-
Are there any guidelines for reharmonizing ii chords when they are in a ii-V-I? I find lots of information on the V chord but not so much on the ii. Is the ii generally left alone? What about adding a 6 or a 9?
-
03-01-2012 07:30 PM
-
A m7 m9 and m11 can all work.
-
Well, it depends on context. You don't want to stomp on what is going on in other parts or a soloist.
That said, one of the most common variations on the ii chord would be to make it a dominant 7 chord. What you end up with is V7 of V.
-
The IV can substitute well for the ii.
-
There's a minor 7 chord every minor 3rd from the diminished scale.... not that I can get it to sound good... just saying!
Could also do a tritone substituted turnaround, although that's really just replacing the V chord again. You do get an extra minor 7 chord out of it though.
-
Another thing: you can split the ii measure in half and do the circle of fifths thing and play vi7 ii7 instead. To make the vi chord more interesting, you can make it a dominant chord, as well as adding the b9 for a diminished sound.
-
Reharmonizing is a term I've heard that is generally used to describe putting different harmony (chords) under an existing melody, whereas substitution can be just swapping chords and it doesn't have to necessarily support the melody (for example if you are substituting chords in your own solo, or while comping for somebody.)
Originally Posted by Merton
But adding tensions and extensions is a different concept from either reharmonization or substitution. In your last sentence you seemed to imply that you were asking about what tensions or extensions can be added to the ii chord.
if ii in C is Dm, then we have the notes D, F, A.
Going further in thirds (staying diatonic to the key of C) we get C as the b7, E as the 9, G as the 11, and B as the 6/13.
in a ii V I, the ii is commonly voiced as m7, so the C note generally included. It also serves an important purpose - to resolve down a half step to the B note of the G7 chord.
The E (9) is also commonly/freely included, but if you are playing the m9 chord under a melody watch out that the E doesn't clash with any Fs in the melody. Sometimes this can sound fine, but sometimes the b2 or b9 clash of an E with an F can be unpleasant.
The G (11) is the 5th note of the key of C, serving no real harmonic function over any of the three chords (Dm7 G7 Cmaj7), yet being a chord tone in the latter two, so I hear it as equally consonant and unobtrusive over all three chords. After all, ii7 to V7 is pretty much the same thing, functionally, as V7sus4 to V7, so an 11th over the m7 is pretty natural sounding, at least to me.
Now the B (13/6) is the only point of contention within the standard extensions because it's the third of G7 and the leading tone of the key. You can add it to the ii, but it will strongly imply a sound that is very similar to G7, sort of "giving away" the next moment in harmony. This can be done in tasteful, interesting, or even bluntly functional ways, but it's just something to be mindful of as it also can weaken the function of the profession, especially if the chords are moving quickly.
In a ii V I generally do not play the 13th over the ii chord unless if the ii chord lasts for four or more measures (making it a bit more of a modal situation than a ii V anyway, like in "Invitation") or if I am intentionally trying to imply the V chord early, as so much of the meat of a ii V progression is the sound of the root of the key down to the seventh of the key. There are definitely ways to make it work. Here are some voicings that could be played if you were playing with a bassist:
Dm13 - x x 5 5 6 7
G7b9#9 x x 6 4 6 6
Cmaj13 x x 5 4 5 5
The B note "voice leads" down to a Bb, the #9 of G, then down again to A, the 13 of C. So in this case the tension still increases before getting to the I.
-
Jake,
Great post. One small point and an addendum.
"The G (11) is the 5th note of the key of C, serving no real harmonic function over any of the three chords"
The G is the 2nd most important note in tonal hierarchy, the V-I movement is the common basis of major and minor keys as well as a chord tone in C.
It is strong enough in the key to provide gravitational support system to many periphery harmonies (Abma7, DbMa7#11, Bb13, B7+, Fm9 etc.)
Addendum to m13 as a II chord
B to Bb to A as you presented (Dm13, G7b9#9, CMa13 )
B to C to C (Dm13, G7sus, C)
B to C# to D (Dm13, G7#11, CMa9
Standard C to B resolution is important to know. The general game is getting back home and there are many paths to get there.
And as a last minute attempt at saying something useful in regard to the original question:
Focusing on the movement of voices can lead to solutions that don't occur as easily when thinking of just the chords.
-
Triple Box technique:
Dm7/G7/C
is our ii - V7 - I
tritone sub for the V chord is very common.
That gives us:
Dm7/Db7/C
You can also tritone sub the ii chord.
Abm7/Db7/C
So, using the triple box technique, you could sub the ii chord with the tritone sub and get:
Abm7/G7/C
I could get way sillier with subs, but these ones are pretty simple to apply.
-
More on this please. I'm aware that TS is common with dominant seventh chords... min7th? What say you, Jake; bako? Originally Posted by GodinFan
-
Ah yes, good point about the strength of the fifth of the key. I knew "no real harmonic function" wasn't the best choice of words. I meant that in terms of fear, the 11th on a iim7 chord can be used freely - I can't think of a context in which it would be disrupt the function of the progression or conflict with a tonal melody. Originally Posted by bako
-
Even though I have a feeling the original question was actually about extensions over a ii, since the discussion has moved more towards substitutions for the ii in a ii V, here are some ones I feel are common, mainly for soloing purposes but sometimes comping. I'll admit I use them more for soloing and less for comping. These definitely can be used for arranging and composing as long as they fit the melody.
Dm7 - - - | G7 - - -
D7 - - - | G7 - - -
Ab7 - - - | G7 - - -
Abmaj7 - - - | G7 - - -
F#7 - - - | G7 - - -
Ebm7 - Ab7 - | G7 - - -
Ebm7 - Ab7 - | (Dm7) - G7 - (Stablemates)
Dbm7 - Gb7 - | (Dm7) - G7 - (Moment's Notice)
There are many more that could all arguably be useful, some even if the function isn't clear, or even if it is:
Fm7 Gb7 Bmaj7 D7 |G7 - - - - (Countdown)
A list for possible substitutions of the entire ii V progression would be much longer.
-
Pretty standard to do as part of a ii V which was how it was presented above. I don't think of Abm7 to G7 to C as terribly common but I might just be blanking on any tunes that have them, and I'm sure there are some great solos that substitute the ii V for those changes. Abm7 to Db7 to C is common, I think Wes and George Benson would play with that idea often. Originally Posted by whatswisdom
-
Yes, but both of these sound very weak, and are a poor substitution when one needs a strong feeling of resolution, IMHO. Something to keep in mind. Originally Posted by GodinFan
-
Well, you know what they say...there's nothing wrong with subtlety, as long as it's obvious. Originally Posted by Gitarguy
-
Shrug...I hear those as being pretty strong, but it is all about context. Originally Posted by Gitarguy
Dm7 Db7 C is a common, traditional, functional resolution. It's generally considered to be quite strong.
-
Not to argue semantics, but that is not functional harmony. Chords progress down by fifth. Hence ii-V-I; a short-cut for I-IV-viidim.-iii-vi-ii-V-I. Originally Posted by JakeAcci
BTW - How do you make the little diminished symbol?
-
Originally Posted by Gitarguy
Dm7 - Db7 - Cmaj is *not* functional harmony? Is the Db7 not functioning as dominant in this example?
I've never heard of anyone declaring a progression suddenly transformed to non-functional via a simple tri-tone sub....but I could wrong....
nah...
What say you good people?
-
Traditional classical harmony is not the same as common practice jazz harmony. subV7 is part of the basic functional harmonic language of jazz.
-
Yes, but let's not pretend it's functional harmony. There is a difference between "chord progression" and "chord succession". Although the term "chord progression" is commonly used to mean the series of changes, it is factually an inaccurate use of the term. Originally Posted by JakeAcci
-
I can't see how that is anything other than academic semantics. No personal offense intended, I just don't understand the purpose of your comments.
-
Seems to be alott of discussion over a basic movement into a V chord. To my ear, the ii chord is just an extension of the V. The best substitute is to simply remove it and consider other approaches to the V using dominants. D7 and its tritone. The choices are few, no?
-
It's absolutely functional. Originally Posted by Gitarguy
A "chord succession" is a "succession" of chords that is non-functional, comprised of unrelated / tenuously related chords, no ii-V-Is in sight.
Branding a simple ii7 - subV7 - I progression a "chord succession" isn't appropriate as it doesn't fit the description.
This is still a jazzzzzz board, yeah?
-
That is arguing semantics ........Not to argue semantics, but that is not functional harmony. Chords progress down by fifth. Hence ii-V-I; a short-cut for I-IV-viidim.-iii-vi-ii-V-I.
Oh God a derail alert
(anyway IV to vii is a tt not a fifth down so belt up)
-
Right on spirit ......... it sooo is functional Originally Posted by Spirit59
It's absolutely functional.
A "chord succession" is a "succession" of chords that is non-functional, comprised of unrelated / tenuously related chords, no ii-V-Is in sight.
Branding a simple ii7 - subV7 - I progression a "chord succession" isn't appropriate as it doesn't fit the description.
This is still a jazzzzzz board, yeah?
Reply With Quote
Seeking
Yesterday, 03:50 PM in For Sale