Ipanema Bridge

[ragman1]

it felt like I barely had to do anything compared to wood-shedding where every mistake feels like it needs to be addressed.

But in the shed is where it counts. Without that no one really knows where they are when it goes outside.

[ragman1]

Thanks! It’s cool I was doing something right.

Sorry, Allan, but no, you'd simply been affirmed in your conclusion. Even though you'd also said you weren't certain about anything. The subject hadn't really been explored at that point.

What Roberoo said was very important. The C#m7 wasn't really making the grade. His suggestion made the C#m7 sound more like an AM7 (with a C# bass) which was much better aurally.

[AllanAllen]

Where did my other comment go?

[ragman1]

It's a mystery. Try the last one, previous page. I quoted from it.

Ipanema Bridge

[ragman1]

Look, the point is that there was nothing particularly wrong with your subs. The underlying harmony in the bridge goes

• GbM7 - B7 (B7 is the IV7 of Gb)
• AM7 - D7 (same thing but Jobim subbed the AM7 with its vi chord, F#m7. You subbed it with its iii chord, C#m7. It's okay but, personally, I thought it didn't quite cut it, it sounded a bit thin to me. Roberoo suggested raising the 5th to A which made it sound fuller, more like the AM7 again, that's all)
• Bbm7 - Eb7 (same again. To my ear that wasn't too bad although maybe the same idea applied)

It's probably a fuss about nothing but it depends how particular about sounds one wants to be. If you're happy with your subs and they're working well with the piano, etc, that's fine, it's your show. But it did sound as though you were inviting critical comments.

[ragman1]

Tell you what, here's your subs done the way I do my own stuff. I know the quality's horrible but, believe me, it shows up the sounds like nobody's business. Definitely my own included.

Cast aside any bias you might have and tell me honestly what you think about the C#m in particular.

[AllanAllen]

I just went back over all the examples The #5 take in post 15 is the best I think. If you play the root on the G string it’s the same shape as G#M7 right? xx7654 A C# E G# wait that’s minor 6?

[ragman1]

I just went back over all the examples The #5 take in post 15 is the best I think. If you play the root on the G string it’s the same shape as G#M7 right?

Nearly :-)

Yes, you're playing the same chord shape as the GbM7 (not G#) and the root is on the D string (not the G string). And you'll be using that same shape for the AM7 and the BbM7.

xx7654 A C# E G# wait that’s minor 6?

No. The notes may be the same, albeit jumbled up, but it's definitely not a C#m6. You'll be led astray thinking like that. It's an AM7. Stick to that.

[ragman1]

Why don't you just play F#m9 and Gm9 per the music and save yourself all this brain damage?

xx2224

xx3335

[Bobby Timmons]

Gotta watch out for that brain damage lol.

[Lionelsax]

[ragman1]

I saw that when it first came out. I like Neely a lot but don't let him confuse you. The song isn't really weird, it's just been messed around a lot.

If anyone's interested (and doesn't already know) there's a Bossa site written by real Brazilians (!). Here's their Ipanema page. Pass your mouse over the blue chord symbols...

Garota de Ipanema Chords by Bossa Nova Guitar

Much more fun :-)

[Lionelsax]

I saw that when it first came out. I like Neely a lot but don't let him confuse you. The song isn't really weird, it's just been messed around a lot.

If anyone's interested (and doesn't already know) there's a Bossa site written by real Brazilians (!). Here's their Ipanema page. Pass your mouse over the blue chord symbols...

Garota de Ipanema Chords by Bossa Nova Guitar

Much more fun :-)

Yes it's fun !
Now I understand why you're so confused if you mix sharps and flats in your head.

[ragman1]

Incidentally, I don't play Ipanema in Db. If you start on the Eb, second string, it's too low. If you start on the 11th fret, top string, it's too high. So I don't play it in Db. Which is a shame because the chords are fun.

[Lionelsax]

Incidentally, I don't play Ipanema in Db. If you start on the Eb, second string, it's too low. If you start on the 11th fret, top string, it's too high. So I don't play it in Db. Which is a shame because the chords are fun.

Sing it and it will be alright, Db is the original tonality, I learnt it like this when I was 14, I played it on the alto with a tenor score so it sounded like Gb !
I think my sax teacher used this score to play it on the alto saxophone because his pianist used to play all tunes only on the black keys.

[AllanAllen]

Why don't you just play F#m9 and Gm9 per the music and save yourself all this brain damage?

xx2224

xx3335

I was trying to make it easier on myself. I can't even remember why I thought it would be easier at this point. At least I got to hurt a few other peoples brains along the way

[mr. beaumont]

If you'd like to get really confused, here's Beato playing it in Db but naming the chords like Ab half the time...what a fucking mess.

[AllanAllen]

Beato and Neely aren't for me.

[ragman1]

I was trying to make it easier on myself.

I know :-)

[pauln]

This bridge is not weird, it's beautiful.
Neely's video is what is "far weirder",
and I haven't looked at Beato's take.

It's three pairs of chords, and there's
no apparent issue with the second of
each pair; all agree these are 7/9/13?

The first chord of the first pair is GbM7
or enharmonic F#maj7, all agree here.

It is the first chord of the second and
third pairs that provides the confusion.

Now, I think things go off track when
attempting to put m7th chords there,
rather than maj7th chords rooted on a
minor third up. So the problem here's
the melody line is the second under
the minor third of the m7th chord, so
a half step apart! With the major 7
chord a minor third up, so the melody
note is the major 7... very nice. Maybe
people, who are correct major and its
relative minor are the same pitch set,
are trying to extend that to the sound
of the m7 and maj7 versions of those
producing a same kind of equivalence?

I'm also not getting why people aren't
noticing that the three pairs are kinda
all strictly isomorphic; identical changes.

Gbmaj7 -> B13
Amaj7 -> D13
Bbmaj7 -> Eb(13)

[Degranulator]

No, it's a C#m7 with the 5th(G#) on the fourth string sharpened to A.

Attachment 98266

No, it is F#m11, and Amaj9/C# , or even B13sus4, or sure, call it C#m7#5 if you want. But the bass is or should be playing F#m so it is still just F#m7 . Or you can play it as a ii-V pair. You might want to try lifting off the E on the second string and just barring across C#, (A) , BD#G# for a F#m13(or B13) color too. Along those lines you might substitute Amaj7#11 for the F#m7. And bass could play A as root tone etc etc.

Going back to your C#m7#5 idea, the problem is you haven't any support for calling C# the root, where as there is a complete Amaj triad spelled out 3 R 5. F#m is the relative minor of Amaj and C# is the 5th of F#m. The relative minor, vim7 = Imaj6. A stronger relationship than the iiim7.

[AllanAllen]

Huh, Jimmy Bruno did it the way I started with, with 3 major 7th shapes in the bridge. I wasn’t expecting that.

[lawson-stone]

Here it is possible to conceive that all three change pairs as relatively "the same", where in hearing maj7th for the first chord of each pair the melody lead note becomes the maj7th of all three, and hearing the 13th for the second chord of each pair makes available if needed the little background line that descends from the 13th.
Conceiving is not the same playing; I may actually play it quite differently depending on the situation, but I will probably hear it like this
F#maj7 -> B13
Amaj7 -> D13
Bbmaj7 -> Eb(13)

This is how I always think of it and play it.

[ragman1]

Jimmy always reminds me of Einstein :-)

[pauln]

This is how I always think of it and play it.

ragman1's link post #38 to the Bossa version (Db) has it that way.
Three pair of maj7 to 7 (13 if one includes the secondary melody)