-3--9
It's beautiful.
But if we put switch things around and put the E in the bottom part of the chord and put the F up top, this no longer gives us a major 7th interval... now it's a minor 9th (octave + a half step). This is an INCREDIBLY tense, dissonant interval. Some people might like it if they're into really out music, but I don't think anyone can make the case that it's not extremely dissonant. And this is the interval that we're creating within a Major7 chord when we play the natural 4.. because the natural 11 (when following standard theory protocol by the book) would be an octave and a half step above the 3rd of the chord (yes there are other ways to voice this... this is just the most standard approach... 1-3-5-7-11). If we're improvising and play the 4th and there's a 3rd present in the chord, or even implied by the key we're playing a tune in... that's enough to create that same sense of dissonance.
I think that's first worth making sure we understand... that E and F do not have the same relationship as F and E.
Beyond that what's fascinating is that even when playing without a chordal instrument, if we play the natural 4 over a major type of tonality or situation, it is often times still going to want to pull down to the 3rd. There are any number of reasons why this could be the case that we could discuss. For me I have two driving opinions on it... one that triad govern everything melodic and that the power of the major 3rd being next to the 4th creates a sense of melodic gravity that wants to pull other notes around it in (including the 2nd... though the gravity is less intense)... and second (and related) the half steps in the scale or where all the human drama and passion and urgency lay. It's not just the 3 and 4, it's also the 7 and 1. There just so much freak nasty in those notes.
There are other reasons too I'm sure... these are just the two that sort of lineup most closely with my views and feelings about music and how they shape my practicing and playing. Of course, if we get into more quartal sounding harmonies and melodic ideas, or free.. a lot of this stuff starts to break down. This is primarily true in a tertian, tonal music. Which often times is most of my personal favorite.
-
Oh... and I left out the 2nd part of the experiment. We played E-9 using just the R, 3rd, and 9th
0X5X7X
Now let's try playing an EMaj7 with just the R, 3rd, and 4/11
0X6X10X
Some of you guys might really dig this interval
XX6X10X
But I imagine most of us, if we're being honest, would not label it as sounding stable or content or "in".
And that's the sound we're creating when we play the 4 of the diatonic major scale over a major chord.
We certainly should explore it, and play around with trying it in different octaves
a half step above the 3rd
0X6200
two octaves and a half step
0.11.13X14.17
But it's definitely a sound that we want to become familiar with and aware... even if it's just to avoid it or make sure we resolve it "properly" to keep our playing more inline with the tradition of referring to it as an "avoid" note.
-
Thanks for the detailed explanation. I sort of had a feeling about the changes in the effect depending on which note is on the bottom but I wanted to get a more formal explanation. Your post does that very well. Everything you said made sense to me.
-
Glad it makes sense! Sometime stuff like this can become so verbose and confusing sounding because of the nature of trying to type out something that's meant to be understood experientially by the ear. I'm not sure where you are with your playing, but I would definitely recommend NOT stopped at just a purely intellectual understanding. Sit with the guitar or a piano and really listen to it.
I'm a big fan of not taking any rules at face value but actively trying to disprove them using sound... not thoughts or opinions. At the very least, I like to verify a rule with sound. It makes everything way more personal and musical. The intellectual stuff is great too... but really sitting with it and trying to get used to the sounds... that's where things can really start to click. For me.
-
Yes, in fact I would go so far as to say that there is not intellectual understanding of music, you either hear it or do not understand it.
Intellectual stuff is assigning names to phenomena that can be "heard" and identifying relationships between them which certainly has it's benefits in ones development as a musician.
-
I think there is a lot of value in learning to "resolve" 7, 9,11, and 13 in the beginning. They all have varying degrees of tension.
Beyond my issues with the term "avoid note", the bigger problem, in my opinion, is telling beginners that all OTHER notes besides the 4 are somehow in the same category.
-
I have problem with saying avoid notes (without quotes).
I have no problem with "avoid notes" as I know exactly what is meant by it. Luckily that's everybody who uses the term. It's a tongue in cheek statement. Levine (inventor of the term) in his book discusses it for many pages as he clarifies that it means "handle with care" note. He encourages the use of it (even without resolution) as a colorful artistic effect and gives examples of it's use.
I haven't seen anywhere anybody suggesting that you actually avoid the note. But I have seen many people who criticize the imaginary people who take the "avoid note" literally and say you should avoid playing the fourth over the tonic major
-
As others have pointed out, the octave in which the two notes are located, matters.
So, for example, if you play C7, C E G Bb -- and you decide to add an F# to it -- it will sound more consonant if you put the F# a natural 7th above the G, compared to putting it a half step below the G.
Using an F in a Cmajor voicing has some of the same issue -- it will sound less dissonant played an octave, or two octaves up. Physics explains it, in part, in a way, since there are various harmonics generated by the vibrating string and the F# isn't in the first octave.
Another issue is that an F in a Cmaj chord can sound harsh, at least if somebody is playing the adjacent E note. But, otoh, in a situation which calls for a Cmajor sound, you can play, say, stacked fourths, e.g. DGCF and it can work if you don't lean too heavily on the F and the other players recognize the harmony and don't play thirds.
Of course, what matters is what sounds good to you. It isn't that hard to run through some sample tunes, trying things out.
-
Yeah, for myself I like to put notes on a spectrum within a scale going from super stable to less stable.
Cadential chord progressions such as ii-V-I can be thought of as movements from less stable notes to more stable notes. The resolution of 4-3 (F-E in C major) is one of the main driving engines of most of these progressions, and the progressions can be intensified by using unstable chromatic notes that resolve by half step in a similar way - b6 (Ab) and b3 (Eb) being two of the most obvious.
To my ears there are no notes that truly clash with a dominant chord, because the dominant chords function in this environment is to clash, and resolve.
OTOH, use of a dominant seventh chord in a non-functioning progression tends to make it into a functional one, so in a lot of modal music they are avoided.
-
Mark Levine did not invent the term "avoid notes", it has been around well before the release of "The Jazz Theory Book".
A few things:
Melodically speaking, a passing note 4th in a major context is incredibly commonplace.
Ornithology- GABCDBCDBG
Bach Minuet- DGABCDGG
etc.
In progression these passing chord movements are also very common:
C Csus C
C F/C C
C G7 C
C7 Db7 C7
etc.
All of these involve the 4th in a major chord context.
Even for those of us who like dissonance are aware that b9 is further down the crunchy spectrum
when played squarely against the 3rd.
What is the reality of the rhythm sections that you play with?
I'm guessing it's not a massive pipe organ sustaining a C chord.
More likely there is a greater sense of space than that.
So even though a chord symbol may indicate C major, a variety of notes and movements can coexist within the chord symbol.
Jordan said it well, investigate, form your own opinion about when, where or if.
I'm a big fan of not taking any rules at face value but actively trying to disprove them using sound... not thoughts or opinions. At the very least, I like to verify a rule with sound. It makes everything way more personal and musical. The intellectual stuff is great too... but really sitting with it and trying to get used to the sounds... that's where things can really start to click. For me.
-
Actually an example of this I REALLY like is Stella be Starlight where the 4 is used a number of times as an accented dissonance on beat 1 that resolves down by a semitone later in the bar. Originally Posted by bako
-
True. In fact it doesn't even need to be resolved in the context of blues. Wes Montgomery used the 'unresolved' 4th a lot. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
I need to sit down at a piano to prove it to myself, but I think the half step dissonance of the 4th on a major chord is only part of the reason it sounds "off." The relationship of that note to the others matters, to--the ambiguity it introduces based on it's relationship to the root also matters.
Also, voicing and context uber alles.
-
That's cos the 4th/11th is not in fact an 'avoid note' over the dom7 chord in the same way it is on a major or maj7 type chord, at least in the sense that it is used in an unrestrained way in lines. (Wes being a case in point.) Originally Posted by Tal_175
In contrast, the 4th must be eventually resolved by step on major chords. (At least in a traditional changes context.)
-
BTW, write out a list of diatonic seventh chords that include the 4th and those that don't. What do you notice?
C major:
No 4
Cmaj7
Amin7
Emin7
Include a 4
Dmin7
Fmaj7
G7
Bm7b5
-
Some people would say the opposite. For functioning dominants, 4th is even more of an "avoid note" as its a spoiler for the arrival of the tonic. In other words it reduces the climatic effect of the cadence. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
That's a valid thing to say... What it does is soften the effect of the cadence.... Which is not (to me) a BAD thing. And this relates to other areas.. Originally Posted by Tal_175
One of the interesting things about jazz is that right from the start the role of the leading note (7) - which is the 3rd of the V chord - has been 'softened' to some extent. It no longer necessarily resolves to 1 or 6 by step in the same way as it does in classical harmony,
So a clear example of this is the guide tone resolution Dm7 G7 Cmaj7. That B is in fact NEVER resolved in the standard 1 3 7 shell voicings I would play.
We can hear this early on - take the melody of Struttin' with Some Barbeque (mid 1920s) and notice that it has a beautiful unresolved 7th against the major chord.
OTOH - it was quite common not to overstate the leading note (that 3rd of the V) when expressing melodies against V7s and ii-V7s. Honeysuckle Rose is a good example. The melody completely avoids the E, on Gm7 C7.
I notice that Lester Young, Charlie Christian and later Charlie Parker and Wes often avoided the conventional dominant sound in favour of sounds that avoided that obvious 7-1 move. That 7-1 actually can sound pretty corny, unless used in the correct structural role, for instance in a bebop head at the end of the second A section.
There's a lot more threads I could mention. I think the influence of church music, Gospel etc is really strong here as well.
So I call these dominant sounds without the 3rd 'soft dominants' - and in general I do not make a distinction between subdominant and dominant because there does not appear to be a basic functional distinction made in the music I have studied.
There is a distinction in terms of the sound, of course... But it's worth bearing in mind how strong you want your dominant resolution to be, so to speak.
In summary - jazzers often play subdominant type sounds on dominant chords, including the 4th on the dominant, cos it sounds cool.
-
Some people would say the opposite. For functioning dominants, 4th is even more of an "avoid note" as its a spoiler for the arrival of the tonic. In other words it reduces the climatic effect of the cadence.
That's one perspective. Another is to view G7sus anticipating the resolution.
Using tonic or dominant pedal notes throughout a progression is a way to leave home
but maintaining a lifeline to the doorstep.
-
Both of the above are good points but I guess I am implicitly considering "avoid note" to mean "departure from conventional aesthetics". In that case any use of 4th that ambiguates the V-I resolution qualifies to be an "avoid note", but then some might reasonably have a more "modern" definition of conventional.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Yesterday, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions