-
9 and 13 on III-7
(all examples are in key of C)
On III-7 chords, is it better to keep the 9 and 13 out of the chord, and stay true to the key, or do you maybe play the 9 and 13 harmonicly, and play b9 and b13 melodicly (phrygian over dorian). Or can you play 9,b9,13,b13 on III-7, harmonicly and melodicly, It doesnt matter? I dont know.
Im not talking about II V/II, ex. |Emin7 A7|Dmin7 G7|Cmaj7...
Im talking more about stuff like |Cmaj7 Dmin7|Emin7 Fmaj7|. Or maybe |Fmaj7 Emin7|Cmaj7 Dmin7|.
-
07-29-2018 11:37 PM
-
Those are not "available tensions" on on that chord. The only available tension is 11.
-
I would suggest saying it a little differently - you can get there if you go through the 11 (4).
Sounds fine to go Imaj7 -> IIIb9 or IIIb13
Sounds off to go from Imaj7 -> III9 or III13
But, it you want to get to the III9 or III13 you can do so by going through the 11 via the III13sus4.
Sounds nice to go from Imaj7 -> III13sus4 -> III9 or III13
-
Well, first of all I'd write that chord iii or iii7, not III-7.
Originally Posted by joel paul
Also, which causes a lot of confusion in theoretical issues, it's a question of being clear whether we're talking about chords or scales.
If you're talking chords, then Em9 gives an F# note, which doesn't work. Likewise the Em13 note is a C#, also not good. Neither of those are in C, of course. That doesn't mean they can never be used in a line. Depends what sort of thing you're playing.
If you're talking the C scale, then the 9 note is an F and the 13 is C. Technically both clash a bit with Em7 but they're fine as passing notes used in a line.
Chord or scale-wise, the 11 is an A and works fine, in fact it's a good sound.
I suppose it also depends how fast the tune is going. You could just play a C scale line over the whole lot resolving nicely to the FM7. If it's slow then you could arpeggiate the chords. At least the notes would fit okay.
I think it's always a mistake to worry that each note should fit perfectly over each chord. They don't have to but the line should obviously end up in the right place.
-
I couldn't resist this but you don't need to listen to it. This is that sequence CM7 - Dm7 - Em7 - FM7 with these things played over it:
1. Simple arps
2. Line that outlines the chords
3. C maj scale
4. C maj scale with blue note (Bb)
5. CM7 arp plus line
6. C maj pentatonic
7. Treating it as C - C7 - F (#1)
8. Treating it as C - C7 - F (#2)
Then, a bit more out:
9. C blues
10. C wholetone (F# in it)
11. C - C7alt - F (C# in it)
Whatever takes your fancy at the time, really. Just so long as you hit the F okay.
-
What do your ears say? Originally Posted by joel paul
-
Sometimes I like to do "Em7 A7 Dm7 G7 Cmaj7" both ways. First time through, treat Em7 like CMaj9, then next time through, do the parallel "Em7 A7" then "Dm7 G7" thing. If that's a beginner's mistake, I'll make it like Wes Originally Posted by djg
-
But are all of those functioning as mediant? Originally Posted by pauln
-
Important to be able to hear it with those notes. Really helps to be able to hear changes . That chord can be a real headache until you learn to hear it/handle it.
More than the theory and all of that, the thing that really helped me most in learning hear this was basically just subbing Imaj7 for that III-7. So, for comping, when you have a bar of III-7, you can play || III-7 Imaj7 III-7||. Really any voicing for Imaj7. Just resolve it back to III-7.
Same for melodic: Imaj7 arps and vocabulary resolving to III-7 is the sound for me. Way better than thinking about it completely separately for me.
If you want to a starter workaround for melodic, 1-b3-4-5 is the minor equivalent of 1-2-3-5 vocabulary for major. don't display them straight up, but invert them, like 1-4-b3-5 etc. Anyway, works over II-7, III-7, and VI-7, just as the major one works for I, IV and V. Avoids the tones which are troublesome. anyway, this is a legit jazz thing anyway, besides being a little easier in this regard. Not ONLY a workaround.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
-
I mentioned "sound" three times in my post to encourage the OP to experiment and listen. Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
You probably know by now that I find it peculiar to convert the sound of music into something else (words, symbols, numbers). The sound of music is literally invisible, so pictorial, graphic, or geometric oriented visual-spatial descriptions fail to connect me with the phenomenological sound of music. Verbal-logical descriptions (terms and relations) are perspectives (of many possible) that suffer from anomalous dependence on categorical classification, an even further removed modality that also fails to connect me with the sound of music.
I consider it a blessing that music to me is intrinsically self revealing without being reduced, converted, transformed, or translated into something else. Playing exclusively by ear, I practice, compose, rehearse, arrange, and perform without picturing or naming anything... where attempting to use images and words for music is like trying to use water colors to cook breakfast.
That all just means to answer your question I would have to know more about "functioning as mediant", but this may be a very interesting question! Let me ask you this...
Let us imagine a progression whereupon a particular chord in question you would assign a label for its functional role. Are there chords that may be inserted before the chord in question that may cause you to change the label of functional role for the chord in question?
Looking at what I wrote:
Sounds fine to go Imaj7 -> IIIb9 or IIIb13
Sounds off to go from Imaj7 -> III9 or III13
But, it you want to get to the III9 or III13 you can do so by going through the 11 via the III13sus4.
Sounds nice to go from Imaj7 -> III13sus4 -> III9 or III13
In other words, were the functional roles of III9 or III13 changed when III13sus4 was inserted to precede them?
Something certainly changed, so offhand, I would answer "yes", but with this caveat... I'm not sure if it was function or harmony or something else that changed because I have read countless posts here where it seems that people have grouped chords into functional roles where I would argue that the chords grouped together actually offer important different sounding functional pressures (to the degree that I would strongly reject some and elect others for a place in the progression, hearing strong discernible differences in regard to the harmony). Yet, they say "any of these is fine"... so my sense of the meaning of function may be more like something else relating to harmony detail where the specific configuration of particular pitches is critical.
-
OK, my understanding is that in conventional jazz harmony the III-7 chord is a slightly unstable substitute for I.
In that context, tension 11 is the only available tension for III-7. b9 and b13 sound very dissonant because they are each a half-step above a chord tone (root and fifth of the III-7 chord).
Including b9 and b13 sounds like an inversion of I, which undermines the slightly unstable substitute for I.
So context is important:
- Going crazy with inversions of I with any/all available tensions for I is one thing, as is using various chord symbols to represent that (like III for instance), and
- Composers are free to do whatever they want, it's a free world (mostly).
So the question is, when you see III in a lead sheet, does it mean III? If it does - tension 11 is the only available tension.
Thoughts?
-
OK, my understanding is that in conventional jazz harmony the III-7 chord is a slightly unstable substitute for I.
What do you mean by "substitute"? A replacement chord?
x 8 7 5 5 x - Fmaj as the I
x 8 7 6 5 x - imposing A (triad) gives a DMinMaj sound
x 8 7 6 6 x - pushing back with the F on top gives an Faug sound
x 8 7 6 8 x - imposing A7 on F is back to either a DMinMaj or Faug sound
x 7 8 6 8 x - this is what the above DMinMaj is approximating (Edim)
5 x 5 6 6 x - making the root A gives the A(b13) sound
Of all those chords, the only two I would consider substitutes of each other are the last two; even better Dbdim with the last.
In that context, tension 11 is the only available tension for III-7. b9 and b13 sound very dissonant because they are each a half-step above a chord tone (root and fifth of the III-7 chord).
The beginning of "Georgia" is Fmaj7 -> Em7 -> A(b13). Playing an A11 sounds terrible. I usually omit the Em7 because the Fmaj7 -> A(b13) sounds wonderful.
Including b9 and b13 sounds like an inversion of I, which undermines the slightly unstable substitute for I.
Including the b9 and b13 makes it sound like Dbdim (which is a sound I would consider a substitute for A7 .)
So context is important:
Going crazy with inversions of I with any/all available tensions for I is one thing, as is using various chord symbols to represent that (like III for instance), and
Composers are free to do whatever they want, it's a free world (mostly).
So the question is, when you see III in a lead sheet, does it mean III? If it does - tension 11 is the only available tension.
OK, know I think I see what you mean. I don't use lead sheets, but I have marked up lots of lead sheets in rehearsal for the piano, horn, and bass where the designated chords did not sound right or were voiced poorly (so far their 100% approval of all of these corrections), but the sheets indicate the chord names, not the Roman numerals. I don't use that system either, but if I had encountered it making these changes I would have noticed, as you suggest, that a "III" is not always a "III".
Thoughts?
Still a bit confused on your use of "tension". With respect to chord tones, non-chord tones below the extensions, extensions, and alterations, which and when do you include as being tensions?
-
I would tend to hear III as a sub for I - in terms of the modality, depends on context.
In general I play I on III. I don’t even hear it as a chord in its own right unless its been tonicised
So I suppose that’s Phrygian. b9 and b13 sound disonant. But 9 and 13 never sounds right here unless that chord has been established as a temporary key centre, or as the product of voice leading, but I’m sure we can find exceptions.
-
Quite often it’s m7b5 as well, not m7. Depends on the melody, honestly. People seem to want to make general rules without considering the melody.
-
Also agreed that I have great difficulty hearing of a minor with a b6 as anything other than an inversion of I. Which is fine.
The b9 will push as more in the subdominant/dominant direction, no? The 4 of the key has no place in a tonic function chordS
-
thought this was a polyrhythm thread!
-
Originally Posted by pauln
Berklee Harmony terminology. Tensions or extensions. Or altered tensions.
Chords include 1-3-5, tensions are 7-9-11-13. Some tensions are "unavailable" on certain chords.
-
Yeah but Berklee theory of avoid notes as I understand it is kind of simplistic, I dislike it.
I think you have to understand these phenomena from the point of view of acoustics and the maths of composite waveforms rather than tones and semitones in the scale.
(Or alternatively use your flipping ears like a musician.)
Bill Evans using a maj6 on min7 in a voicing is not like using a 4th on a major 7th... some avoid notes are more avoidey than others ....
-
Anyway I don’t want to derail the thread... I think that the b9 is a strong avoid note here and the b13 has the effect of making the chord sound like I (there should be some name for that, but technically it is an avoid note on m7 - the effect seems different from b9 though.)
Insensatez is an example of a melody that features the b6 on a minor chord ... that first chord, a m9, is kind of harmonic pivot between Dm and Bb as well, a tonicised iii chord if you like from the perspective of Bb
-
The b2/b9 and b6/b13 are built into the position of IIIm when presented in a diatonic key situation.
So original context matters, but then there is whatever you choose to do with that context.
2/9 and 6/13 are surely possibilities.
I tend to think about whether to express a commonality or a differential with the preceding and following chords.
Taking a step back from the one scale per situation mentality: you can also use both, most often appearing in a
brighter/darker sequence 6-b6-5 or 9-b9-1
Sometimes best to honor the key/scale, other times better to expand the note collection.
Re-imagine Satin Doll: EDE DE E DE ---- FEF EF F EF
I don't think so.
-
Yeah I think you can honour the III when it becomes a temp key.
The same is more obviously true of ii and vi. But a long turnaround starting on #iv is the most obvious place you will come across a tonicised iii. I think of that progression as a ii v I into iii, ii v I into I so the iii can take all the usual minor options. Not the only way of breaking it down but tunes like All God’s Children, GDS and I Remember You strongly suggest this.
Or in the case of Shiny Stockings, major
Now there are variants of the long turnaround that aren’t tonicising iii - night and day for instance
In a simple 3 6 2 5 turnback it isn’t really independent from I
That said, the 3 can be dom, half dim or minor
-
OH, WELL! Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Just a few thoughts to share: Originally Posted by christianm77
Theory of avoid notes and what to do/not do with them is not owned by Berklee.
I know of no theory of harmony that recommends tensions 9 and 13 on the IIImi7 chord in major, but am always curious to study new sources.
I use my ears, and they tell me that b9 sounds like shit, and b6 sounds like an inversion of I.
Theory is just that, theory. There are always exceptions in practice. But the general advice is established for this chord.Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 08-02-2018 at 09:55 AM.
-
Or is it I in D Minor? Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Are you talking about a melodic line or sustaining a chord, as one does when comping? The latter was my interpretation of the OP. Originally Posted by bako
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Yesterday, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos