What is the Voice Movement that defines a I7 - IV7 - V7 Jazz Blues Progression?

[AlsoRan]

I understand the movement of thirds and sevenths that defines the 2-5-1 movement but what is the theory behind the voice movement in a 17-IV7-V7 Blues progression? Is it just the "restlessness" of the Dominant 7 chords since they are not chords of rest like Major chords?

As always, thanks in advance.

[wolflen]

AR..

blues, often called a simple form, is far from it...it has its own harmonic "rules" (some may even disagree on that term) ..even the definition of "blues" varies widely by different interpretations of the style..I would not even begin to compare it to "diatonic harmony" rules..as they don't apply..it like blues is the true rebel in music and even after all this time and many practitioners of the form..some of them excellent jazz players..there are still "new" sounds that come from this "simple" form..

all that could be said in answer to your question is.."this is what some people play when approaching the IV7 chord in a blues progression" .. you would need to actually study the style of specific players to get your answer..but it would be just for that one player..BB King and Jimmy Smith are going to be playing very different voicings on the same "progression"

over most chords in a blues progression there are hardly any "you cant do that" in the genre...just about everything is allowed..diatonic, chromatic, symmetric, synthetic and of course pentatonic chords AND scales are used in some progressions...and they WORK!!..the WHY they work has puzzled some of the best musicians and theorists for a very long time..it comes to the basic element of the style itself...it just FEELS good..

so if you read an analysis of why certain notes/chords work in a blues progression..as Donavan sang in "young girls blues" (which was not a blues) "..is one persons opinion of moonlight.."

[StanG]

Steve Kimock has discursed on this topic at length many times in the Playing and Technique section of the Gear Page.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I understand the movement of thirds and sevenths that defines the 2-5-1 movement but what is the theory behind the voice movement in a 17-IV7-V7 Blues progression? Is it just the "restlessness" of the Dominant 7 chords since they are not chords of rest like Major chords?

As always, thanks in advance.

3rds and 7th movement defines blues somewhat as well. From the I7 chord, 3 and 7 resolve up halfstep to the IV7 chord. From the I7 chord, 3 and 7 resolve DOWN halfstep to the V7 chord. More to it in practice, but it's there...

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

3rds and 7th movement defines blues somewhat as well. From the I7 chord, 3 and 7 resolve up halfstep to the IV7 chord. From the I7 chord, 3 and 7 resolve DOWN halfstep to the V7 chord. More to it in practice, but it's there...

T'other way 'round, eh?

[fumblefingers]

What is the Voice Movement that defines a I7 - IV7 - V7 Jazz Blues Progression?

I'm not sure that I understand the question. The progression is defined by root movement and chord quality, isn't it?


Granted, it's different from a traditional I-IV-V cadence in that all chords are dominant.

But in terms of voice movement or voice leading, you can voice lead the progression in a number of ways. Try a few on the guitar. Start with a C7 in root position, drop 3 voicing from the 6th string, then experiment with different ways to voice the F7. For the G7 just go up two frets from the F7, for starters.

You can add tensions and altered tensions as well. 9ths and 13ths, and altered 9ths and 13ths, especially on the V chord. No need to limit yourself to seventh chords.

Many variations are possible.

[matt.guitarteacher]

T'other way 'round, eh?

Ha ha. Yes, in the northern hemisphere, anyway. ;-)

Let me see.

Should be: From the I7 chord, 3 and 7 resolve DOWN halfstep to the IV7 chord. From the I7 chord, 3 and 7 resolve UP halfstep to the V7 chord.

[KirkP]

Building on what Matt said... I think the heart of blues is that 3rd/7th tritone interval moving around with the changes.
Whenever the chord drops a fifth, the tritone interval moves down chromatically. With the right subs of dominant and diminished chords, the tritone interval can move chromatically downward six steps, which means the two tritone voices have hit all 12 tones of the chromatic scale. That's a lot of fun to solo through.
The tritones are definitely restless and the tonality is often ambiguous (especially if the bass line is walking), which is what blues is all about to me.

[NSJ]

One very easy trick-playing the guide tones on strings 4 and 3 -- on a dominant seventh chord, they will always form the same shape (a tritone ), regardless of whether you are going from 3rd to 7th or 7th to 3rd .

Therefore: ascending the circle of fifths (G7-C7-F7-Bb7) means going DOWN the neck stepwise on strings 4 and 3 with the exact same tritone shape. Descending circle of fifths (G7-D7-A7-E7 etc ) means going going UP the neck stepwise on strings 4 and 3 with the same tritone shape.

Can't get more uncluttered than that . Want to throw in a Maj7 or m7 guide tone? These only form a perfect fifth (3rd to 7) or a perfect fourth (7th to 3rd).

Can't get any more simple than that .

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

There was a good article about changes for Jazz Blues (was it Matt?). Anyway, I really like this idea (x2) for the first four measures:

If you are, say, in F, play:

|F7|G7|A7|B7|Bb7...

or

|F7|Eb7|Db7|B7|Bb7...


The whole step pattern is so obvious it provides its own structure, and it takes you a little bit out but it delivers you right to the door of the IV.

EDIT: Also, I'm always looking for ideas than can span choruses. With this, in one chorus you could use the ascending pattern and in the next chorus the descending.

[docbop]

Been seeing this topic popup many times over the years and I keep waiting for the Theory Nerds to dropping in with an explanation, but still waiting. No matter how original and hip we thing some new music is, the old classical cats did it already, and we aren't aware because some theory writer back then gave it some weird name. What the latest I came across a Picardy Third. I think I like Jazz terms like Backdoor II-V better.

So has to be some traditional theory explanation of a song based all on dominants, must be some Barbarian 7th or something in Beethoven did?


For those that might not know Bach was a badass improviser and Figured Bass was the Real Book of its day.

[JonR]

wolflen has it closest, IMO, in that attempting to apply classical-(or even jazz-) style analysis to blues chords is a category error.
In classical and jazz harmony alike, chords have functions: we recognise them by either their quality (maj7, min7, dom7, dim) or their scale degree, and that leads us to expect movement in certain directions, according to "common practice" in those genres. And naturally most composers will exploit those expectations to surprise us occasionally, to make music more interesting.

Chords as used in blues are best not seen in that light. At least, while the V7 chord can still be seen (and heard) to have a dominant function, the I7 and IV7 don't.
The I7 will have a brief secondary dominant function before it moves to IV, but only then.
The IV7 has no dominant function at all
And typically (in blues outside of jazz ) the V7 tendency is subverted, weakened, by inserting the IV7 before the I.

In brief, the reason the I chord has a b7 is because the scale does.
And the reason the IV chord has a b7 is because the scale has a b3 (sometimes).
(Miles Davis expressed this most economically in All Blues, in which a G blues sequence goes to Gm7 instead of C7.)

IOW, the 3 chords attached to blues are a kind of crude "European" attempt to dress a modal, essentially African, melodic vocal form in harmonic "clothes" - and rather restricting clothes at that. Fixed pitch instruments like pianos can't play the variable blue 3rds. So they get round that by using a major 3rd on the tonic and the minor 3rd as the b7 on the IV. That becomes a habit for all instruments, even those like guitars that can get round it by bending notes.
That also represents a common feeling in blues vocal melodies that the repetition of the first line tends to have a more insistent or darker tone than the first line. The lowering of the 3rd (and the b7 to 6) seems to hint at that quite well (if crudely).
We all know that blues riffs and melodies don't transpose up a 4th when the IV chord arrives. They stay much the same, except the 3rd may flatten - and sometimes (if they already have a b3) they'll stay exactly the same.
The fact the bass moves up a 4th is incidental, a result of the decision to place a IV chord there. (A decision Miles realised wasn't necessary. It still sounds like blues if you just switch the chord from major to minor.)

However, when jazz musicians got hold of blues (I mean the ones in the days before the modal consciousness that arose in the late 1950s), they tended to be bored with the crudity - in fact the practical absence - of a harmonic scheme. They couldn't resist applying classical harmonic practice to it. They'd change the V-IV to ii-V, to create a classic perfect cadence. Worse, they'd apply all kinds of other secondary dominants and back-cycling.
So the blues was all dressed up in the best classical finery, so you could barely recognise it any more! Harmonically, of course, it was then much more "interesting" - presenting a suitable challenge for the jazz musician keen on displaying his creativity and education. But its original modal subtlety had necessarily been lost. (Of course, good jazz musicians still respect the essentially vocal nature of blues, and its swooping melodic practices; but generally, for them, that's not enough.)

[wolflen]

JonR..

one of the best overviews of the blues structure...your insight into Miles..ALL BLUES..is on target..I have some hot discussions on this tune.."is it really a blues.." etc..(it opens with a classic blues cliché riff and has major and MINOR blues devices in it..its Miles Davis showing off-so to speak-of course its a blues)

and yes Parker & Co took the basic raw harmonic (and melodic) structure and "dressed it up" with chord cycles and other ribbons & bows..and that changed the definition for quite some time..not that the form was discarded in it true form..Monk and many others reminded us of that..

It was little wonder that the 60's brought British blues players to remind us of our great American treasure and dusted off many of our great blues legends. I am so grateful I got to see Albert King live many times..and pay tribute to him whenever I can..ahhh the power of three notes

yeah we can analyze the structure.. b3rds and 7ths and all..but its the "magic" that the raw feel of the form gives .. it makes some scream going into that IV chord..its that raw emotion that has to be felt by the musician or it seems flat..so to speak..

again .. a tip of the hat to you

[KirkP]

Guitarists tend to focus on chords and forget that in its early forms blues was primarily about melody, rhythm and telling a story. Blues wasn't necessarily 12-bars, and when harmony was added it wasn't necessarily the I, IV, V patterns most of us think of today. For example, they'd often stay on the I chord through the whole tune. So folks that want to understand the essence of the blues should probably go back to the earliest recordings (before Robert Johnson) and learn those melodies and phrasings.

[JonR]

Another way of thinking of the IV7 is as a Idim7 (common-tone diminished). IOW, not just a lowering of the M3, but the b7 too, and even the 5 to the blues b5.
After all, we all know about chromatic approaches (on the I chord) to 3, 5 and b7 - those are common melodic effects. The IV7 just combines them into a chord!

(This is just one "answer" among many. IMO, part of the appeal of blues is it resists easy analysis of this kind. It's simple, but slippery... )

[marcw]

While I agree that attempts to apply Western classical music theory to blues are sometimes misguided, it is interesting to make connections between the harmonic and melodic practices used in both styles. In Western classical music theory the IV7 chord is sometimes used without a dominant function in the minor mode. It occurs when the melodic ascending minor scale is used and a raised sixth note of the scale is employed. Chords from the minor mode are also sometimes borrowed and used in the major key through a technique called mode mixture. The progression IV7-I can, therefore, be viewed through the lens of Western classical music theory as a plagal progression employing mode mixture.

In Western classical music theory, mode mixture sometimes produces a "blues note" as well--such as when b7 in the melody is played over a major V chord in the minor mode (e.g. descending form of the melodic minor used in the melody and ascending form of the melodic minor used in the harmony).

The progression V-IV-I also sometimes occurs in classical music. The IV chord is viewed as a voice leading chord inserted between the V and the I that delays (but does not necessarily subvert) the resolution from V to I.

[Nate Miller]

ok boys, here's the story....stability and instability of harmonic structures is relative. In "The Craft of Musical Composition" Paul Hindemith lays out classifications of harmonic structures that proceed from the most stable to the most unstable and he points out that when you start at a relatively unstable harmony and proceed to even MORE unstable harmonies, the original only relatively unstable harmony starts to sound like a resolution.

Now Mr Hindemith took a lot more time and space to lay that idea out, so the best thing to do is read the work. It is translated into English and on sale at Amazon for cheap

so it doesn't matter one little bit that they are tonic 7th chords. A dominant seventh chord on the tonic is still home base

The harmonic functions of sub dominant and dominant are all there as well

and it all has to do with relative harmonic stability

Arnold Schoenberg wrote a book about the structural functions of harmony that would be a good read for anybody interested in this sort of stuff. He basically is saying that the functions of harmony are the tonic, subdominant, and dominant relationships...all of which are present in our blues progression

anyway, the best theory stuff to read about this sort of thing are the treatises from the first half of the 20th century

standard schoolroom theory only gropes at the subject

[christianm77]

There's more overlap between the blues and other jazz tunes then people sometimes think. Many of the standard progressions you are likely to come across are essentially embellishments of the I IV V blues thing.

I think the 2-5-1 in seventh chords is actually not the most important progression in jazz. I think movements between I, IV and V are much more important, and this is a central part of the blues. This comes from the common statement 'don't play the ii chord' that I have heard from Barry Harris, Peter Bernstein, Hal Galper and many others.

As a student of bop/swing I've come to view the 7th as up for grabs over any major chord. Studying the music of Lester Young, Bird etc shows that the role of the seventh was very fluid over major chords on all tunes. Given accompanists of the time were likely to play chords without a seventh in - such as sixth chords - it makes more sense. For example, this is the way I would typically play a jazz blues. I don't think of the first chord as 7th, for example.

The bracketted chords are typical passing chords and you wold hear them in a Ray Brown style walking bass line:

Bb6 (Bb7/D) | Eb7 (Eo7) | Bb

or

Bb6 (Bb7/Ab) | Eb/G Ebm | Bb

But basically it is just Bb6 or Bb7 going to Eb6 or Eb7 and coming back again.

Whether the chords are major or dominant really doesn't matter. This is in fact true for all standards, and it's a useful thing to know if you want that Kansas City Swing/Early Bop vibe on non blues progressions.

Backcycling root movement (2-5-1, 3-6-2-5-1) is beautiful thing, but I see it as an embellishment of underlying harmony. But II-V's are really just fancy V's.

It seems that Peter Bernstein has similar ideas from the video floating around on the forum, for example. It's a liberating way to view harmony.

Bbmaj7 Gm7 | Cm7 F7 --> Bb | F7

Now, let's take a look at Rhythm Changes:

Bbmaj7 Gm | Cm F7 | Dm7 G7 | Cm F7 |
Fm Bb7 | Eb Eo7 | Bb G7 | Cm F7 |

Can easily be boiled down :

Bb | F7 | Bb | F7 |
Bb7 | Eb7 | Bb | F7 |

Where you are free to play an A or an Ab on the Bb chords. Rhythm tunes aren't far away from the blues, and you should be able to play changes on blues, and blues on rhythm changes. By extension you have the same options over a lot of standards with turnaround A sections. You can also use those simple chords as a resource for interesting melodies rather than having to chase the changes all the time.

You can slot in passing chords as you see fit...

I daresay lots of people will weigh in to poo poo this as 'simplistic' but I didn't make this stuff up and frankly it's their loss - I'm heavily influenced by Barry Harris's teaching as well as what I see in the transcriptions I make.

If you want to really understand the link between folk blues and jazz, I recommend the paying close attention to the playing of Lester Young, Charlie Parker and Charlie Christian.

[Nate Miller]

"lots of people will weigh in to poo poo this as 'simplistic' but I didn't make this stuff up" - and no, you didn't just make that up. That is EXACTLY how I got taught by bebop piano players.

In fact, the ii-V is probably given too much emphasis in modern jazz education. There's too many instances where Charlie Parker was clearly only playing over only the dominant chord to claim that the ii-V is elemental. In fact, it really is just the result of a suspension

This simplification of rhythm changes you gave

Bb | F7 | Bb | F7 |
Bb7 | Eb7 | Bb | F7 |


is the exact distillation I had taught to me when I was a teenager, and to this day THIS is what I'm playing over when I play a rhythm changes tune

nice post, Chris

[Arpeggio]

The way I see it is that they are functioning secondary Dominants, up a 4th or down a 5th. The IV7 and V7 chord to each other aren't of course, so the I7 is important for context.

I7 to IV7 = The 3rd of the I7 goes a semitone up to the Root of the VI7, while the b7th goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the IV7

IV7 to I7 = The 3rd of the IV7 goes up a semitone up to the b7th of the I7, while the Root goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the I7

V7 to I7 = The 3rd of the V7 goes a semitone up to the Root of the I7, while the b7th goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the I7

I7 to V7 = The 3rd of the I7 goes up a semitone up to the b7th of the V7, while the Root goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the V7

[Nate Miller]

The way I see it is that they are functioning secondary Dominants, up a 4th or down a 5th. The IV7 and V7 chord to each other aren't of course, so the I7 is important for context.

I7 to IV7 = The 3rd of the I7 goes a semitone up to the Root of the VI7, while the b7th goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the IV7

IV7 to I7 = The 3rd of the IV7 goes up a semitone up to the b7th of the I7, while the Root goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the I7

V7 to I7 = The 3rd of the V7 goes a semitone up to the Root of the I7, while the b7th goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the I7

I7 to V7 = The 3rd of the I7 goes up a semitone up to the b7th of the V7, while the Root goes down a semitone to the 3rd of the V7

harmony has 3 functions: Tonic. Subdominant, and Dominant

all 3 functions are expressed in the standard blues progression. That you have a I7 on the tonic does not matter at all

That IV is a dominant 7 doesn't matter either

in the voice leading, the 3rd and 7th are a tritone in a dominant 7 chord, so that triton moves down a half step for the IV and up a half step for the V. In each case, the 3rd resolves to the 7th and the 7th to the third

You are doing the right thing in looking closely at the voice leading, but generally speaking its best to forget about the root (and everything else, really) and pay attention to the motion of the 3rd and 7th

its the blues, so being really pedantic about the classroom theory is going to be counter productive. It really is as simple as I-IV-I-V-IV-I

[Arpeggio]

harmony has 3 functions: Tonic. Subdominant, and Dominant

all 3 functions are expressed in the standard blues progression. That you have a I7 on the tonic does not matter at all

That IV is a dominant 7 doesn't matter either

I have to take it that the above (Blues in general) is a separate subject from the below (Dom7 blues) because the tritone is in the Dom7 chord.

in the voice leading, the 3rd and 7th are a tritone in a dominant 7 chord, so that triton moves down a half step for the IV and up a half step for the V. In each case, the 3rd resolves to the 7th and the 7th to the third

You are doing the right thing in looking closely at the voice leading, but generally speaking its best to forget about the root (and everything else, really) and pay attention to the motion of the 3rd and 7th

So forget about the root note.

Apart from being interesting what is the importance of this movement, vs Tonic, Sub & Dom and / or Functioning Secondary Dominants, both of which pay attention to the root notes? This is what I would really like to know.

its the blues, so being really pedantic about the classroom theory is going to be counter productive. It really is as simple as I-IV-I-V-IV-I

I-IV-I-V-IV-I would be paying attention to the root note.

[dasein]

If you want to understand where the blues comes from, forget about dominant seventh chords, secondary dominants, and functional harmony in general.

That's probably a bit extreme, since jazz blues playing sort of skirts the line between functional harmony and traditional blues. But if you want to understand where the blues COMES FROM... it ain't European functional harmony.

It's derived from the overtone series, which is why great blues players are always reaching for notes "between the piano keys" (as Muddy Waters put it).

[Nate Miller]

Well, its always good to remember that music is hard and tricky. so yes, the functional relations are paying attention to the root, you are right about that.

The reason why I said to just pay attention to the 3rd and 7th in the voice leading is because the bass player has the root covered, so you want to have the 3rd and 7th on your D and G strings, use the B and E strings for your extensions, and don't play anything on the low E an A strings. You can't help but sound hip if you do it like that.

You can really follow that same voice leading principle anytime you play with a bass player

so maybe I should have said why I said what I said

[AlsoRan]

Well, its always good to remember that music is hard and tricky. so yes, the functional relations are paying attention to the root, you are right about that.

The reason why I said to just pay attention to the 3rd and 7th in the voice leading is because the bass player has the root covered, so you want to have the 3rd and 7th on your D and G strings, use the B and E strings for your extensions, and don't play anything on the low E an A strings. You can't help but sound hip if you do it like that.

You can really follow that same voice leading principle anytime you play with a bass player

so maybe I should have said why I said what I said

Fareed Haque's course, Comping Survival Guide, on TruFire goes into detail with your philosophy for comping. It has you focusing on those 3rd and 4th strings with plenty of examples of building chords around the 3rds and 7ths that lie on these strings. He has moving voices on the first and second strings, throwing different tensions here and there and comping riffs.