b5 in dominant chords

[alez]

I'm starting to experiment with this and it's confusing me. I'm not finding it intuitive. It's like I'm unsure whether the b5 I'm about to play will sound good or horrible until I do it.

For example, the other day I was trying this b5 over the V7 of a blues tune (key's b2 / #1). It sounded pretty bad to me and I don't understand why, so I kept trying, but I didn't manage to make it work.

I'm still trying to find a reason:

Possible reason #1: the tone clashes with the chord.

I fail to see how, as this tone can be seen as a #4 (lydian dominant standpoint). Moreover, the #5 (key's b3, therefore part of the blues scale) sounded alright to me, even though I bet the guy on comping guitar was most likely playing the perfect 5, which may be problematic. Despite that, it seemed to work way better than the b5. (I used the whole tone scale over V7 a few choruses to keep trying both 5ths.)

Possible reason #2: the tone is both

-Not diatonic (i.e. not part of the key signature or the part of the blues scale).
-Not a chord tone.

Not a valid reason, as I've seen this very scenario working beautifully before. Examples:
a) In a major tune, 11 over IVm (key's b7).
b) In a major tune, #4 over I, or major 6 over VIm (key's #4).
c) In a minor tune, major 9 over V7 (key's major 6, i.e. melodic minor sound).

What are your thoughts and experiences with this?

[Alter]

When you see the b5 in a dominant chord, sometimes the scale can have a natural 5 also, sometimes it doesn't. If it does,(like the lydian b7 or the half-whole diminished scale) look at the b5 as a #4 (or better #11), as a tension. If it doesn't (as in the altered scale), look at the #5 and b5 as notes that have replaced the 5, and in doing so have increased the tension that the dominant chord has to begin with, the tension to resolve to its four.

So using them involves learning how to resolve them, meaning voice leading them into the next chord, for their tension to get a release. I find the #5 to be more characteristic of the altered scale than the b5, so I would start from there when the alteration of the 5 is concerned. An excellent practice is the Dom7#5 arpeggio that can help to introduce the sound of an altered dominant chord.

Common uses of the altered and half whole diminished scales would be in the normal use of a dominant, aka resolving to its four. Common use of the lydian b7 scale would be in all other situations (tritone substitutions and special function chords).

[ragman1]

It's like I'm unsure whether the b5 I'm about to play will sound good or horrible until I do it.

In playing standard blues it's common to slide into a dom chord. So G7 - C7 might be played G7/Db7 - C7.

Db7 is the tritone (b5) of G7. That works absolutely fine in a blues and you can slide wherever you like from one to the other: Db7 - C7, F#7 - G7, Eb7 - D7, Ab7 - G7, and so on.

I was trying this b5 over the V7 of a blues tune

If you mean trying to play D7b5 instead of D7 or D7/Ab7, it won't work because that's not the chord. It's not a b5 chord in its own right and there's no reason to make it one.

In a jazz blues, where the chords are modified to

G7-C7-G7-%
C7-C#o-G7-E7#9
Am7-D7-G7-D7

substituting b5s obviously won't work over all those chords. Dominant to dominant is good, like the standard blues.

Bossa uses tritone (b5) sounds because it suits the genre:

Gm7 - F#7b5 - FM7 - F6

That's quite a different matter. The sounds are right and flow properly.

Likewise in non-bossa standards where you get a lot of 5-1s, if you see F7 - BbM7, a B7b5 could sub for the F7 providing it sounds all right in context. Too many of them can make the tune sound a bit flat.

M7#11 chords aren't the same as doms or 7b5 chords. The #11 sound is just an embellishment of the sound, generally speaking.

Some tunes, however, are written specifically around the b5 sound, but that's a different thing. There, the work is done for you, so to speak.

******************

I have to be honest, I wouldn't waste time trying to figure out analytically why a b5 sound in the wrong place doesn't work in technical terms. Answer: Because it doesn't!

Far better to focus on the places where it does work, then you can slip them in with confidence when playing.

[christianm77]

When you see the b5 in a dominant chord, sometimes the scale can have a natural 5 also, sometimes it doesn't. If it does,(like the lydian b7 or the half-whole diminished scale) look at the b5 as a #4 (or better #11), as a tension. If it doesn't (as in the altered scale), look at the #5 and b5 as notes that have replaced the 5, and in doing so have increased the tension that the dominant chord has to begin with, the tension to resolve to its four.

So using them involves learning how to resolve them, meaning voice leading them into the next chord, for their tension to get a release. I find the #5 to be more characteristic of the altered scale than the b5, so I would start from there when the alteration of the 5 is concerned. An excellent practice is the Dom7#5 arpeggio that can help to introduce the sound of an altered dominant chord.

Common uses of the altered and half whole diminished scales would be in the normal use of a dominant, aka resolving to its four. Common use of the lydian b7 scale would be in all other situations (tritone substitutions and special function chords).

It’s interesting you say that Alter because it is the b5 that differentiates the altered scale from the more conventional diatonic harmonic/natural minor options.

So perhaps you don’t actually hear the altered scale always even though you understand your lines intellectually that way.

It’s a sound I struggled with. Bill Evans helped me out here...

To the OP - to me this whole question is about voice leading. The b5 on V7 typically resolves to 1 or 2 (9) of the I chord - try and hear it that light perhaps.

[joe2758]

no one will probably agree with me, but this is how i think of it:

Dominant chords come from diminished chords.

C diminished gives us B7, D7, F7, and Ab 7 by lowering one note of the diminished chord to the root of the dom 7 chord.

These chords are related in this way and pretty much interchangable

If you can lower any of the one notes at a time to make related dom chords, it makes sense that you can lower any of the other notes as well.

You can lower the 3rd, 5th, or 7th of the dom chord down a half step.

The lowered 5th is particularly strong because it is the root of the tritone sub.

It is the dominant 7 and the tritone both at once

dom7 b5 is my favorite chord

[christianm77]

no one will probably agree with me, but this is how i think of it:

Dominant chords come from diminished chords.

C diminished gives us B7, D7, F7, and Ab 7 by lowering one note of the diminished chord to the root of the dom 7 chord.

These chords are related in this way and pretty much interchangable

If you can lower any of the one notes at a time to make related dom chords, it makes sense that you can lower any of the other notes as well.

You can lower the 3rd, 5th, or 7th of the dom chord down a half step.

The lowered 5th is particularly strong because it is the root of the tritone sub.

It is the dominant 7 and the tritone both at once

dom7 b5 is my favorite chord

Hey agree. Although dim/dom is chicken and egg for me!

Actually Jonathon Kreisberg I remember using the 7b5 sound on a blues in one of his masterclass vids. He didn’t mention it (the class was about rhythm) but remember pricking my ears up.

[christianm77]

Also - whole tone.

7b5 is where whole tone, diminished, altered and Lydian dom kiss

[ragman1]

Alez -

It occurred to me that you may mean playing b5 notes as opposed to chords.

It's simple, the same applies. If you can successfully substitute a b5 chord then you can play b5 sounds. If not, not.

[joe2758]

Also - whole tone.

7b5 is where whole tone, diminished, altered and Lydian dom kiss

beautiful and true!

[ragman1]

Incidentally, that's a very good point about altered and lydian dominant sounds.

Say you had that bossa progression: Gm7 - F#7b5 - FM7 - F6.

The F#7b5 is obviously a sub for C7. BUT do you play F#7 altered or C7 altered?

Probably a lot of players would head for F# alt (G melodic minor) which is nice but it wouldn't give a proper b5 altered sound. They'd in effect be playing F# lyd dom which isn't the same. To make it work you'd have to play Db melodic minor.

Just a thought.

[christianm77]

Yeah I tend to feel V lyd dom/bII altered is not really a resolving sound going to I

More chromatics = more ways to resolve into a target chord.

[Alter]

It’s interesting you say that Alter because it is the b5 that differentiates the altered scale from the more conventional diatonic harmonic/natural minor options.

Which particular mode of the harmonic/natural minor do you refer to? If the 1 b9 #9 (for natural, 3 for harmonic minor mode) 11 5 b13 b7 , i would see them as scales that alter the 9 but keep a regular 5, with different tensions and color.

The way i approach all the different scales over any chord, is starting from the chord tones and what happens to them. For dominant chords, the main things for me are what happens to the 5 and 9 (not a chord tone of course) of the chords. So for me one category is the mixolydian and mixo b13 that don't alter anything, another the phrygian, phrygian dominant, and half whole diminished that alter only the 9 (with the diminished adding the challenge of an 8-note scale), the whole tone scale (which i forgot on my previous post) altering only the 5 plus the 6-note scale thing, and finally the altered scale and super locrian that alter both the 9 and 5.

I remember when first practicing all these with scott henderson's video tape, where he played all these cool sounding scales over chords, but i found it difficult to handle them the way he did. Basing them on the arpeggio of the underlying chord helped me a lot in say , making an A altered scale sound like A altered and not Bb melodic minor.

So it's just my approach on things. Chords, arpeggio, scale and finally chord scale (drop 2, quartal or whatever) in that order. And then moving from the actual scale to playing arpeggios and stuff based on all the chords of the scale.

[alez]

I'm overwhelmed. Thanks so much.

Before I find some time to go through this and respond, just a clarification: yes, I really should've described the context better. I was soloing (on trumpet, to be more specific, although I don't think that matters) over a walking bass + guitar comping. Sorry I didn't make this clear, leading to some of you guys (ragman1, joe2758) putting effort trying to explain chord substitutions etc.

[joe2758]

my B

[christianm77]

Which particular mode of the harmonic/natural minor do you refer to? If the 1 b9 #9 (for natural, 3 for harmonic minor mode) 11 5 b13 b7 , i would see them as scales that alter the 9 but keep a regular 5, with different tensions and color.

Basically I do this think called playing in the minor key, where a minor phrase can include notes from the three minor scales. Take a look at any music from the past 300-400 years.

This might sound flip but there is a heavy point here. A really obvious example would be the notes Bb and Ab on Blue Bossa which occur over the G7 in Blue Bossa.

We can write #9 and b9 here and think - G7 altered like good little jazz students, but really the melody is in C natural minor and that’s obviously what’s going on. I mean there’s an altered implication if you want to use it, but it seems a bit daft to suggest that’s what Dorham was thinking when he wrote it.

(See also - why the altered sounds a bit weird on All Blues and why none of the people I’ve transcribed seem to use it.

#9 (more correctly b3 as the enharmony for the altered scale is all messed up) really the product of a cross relation between the natural minor and a V7 chord. You can mix it up. So you get an 8 note scale with 7 and b7 or on the V7, 3 or b3.

The only difference between this scale on V

1 b2 b3 4 5 b6 b7

And altered

1 b2 b3 b5 b6 b7

Is that the 4 and 5 are replaced with the b5. If you don’t use b5, you are hearing minor V. Which is a familiar sound from Bach Mozart Charlie Parker etc.

If we have these sounds in Major we have standard parallel minor modal interchange.

The way i approach all the different scales over any chord, is starting from the chord tones and what happens to them. For dominant chords, the main things for me are what happens to the 5 and 9 (not a chord tone of course) of the chords. So for me one category is the mixolydian and mixo b13 that don't alter anything, another the phrygian, phrygian dominant, and half whole diminished that alter only the 9 (with the diminished adding the challenge of an 8-note scale), the whole tone scale (which i forgot on my previous post) altering only the 5 plus the 6-note scale thing, and finally the altered scale and super locrian that alter both the 9 and 5.

I remember when first practicing all these with scott henderson's video tape, where he played all these cool sounding scales over chords, but i found it difficult to handle them the way he did. Basing them on the arpeggio of the underlying chord helped me a lot in say , making an A altered scale sound like A altered and not Bb melodic minor.

So it's just my approach on things. Chords, arpeggio, scale and finally chord scale (drop 2, quartal or whatever) in that order. And then moving from the actual scale to playing arpeggios and stuff based on all the chords of the scale.

That’s all great. But I’m talking about the very basics and the history of the music.

[christianm77]

Some scales with the b5 in (excuse the enharmony)

Altered - 1 b2 #2 3 b5 b6 b7
Diminished W-H - 1 b2 #2 3 b5 5 6 b7
Whole tone - 1 2 3 b5 b6 b7
Tritone dominant (Mix) - 7 b2 b3 3 b5 b6 b7

So, anyway, whether or not we choose to identify this b5 note as altered scale or tritone dominant or whatever is actually pretty academic... It's the SOUNDS that's obviously the real thing to focus on.

In terms of melodies, the two main examples I could think of are both minor:

Night in Tunisia and Segment

In the case of NIT it's the whole tone tetrachord 1 b7 b6 b5 which in both cases resolving into the 1 of the I chord by half step. So, e.g.:

G F Eb C# --- > D (for A7 into Dm)

Segment just has that little chromatic enclosure B A Bb in Bb minor... Super bebop to my ears...

And both examples would work the same in a major key.

So although it's super fashionable to view chord scales as collections of notes which we can access as intervallic structures, one of the altered scale's most distinctive features is its stepwise structure. That mix of the whole tone and diminished tetrachords is melodically intriguing. The notes 1 b9 #9 3 form so many common motifs in jazz - think of Green Dolphin Street for instance; while the whole tone sound has rich history through Duke Ellington and Bud Powell.

Due it's highly chromatic nature, the scale creates lots of useful resolutions into target major and minor scales.

It's a one size fits all scale, which is why jazz educators love it so much.

Jordan Klemons has a few triads for altered dominants depending on the melody. The tritone triad (Db on G7 say) is the most relevant one and you can find many examples from the music. Hank Mobley uses it in his solo on If I Should Lose You, for instance. Hearing this sound may help.

Also the cheesy triad pair everyone plays - G/Db/G/Db....

[joe2758]

7b5 dim: 1 2 3 4 b5 b6 b7 7

[Alter]

Christian i totally agree with what you are writing being the rule for a big part of what we consider classic jazz (and older music of course), however many players in traditional bebop are also using things like the altered scale or other alterations over the dominant chords. A lot of the soloing concepts do come from simple approaches and are built around the melodies, tonal centers and scales, but the influence of Parker and the whole bebop chord substitution and superimposition thing is more and more prevalent as years go by. Wes uses it (just watch how he explains chords to the piano player in this tv film in europe, i forget the tune, he knows his harmonies!), most of the sax players are masters at it. Especially for the post Coltrane generation, i see it becoming a mainstream part of the musics vocabulary.

And having talked to people, i don't think it is a student thing. It is the way the a lot of musicians in the idiom thought and think. Playing different scales and sounds over the same chords, or different chords alltogether every time over the same basic changes. Of course the simple minor tonality thing is valid, very beautiful (Grant Green ) and has a place musically, but so does the other approach. I try to work on both.

Think of a player like Rodney Jones. Huge roots on simplicity and musical tradition, all the gospel and blues background you might want, but also master of the other stuff as well. Triads, alterations, chords and chords over chords... Benson is the same, just with less coltrane influence to my ears..

[ragman1]

I'm overwhelmed. Thanks so much.

Before I find some time to go through this and respond, just a clarification: yes, I really should've described the context better. I was soloing (on trumpet, to be more specific, although I don't think that matters) over a walking bass + guitar comping. Sorry I didn't make this clear, leading to some of you guys (ragman1, joe2758) putting effort trying to explain chord substitutions etc.

I wondered about that, hence the 'notes' posts #8 and #10.

I don't think being a brass or woodwind player should obviate understanding background harmony ('chords'), quite the contrary. I think one has to know about it whatever the instrument, otherwise how does one solo effectively?

[christianm77]

It’s not terribly important how one conceptualises this really.

I just found it funny that you kind of dismissed the one note I would think as really specific to the altered scale, as opposed to the usual minor key bebop shenanigans, as not giving the altered scale sound.

Which implies your ears gravitate towards more minor key sounds.

But it’s not important.

The important thing is the sounds. I would encourage the op to learn how to hear this b5 sound through the suggestions above.

[christianm77]

Christian i totally agree with what you are writing being the rule for a big part of what we consider classic jazz (and older music of course), however many players in traditional bebop are also using things like the altered scale or other alterations over the dominant chords. A lot of the soloing concepts do come from simple approaches and are built around the melodies, tonal centers and scales, but the influence of Parker and the whole bebop chord substitution and superimposition thing is more and more prevalent as years go by. Wes uses it (just watch how he explains chords to the piano player in this tv film in europe, i forget the tune, he knows his harmonies!), most of the sax players are masters at it. Especially for the post Coltrane generation, i see it becoming a mainstream part of the musics vocabulary.

And having talked to people, i don't think it is a student thing. It is the way the a lot of musicians in the idiom thought and think. Playing different scales and sounds over the same chords, or different chords alltogether every time over the same basic changes. Of course the simple minor tonality thing is valid, very beautiful (Grant Green ) and has a place musically, but so does the other approach. I try to work on both.

Think of a player like Rodney Jones. Huge roots on simplicity and musical tradition, all the gospel and blues background you might want, but also master of the other stuff as well. Triads, alterations, chords and chords over chords... Benson is the same, just with less coltrane influence to my ears..

Well, sure, it's more that I found it funny that you kind of dismissed the one note I would think as really differentiates the altered scale from usual minor key stuff as not giving the altered scale sound.

Which implies your ears actually gravitate towards more traditional minor key sounds.

But it’s not that important really how we conceptualise these things.

The important thing is the sounds. I would encourage the op to learn how to hear this b5 sound through the suggestions above.

I found the b5 to be a tricky sound to hear.

[alez]

So using them involves learning how to resolve them, meaning voice leading them into the next chord, for their tension to get a release.

To the OP - to me this whole question is about voice leading. The b5 on V7 typically resolves to 1 or 2 (9) of the I chord - try and hear it that light perhaps.

My ears seem to agree totally. My only previous experience with a similar situation is resolving III7's b9 (key's 4) to VIm's perfect 5th a half-tone below. The b9 is not really consonant over III7 (to me at least), and I'm only being able to make it work provided that I resolve like that, in which case it does work good.

It's simple, the same applies. If you can successfully substitute a b5 chord then you can play b5 sounds. If not, not.

I found what you say really interesting when I started substituting chords in my soloing (over comping that used the "official" changes). From a tone-chord clash perspective, I would've thought it wouldn't work, and certainly it produces tension here and there, but it still works really well as long as the harmony you imply in your soloing makes sense and goes where the "real" harmony is going. All of which is in line with the two quotes right above about tension-release vs. tone-chord consonance.

Yeah I tend to feel V lyd dom/bII altered is not really a resolving sound going to I

Same here. Whenever I made it work for me, it was by using the V7's #4 at some point during the chord length, then moving somewhere else before the I, so I can totally ignore the #4 on my resolution. Which I find odd because this #4 tone is root of the tritone sub, which is supposed to lead strongly to the I root by half-tone down.

I don't think being a brass or woodwind player should obviate understanding background harmony ('chords'), quite the contrary. I think one has to know about it whatever the instrument, otherwise how does one solo effectively?

Absolutely. I'm not really able to make much of a tune until I have an understanding of the harmony. Much of this understanding comes from trial soloing, which I make totally chord based and voice leading based at first. That way I can "play chords" on my monophonic instrument to see how the tune is put together.

The important thing is the sounds. I would encourage the op to learn how to hear this b5 sound through the suggestions above.

That's what I thought: maybe the people in the forum can help me hear that.

This thread really helps. I really appreciate the time and effort you all have put in this.

[christianm77]

My ears seem to agree totally. My only previous experience with a similar situation is resolving III7's b9 (key's 4) to VIm's perfect 5th a half-tone below. The b9 is not really consonant over III7 (to me at least), and I'm only being able to make it work provided that I resolve like that, in which case it does work good.



I found what you say really interesting when I started substituting chords in my soloing (over comping that used the "official" changes). From a tone-chord clash perspective, I would've thought it wouldn't work, and certainly it produces tension here and there, but it still works really well as long as the harmony you imply in your soloing makes sense and goes where the "real" harmony is going. All of which is in line with the two quotes right above about tension-release vs. tone-chord consonance.



Same here. Whenever I made it work for me, it was by using the V7's #4 at some point during the chord length, then moving somewhere else before the I, so I can totally ignore the #4 on my resolution. Which I find odd because this #4 tone is root of the tritone sub, which is supposed to lead strongly to the I root by half-tone down.



Absolutely. I'm not really able to make much of a tune until I have an understanding of the harmony. Much of this understanding comes from trial soloing, which I make totally chord based and voice leading based at first. That way I can "play chords" on my monophonic instrument to see how the tune is put together.



That's what I thought: maybe the people in the forum can help me hear that.

This thread really helps. I really appreciate the time and effort you all have put in this.

I went for a lesson with Peter Bernstein today (clang!) now there’s a fella who plays a whole lot of b5 - and he’s all about the voice leading.

I think like the obvious move A7b5 going in Dm9 - for instance ... which I think of as a Bill Evans move but for all I know Monk played it.

In terms of the substitutes and so on - often he really uses “incorrect” and quite parallel harmony but it works brilliantly because of the lead line in the chords.

[christianm77]

Oh another thing Peter said that I think is significant - he started on piano and still uses it to help him with voicings.

For any kind of musician - guitar, trumpet, sax, whatever - I think piano skills are very helpful even if you have to play everything in c major.

[alez]

It's simple, the same applies. If you can successfully substitute a b5 chord then you can play b5 sounds. If not, not.

I found what you say really interesting when I started substituting chords in my soloing (over comping that used the "official" changes). From a tone-chord clash perspective, I would've thought it wouldn't work, and certainly it produces tension here and there, but it still works really well as long as the harmony you imply in your soloing makes sense and goes where the "real" harmony is going. All of which is in line with the two quotes right above about tension-release vs. tone-chord consonance.

In terms of the substitutes and so on - often he really uses “incorrect” and quite parallel harmony but it works brilliantly because of the lead line in the chords.

Another enlightening experience I had with this came when I realised that any particular tune is shown using different changes in various fake books. I understand that the early Real Book (Sher Music) has wrong chords here and there but, that aside, I think the reason for it is that each sheet is a transcription of a particular recording. But what I found interesting is that I could choose the changes I like the most among the ones available (from fake books or by ear from different recordings), memorise them, and use them for my solos perfectly fine regardless of the changes that the comping instrumentalists were actually using. There's a little tension sometimes, but they are largely compatible.

Before I realised that, I was kind of concerned that I'd turn up at a jam session and play unusual changes, and I always tried to get my chords really accurate, looking them up in many different places. Now I choose the changes that make my solos sound cool to me. (Obviously, in terms of harmony, the big blocks of the tune are the same accross sheets and recordings, like for example, in Summertime, measure #2 or #4 may change, but measure #5 won't.)

Oh another thing Peter said that I think is significant - he started on piano and still uses it to help him with voicings.

For any kind of musician - guitar, trumpet, sax, whatever - I think piano skills are very helpful even if you have to play everything in c major.

I've heard this advice so many times!, and lately I've been thinking that I really want to make a start with this. Hopefully sometime this year