-
I'm starting to go thru Mickey Baker's jazz books again - 40 years later. I'm finding a chord substitution I can't make any sense out of. He substitutes a Bbmin7 for a Gdim in the key of G. Standard is G/Gdim/Amin/D7 and he substitutes GMaj7/Bbmin7/Amin7/D13b9b5. This looks like a I-VI-II-V progression, and Gdim is kind of related to Emin7 - but where does the Bbmin7 come from?
In the next exercise, Mickey uses the same progression, but uses a G#dim instead (G/G#dim/Amin/D7). Still he uses the Bbmin7 as a substitute for the G#dim (GMaj7/Bbmin7/Amin7/D13b9b5).
Is this a typo? Can Bbmin7 be used as a substitute for both Gdim and G#dim? Or did he intend for G#dim to be used in both places? These exercises are at the very beginning of book #1.
Thanks in advance.
-
05-26-2013 08:41 PM
-
Time to write out the notes in those chords and check the resolutions.
I consider it less a sub and more another option on a turnaround...I also consider the G#dim "standard," as it's a clear sub for E7b9
-
Question kinda comes out of nowhere, but it's not really bad sounding. Somewhat of an East of the Sunny vibe. II-7 of a tritone sub? It's not uncommon. I never know what the context of instructional books is and I don't have one of those. Sorry if this is just a waste of cyber space.
The progression does work on a number of levels. But a typo it may be. If somebody calls you on that change while you play it on a gig, you can always claim it was a typo that sounded good to you. Play it convincingly and they won't ask.
David
Hey I'm just curious. That is a G dim you meant and not a G#dim right?Last edited by TH; 05-26-2013 at 09:38 PM.
-
These are all variations on the basic turnaround. Most commonly the Gdim would be called a Bbdim (same chord, different inversion) i.e. G/B Bbdim Am7 D7
The bass movement makes the progression work here. From here it's not hard to see how the Bbdim could become a Bbm7. Its the same root movement with only minor tweaks to the chord function.
Also the Bbdim can be thought of as an A7-9 and the preceding G/B as an Em7.
The other common diminished chord to link the G and the Am7 is the G#dim. This also gives a strong bass movement. i.e.
G G#dim Am7 D7
Here the G#dim can be switched out for the E7-9 giving a I-VI-II-V progression. The Bb-7 can still work as a substitution here if the melody allows it. Theoretically, the b5 of E7-9 is Bb.
Honestly, in a classic turnaround such as this one, there are so many variations possible. The only limitation is that you stay within the style of the arrangement and not step on the melody. That is, if you're playing in an older style, don't go too far "outside".
-
I agree with the above.
A lot depends on what we understand by the term "substitution". What is the new chord supposed to do? Perform the same function? Sound as close to the original as possible? Share at least 2 notes? Or merely offer a different kind of transition between two chords?
In this case, he seems to be substituting Bbm7 for two different original chords (dim7s a half-step apart). Bbm7 obviously doesn't perform the same function as both original chords; but it does make a good transition between G and Am7 - just think of Gmaj7 as Bm/G and the way Bbm7 works is pretty obvious.
IOW, it's not really anything to do with either Gdim7 or G#dim7, both of which work a little differently (although Bbm7 shares 2 notes with each).
As setemupjoe suggests, there are many possible variations on a turnaround like this, and it's good to look the big picture. Essentially what's happening is a move from I to V7; that's the basic "outline", the fixed points*. The Am7 is itself an addition, a "pre-dominant" embellishing the V7. There are then all kinds of games you can play with chromatic voice-leading between G(maj7) and Am7.
Gdim7, G#dim7 and Bbm7 are 3 possibilities for passing chords, each with their own set of voice moves: combinations of half and whole step moves (up or down) and shared tones. There are other possibilities, and the only limitation (again as setemupjoe says) is melody and style: what fits in that sense, as well as a purely voice-leading sense.
* In fact even the V7 can be substituted, eg by the tritone sub. In fact, in this case "D13b9b5" can be seen as Ab7#9#11 (it's all the same notes) - so with "Bm/G"-Bbm7-Am7-Ab7#9 (and then back to G of course) you're obviously looking at a string of (mostly) half-step descents.
-
Originally Posted by TruthHertz
Yes, the book has a Gdim in the first instance and and G#dim in the second. I can understand a Bbmin7 for the G#dim as both are alterations of G7, but the Gdim doesn't fit at all. I am leaning towards typo.
-
Thanks for the replies. This is valuable information I will hang onto. Originally Posted by JonR
This is the beginning of a beginner book. I just can't imagine pushing the theory envelope out so far as to use a Gdim following a GMaj7 in a simple II V I progression. He uses the Imaj7 to I#dim in all other instances I found in the book, and that makes all the sense in the world. I'm going to consider it a transcription mistake (it's a Kindle version) so I can move on.
-
I think Baker wasn't as much concerned the users of the book dig into the theory behind the examlles as he was concerned with the beginner getting his hands on some common moves.
I don't have my copy of Baker with me, so I forget the context, but I like Gmaj7-Gdim-Am7-D7b9 as a turnaround...
-
It isn't really a guitar beginner's book, only a jazz beginner's one. Originally Posted by flyingace
They're two deceptively similar things which aren't really the same. If G#dim is related with G at all, it's a G7b9 without the root, as people have told you, but Gdim is still a chord of G. So in fact it is less far out than the G#º. And the minor third and flattened fifth of the Gº resolve beautifully down to the root and third of the Am chord while the root of the G becomes the seventh of the Am - this is classic stuff, almost classical.I just can't imagine pushing the theory envelope out so far as to use a Gdim following a GMaj7 in a simple II V I progression. He uses the Imaj7 to I#dim in all other instances I found in the book, and that makes all the sense in the world.
No, it's definitely not a transcription mistake or a typo. If you can't get your head round the theory, it might be a good idea to put the theory to one side (theory isn't MB's strong point, after all), but you'll benefit from playing and practising his examples.I'm going to consider it a transcription mistake (it's a Kindle version) so I can move on.
-
No it's absolutely not a typo. Both forms of the diminished are commonly used and should be learned. In fact, I have found the Gdim is more common in older styles such as dixieland turnarounds. Originally Posted by flyingace
A prime example of both forms in one song would be S'Wonderful by Gershwin. The first two A sections use these changes.
Eb ///|////|Edim ///|////|Fm7 ///|Bb7 ///|Eb///|////||
The last A section uses a different diminished.
Eb ///|////|Gbdim ///|////|Fm7 ///|Bb7 ///|Eb///|////||
Also in Almost Like Being In Love by Lerner and Lowe the original (and much superior chords IMO) are
EbM7 ///|F7 ///|BbM7 ///|Bbdim ///|Cm7 ///|F7 ///|Bb ///|Bb7 ///||
Which unfortunately has been homogenized by fake books into this:
Cm7 ///|F7 ///|BbM7 ///|G7 ///|Cm7 ///|F7 ///|Bb ///|Bb7 ///||
(EDIT) One last musical example is The Sheik of Araby by Ted Snyder. In the first 8 bars it uses these changes.
Bb ///|Bdim ///|Cm7 ///|F7 ///|Cm7 ///|F7 ///|Bb ///|////||
In the next 8 bars he does this.
Bb/D ///|Dbdim ///|Cm7 ///|F7 ///|Cm7 ///|F7 ///|Bb / Dbdim /|Cm7 / F7 / ||
Please don't discount the Idim. It is very important and thanks to the real book and other misguided publications, it's been sidelined and largely forgotten as a passing chord.Last edited by setemupjoe; 05-27-2013 at 01:21 PM.
-
Guys, I made a mistake in my evaluation. I see now that the 'old' sequence was GMaj7/Gdim/Amin7/D7. I can explain the Gdim in this case as a tritone substitute for G7 (C#dim or C#7b9) which leads to the Amin7
Now, this leaves me with the 'new' sequence of Gmaj7/Bbmin/Amin7/D7b9b5. What leading function is the Bbmin7 playing in this case?
-
You didn't believe me when I said it fits in as a II-7 of a tritone sub, you know G#7? that's Ab7 enharmonic. Originally Posted by flyingace
Gmaj7/Bbmin/Amin7/D7b9b5
GM7 would be your tonic
Bb- (or Bb-7) would fit into the turnaround in a space where D7 tonality could be tritone subbed with Ab7. In that context, the II-7 of that Ab7 would be Bb-, and you could imply, play or play an Eb7 to take you there. Or not.
A-7 would be your II-7 as you come back "inside"
D7 would be your V7
Play it, see what your ear tells you. Does that make any sense?
DavidLast edited by TH; 05-28-2013 at 10:12 PM.
-
But it isn't. The tritone sub for G7 is Db7 (C#7) - not C#dim. Originally Posted by flyingace
Gdim7 is the same notes as C#dim7, of course, but is as different from Db7 as it is from G7 or Gmaj7.
Gdim7/C#dim7 = G Bb Db(C#) E
G7 = G B D F
Db7 = Db F Ab Cb
I see one note in common between Gdim and G, and one in common between G/C#dim and Db7. One shared tone (and 3 different ones) does not make for a subsitute!
(Dom7s for which Gdim7 could be a sub are: A7, C7, Eb7, F#7. Not G7 or Db7.)
IOW, tritone subs are not simply about a chord whose root is a tritone away. They are about chords which share a tritone.
G7 and Db7 share their 3rd and 7th (F-B, F-Cb); that's what allows the substitution, because it's the essential tension that resolves to the E and C in a C chord (or, going the other way, to Gb-Bb in a Gb chord). That's in addition to the chromatic bass move Db-C.
You'll notice they're also the same chord type: dom7s.
In any case, while G7 can resolve to Am, it's not the kind of cadence where a tritone sub is usually applied. (The tritone certainly works the same way, but the Db note sounds odd.)
It's already been explained that Gdim is a common chord (traditionally) between Gmaj7 and Am7. (In my experience, it often has a Bb bass, so one might call it Bbdim.)
As I said earlier, Bbm7 is not (IMO) a functional sub for Gdim. It's a different chord type and only shares 2 tones (although that's better than one
). It's simply an alternative transition - as I would call it - between Gmaj7 and Am7.
Look at these shapes: Originally Posted by flyingace
Gmaj7 Bbm7 Am7
7-----6-----5----------------
7-----6-----5-------------------
7-----6-----5-------------------
5-----6-----5-------------------
-------------------------
-------------------------
That should answer your question... (The "leading" could hardly be plainer.)Last edited by JonR; 05-28-2013 at 06:55 AM.
-
I agree I am wrong about the C#dim. It is a C7b9, not a C#7b9.
It's easier for me to think of the Bbmin7 as the II and Eb7 as the V of Ab7 (II-V-I). With the Ab7 being a tritone sub for D7. At least it's an explanation for the movement that fits within my (limited) preconceptions about harmony.
Knowing this, it isn't hard to then explain the GMaj7/Gdim move since Gdim is also a Bbdim, and as was mentioned above, not a big stretch between Bbmin7 and Bbdim.
-
The Gdim is also a Eb7-9 so you can see the II-V relation to Bbm7. Originally Posted by flyingace
You can think of the progression this way:
Bm7 E7 Bbm7 Eb7 | Am7 / D7 / |
The GMaj7 becomes a Bm7 which then becomes a II chord allowing the E7. The Bbm7 and Eb7 then become side steps on the way to the eventual II - V of Am7 and D7. You can also see the Bbm7 and Eb7 as flat fives of Em7 and A7 which would give you a classic cycle of fifths progression.
Now cherry pick that Bb-7 out of the above progression and drop it into your original progression instead of the diminished and it doesn't seem so out of place.
GMaj7 / Bbm7 / | Am7 / D7 / |
-
Easier? Originally Posted by flyingace
Ah! You're looking for circle-of-5ths root movements (5th down or 4th up)! And therefore subs that would fit that scenario. Originally Posted by flyingace
That's well and good, and is nomally a good and revealing strategy. (And setemupjoe has demonstrated an interpretation of that kind). But it's not always necessary.
My view (which I find always simplifies any chord movement or sub) is: look at the voice-leading. Tendency tones, guide tones, whatever. Half-steps have the strongest tendencies (down or up), and downward scale moves (half or whole steps) are also quite strong.
When we have circle-of-5ths moves between 7th chords (especially tritone subs or dim7 subs), what's happening? They are simply creating half-step moves, voice-leading, usually in a downward direction, usually involving half-steps. That's how these sequences work. We employ tritone subs because they give us additional half-step descents.
Root movement in 5ths (down) is one thing (with a "natural" sound); but stepwise descents, especially half-steps, are equally "natural" (as a gravitational move) and much more clearly audible.
So a logical view is to see those voice moves as the nitty-gritty - the real explanation. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
That's why, for myself, I see no need for further "explanation" of the Bbm7 other than that its an obvious chromatic step inserted between Bm/G (Gmaj7) and Am7. It's staring us in the face. Why complicate it?
For all the subtlety of setemupjoe's string of ii-Vs, it strikes me as a hugely roundabout way of "explaining" the Bbm7. I actually think it obscures the function of it (although adding the dom7s does make a more sophisticated sequence).
Yes, Gdim7 is also Bbdim7, but it's still a stretch too far between that and Bbm7. A shared root is not enough to make a sub, as I mentioned before (well, not IMHO anyway). Even though they also share a b3, the half-step difference between the other tones gives them a very different character and (therefore) function. Originally Posted by flyingace
After all, would you say a Gmaj7 makes a good sub for Gm7? I hope not. But they also share two tones (including the root), with the other two a half-step different.
So although some subs do share two notes (with the other two different) - such as the tritone sub - it matters which two notes they are.
IOW, looking to Bbdim to explain the Bbm7 is looking in the wrong direction. Bbm7 might be "replacing" the Bbdim, and it certainly performs an alternative transitional move. But it isn't a functional substitute, because it's a very different sounding chord. Bbm7 actually makes a much more direct transition (even a more crude one) because of all those half-steps.
This is all just my personal perspective of course - one that I've evolved through 47 years playing music, and at least 20 studying theory. I don't claim that length of time gives me a special authority (there's lots I still don't know), just that it's become an organic process.
IMO, we all use theory in whatever way makes the best sense of music from our own experience. This is just mine. YMMV.
Last edited by JonR; 05-29-2013 at 06:30 AM.
-
Just to keep the education going, I'll offer that simple chromaticism isn't adequate as an explanation for harmonic movement. The reason I say that is because if that were true, than ascending chromatics should also work. In this case, using Abmin in front of Amin instead of Bbmin. It doesn't work. And I think the reason it doesn't work is because it doesn't fit into the cycle of fifths in any reasonable way.
For me, there needs to be some framework or structure for chordal movement. Otherwise, it seems like I'm just guessing.
Reply With Quote
How is the Steve Howe 175?
Today, 05:54 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos