-
Hi, recently in a piece of music I was reading I saw a chord that was sort of odd. It was E7 (+9). I don't know what (+9) means I have never seen a (+9) in a chord. If anyone can tell me what that means it'd be greatly appreciated.
-
04-18-2017 06:55 PM
-
Do you know E7#9? Same thing
-
That's pretty old school. I'd never use it if I was writing a chart.
Originally Posted by Striker813
-
X7678X , "Hendrix chord"
Or
022133
Its got a maj3rd and a min3rd
-
I have also sometimes seen "+9" to mean ("add 9"), meaning to include the 9 without first including the flat 7 that would normally be implied if one just wrote it as a 9th chord. So, for example, C6(add 9) = C6(+9). I don't like that usage of the "+" though, as it can be confusing.
-
It's a good question. The - and + signs are often used in jazz chord notation. The - sign is generally short for minor (A-7 is Am7). Originally Posted by Striker813
The + sign generally means a sharpened, or 'augmented', or 'raised', 5th (C+ is C augmented - CEG#. It's not generally written C augmented 5, just C aug.).
If you're used to that then E7+9 might be confusing. And it is confusing because + can also mean #. So it has to be taken in context. Almost always, as the others have said, E7+9 means E7#9.
There is an augmented 9 chord but that would be written E9+. It's the 5th which is raised, not the 9th!
If you look at this chart you can see both + and minus signs appear, as do # and b. The player has to bear in mind the various uses of these signs.
What, for example, does D+7 mean? It almost certainly means D7#5 because D#7 is a bit silly.
Ultimately it's never that tricky, just a matter of common sense.
Last edited by ragman1; 04-19-2017 at 06:18 AM.
-
P.S. If you're in any doubt you can always ignore the extensions or alterations and just play the basic chord. So if you see Eb7b9b5 and go UH? just play an Eb7. It's a lot easier :-)
-
... and then there's the confusion when someone writes, for example, Ab9: is that an Ab with a natural 9, or an A with a b9? It should be clear if the writer put the b symbol either right next to the A (Ab9) versus as a superscript next to the 9 (Ab9 which IMHO really should be written as A7b9) but a lot of people are a little sloppy in the handwriting department and in many typing situations (unlike this one) superscripts are not possible...
-
So how did you do that clever little superscript, eh??
-
There are icons for subscript (X2) and superscript (X2) in the formatting choices above where you type your post. Originally Posted by ragman1
So how did you do that clever little superscript, eh??
-
OOOHHHH!
A7b9
heh heh
-
ahhh...had that feature turned off all this time..fonts...and CoLoR Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Glad to have been of service, gentlemen...
-
Maybe it's addition in hexadecimal
C+9 = 15 (is it?)
-
It's basically what I do most of the time. Extensions are for horn players baby. Originally Posted by ragman1
-
[QUOTE=christianm77;763736]It's basically what I do most of the time. Extensions are for horn players baby.[/QUOTE
If the chord symbol contains a b5, I'd be reluctant to play a natural 5 in the chord. I'd be concerned that somebody might play the b5 a half step below my note and create some dissonance that wouldn't sound good.
If I want to leave the extensions for the horns, I'd probably play just 3 and b7.
On the other hand, if the chord was actually a 7#11, then having both notes is perhaps more justifiable, at least if the 5 is in a lower octave than the #11. But, since I can't predict what others will play (even the bassist could be in my range at any given moment, or there may be horn backgrounds, or something), I'd be cautious and avoid the natural 5 if the chord symbol is #11 or b5.
Can't say that I've tried it the other way much, so I could be wrong.
-
Theoretically you are right, but the paradigm of - that's a C7#11 - is something that can lead to overthinking before people get off the starting block.
People are going from chord charts rather than learning the whole song by ear, and treating everything as if it's fusion by viewing each chord like it's own isolated thing. It's a cool sound, but it's not basic changes playing.
Thing I endlessly bang on about to seemingly absolutely no interest haha - almost all the upper extensions written into the chart of standard tunes in the real book, say, is the expression of a melody note that isn't a chord tone.
So Cherokee goes to D in the melody over a backdoor dominant Ab7, and the chart says Ab#11. But in fact Ray Noble was writing diatonic melody against a chromatic chord, and the fact that the chord is written this way is just one aspect of it - what it looks like frozen in time looking up from an Ab bass.
So the #11 is there to tell you not to play 11 if you don't know the song. But - do you really want to double the melody note in your voicing? Well possibly if you have a singer you is unsure of the key, but probably not for a sax player. And if you are playing solo you'll be playing the melody anyway.
First thing I learned about jazz (Dave Cliff) 1, 3 and 7 is plenty. Leave the 5th out - it's boring.
In fact in a band with bass you may not want to play 1, but that's another thread.
I know it's fashionable to play drop 2s on the bottom 4 strings, but really that's a special effect, a more chunky texture.
Leave the 5th out until you know what you are doing. Works.
Went to see Peter Bernstein last night and it was good enough for him.:-)
If you are a bit of a mor advanced player, the second elephant in the room after timing with guitarists is learn the melody. The melody will tell you what's going on with the extensions, not that you are limited by this in your improvisations.
Guitarists think about chord charts far too much. I know I do, but I'm getting over it.Last edited by christianm77; 04-19-2017 at 05:00 PM.
-
good points. Music is like the story about the blind men describing an elephant by touch. Depends where you are with respect to the elephant.
I play in two contexts. One is harmony-heavy Brazilian jazz and the other is big band style American jazz.
The Brazilian music is small combo, typically g/p/b/d with a horn or a singer. Typically, the harmony is sophisticated with interesting voice leading and it's played with a groove. In that context, and depending on the composer, 3s and 7s aren't enough to get the proper sound. Toninho Horta's music is an example. The existence of a groove means that stick-and-jab comping is not the rule, giving the piano and guitar a better change to complement one another, if they phrase well.
On the other hand, in the big band type music, it's typically harder. There are, in a way, three chords playing at the same time. The piano, the chord formed by the horns and then, often an afterthought, the guitar. The first rule is the same as medicine, "do no harm". So, you stay off the root to avoid conflicting with the bass. You don't play the fifth because it doesn't add enough to justify the risk of clashing with somebody's altered fifth elsewhere in the band. You can play 3s and 7s, and, if the tune is Basie style, you can Freddie Green it and it will sound great. But, for other things, to my ear, laying out is often a better choice than that. And, sadly, I rarely hear a complaint when I lay out.
Often, I've never heard the arrangement before and I have no idea what the horns are going to play. When I've heard the arrangement before I can often figure out something to do which works. I think it often sounds more interesting if I nail the alterations in my voicing -- but that's not without the risk of making mud. The pianists I play with are generally generous, but often are struggling to get through the chart themselves (all the problems the guitarist has, plus the left hand, and a greater likelihood of complaints if he lays out). Better for the guitarist to work around the pianist.
So, bottom line -- it's often not easy to figure out how to make a positive contribution.
-
What is it with elephants today? :-)
-
Oh yeah I am talking specifically about comping standards in a small band which I think is where most jazz guitarists get started with chords. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Advanced players will have good enough ears and a wide enough repertoire of voicings to make their own aesthetic decisions.
Even Jobim has a bit more extra harmony, often just an extra voice. A lot of the Brazilian stuff has specific guitar voicings of course. I see it as related but distinct from jazz comping, as you say the regularity of the comping changes a lot.
I don't know Horta's music and I probably should.
So much depends on what the arranger has written and how they have written it. In terms of playing Basie style stuff if the guitar volume is set right you wouldn't hear any chordal arrangement details in the guitar part anyway, so if it's written in its basically and exercise for you. But the groove is all important. I often find myself simplifying guitar busy chord parts on big band gigs of that type.On the other hand, in the big band type music, it's typically harder. There are, in a way, three chords playing at the same time. The piano, the chord formed by the horns and then, often an afterthought, the guitar. The first rule is the same as medicine, "do no harm". So, you stay off the root to avoid conflicting with the bass. You don't play the fifth because it doesn't add enough to justify the risk of clashing with somebody's altered fifth elsewhere in the band. You can play 3s and 7s, and, if the tune is Basie style, you can Freddie Green it and it will sound great. But, for other things, to my ear, laying out is often a better choice than that. And, sadly, I rarely hear a complaint when I lay out.
For modern stuff, it's much more specific and the guitar will contribute more to the harmonic sound of the group.
I don't work with a pianist much in quartets etc (budget), and when I do I tend to stay out of the way or play fours if stylistically appropriate (such as in a trio with bass.) 1 3 7 voicings ALWAYS sound good, and then the horns or piano can play their fancy notes. It's a pretty good basic framework for actually playing.Often, I've never heard the arrangement before and I have no idea what the horns are going to play. When I've heard the arrangement before I can often figure out something to do which works. I think it often sounds more interesting if I nail the alterations in my voicing -- but that's not without the risk of making mud. The pianists I play with are generally generous, but often are struggling to get through the chart themselves (all the problems the guitarist has, plus the left hand, and a greater likelihood of complaints if he lays out). Better for the guitarist to work around the pianist.
Well that's no bloody help at all to the beginner (which you don't sound like at all) - you have to give them rules and guidelines even though later you end up questioning everything. What Dave Cliff told me over 20 years ago kept me going for at least a decade and I still use it 50-60% of the time playing standards.So, bottom line -- it's often not easy to figure out how to make a positive contribution.
I'm a fan of keep it simple stupid.
Comp only if your chords are better than silence!
-
Comp only if your chords are better than silence![/QUOTE]
That's the secret!
I guess I could try to produce some better advice than "it's hard". Although recognizing that it's hard is part of it, I think. For me, it reminds me to keep my ears wide open -- always thinking about the contribution of the guitar to the overall sound of the band.
Beyond that, I'm having trouble coming up with a rule. Certainly, chunking away on 3rds and 7ths Freddie style is great in some circumstances. That said, Freddie played with Basie, who played sparsely, although Herb Ellis did the same thing, at least at times, with Oscar Peterson.
For other styles, the issue is creating a part that contributes. That's going to depend on what the rest of the rhythm section is doing. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a rule for it. Some guys alternate laying out with the pianist. I find that a little jarring to the ear. I've played the gig without a piano and it was fine, but I don't like alternating. Sometimes you arpeggiate the chords. Sometimes strum on the one or the and of 4. Sometimes play a guide tone line. Sometimes the pianist will leave enough space for a kind of call and response (which is cool during the bass solo, to keep yourself awake). Sometimes I just play my own version of what the piano is doing -- but I probably shouldn't do that. Sometimes you can't beat laying out.
And, although I'm hijacking thread (I usually post whatever I'm thinking about that day), another big issue is how well the guitarist and pianist can hear each other. It's way easier to phrase together if you can hear what the other instrument is doing -- there are various reasons that might not happen.
Last thing -- I studied with a world class pianist for a while. He could create a part with anybody on anything. That said, I can remember one time when he stopped the group (combo class) and pointed out that my guitar part didn't leave any room for him to play anything. He wasn't saying it would have been a bad part if I had been the only chord instrument, rather, it was a bad part given that there was a pianist.
-
Same thing about continuo (300 years away - the problem is the same).... I had an argument with a leader if I had to play all the figures in the score... his idea was if a composer wrote it then it was for something... my idea was: yes it was for something... it was to indicate the notes that the melodic instruments played so that the continuo player would not contradict them... because most probably continuo did not have the full score on the stand, only continuo partIf you are a bit of a mor advanced player, the second elephant in the room after timing with guitarists is learn the melody. The melody will tell you what's going on with the extensions, not that you are limited by this in your improvisations.
-
Yes I agree with you, that makes complete sense. Originally Posted by Jonah
-
On the D+7 note that the melody has a Bb in the measure, and Bb is the #5 of D, so I'd read the chord as "DAug7" Originally Posted by ragman1
It's a good question. The - and + signs are often used in jazz chord notation. The - sign is generally short for minor (A-7 is Am7).
The + sign generally means a sharpened, or 'augmented', or 'raised', 5th (C+ is C augmented - CEG#. It's not generally written C augmented 5, just C aug.).
If you're used to that then E7+9 might be confusing. And it is confusing because + can also mean #. So it has to be taken in context. Almost always, as the others have said, E7+9 means E7#9.
There is an augmented 9 chord but that would be written E9+. It's the 5th which is raised, not the 9th!
If you look at this chart you can see both + and minus signs appear, as do # and b. The player has to bear in mind the various uses of these signs.
What, for example, does D+7 mean? It almost certainly means D7#5 because D#7 is a bit silly.
Ultimately it's never that tricky, just a matter of common sense.
-
Yeah plus means augmented generally. D+ is the augmented triad, D+7 is D7#5
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Today, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos