#9 b5 anybody???

[princeplanet]

Of all the altered chords, this is one I never see, or play. Does anyone use this chord? Does it get used in any tunes or common reharms for tunes?

Further, does anyone have a neat way to conceive of all their altered chords? This is mine:

Ground zero for anything Dominant for me is the rootless Dom9th chord (m7b9 or m6th- whatever...).

So for every inversion (drop 2, drop 3, all string sets etc) just altering these shapes gives me most things I need, so:

B D F A - G9

B E F A - G13

B DbF A - G7b5

B D# F A - G7#5

B D F Ab - G7b9 (Ab Dim7)

B D F A# - G7#9

B DbF Ab - G7b9b5 (C#7)

B D#F Ab - G7b9#5 (C#9 rootless)

B D#F A# - G7#9#5 (C#13 rootless)

B DbF A# - G7#9b5 (C#13 no 5th)


Pretty basic, I know but it gets me out of trouble, or does it? I feel as though there's things I'm missing, like exploring 5thless voicings which may be easier to play or just sound better?

[yaclaus]

I transcribed Jonathan playing a F#7#9#11

x.9.8.9.10.8

So one can definitely use it. I don't have a strict method to altered chords, one way is multi use voicings I have a few Pdf's with them, check it out.

[PMB]

Try 7#9b5 in place of the half-diminished in a minor ii-V-i progression for a more altered sound:

B7#9b5
x21231

E7#9
07678x

Am9Δ7
x06500

[JonR]

Of all the altered chords, this is one I never see, or play. Does anyone use this chord?

Well, it represents the tritone sub perfectly.
G7#9b5 = Db13#11

x-4-x-4-6-6 could be either, and resolves to C6 very nicely. Adding the G makes it a little more dissonant of course (3-4-x-4-6-6, or x-4-5-4-6-6), and arguably a less useful voicing. (And a Db13#11 including the 5th too is even more of a handful: 4-4-5-4-6-6 - awkward sounding too.)
The problem is getting both the major 3rd and b5 into the chord. Eg, x-x-5-6-6-6 is a nice chord, arguably a partial G7#9b5, but really just Gm7b5 (Bbm6).

Here's another nice voicing: x-x-9-10-11-9 (Db13, or rootless G7#9b5). Take that to x-x-10-9-10-10.
(As 3-2-3-3-2-x, though, G7#9b5 seems too muddy; so it depends on register.)

In general I agree - it does seem the least practical of the altered dom7 voicings, ar least for guitarists.

[Reg]

Yea with out having some type of connection, your kind of just throwing changes at the wall.

There's a lot to this conversation, lots of layers. And your going to need to get your ears out of basic functional harmony to have a chance etc..

On a easier note...

The most useful voicing I use, (in general the spelling is one of the easiest methods of implying organization... the use of #5 basically say's there is none)

X X 3 4 4 6

G7 b13#9
Db7#11
F-7b5

Any chord from Ab melodic minor

[SeanZ]

I don't get that voicing as Db7#11? I can understand it as Db9/13 - wonder if Reg mistyped?

[JonR]

I don't get that voicing as Db7#11? I can understand it as Db9/13 - wonder if Reg mistyped?

"7#11" is a generic symbol, covering any kind of lydian dominant voicing. (And "9/13" is redundant btw; "13" covers it, implying inclusion of an optional 9)
You're right the #11 is missing from xx3446, but that wouldn't usually matter. If the chord was going to C, Cm or Eb (or anywhere but Gb), then a #11 is implied.

Likewise, as Fm7b5, xx3446 includes the 11th (optional extension) and omits the 3rd. Again, context would imply the Ab (as an F7sus chord would not generally have a b5 ).

(I'm sure Reg will correct me if I've misunderstood him, or if indeed he did mistype!)

[christianm77]

No thank you, I'm trying to give them up.

Oh go on then. Just one.

[christianm77]

What is Omvendinger?

[princeplanet]

No thank you, I'm trying to give them up.

Oh go on then. Just one.

Don't worry, they're definitely not addictive.... and I give up, what is Omvendinger?

[princeplanet]

I don't get that voicing as Db7#11? I can understand it as Db9/13 - wonder if Reg mistyped?

Yeah, Db13 (no 5th). I think it's also a common move to go up a m3rd with that chord before resolving- essentially E13 going to either C or Am ( maybe Eb or Cm?). I think there's a Barry Greene clip about it somewhere...

Anyway, in trying to think of ways that #9b5 sound good to my ears, I found one that actually has #9b9b5, it's the "Hendrix" chord a m3rd up, So: X 10 9 10 (11-9) X , X 13 12 13 (14-12) X to C or Am. This is a fairly common sound too, right?

[dortmundjazzguitar]

an omvendinger is obviously an omkeering.

[christianm77]

an omvendinger is obviously an omkeering.

I think it means 'chord inversions?'

[dortmundjazzguitar]

there you go. did you also spot the chord in question?

[fep]

I do this

E7#9 x7679x to

Bb13 (or E7#9b5 ) 5x679x

[princeplanet]

I do this

E7#9 x7679x to

Bb13 (or E7#9b5 ) 5x679x

You mean B string "8" in first chord, and thick E string "5" in second chord, no?

If so, then yeah! Cool usage, very Bossa!

[jordanklemons]

I prefer to organize my chords with some sort of triad in the upper (or lower) structure.

If we're thinking C7#9b5, we could organize it as an Ebmin triad over a basic C7.

Some basic voicings might be

X32342

or rootless (triad/tritone)

X12342

I haven't actually picked up my guitar to try any of these. Might take some funny fingerings to get those notes.

8X8.11.11.11

X78876

It's definitely not the most commonly used altered chord, but can be a cool sound for sure. I personally prefer to organize all of my altered dominant chords by thinking of them as triads. It helps create some very different and unique sounds that otherwise can sometimes get whitewashed over if we just think unaltered vs altered. Plus, knowing the triads that define each altered chord gives some great melodic ideas about how to improvise over different types of changes without getting caught too deeply in scales... which again... can whitewash over a lot of different unique sounds.

[princeplanet]

@ Jordan and fuzzthebee, you guys seem to use 5 note chords exclusively. Do you guys feel like you couldn't express your ideas as well with 4 notes or less?

[jordanklemons]

@ Jordan and fuzzthebee, you guys seem to use 5 note chords exclusively. Do you guys feel like you couldn't express your ideas as well with 4 notes or less?

Most definitely. I already shared my entire thesis on developing harmony in this new approach somewhere on this forum a few months back, so I won't go through the entire process again because you can just read it if you want.

But the whole thing started while I was studying with a vibraphonist/pianist who pointed out the simplicity of these altered and more advanced chords on the keyboard (1-3-7 in the left hand, an upper structure triad in the right hand). That got me thinking about how to translate the simplicity onto the fretboard. The first step was 6 note chords putting the triads on the top 3 strings and the 1-3-7 on the bottom 3. That's not always (or often) possible, so I lumped in 5 note chords into the 6 note chord category and explored 5-6 note voicings a lot.

But once I'd charted out everything I wanted I then started minimizing down to 4 note, 3 note, and even 2 note voicings. So yes, all of these chords can easily be expressed with 4 notes. The 3 and 4 note voicings are usually my favorites to use for actually playing, though the 5 and 6 note voicings can really come in handy during ballads and solo guitar playing and intros and outros and things like that. But I think I just revert back to that initial 1st step of 5-6 note voicings when I'm thinking about a new chord.