The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 33
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Seems I've read that there is but maybe someone can shed some light on this. For example, if I play D7b9 > G (V7 I) or F#dim > G is there a reason I'd call it one or the other? I think I kinda see that in a different sequence it'd be diminished, for example in measure 6 of rhythm changes in Bb I play Ebmaj7 > Edim and call it that because the next note in the bass would be F (Bb/F) So any clarification is greatly appreciated.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    In the example you gave there is no functional difference since you establish the context of both to be V7->I.

    Although 7b9 can be realized with a variety of scales, it's a chord symbol convention that it's understood to be diminished. That doesn't mean you can't substitute it with other variants of dominants (melody permitting) and use different extensions. But it's my understanding that 7b9 is just a different way of saying dominant-diminished (suggesting a natural 13th).

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Personally, I like to keep my 2-5's intact and not confuse matters. If you're playing D7b9 - G7 or Gm7 then one ought to hear that bass D. If you've got a backing (or bass player, keyboard, another guitar, etc) then you could probably get away with just playing a dim shape (F#, A, C, Eb) and it would sound okay. Otherwise I'd play a D7b9 so it sounded like one.

    As you say, playing the E dim chord for EbM7 - Eo - Bbm7 would be correct because it's evidently just a passing device and the bass line is clearly spelled out. That's a different matter.

    There are always exceptions. In a chord melody arrangement you might want to emphasize the F# - G sound so it would be worth playing F#o. But it shouldn't be forgotten that it's really a D7b9 in disguise.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    In the example you gave there is no functional difference since you establish the context of both to be V7->I.

    Although 7b9 can be realized with a variety of scales, it's a chord symbol convention that it's understood to be diminished. That doesn't mean you can't substitute it with other variants of dominants (melody permitting) and use different extensions. But it's my understanding that 7b9 is just a different way of saying dominant-diminished (suggesting a natural 13th).
    Thanks for your reply. Yeah, I get that 7b9 is common to at least a few scales, and that dominant chords are a world unto themselves. I also get that the natural 6th in, for example, a H/W diminshed scale is what separates it from an altered scale. I guess I'm trying to figure out if there's any functional difference between 7b9 and diminished or if, as you say, it's merely a naming convention. Thanks again!

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    I'm trying to figure out if there's any functional difference between 7b9 and diminished or if, as you say, it's merely a naming convention
    Depends entirely on the function.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by buduranus2
    Thanks for your reply. Yeah, I get that 7b9 is common to at least a few scales, and that dominant chords are a world unto themselves. I also get that the natural 6th in, for example, a H/W diminshed scale is what separates it from an altered scale. I guess I'm trying to figure out if there's any functional difference between 7b9 and diminished or if, as you say, it's merely a naming convention. Thanks again!
    I see. Yes, I think it's just a naming convention.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Depends on the function. A diminished chord is a real chord, as is a 7b9. Calling it a diminished is not the same as calling it a 7b9 (no root), and vice versa. I think it should be called what it is!

    There's a tune that goes

    Fm - Dm7b5 - Gm7 - C7b9 - Fm

    Would you write that

    Fm - Fm6 - Gm7 - Go - Fm

    I wouldn't! Do you see the point?

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Depends on the function. A diminished chord is a real chord, as is a 7b9. Calling it a diminished is not the same as calling it a 7b9 (no root), and vice versa. I think it should be called what it is!

    There's a tune that goes

    Fm - Dm7b5 - Gm7 - C7b9 - Fm

    Would you write that

    Fm - Fm6 - Gm7 - Go - Fm

    I wouldn't! Do you see the point?
    So it depends on the context.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    I understood the question to be whether 7b9 means dominant-diminished by the common chord symbol convention.

    That's true but yes it doesn't go the other way around. In other words, when you see a diminished chord in tunes, there is no conventional, specific 7b9 chord implication. Diminished chords have a few other common uses in standard tunes. How (or if) you analyze them as a dominant chord is not part of the chord symbol convention.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    If you see a progression like Fmaj7 F#dim7 Gm7 etc.

    The F#dim7 chord is F# C Eb A. F7b9 is F A C Eb and F# (the difference is that F7b9 has one more note, an F)

    F#WH is F# G# A B C D Eb E

    F7b9 gives Fmixo with an added b9: F G A Bb C D Eb F#.

    So, both F# WH and Fmixo(addb9) contain the chord tones.

    But, they differ as follows

    F vs F#, G vs G# Bb vs B and Eb vs F.

    The point of this rabbit hole is that the chord tones are almost the same, but the underlying scale/usage is substantially different.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by buduranus2
    Seems I've read that there is but maybe someone can shed some light on this. For example, if I play D7b9 > G (V7 I) or F#dim > G is there a reason I'd call it one or the other? I think I kinda see that in a different sequence it'd be diminished, for example in measure 6 of rhythm changes in Bb I play Ebmaj7 > Edim and call it that because the next note in the bass would be F (Bb/F) So any clarification is greatly appreciated.
    Truth be told, if I'm playing a chord, I'm not calling it anything. I'm just playing it. Assuming we're talking about a tune that has a progression written in a chart as V7 > I, I'd call that bundle of notes a V7 chord. If someone were to ask me "hey, why did you play an F# dim7 where the chart says D7?" [I hope to flying spaghetti monster the chart just says D7, and does not spell out the extensions and alterations ...], I'd explain that what I played looked like a dim7 chord, but was really a rootless D7b9 voiced with a 3rd in the bass. Thinking of it as a dim7 is "wrong" from a functional harmony standpoint, but useful from a mnemonic/figuring-out-stuff-to-play standpoint.

    In your rhythm changes example, that clump of notes is actually carrying out the classic passing-chord function of a dim chord, so you call it one there.

    Long story short, what you call a bunch of notes depends on what the functional harmony is in that point of the composition. Clumps of notes can only be named in context. Chords don't have names outside of context, which is very weird for a guitar player to grok since we're taught from day 1 that chords have names, and don't really get told the truth until we start learning music more broadly than the mechanics of our specific instrument.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by buduranus2
    So it depends on the context.
    Yes, always:

    C7 - C#o - G7 - E7

    But

    Dm7 - Dbo - Cm7 - F7

    Same chord, two different contexts, two names.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by buduranus2
    Seems I've read that there is but maybe someone can shed some light on this. For example, if I play D7b9 > G (V7 I) or F#dim > G is there a reason I'd call it one or the other? I think I kinda see that in a different sequence it'd be diminished, for example in measure 6 of rhythm changes in Bb I play Ebmaj7 > Edim and call it that because the next note in the bass would be F (Bb/F) So any clarification is greatly appreciated.
    Simplest thing is - that’s what you see. Look at enough charts and you’ll get a feel for what’s common and what isn’t.

    So this touches on a couple of points of theory.

    first I’d say, really it’s the bass. With dim chords there’s most often chromatic movement going on - usually a half step up or down to the next chord. As a result, there’s often a bassline implied by the chord symbols and if the aim is to make the chart work well for a musical performance there’s a reason why you would choose one and not the other (assuming there isn’t a notated bass line)

    as a side bar i would say there’s a lot of things in harmony which are the same but disguised by dint of having different bass notes, and therefore different chord symbols.

    for instance, Dm7 Fm6, F6 Fm6 and Dm7 Dm7b5 are all the exact same thing with different bass and you’ll see them all in standards. There are also very closely related progressions such as minor IV-I and backdoor. It’s good to learn all of these because then you can find ways to play the same voicings and lines and so on in apparently different settings.

    Second thing is that while dim chords can move up or down by semitones, in general we are used to seeing 7b9 chords move like dominants - which is usually to say up a fifth, or less often down a semitone. Not all diminished chords function like this.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Yes, always:

    C7 - C#o - G7 - E7

    But

    Dm7 - Dbo - Cm7 - F7

    Same chord, two different contexts, two names.
    So the progression that you often get in blues and rhythm tunes

    Eb Eo7 Bb

    On the face of it looks like the bass doesn’t move in the expected way but in fact it used to be

    Eb Eo7 Bb/F

    In classical terms this is called a converging cadence and the Bb/F is understood not as a tonic chord but a type of double suspended dominant chord, something called a cadential 6 4. We’d normally have

    Eb Eo7 Bb/F Fsus4 F F7 Bb

    in Bach or whatever

    In jazz this sort of context has dropped away and unless you are playing Dixieland or something the bass may not bother playing the F bass (although Ray Brown would have)

  16. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    first I’d say, really it’s the bass. With dim chords there’s most often chromatic movement going on - usually a half step up or down to the next chord. As a result, there’s often a bassline implied by the chord symbols and if the aim is to make the chart work well for a musical performance there’s a reason why you would choose one and not the other (assuming there isn’t a notated bass line)

    Second thing is that while dim chords can move up or down by semitones, in general we are used to seeing 7b9 chords move like dominants - which is usually to say up a fifth, or less often down a semitone. Not all diminished chords function like this.
    Well, that's the whole gig in a nutshell. Appreciate you!

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller

    Eb Eo7 Bb/F Fsus4 F F7 Bb

    in Bach or whatever

    In jazz this sort of context has dropped away and unless you are playing Dixieland or something the bass may not bother playing the F bass (although Ray Brown would have)
    This is interesting because, I think, I look at it the same way but play differently.

    When I try to aurally understand the role of a diminished chord in a progression, I try to hear it in terms of voice leading. Of course that's also how one would look at your example but I think I'm focusing on a different tritone. Here is what I mean:

    I consider each of the four tritone intervals in the diminished chord and find out which one connects to the target chord in a way that I like. Sometimes I need to look at a variation of the target chord for this to work. For example if the target is a major chord, the voice leading can be heard better in terms of one of the related minors as the target. Or if the target is a II-V, the actual target can be the V chord.

    If I apply that to the rhythm changes example, Edim -> Bbmaj7, the tritone I find is Db-G. Because I like how these notes resolve to D-F. So the voices, Db and G of the Edim, resolve linearly to the voices D and F of the BbMaj7 chord. After finding this out I can also analyze this also as A7b9->Dmin (one of the related minors of BbMaj) but the important thing is the identification of key voice movements.

    Of course the magic of the diminished chords is that you can find more than one interesting voice leading options and different analysis/chord-symbols maybe produced by each of them. I think the example you give is E-Bb tritone of Edim resolving to F-Ab of Fmin (or Bbsus), aka C7b9->Fmin.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 06-02-2022 at 03:49 PM.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by buduranus2
    Seems I've read that there is but maybe someone can shed some light on this. For example, if I play D7b9 > G (V7 I) or F#dim > G is there a reason I'd call it one or the other? I think I kinda see that in a different sequence it'd be diminished, for example in measure 6 of rhythm changes in Bb I play Ebmaj7 > Edim and call it that because the next note in the bass would be F (Bb/F) So any clarification is greatly appreciated.
    Thanks for asking the question. It helped me cement my thought process on this topic. Still, I am going to have to carefully read through it again, since that chord is used a lot in Jazz Blues, my current genre of study.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    first I’d say, really it’s the bass. With dim chords there’s most often chromatic movement going on - usually a half step up or down to the next chord. As a result, there’s often a bassline implied by the chord symbols and if the aim is to make the chart work well for a musical performance there’s a reason why you would choose one and not the other (assuming there isn’t a notated bass line)
    2nd this. This is the only difference I view the 2 as, assuming keeping the notes the same and not using different scales or extensions for the domb9. I just view the diminished as a dominant that resolves stepwise or as a passing chord instead of the standard up a 4th down a 5th of the domb9.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    first I’d say, really it’s the bass
    ...and how it interacts with the melody. How you indicate a chord on a chart conveys options to the bass player and any other instrument that might add a root or an inversion tone as an anchor. "Over the Rainbow" is a perfect example. The first two notes of the melody are Eb(4) and Eb(5) and the original chording is Eb Cm. The coolest substitutions I know of and use behind these two notes are Eb dim/maj7 Eb dim. If you write the Eb dim as a D7b9, most bass players and many keyboards will play a D, which (depending on who's playing it, how, and on what) can clash with the Eb in the melody. If you write it as an Eb dim, most will play an Eb, which reinforces the melody note. Skillfully done, either can work - but they sound quite different.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    So the progression that you often get in blues and rhythm tunes

    Eb Eo7 Bb

    On the face of it looks like the bass doesn’t move in the expected way but in fact it used to be

    Eb Eo7 Bb/F
    I know, but I'd also say that the ear hears the F whether it's actually played or not.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    In any case, a diminished chord is one thing and a dominant chord is another. A dominant chord with a b9 is just that, a dominant chord with a b9, not a diminished chord.

    They are two different chords. Just because some of the notes are the same doesn't mean they are the same. Otherwise you could say that CM7 is the same as an Em chord because the CM7 contains the notes E G B.

    In other words a major chord is the same as a minor chord. Complete nonsense.

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    In any case, a diminished chord is one thing and a dominant chord is another. A dominant chord with a b9 is just that, a dominant chord with a b9, not a diminished chord.
    Dude, you say this stuff as if people aren’t still arguing about this after hundreds of years lol. At the end of it chord symbols are …. Limited. Talking about chord symbols is … limited too. And figured bass, and functional analysis. This stuff comes from counterpoint really and counterpoint is approximated by chord notation - something exacerbated in jazz where people layer up chord subs and so on. But these moves go back to the 18th century and no one would have had a clue what these Roman numerals were about back then. Mostly they would have been interested in the bass and melody…

    The two things sound different and yet, also kind of the same. That’s the thing about theory; it always simplifies something to learn something. Chord voicings belonging to the same scale or mode don’t sound the same, even though CST treats them as if they do because it suggests interesting possibilities to do so. chords with the same functions don’t always work as well…. and so on. Are two chords in different inversions different chords?

    choose yes, argue with Rameau. Choose no, argue with Bach. These days I can see value in both views.

    Its only a model. In practice, all the the inversions do different things. You have to be a musician and sensitive to the idiom you are working in. Dim7 isn’t quite an inversion of 7b9 but it is often treated like it is. (I would say no too but that’s another story.)

    And yet mental models affect the way we play and what we play so it’s not true it’s only about the ears either.

    They are two different chords. Just because some of the notes are the same doesn't mean they are the same. Otherwise you could say that CM7 is the same as an Em chord because the CM7 contains the notes E G B.
    Well it sounds great to play it that way. Cmaj7 is a flipping weird chord actually at least compared to C6 or just C, once you go beyond the standard root position voicings.

    i mean
    x 7 9 x 8 8

    wut

    In other words a major chord is the same as a minor chord. Complete nonsense.
    You could argue with Jordan or Stephon Harris about that lol.

    In any case even looking at standard jazz theory around voicings etc Major seventh is not really major. it doesn’t behave exactly like a major. You can’t always use it the same way. That’s a big old lie to children they tell… and yet a lot of contemporary players get a certain sound treating it as if it is.
    Last edited by Christian Miller; 06-04-2022 at 07:00 AM.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    It would be easier to analyze if three things: function, feel and taste (mean personal preference) would be distinguished.

    Both chord creates tension and leads to resolution. This way they are functionally replacable, subst using jazz terms. Still must be controlled, revised by the players taste, in all particular situation. To answer the question, if they names are interchangable, first answer, why on earth would we want to do that? Just for creating a new naming issue for ourself? It just simpler to call them D7b9 and F#dim, and know they can function as subst. If we add, that the subst must be controlled by taste, and must serve some musical intention, the we are done, we eliminated the question, instead of creating a new dilemma.

    Regarding feel, way no. Even a chord bass note can alter the musical feel, mood, meaning. Similar way different inversions could have different expression.

    Taste: at the end of the day, the player can not be without his personal taste, his musical preference. There is always a musical context, and the player always must decide, if a subst, or a specific inversion sounds good to him or does not in that context. Always go for your own ear.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Yeah I mean there’s a million ways you can look at something. Jazz theory makes no sense to classical musicians for example.

    OTOH that’s at least in part because of the purpose of the theory. jazz musicians are looking to make music on pre written changes most of the time rather than harmonising a melody or writing something on a bassline. This is true even for Classical improvisers. The closest thing in classical music is improv on a ground bass - which is similar but not exactly the same thing as soloing on changes.

    And of course mainstream classical musicians don’t really do that anymore, rather theory is about analysing existing works, maybe writing new ones that’s their thing. So in this case the question ‘what do you play on a dim7 chord?’ is more what a jazzer would ask…

    In terms of the difference in classical terms - a dim7 chord is not a dominant chord per se and most likely to be used as an altered predominant in a cadence as the 7-1 bass would be considered weaker than 5-1.

    So it’s totally different. (Not touching on partimento etc) Jazzers don’t care about this aspect so much, I would say.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    interesting
    I’m starting to go towards the thinking
    that the inversion of the chord is
    important when playing the tune

    eg
    to make you feel my love (in Bb)

    6x876x
    5x356x
    4x356x. etc

    but when I’m practicing being able to improvise over those changes
    (or getting it ‘into the ears’ Hal Galper)

    i concentrate on the functions
    ie
    Tonic
    V chord
    V minor (or maybe ii V of VI or something)

    ive noticed that in modern popular songs
    the 1st inversion is really important to get right (for the root movement ?)

    but that might be just where i’m at right now

    any thought on that ?