-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
This is an internet forum, after all. Not oral arguments.
-
07-31-2024 09:06 PM
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
I tracked down the video.
Citation not given! It does sound Bill Evansesque to me though I must say.
I’d have to listen to a load of Bill Evans and see if i can spot this sound. Which would be a terrible chore of course ;-)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
However the Eb bass keeps it from feeling fully resolved. If you have the last chord in root position it feels more conclusive.
But that said maybe the appeal is that it doesn’t sound as conclusive as a V-I. The move in jazz even fro the early days has been to subvert functional harmony like this for something more colouristic, especially in the music of the 60s.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Re: the Maj7#5 chord, the only Bill Evans tune I know of where he uses it is "Bill's Hit Tune" but it's not functioning as a dominant chord, but as a subdominant or substitute tonic chord.
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
It’s also a classic bass player move to pedal V on something like the A section of rhythm changes.
Anyway I have no trouble hearing what Chris Whiteman is doing as a sub for II V I
Really a II V I is exposition-conflict-resolution, three act story structure. The conflict is not meant to be ‘nice’ and the nature of the conflict and its artful resolution is what makes a story interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
I had a jam with a friend today and he mentioned the B—>C thing as a Coltrane thing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
CM9#5 > FM7#11: x-3-0-1-0-0 > 1-x-2-2-0-0
Does that sounds like a V7-I resolution to you?
To me it sounds more final if you reverse the progression like say:
FM7#11 > CM7#5: 1-x-2-2-0-0 > x-3-2-1-0-0
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
You have to use yer lugholes to work that out I’m afraid.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
This sounds like one of those things jazz players say when it starts to sound too much like there aren't any rules.
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
@ Christian Miller
maj7#5 will be my new fav for a bit.
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
That Bmaj7#5 is (enharmonically) all the pretty stuff from the Ab melodic minor scale. So that’s not really a particularly adventurous example for G7, even.
I don’t use it much just because the arpeggio's kind of hard for me to play for some reason, and I’m lazy. So I usually opt for the Fm7b5 or AbmMaj for some of the same stuff.
-
Eb G B D is right out of Cmelmin.
Per Mark Levine, it is the same chord as every other melodic minor chord, which means it's interchangeable with a Cminmaj7, D7susb9, F7#11 etc, up to Balt.
So, that group of notes is going to have a lot of usages. As G/Eb or Ebmaj7#5, I can hear it easily as leading to a Ebmaj7 (and have used it in similar harmony), because that occurs in a tune I play, Serrado by Djavan.
It feels like a delay in the resolution of a ii V. It sort of takes the place the V chord. In that tune, in the original key of F, it's Gm7, Fmaj7#5, Fmaj7, E7sus and eventually Am7.
Anybody have more examples of maj7#5 usage?
-
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
Dbmaj.7#5 > Cmaj.7 sounds like V7 to I (Db is a b5 sub for G7) but I don't hear Bmaj.7#5 > Cmaj.7 functioning like that.
rpjazzguitar, Fmaj7#5 & Fmaj7 have only one note that differs, can't see it serving as anything other than a passing chord.
-
I mean what it comes down to is ‘do I like the way it sounds?’ (Or not)
So I don’t really acknowledge a difference between chord subs and playing over chords. It’s kind of the same stuff and any voice leading idea can be expressed as a line. You need to be able to express harmony in your line - be it the vanilla changes, something related or even something unrelated - rather than simply playing something that simply ‘fits’ with the chords. (Which is pretty much what Peter has been saying.)
It’s also worth bearing in mind Bill Evans was not ‘playing over chords’ most of the time as he was most often the sole harmonist on his records (with one notable exception being his records with Jim Hall)… and neither is Chris W in that video. (And tbf neither do I on most gigs…)
Tbh the ‘playing over chords’ discourse I think stems from an unholy fusion of backing tracks and chord scale theory. The former is a standard practice tool for most beginner to intermediate players (though maybe less so advanced players?) and the latter emphasises taking soloing choices from pitch sets suggested by written chords on a one to one basis.
As a result it seems people often have it in their heads that the changes in the lead sheet must be pedantically realised at all times in terms of scales and arpeggios, and subs that ‘fit’ this or that scale according to some jazz manual.
while this is certainly a useful practice activity, it’s not how the music actually works, where often entire chordal movements are superimposed on top of others. So you end up in a similar place such as a Tonic function chord, but the sax and piano may take different routes to get there.
Additionally a real playing situation with a comping instrument they can listen to what’s being played and *comp*liment (geddit?) what the soloist is doing using the power of not being an Aebersold play along. (Conversely if you have someone who sees comping less as an opportunity to engage in musical dialog and more as an opportunity to play their favourite lush voicings you will find your options more constrained.)
The recorded history of jazz is full of moments like this - and of course moments where the chords and the melody (or even the two hands of a pianist lol) ‘clash’ harmonically and resolve - and it doesn’t even stand out to the casual listener.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkLast edited by Christian Miller; 08-02-2024 at 04:34 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
In Serrado it is held for several beats and is clearly heard. Seems important to the harmony of the tune. I don't know if it qualifies as a "passing chord" or, if not, what it should be called. It's at the end of the A section of Serrado in the version I recall.
The take away is that if you have a Gm7 going toward F, you can play A/F aka Fmaj7#5 between the Gm7 and the F. I find it to be a useful sound and, for whatever reason, it was easy to hear and identify. So, it got right into my playing.
As far as substituting maj7#5 for dominant, it seems to me that Mark Levine's approach is relevant. Since it's a part of the melodic minor scale and Levine says all melodic minor chords are the same chord (which seems to work well when I do the subs) -- then:
Cminmaj7
D7susb9
Ebmaj7#5
F7#11
G7b13
Am7b5
Balt
If all these are the same chord and you're using one of these voicings as a dominant, then you can substitute Ebmaj7#5 for any of the others.
Of course, that's on paper. When you try them some of them are more ear twisting than others, but they all can work. But, the proof is in making a song sound good.
As far as Bmaj7#5 going to C, it's different but I can get it to sound okay in a simple ii V I. Per Levine it's out of Abmelmin and therefore is the same chord as Galt.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
x x 5 4 4 6
Aka G7#9b13 (no 7th)
Also - don’t sleep on the shell voicings. These all have a Bmaj7 (no 5) upper structure
3 x 3 4 4 6
3 2 1 3 x x
x 8 9 8 11 x (G7b13#9 rootless)
I daresay you’ve played some of these before?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by Mick-7
Do we know whether Charlie Parker had a Bdim7 written on a leadsheet somewhere every time he played that instead of G7 in a solo? No. Do we care? Also no.
That Bmaj7#5 thing is a common sound. People use it. Not sure what the difference is if they wrote it.
Dbmaj.7#5 > Cmaj.7 sounds like V7 to I (Db is a b5 sub for G7) but I don't hear Bmaj.7#5 > Cmaj.7 functioning like that.
An Old Man's New Semi-Modular Rig - 1st...
Today, 06:52 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos