Subdominant and Dominant as one functional area

[Jonah]

Lately I have been thinking about the audial experience I have with S and D functions in modern functional music (mostly pop and jazz)...

In classical music at least till very late romantics three functions are represented quite clearly, their roles and functionality are different and clear...

In modern pop I hear as both are mixed in one often...

- sus chord G-F-A-C in C major combines feature of both S and D ... It could be resolved both to G (dom and the it is a sus dominant chord) or directly to C (as usually is) and then it sounds like mixture of both S and D chords.. to my ear it has mixed sound of plagal and regular cadence in one.
As a fact I would even say it sounds like common classical cadential I6/4 chord just heavily suspended and resolved directly to tonic...
(Actual in classical I6/4 can be heard as suspension to V often too)

- using extensions makes jazz harmony pretty vague (like 'all can sub all' in general because there are plenty of tones in common)... so we get Dm7 as an extension of G7 (7 9 11) thsi way treatin S and D just as D. Quite common approach in improvization...

- minor 4th and backdoor turnaround... in classical music minor IV can be found mostly from romantic era when they began to involve folk music turnarounds intensively... but in a disguised way it has been in use from much earlier time...
I think form middle 19th century it became quite common and lost its exotic feature... it is to be resolved to I directly
And it is often used as following major IV (in pop music I believe John Lennon favoured this kind of turnaround)
I really hear this sound more as a Dominant extension

Maybe thee are other examples too.. but in general in modern functional harmony I really hear more like just two functions Tonic and Another one)

[mr. beaumont]

I posted it somewhere here recently, I'll say it again...I'm really starting to think it's almost all V and I (or i)

[christianm77]

Indeed. I found that realising this was a big help in understanding what was going on.

Basically there's two types of diatonic chords. Ones with the 4th in and ones without.

The 7 has a somewhat weakened role in 20th century music

Chromatic alterations and modal interchanges - perhaps most importantly b6 - expand the colours available.

[christianm77]

A related point - bebop is about the study of the dominant (including related subdominant options such as IV and IIm on V7)

However in a recent interview with Adam Neely, Evan Marien points out that when learning Holdsworth's music he found that it was essentially all based on major and minor tonalities, and when there was a dominant chord it was quite a jolt.

As in a modern non functional progression we might well play Lydian over every major type chord we encounter, every chord has in effect become subdominant. Dorian is the relative minor equivalent. And then we have melodic minor and Lydian #5 options.

We can substitute traditional changes entirely for various type of major & minor tonality ... this is something you begin to hear in the 30s at the latest, but modern harmonic approaches take this to the nth degree.

[rintincop]

I posted it somewhere here recently, I'll say it again...I'm really starting to think it's almost all V and I (or i)

I think that too sometimes and that everything else is simply an extrapolation of it.

[ghoststrat]

I posted it somewhere here recently, I'll say it again...I'm really starting to think it's almost all V and I (or i)

Man, I'm the same way. Years ago it hit me after constantly discussing "tension and release", it's all just varying degrees of each.

[docbop]

I posted it somewhere here recently, I'll say it again...I'm really starting to think it's almost all V and I (or i)

I more I get to hang with older Jazz musicians and hear about the legends they knew the more I hear the same thing V-I or dominant-tonic. Basically I, III, VI, were all tonic sounds, II, IV, V, all dominant sounds. Looks at the I guess it's the Barry Harris type stuff with major diminished scale you harmonize it and a major scale turns into a series of V-I's. The old cats I hear talk about soloing and the "pendulum" which boils down to implying a V with one note so their lines have the V-I sound.

Thinking basics like that gives you that tension and release sound that give music life.

[christianm77]

'Pendulum' - I like it.

Here's another thing - what are 'diatonic extensions' other than playing V on I without resolving? (But avoiding the 4)

Your chord functions are neatly defined by whether or not the chord contains the 4th degree of the key.

Also - you can play tonic on dominant.

[Robertkoa]

A related point - bebop is about the study of the dominant (including related subdominant options such as IV and IIm on V7)

However in a recent interview with Adam Neely, Evan Marien points out that when learning Holdsworth's music he found that it was essentially all based on major and minor tonalities, and when there was a dominant chord it was quite a jolt.

As in a modern non functional progression we might well play Lydian over every major type chord we encounter, every chord has in effect become subdominant. Dorian is the relative minor equivalent. And then we have melodic minor and Lydian #5 options.

We can substitute traditional changes entirely for various type of major & minor tonality ... this is something you begin to hear in the 30s at the latest, but modern harmonic approaches take this to the nth degree.

This is really interesting because I was just looking into Modern Harmony with some Hancock and Wayne Shorter and it's less V of V of V of V -

Is this Concept you mentioned explained or documented further in any Theory Books ?

I was always trying to ' sneak into ' New Keys as a Writer ...but it is much easier to just ii - V- I to get everywhere but I prefer the more Modern sounds which is why my Primary Chords are usually 5 and 6 Note Voicings...

But seems like sometimes you have to use Dominant Harmony or at least Chords with a Diminished 5th interval somewhere to announce a New Key or Tonicize etc...

I have sometimes felt that Jazz is V of of of V and
Rock is more IV of IV of IV of IV ..but this is an oversimplification...

But ironically I now use linear Vs and Vii° in a linear way to create Tension and 'set up' Notes and phrases which I never used to..

And I like to harmonically disguise Vs ( 11ths , 9ths in Bass...) when I use them...

But I would like to be more like McCoy Tyner on Guitar sometimes at least which seems rare in Jazz Guitar - right ?
And he does exactly what you Guys are talking about...fuses the IV and V together often...at least functionally..

[NSJ]

Ever since I started studying the Barry Harris stuff, I think exclusively in terms of V7-I, which for me is a simplified method that creates more possibilities that are doable and sound interesting.

I came to the realization that it's better to learn a few things very intensely and thoroughly and to be able to apply them infinitely and expressively in many different ways then it is to learn 1 million things in a schematic sort of away .

What is this fundamental simple concept that offers so many possibilities? It's only the movement from dissonance to consonance,

also by way of the same thing: v6 to vi7, especially when you don't use the same form and voicing but try to voice lead with minimal movement between two forms – grips .


even better--v6 to #V° to vi7.

[Jonah]

Yes... but I just want to stress that it concerns only modern functionality... in classical music subdominant has quite distinc function different from tonic and dominant...

I mean I would not like to expand this 'all is V-I' concetption backwards..

it's not even V or I ... but I just hear it as I am either in dominant area or in tonic... in this case dominant actually stoips being dominant in a common sence... it sopts being that definite

[princeplanet]

I'm a T/D guy also, but rather than to always place say a IV chord in the D category, I tend to classify the IV chord as "ambitonic"- i.e.- it can swing both ways due to it have notes in common with both T and D. For instance, when you get to the IV chord in Autumn Leaves, you can treat it as either T or D.

BTW, If any novices reading the thread, please understand that by IV we mean a major chord, not the IV7 you find in Blues! That's always gonna be a D sound, or a Blues sound from a 4th below...

[Jonah]

For instance, when you get to the IV chord in Autumn Leaves, I think it works either by treating it as T or D.

Which chord do you mean by IV here? It's a minor tune the IV is Cm7 (in G minor)... or you think it as realtive major key?

If any novices reading, please understand that by IV we mean a major chord, not the IV7 you find in Blues! That's always gonna be a D sound, or a Blues sound from a 4th below...

In blues actually there's a kind of modal harmony to my ear... parallel voicings.. stable sounding dom7th chords wuth 7ths that actually do not resolve anywhwere...

[christianm77]

This is really interesting because I was just looking into Modern Harmony with some Hancock and Wayne Shorter and it's less V of V of V of V -

Is this Concept you mentioned explained or documented further in any Theory Books ?

Sure, it's fitting the appropriate CST scale on each chord and then doing this through lots of modern tunes. You can also do this to standards of course. You just crank the handle and churn through it.... Mark Levine theory book is good for this. This is something that's well covered in the literature.

Now, what you realise in the same way that modes can be extracted from a single scale, scales can be extracted from modes, so you can map a progression in terms of one structure. This could be a major triad on a bass note for classic slash chord harmony:

i.e --
Cmaj9 --> G/C
Dmin7 --> F/D
F#m7b5 --> C/F#
G7alt --> Db/G
F7#11 or F7#11 --> G/F

etc

And then use the triad movement as the basis of your soloing etc.... Lots of possibilities. Pentatonics are very useful here for instance. Triad pairs are another popular direction. Personally I work a lot on non tertial lines using 7 note scales.

But it's more application than theory. The theory is all in the standard modern jazz texts, Berklee, Levine etc.

This has some connection to earlier practice, like the so called family of four (Sheryl Bailey - also Barry Harris but he doesn't use that name.)

G7 --> G7 (boring!), Bm7b5 (Dm6), Dm7, Fmaj7

All these options in use by the 40s, but the Fmaj7 popular with bop guys. Softer sound - Subdominant on Dominant right? So

F/G --> F9sus4

And so on into Burt Bacharach, who was heavily influenced by bop... And Bossa, then into mainstream 60's/70's pop/rock. Also these sounds popular in Gospel/Soul?

Now, for the genesis of fusion sounds, take this tritone sub (Barry Harris)

Db -- > Db7, Fm7b5 (Abm6), Abm7, Bmaj7

So, we can have B/G right? Fusion slash harmony getting started. Barry would hate that.

I was always trying to ' sneak into ' New Keys as a Writer ...but it is much easier to just ii - V- I to get everywhere but I prefer the more Modern sounds which is why my Primary Chords are usually 5 and 6 Note Voicings...

ii-V-I is only one of a number of options. I play with a guy who teaches classical harmony and plays jazz professionally, and he thinks that Jazz musicians obsession with that progression is quite funny. Personally I think it's because many jazz players never properly learn functional harmony and ii-V-I is a short cut.

Jazzers can solo on a standard, but they mostly couldn't write one.

If you want to learn to modulate in a functional harmony environment check out Schubert. No-one does it better.

But seems like sometimes you have to use Dominant Harmony or at least Chords with a Diminished 5th interval somewhere to announce a New Key or Tonicize etc...

Well yes, that's functional harmony 101 really, Bach Chorales etc. If you want to learn the ropes I really would advise reading some classical theory. It's about how the progressions are put together.

But writing and soloing practices are different. There's no need for me to express V-I into a new key if the bass player is playing a big old leading note into the new tonality.

I have sometimes felt that Jazz is V of of of V and
Rock is more IV of IV of IV of IV ..but this is an oversimplification...

Rock is more modal... The use of bVII-I cadence is terribly important as are minor dominants and the use of progressions like bVI-bVII-I etc...

Modern Rock is based a lot on progressions in one or two scales with little V-I movement which is why rock guys really struggle with the harmony of jazz... Just hearing it at first...

But ironically I now use linear Vs and Vii° in a linear way to create Tension and 'set up' Notes and phrases which I never used to..

And I like to harmonically disguise Vs ( 11ths , 9ths in Bass...) when I use them...

But I would like to be more like McCoy Tyner on Guitar sometimes at least which seems rare in Jazz Guitar - right ?

Look into intervallic pentatonic applications on progressions then, if you haven't already. I believe Mark Levine has a chapter in the Theory Book?

And he does exactly what you Guys are talking about...fuses the IV and V together often...at least functionally..

Well, this has a long history. I've looked into Lester Young and Charlie Christian, and they do it.

Possibly it goes back further... I mean what is the melody of Honeysuckle Rose (1928) other than an IVmaj9 arpeggio on a ii-V?... And this was an important motif in Charlie Parker's playing and beyond.

[christianm77]

I'm a T/D guy also, but rather than to always place say a IV chord in the D category, I tend to classify the IV chord as "ambitonic"- i.e.- it can swing both ways due to it have notes in common with both T and D. For instance, when you get to the IV chord in Autumn Leaves, you can treat it as either T or D.

You can always play T on a D chord. Again, Lester Young was doing this...

BTW, If any novices reading the thread, please understand that by IV we mean a major chord, not the IV7 you find in Blues! That's always gonna be a D sound, or a Blues sound from a 4th below...

Indeed, good point. However, IV7 I works great on V7 I too.

[princeplanet]

Which chord do you mean by IV here? It's a minor tune the IV is Cm7 (in G minor)... or you think it as realtive major key?



In blues actually there's a kind of modal harmony to my ear... parallel voicings.. stable sounding dom7th chords wuth 7ths that actually do not resolve anywhwere...

OK, I mean the IV of the relative Maj key.... and yeah, all Doms in Blues can allow different treatments when compared with Doms appearing in functional tunes, but I must say that all my Dom material works for for any of the 4 or 5 different Doms found in Jazz Blues, and can resolve to the next chord in most cases in similar ways except of course to the maj 7th (actually possible with V7 to I6 or maj7). The only "idiosyncratic" movement is IV7 to I7 - I wonder if Bach ever used that one?.....

[Jonah]

The only "idiosyncratic" movement is IV7 to I7 - I wonder if Bach ever used that one?.....

Why Bach?)) Why not Buxtehude or Pachelbell or Handel?))) Kidding...

I can't remember they could ever use it. S goes to D and that's it - otherwise it's not S anymore. It ruins all the logics of Functional setup... and they would not ruin it since they were those who just created it

at least up to late Romantics

[princeplanet]

[QUOTE=christianm77;773482]You can always play T on a D chord. Again, Lester Young was doing this...

Yep, so Key of C: Dm7 - G7 - Cmaj7 - (Fmaj7) - Bm7b5 - E7b9 - Am

Is the Fmaj7 a IV in C, or a VI in Am? Of course, if you just play chord tones it doesn't matter, but if you add in scale tones then you either choose a g nat , or g# to "announce" the coming cadence. But if you (as many do) wish to treat the Fmaj7 as still being in the key of C, and you take the T/D approach, then you have to decide if you play G7 related ideas (or Bm7b5) or C6 related ideas over the Fmaj7.

So that's question for the T/D guys here, do you play T or D over the IV in this instance? What about other instances? Do you have a default, or will it always depend on context? The IV is kinda the achilles heel for T/D, for me at least, but thankfully you don't bump into so often in most Jazz tunes....

[Jonah]

What I am going to is...

In clkassical T - S - D is not just a realation between chords... not just IV toV to I...
it is a complex system working on macro and micro leveles... that allowed to elaborate very complex music and stay integral.

In symphonic music we have vast areas of Dominant and Subdominant etc.
It is not just about tension - release between two chords (thogh on micro level it is)


What I thing that in modern jazz harmony it is not functional any more.

What we have now here is like two poles of tension... working right here and right now.... to me it seems that the idea of tonic and dominant .. the hierachy of it becomes also vague...

Two pole - now one is stronger anothe one is weaker.. then it's different... then again... just like two magnets.

[princeplanet]

Why Bach?)) Why not Buxtehude or Pachelbell or Handel?))) Kidding...

I can't remember they could ever use it. S goes to D and that's it - otherwise it's not S anymore. It ruins all the logics of Functional setup... and they would not ruin it since they were those who just created it

at least up to late Romantics

I've always wanted to know where IV7 - I7 (or even just IV7 - I) first occurred. Anyone care to guess?

[Jonah]

Anyone care to guess?

I think you can find something similar in early baroque/late renessance...
It happens quite often in renaissance lute fantasias and recercares... or virginal English music.

But there it sounds just like they do not yet hear it all as they would later in functional world.

These turnarounds are resultats of linear voicings on one hane and on the other hand they already heard them as a harmonic turnaround..

I think even they did not make much difference between plagal cadence and dominant cadence in that sence .. both sounded like a cadence.

Check Luis Milan or Narvaez fantasias.. somehow it's the first thing that comes to my mind but I believe there's much more than that.

[princeplanet]

What I am going to is...

In clkassical T - S - D is not just a realation between chords... not just IV toV to I...
it is a complex system working on macro and micro leveles... that allowed to elaborate very complex music and stay integral.

In symphonic music we have vast areas of Dominant and Subdominant etc.
It is not just about tension - release between two chords (thogh on micro level it is)


What I thing that in modern jazz harmony it is not functional any more.

What we have now here is like two poles of tension... working right here and right now.... to me it seems that the idea of tonic and dominant .. the hierachy of it becomes also vague...

Two pole - now one is stronger anothe one is weaker.. then it's different... then again... just like two magnets.

Sure, some kinds of Jazz, I guess starting in the 60's, really started blurring the line. If you play Cmaj13 material, with or without diatonic or chromatic embellishment, it is also G13, and every other 13th chord from that key as well. Some guys hang out in the "extension" range quite a bit, I'm kinda getting into it more myself. But it's not really like forcing T over everything, because 13th arp based material is by it's very nature neither T or D, but essentially both, ambiguous, ambivalent, or as I call it "ambi-tonic" .

It doesn't even matter where you start a run of notes, e.g.- Over G7 you can play c e g b d f a from the "1", weird way to start a line maybe, but the last 5 notes are G9, so that just takes over the sound and it becomes a question of where in the bar the strong notes are placed. So if you played (again over G7) g b d f a c e, it obviously works, but with a different weighting , strong at the start, "extension" land at the end.

If those 2 extremes sound equally fine, then any other diatonic 13th arp will as well. Further, if you play devices that embellish the chord tones in any diatonic 13th chord, as much chromaticism as you like whilst landing "chord" tones, on strong beats, then the lines can work. The proviso I think (for me anyway) is that the chord tones must be stacked in 3rds, even with embellishments in between each chord tone. Notice I call them chord tones and not scale tones. We're not talking CST here, while the scale may be : c d e f g a b, that can sound horrible in many instances! But play c e g b d f a, or any subgroup starting anywhere, then you can't really sound bad.

Not saying' you'll sound great either! But I do notice some players have their stock of "ambitonic" lines they fall on when they're finding their feet sometimes mid solo, to maybe fill in between ideas maybe....

[princeplanet]

I think you can find something similar in early baroque/late renessance...
It happens quite often in renaissance lute fantasias and recercares... or virginal English music.

But there it sounds just like they do not yet hear it all as they would later in functional world.

These turnarounds are resultats of linear voicings on one hane and on the other hand they already heard them as a harmonic turnaround..

I think even they did not make much difference between plagal cadence and dominant cadence in that sence .. both sounded like a cadence.

Check Luis Milan or Narvaez fantasias.. somehow it's the first thing that comes to my mind but I believe there's much more than that.

Yeah, I'm sure you'll find instances in early contrapuntal choral music, but as you say, perhaps by "accident"...

[christianm77]

You can always play T on a D chord. Again, Lester Young was doing this...

Yep, so Key of C: Dm7 - G7 - Cmaj7 - (Fmaj7) - Bm7b5 - E7b9 - Am

Is the Fmaj7 a IV in C, or a VI in Am? Of course, if you just play chord tones it doesn't matter, but if you add in scale tones then you either choose a g nat , or g# to "announce" the coming cadence. But if you (as many do) wish to treat the Fmaj7 as still being in the key of C, and you take the T/D approach, then you have to decide if you play G7 related ideas (or Bm7b5) or C6 related ideas over the Fmaj7.

So that's question for the T/D guys here, do you play T or D over the IV in this instance? What about other instances? Do you have a default, or will it always depend on context? The IV is kinda the achilles heel for T/D, for me at least, but thankfully you don't bump into so often in most Jazz tunes....

Eh? Do you not play 12 bar blues tunes?

This did pop into my head actually. Not sure TBH. Subdominant - Tonic always works though.

This is ambiguous .... which brings me to my next post....

[Jonah]

I was reminded now... minor subdominant inmajor is common for Bach's codas.. usual on tonic pedal point.

But it's minor subdominant