-
+1!!!
Originally Posted by Spirit59
-
04-10-2011 09:48 PM
-
I understand how one could construe a phrygian scale over an altered dominant as effectively becoming a sort of hybrid because of the underlying / implied harmony. I'm just saying that one can mentally approach these things via a perspective of "parallel phrygian over dominant" and it can be very cool.
But in modern harmony, there are lots of examples of more traditional dominant harmony being subbed with maj7#5 type harmony, and many other structures conspicuous in their absence of M3 or b7 intervals.
-
Totally. Originally Posted by Spirit59
***
That MM sub stuff is a bit out of my knowledge unless it is a twisted ALT sub (for example G7ALT being replaced by the B(Cb)maj7#4#5 3rd MM mode thing - both from Ab MM. I don't mix true "major" with "dominant" harmony... as of yet.
Last edited by JonnyPac; 04-10-2011 at 10:08 PM.
-
Yes but Mr. Levine's method is to say, this chord and/or this note is problematic juxtaposed against this other chord and/or note; therefore, change keys, go to a mode of that key, and get this other chord and/or note. The implication is that the substitutions come from the structure of the scales and chords themselves, in this particular way -- IOW they didn't find themselves put together for purposes of voice leading. Originally Posted by Spirit59
So again, how did he get from G (a 2-5-1 in G, i.e. A D G) to Bb? If that is the is the wrong approach, it's Mr. Levine that's wrong, not me. It's his approach. It's what he says. If I had invented it, would I be asking how it works?Last edited by Ron Stern; 04-11-2011 at 01:11 PM.
-
Levine kinda sucks that way. Why no 2nd revised edition??? GRrrr.
-
One really simple explanation is modal interchange. Levine does not acknowledge that device AT ALL! Originally Posted by Ron Stern
G and Bb Major are actually G and G Minor parallel keys. Bb is the relative major of Gm. D Phrygian is the iii of the key of Bb. The iii is a sub for V7 as far as ML goes, though I explained to Spirit, the M3 is implied creating "Phrygian Dominant", etc.
-
Ron,
Decisions that are made in composition don't ever have to be theoretically justified or even explained. As I said, I haven't read ML's book, but I'm wondering - does he really say, "You must do x" and "You must not do y"? Or is it possibly your own perception? Even the most remedial theory book will always tell you that there are no hard and fast rules.
If your're having a problem with ML's book, by all means, drop it and grab another. How about Liebman's A Chromatic Approach to Jazz Harmony and Melody? (A personal favorite)
And like Jonny said, with modal interchange, you can do anything. Even the Beatles knew that you can change any chords' quality (eg. major to minor) at the drop of a hat.
-
Then what's the book about? Originally Posted by Spirit59
It's ever so much richer than that. He says that, and more, and less, and . . . well, you tell me. Originally Posted by Spirit59
"The Phrygian Mode and the Susb9 Chord"
I. The Theory --Key of C
Mode 3 of C is E Phrygian. There's said to be a problem playing E
Phrygian over Em7 because C is b6 of Em7 -- "highly dissonant."
This makes no sense. The notes of E Phrygian are the same as the
notes of C major. Many notes of C major are played over Em7. Indeed
the only one that's a problem, so far as Mr. Levine himself has
deigned to tell us, is C. So it's not the Phrygian Mode of C that's
the trouble, it's the note C, which is found in *every* mode of C.
So every mode of C is highly dissonant with Em7, to the same extent
as the Phrygian. Why pick on the Phrygian? Indeed, what's the
Phrygian aspect of anything here? The fact that Em7 is the third
chord in the harmonized C major scale? What's Phrygian about that?
Then, out of the clear blue sky: "The Phrygian mode is usually
played, not over minor 7th chords, but over susb9 chords." This
isn't theory, it's an observation. It might well be evidence, but
of what?
And that's the end of the explanation. All it says is, the note C
over Em7 is an avoid note, and "the" Phrygian mode is usually played
over "the" susb9.
1. *What* Phyrgian mode is usually played over *what* susb9?
2. What's the connection? You couldn't possibly say unless and
until you answer #1.
Perhaps some further part of the theory can be deduced from the
examples . . .
II. The Example (Figure 3-47, p. 49)-- Key of D, the key of the
root of the chord
We start in the key of G with a D7 chord (Fig 3-47 p 49). The fact
that this D7 chord is the Vb7 in a 2 5 1 in G might or might not be
relevant; Mr. Levine doesn't say. So we'll assume the only context
is a D dominant chord; and that the only relevant note is the root,
D. Already we're skipping over some major questions but we'll never
get anywhere if we don't.
He says, in describing the example: "The Dsusb9 chord is from the
Phrygian mode of the Bb major scale." This is the first piece of
information that might answer question #1. "The (x) Phrygian mode
is played over Dsusb9." But it doesn't matter because the question
isn't what mode is being played but how Dsusb9 came to be
substituted for D7. We *have* changed keys. That also doesn't
answer the question.
Anyway --
Applying the theory, mode 3 of D is F# Phrygian . . . wait a minute,
F# is not D. We're looking for a D chord, specifically Dsusb9,
because that's the chord in the example. Therefore, we're not in
the key of D; or the theory doesn't work; or the passage is not an
example of the theory.
III. The Example, Take 2 -- Key of G, the key of the example
Mode 3 of G is B Phrygian . . . wrong.
IV. The Example: start over, go backwards --
Where you gonna get a Dsusb9? From a mode that begins on D, anyway.
There's lots of modes that begin on D. What else must this mystery
mode X do? It must have sus4 and b9. Well, you can stay up till
midnight calculating and burning through the scratch paper but all
you're going to find is a mode that fits the bill. Then what? What
are you going to do with it? Construct a chord to use as a
substitution? Ha ha, sucker. You *started* from the proposition
that Dsusb9 was going to be the substitution. It was *given*. You
didn't derive the substitution from the theory. It's not a theory.
It's true you can construct a Dusb9 from Mode 3 of Bb, i.e. D
Phrygian. So what? You couldn't construct it from the theory.
1. Root of the chord to be subbed is D. If that's the key, the
third mode does not begin with D.
2. Key of the passage is G. If that's the key, the third mode does
not begin with D.
3. The third mode of Bb begins with D and as Mr. Levine says Dsusb9
comes from Bb. Why did we start with D? Because it was a D root
chord we set out to sub. How did we know to go to the 3d mode of D?
Because that's the mode that produces a susb9. How did we know we
wanted a susb9? Because that was given. But that's circular.
All he did was take the root of a chord and make a susb9 on the same
root. If that's all there is to it, you should be able to do it on
any chord, in any context, independent of key, chord progression,
voice leading, anything. All the recipe does is make a susb9 on the
same root. Period, the end. Tracing the susb9 back to someplace is
pointless because all you wind up with is what you started out with,
hours later.
Note: the theory proceeds from the premise that there is a clash
with a minor chord, and so a substitution may be called for. In the
example, by contrast, it is a dominant chord that becomes a susb9.
But to say minor or dominant doesn't matter is to say that the first
premise of the theory (". . . the tonic note is highly dissonant
over the iiim7 chord . . .") is irrelevant. Anyways, in the example,
we are dealing with D7 which is not the iiim7 of anything so the
clash of the tonic being the b6 of iiim7 is simply absent, and the
theory applies anyway. Some theory you got there, Mister. It erases
its own tracks like a skilled Indian scout.
He does say Susb9 chords usually function as V chords. Again, an
observation, not a theory. In my tests, they do function as V
chords. I'll have to take his word for it as to "usually."
I tried susb9 as a sub for IV in a I IV and that works. I tried an
all-susb9 2-5-1, i.e. Asusb9, Dsusb9, Gsusb9. That works also. Why
wouldn't it? The roots are the same. I guess the 3ds and 7ths
switcheroo is out the window, but hey. The 4th always wants to
resolve to the 3d -- what else is new. Speaking of the third,
remember that the sus4 now includes the third and good luck with the
voicings and the fingerings. Let's see here, 1 3 4 5 b9 . . . oh
wait, in this recipe, the sus4 *doesn't* include the third . . . the
theories are dropping like flies !
It sounds like the bottom line is: make any chord anywhere, anytime,
a susb9 (the old fashioned kind without the third) if you like the
way it sounds. If there's a reason why it wouldn't work in this or
that context, you could never tell from the recipe. That's not
really even a recipe. That's like saying add salt to anything if
you like the way it tastes. That's the recipe of salt. That's the
theory of salt.
-
Hi Ron,
Sorry but I'm having some difficulty in being able to tell which are excerpts from the book and which are your comments, so I'm a little confused....
-
I don't think he is wrong. He is explaining that D phrygian is the 3rd mode of Bb major: you play the Bb diatonic notes to get D Phrygian. He also is saying that many musicians use the Dsus b9 chord as a dominant chord,, in the key of G . It is another issue. Originally Posted by Ron Stern
The reason why this is so, I see it this way: think of Spanish music, for instance, when you have E7 going to A minor. You use A natural minor on both, which means you are using E phrygian and A aeolian.
This also works when going to A major: it is what we have here: Am Dsusb9, G maj.
Joao Pedro
-
I think there is a common confusion that the modes are used with the ionian key. For instance, when we talk about D dorian, we are in the key of C. This is generally NOT true.
-
Why do you use A natural minor on E7? Originally Posted by jonasfixe
-
Ron,
Are you familiar with the terms 'relative minor' and 'tonic minor'? The relative minor shares the key signature while the tonic minor only shares the root. Ami is the relative minor of C while it is the tonic minor of A. You will often see classical pieces that start in A major and move to A minor. (as well as pieces that start in C and move to A minor)
You can look at the other modes the same way. You have relative modes and you have tonic modes
ex. D dorian is the relative of C major but the tonic dorian of D
D phrygian is the relative of Bb but tonic of D etc etc
This is what get's a lot of people confused. Modes can function in a number of ways. For example you could play D phrygian against a Bbma7 and it will work . D is the 3rd of Bb. Or you could use D phrygian against some kind of D chord. usually Dmi7 but also D7sus4b9.
-
I think the term "parallel minor" is more accurate. Originally Posted by JohnW400
-
Yep
In music, parallel keys are the major and minor scales that have the same tonic. A major and minor scale sharing the same tonic are said to be in a parallel relationship.[1] The parallel minor or tonic minor of a particular major key is the minor key based on the same tonic; similarly the parallel major has the same tonic as the minor key, as opposed to relative minor (or major, where appropriate) which shares the same key signature. For example, G major and G minor have different modes but both have the same tonic, G; so we say that G minor is the parallel minor of G major.
-
True, but in this example they are only being used one way. Originally Posted by JohnW400
1. Make any chord into a susb9.
2. If you go up to the third degree of the scale that starts on the root of the original chord, start a the new scale on that note, then go to the third mode of that scale, then you can construct a susb9 that has the same root as the original chord.
What does #2 have to do with #1, and who cares?
As Kevin said way back when.
-
I don't think I would use the Phrygian to construct the chord. It really doesn't come from the Phrygian even though it 'fits'.
D Eb F# G A Bb (or B) C D are the notes in the chord. The F# is still part of the chord in as much as it was the note you suspended from. These notes belong to either G harmonic major or minor.
I don't know about what Mark L is trying to teach with this. As I said in another post. I never read the book.
Just trying to clear up the why of Phrygian for the b9sus4 and how a 2-5-1 doesn't require you to stay in one tone center for all the chords
-
I'm kind of with you here, Ron, but let's look at exactly what he does say. (It's not totally clear from your post.) Originally Posted by Ron Stern
P.48 - Under the heading "The Phrygian Mode and the Susb9 Chord" (I'm not going to quote it all.)
"This mode [E phrygian] appears as though it would be played over an E-7 chord. C, the b6 of E-7, sounds very dissonant against the chord, as you'll hear when you play figure 3-44"
[E-G-B-D chord in left hand, with a C in right hand, above the D].
"You usually play C on E-7 only in diatonic progressions such as III-VI-II-V (E-7, A-7, D-7, G7, in C major), where the C in the E-7 chord is played only as a passing note."
- IMO, that's confusingly phrased, because - if it's a passing note - the C isn't "in" the Em7 chord. He goes on:
"The Phrygian mode is usually played, not over minor 7th chords, but over susb9 chords." [his italics]
Now, that's an assertion. He says "is" - not "can be", or "should be". So we need evidence! (He does give examples of course, but they're less than convincing - see below.)
And again, it's a little confusing anyhow. It would make more sense to me to say it the other way: "a susb9 chord indicates phrygian mode". (I'm not saying I agree with that statement, only that it makes more sense to me that way.)
And what is happening if someone plays the C major scale over an Em7 chord in key of C? Is that not done? Obviously it is, sometimes.
So is that not "phrygian mode"? and if not, why not? (I mean, I know why not, but it would good to spell it out.)
Anyway, his examples begin (3-46) with an Absusb9 chord from Duke Ellington's "Melancholia" (1953). This is to show how Duke anticipated a lot of the so-called "new" sounds of 1960s jazz. Duke's Absusb9 resolves to a Dbmaj7. IOW, it seems to be functioning as a V7, albeit with an alteration - which he notates as A natural (not Bbb), fairly low, a semitone above an Ab in left hand (Db-Eb-Gb above).
ML says the "Absusb9 chord comes from the Phrygian mode of the E major scale". Whoops! (Actually he inserts a footnote excusing the enharmonic mismatch.)
But more importantly - and I take it this is your argument - where's the evidence that that's where the chord "comes from"? Certainly, with some enharmonic adjustment, the chord can be harmonised from the E major scale. But it can also "come from" the C#/Db harmonic minor scale. Or C#/Db harmonic major, for that matter. And seeing as this excerpt resolves to Db major, I'd say that was a more pertinent observation.
The A natural in the chord is a half-step fall from the Bb in the previous Absus chord (and is the only significant change from that chord) - it would seem to be a passing chromaticism on its way to an Ab in the Dbmaj7 - except ML doesn't notate the chord that way (there is an Ab, but an octave lower).
IOW, we simpy have a sus variation on a V7b9 chord, borrowed from the parallel minor. (We don't know how Duke would have thought of it, but I'd bet it was something like that.)
We haven't changed keys - unless you're saying ML is suggesting that by invoking Bb major? Originally Posted by Ron Stern
I agree, the question that should matter (to a theorist!) is why Dsusb9 is used as a V in G major.
IMO, ML has turned a piece of modal jazz thinking on its head. IOW, it may be that jazz players like Wayne Shorter used susb9 chords as harmonies in a phrygian modal context. (I think the evidence proves that.)
But that doesn't mean that all susb9 chords are necessarily phrygian! At least, not when they are clearly functioning as dom7 chords in key-based progressions. That's nothing to do with modal jazz.
That doesn't mean that ML's "theory" (shall we call it "advice" instead?) is wrong. Maybe phrygian mode sounds just fine over a V7b9 chord. IOW, Bb major scale used over Dsusb9 to resolve to G major. Why not?
Well, what we need is some clear examples of recordings where well-known players have used what is clearly phrygian mode (and not possibly part of another scale) in just such a situation. The great strength of ML's book - the way he supports his assertions, the apparent authority they give his "theory" - is the quotes from recordings. So what does he give us?
Fig. 3-47: Freddie Hubbard's line is simply chord tones: D-C-G-Eb-D. Could be D phrygian (Bb major). Certainly no other major scale mode contains those notes. But what about G harmonic minor or (less likely admittedly) G harmonic major? (There is an F# at the end of the bar, but only as an anticipation of the maj7 of the G.)
Figs. 3-48 through 3-54 are simply chords, or inconclusive solo phrases using chord tones.
Finally 3-55 (p.51) is a Miles solo from "Flamenco Sketches". This is clear D phrygian mode: but is of course a classic modal jazz tune. Apparently no susb9 chord, however, just a "D pedal point".
And that's it. ML has clearly not been able to find (in all his hugely extensive jazz listening) conclusive evidence of anyone playing phrygian mode over a susb9 chord! Presumably he just thinks it would be a cool idea - which is fair enough, but is hardly "jazz theory" in any important sense.
Another quote (p.51):
"Susb9 chords are often played in place of sus chords, dominant 7th chords, and II-V progressions. We'll get to this in Chapter 14, "Advanced Reharmonization". Also, a scale other than Phrygian is often played over susb9 chords, as you'll learn in this chapter's section on melodic minor harmony."
Well, he's shown us susb9 chords replacing V7s; but not the rest.
Again, note the use of "are often" and "is often". These are assertions requiring evidence!
I won't comment on the Advanced Reharmonization chapter, but the melodic minor section simply states that one can or would use the 2nd mode (phrygian natural 6) on a susb9 chord. There are no recorded excerpts given.
Well, to be fair, he does give examples from recordings. Maybe not enough to support "usually", but enough to demonstrate the concept. Originally Posted by Ron Stern
The problem is, however, that that undermines his phrygian mode idea! If a susb9 is functioning as a dominant, one would think it ought to be concealing a major 3rd, not a minor 3rd. IOW, it ought to be some kind of harmonic minor V chord.
(Of course, the fact that he doesn't go into the mechanics of functional harmony - outside sketching a few II-V-Is - means he doesn't confront that issue.)
It's all very well to take a susb9 chord from a modal tune and explain how it stands for phrygian mode. But it doesn't follow that a susb9 functioning as a dominant is a phrygian chord! That's pretty shoddy "theory", IMO.
ML doesn't say that a sus chord always includes the 3rd. He only says it can, and that it's a "myth" that it needs to exclude the 3rd. (p.46) Originally Posted by Ron Stern
He makes a good case (IMO) for adding the 3rd on top of a sus chord, but the implication (of course) is that it's a mixolydian sus: the 3rd being major. (And the 9th in those cases is major too.) True, he does only give one example from recordings: a Wynton Kelly chord, voiced F-Bb-Eb-G-A from bottom to top.
The chord is still a "sus" - in his estimation - because of the largely quartal voicing, and the overall sound of the chord. The optional 3rd on top is a decoration.
-
No, you'd use an A minor scale that has G# in it. But the thing is that in this context, the F# which isn't part of D Phrygian is not a chord tone, so you can actually play it as G Minor Natural, which contains the same notes as D Phrygian. Originally Posted by jonasfixe
-
Nice. Thanks Originally Posted by JohnW400
***
Another view based on parallel keys...
Vanilla ii V7 I in G Major is: Am7 D7 G
With the V7 we can sub shiz-tons of things! D7 D9 D13 D7b9 D7#9 D7ALT D13b9 and all the Ab7 tritone subs... It's dominant and it gets dolled up in jazz as usual. If Levine says susb9 functions as a weird dominant, Dsusb9 is just one more choice. It is of little to no importance that it is from Bb besides that it tells you what scale tones to play over it. It fits in with modal interchange like a glove.Last edited by JonnyPac; 04-12-2011 at 09:52 PM.
-
Jonny,
I'll have to look but I don't remember seing a lot of b9sus in major 2-5-1's. It is such a restless chord. It resembles the iim7b5 so much......
-
I don't use it that way, myself. ML says it resolves up a 4th (down a 5th) like a dom. He also says the MM version (2nd mode) does the same. Originally Posted by JohnW400
-
Yes, but
5 6 x 7 88 Ami11b5
x 5 7 888 D7b9sus
3 5 x 4 77 Gma7
Not a lot of difference between the A and thd D
BTW, Here's a version I like
D C Eb G A D 10 15 13 12 10 10
-
Just messin' around and I played a Gb9sus to a C Lydian type chord and it sounded really nice. I'm on my way out the door right but later I'll post the voicings.
(The Gb9sus's top voice is the root on the high E, 3rd fret, the C Lydian's top voice is the #11 on the 2nd fret of the high E)
-
That fits ML's big thing on sus replacing both the ii and V7. Like Am7 D7 unified as D7sus. Am7b5 and D7b9 can be Dsusb9. Originally Posted by JohnW400
Am7 Dsusb9 is nice major/minor interchange, I guess, whereas Am7b5 is all minor till the tonic. It's all good.
Reply With Quote
"Why Do The World's Best Guitarists Play On the...
Today, 11:50 AM in Guitar Technique