The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 31 of 31
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Ignorance is agony.
    Only when you find out. Till then it's quite painless

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Reminds me ‘the unexamined life is not worth living’ ‘how do you know? Have you examined the matter?’

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JakeAcci
    But this is exactly the kind of mental gymnastics that I feel are unnecessary because you're going through great lengths to try to frame something as V7 to I, which, as I already said, you certainly CAN do for everything, but why would you? There are other harmonies and ways to get back to the I besides V7.

    It's like how in a lot of rock and blues music you get bIII triad to the I. Do we want to say that that motion is an upper structure of V7 alt, having root, #5, and #9 of the V chord and no 3rd? Of course we COULD say that, but to me it's incidental and not really a good way to analyze a Fleetwood Mac song
    It is faintly hilarious the way some want to relate everything to ii v I. I see it as an unnecessary burden.

    See also ‘Jobim is non functional’ :-)

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    I think cadences should have at least one quality... they mark the watersheds of form.. they can be harder and softer... more determined and more loose... Interrupted, posponed, fugitive etc.
    Each cadence has its own semantics in language and composers used it...

    I mean the most important differnce between is how the are ended - on root or on dominant or on VIth or whatever else.

    The seconf important thing is how they are approached...
    like V-I and VII - I for example and different suspension and all it adds a character to one of the main cadences, makes it more subtle in the context

    Besides... not every V-I is a cadence

    But jazz cadences are less about semantics and more about just colours for the same classical types of cadences basically...
    and in standards they are at the end of the choruses and in the end of the bridge... and usually there are no revelations about how they are used...

    Looks like what is called a cadence in this thread is just a V-I turnaround and its subs or other turnarouds to I how we distinguish them depends much on personal hearing and context... if they are subds for V-I or something on their own.. how you hear it is how you use it.
    but they are not really - or not necessarily - a cadence...


  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JakeAcci
    But this is exactly the kind of mental gymnastics that I feel are unnecessary because you're going through great lengths to try to frame something as V7 to I, which, as I already said, you certainly CAN do for everything, but why would you? There are other harmonies and ways to get back to the I besides V7.

    It's like how in a lot of rock and blues music you get bIII triad to the I. Do we want to say that that motion is an upper structure of V7 alt, having root, #5, and #9 of the V chord and no 3rd? Of course we COULD say that, but to me it's incidental and not really a good way to analyze a Fleetwood Mac song
    I agree, I would never think of it like I wrote in that post. I was just saying, for the sake of argument.
    In practice it is just another approach that works. There are many.
    So, the question is not does it work. Established is that it does. Why it works, is the question.
    If it's because of some sense of resolution, than it's likely some form of V -I.

    Further, IMO, looking at music, Jazz, learning* to play it as something that is "resolving from ... somewhere ... to ... anywhere ...", dominant to tonic, is shortcut to dull, pointless and meaningless ... unlistenable. It is not what I hear when I listen to the music I like.

    *It can be learning tool, to get some things under fingers, but music should not be composed and played that way.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by DadanMizwarMaulana
    Hi guys . Iam sorry if my english is bad ????

    I have a question about julian lage lesson from youtube.
    he talk about superimpostion . For example in II V I on C
    Dm - G7 - C
    in Dm7 he using C#maj9#11
    where is come from? Anyone can help me to explain thats theory.


    Dominant minor substitution: You can substitute the minor chord a perfect 5th higher than the dominat 7th chord. You can also reverse this rule and given a minor chord substitute the dominant 7th type chord a 4th higher.

    Therefore in Julian's example the C#maj9 could be thought of as a sub for G7, which is being subbed for Dmin7. C#9 is a tritone sub for G7. If you look at the difference between C#9 and C#maj9 there is only one note different. The b7 in C9 is moved up to a maj7 interval in the C#maj7 chord. You can look at it this way, chords only have 3 or 4 notes that's it. So if you have two chords with three notes the same and only one note different then those chords are similar/hugely related in some way. Therefore those chords can sub for each other becasue they are closely related sonically in some way. In other words they have much more in common then they have different from each other so they'll work as chord subs for one another. Furthermore that maj7th interval in the C#maj9 chord is actually a tone that is in the ii chord in the key C. So all of the notes in C#maj9 are either in C#9, the tritone sub of G7, or in Dmin7. Of course there are other ways to examine this chord move but this is certainly one explanation.

    "Blah blah blah one" lol. I really like that quote from Julian becasue it sounds funny but it's true in a way. As long as you arrive at that nice consonance on one, whatever comes before it during the cadence, can just be blah blah blah lol. Or is that just an excellent players funny way of expressing that there are so many options and ways of putting them all together to arrive at one?
    Last edited by Bobalou; 04-22-2018 at 05:02 PM.