I-bVI7-I
Howard Peirce
progressions and fragments in pre-modern (trad, swing, and early bop)
jazz and pop songs, to try to isolate some basic chord
progressions--small (2-4 bar) fragments on which from which other
progressions are derived. E.g. dominant cycles, minor plagal cadences,
diatonic root movement by fourth, etc. I've come across something I
can't quite get a handle on.
A dominant-seventh chord based on bVI of a major key is a very common
chord in traditional styles of jazz. In many cases, it precedes a V
chord, so it can be understood as a kind of secondary dominant (a
tritone substitution for V7/V). However, sometimes the bVI7 is used to
decorate a tonic chord. For example:
C6 | Ab7 | C6 | E7 A7 | D7 | G7 | C
Thinking 19th c. classical harmony might yield some clues, I came up
with this at the piano (choose your own octaves):
C C C B C
G F# G F E
E D# E D C
C Ab G G C
Or, I-?-I64-V7-I, where ? is some nationality of augmented 6th chord, I
assume. So, the chord in question could be considered as decorating the
tonic, but I thought I remembered that I64 chords were considered
functioning more like a pre-dominant of some kind.
I guess what I'm looking for is: Does bVI7 function in this case as a
dominant chord, or is there another way to think about this? e.g., is it
some kind of borrowed/altered submedient? A "rootless plagal cadence"
:-)? Does anyone know of a reasonably meaningful name/description for
this kind of progression, something that would be useful for pedagogical
or theoretical purposes to teach/understand pre-modern jazz styles?
Thanks,
HP
Mike Van Dyke
Ray Watson
any given progression or musical phrase, there are countless variations that
are possible that can be derived and yet the original identity will remain
intact.
I have built an arpeggio progression generator that demonstrates my
theory. You are welcome to visit and see if the Pseudo Random variations of
Orchaos can provide you with some of the answers you seek.
To visit, go to: http://www.quantumportal.com
Expect the unexpected!
-Ray
Howard Peirce wrote in message <387FA9AC...@sdrc.com>...
Craig Clark
Ken Durling wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:56:44 -0500, Howard Peirce
> <howard...@sdrc.com> wrote:
>
> >Or, I-?-I64-V7-I, where ? is some nationality of augmented 6th chord, I
> >assume. So, the chord in question could be considered as decorating the
> >tonic, but I thought I remembered that I64 chords were considered
> >functioning more like a pre-dominant of some kind
>
> This is the standard #6 resolution (German in your ex. BTW,) - the
> dissonance resolves out to the octave: Ab-G and F#-G.
>
> You *could* possibly think of it as a tritone sub 2ndary dom i.e.
> bII/V, and the I6/4 becomes a "prolongation" of the resolution to V by
> virtue mainly of the dissonant 4th in the bass.
>
> I myself prefer to think of it as a different species of dissonance
> treatment, since the "7th" (the #6) gets resolved in a new way, and
> the tritone is NOT resolved in the usual way. To me, the whole point
> of tritone substitution is the utilization of the "other spelling" of
> the tritone. In the case of the #6 chord a different aspect of voice
> leading is being exploited, i.e. the presence of the Ab as an upper
> neighbor to V, alongside the F# as the lower - using the "1/2 step
> magnetism" to drive the cadence. . I think it's actually more
> closely related to this medieval cadence (I forget what it's called):
>
> B C
> F# G
> D C
>
> HTH a little
>
> Ken Durling
--
You could just as readily resolve to Am, as the relative harmonic
minor scale suggests.
Craig Clark
Composer
Home Page:http://pages.prodigy.net/crjclark/
Ken Durling
PhJ
your second example (resolving to the dominant) looks like a standard german
6th, but the first one ( C6 | Ab7 | C6 | E7 A7 | D7 | G7 | C) I would
simply call (in french) an "accord de broderie" ('embroidery', is this the
english word for the french 'broderie' in the musical sense ? (german
'Wechselnote')) and I wonder if there really is a better description of this
chord than what you said : 'decorating the tonic'. (iow, searching too far
for one might rather make the issue more complicated than what it is ?)
PhJ
Howard Peirce <howard...@sdrc.com> a écrit dans le message :
387FA9AC...@sdrc.com...
> I'm looking for insights. I've been going through typical chord
> progressions and fragments in pre-modern (trad, swing, and early bop)
> jazz and pop songs, to try to isolate some basic chord
> progressions--small (2-4 bar) fragments on which from which other
> progressions are derived. E.g. dominant cycles, minor plagal cadences,
> diatonic root movement by fourth, etc. I've come across something I
> can't quite get a handle on.
>
> A dominant-seventh chord based on bVI of a major key is a very common
> chord in traditional styles of jazz. In many cases, it precedes a V
> chord, so it can be understood as a kind of secondary dominant (a
> tritone substitution for V7/V). However, sometimes the bVI7 is used to
> decorate a tonic chord. For example:
>
> C6 | Ab7 | C6 | E7 A7 | D7 | G7 | C
>
> Thinking 19th c. classical harmony might yield some clues, I came up
> with this at the piano (choose your own octaves):
>
> C C C B C
> G F# G F E
> E D# E D C
> C Ab G G C
>
> Or, I-?-I64-V7-I, where ? is some nationality of augmented 6th chord, I
> assume. So, the chord in question could be considered as decorating the
> tonic, but I thought I remembered that I64 chords were considered
Joey Goldstein
Howard Peirce wrote:
>
> A dominant-seventh chord based on bVI of a major key is a very common
> chord in traditional styles of jazz. In many cases, it precedes a V
> chord, so it can be understood as a kind of secondary dominant (a
> tritone substitution for V7/V). However, sometimes the bVI7 is used to
> decorate a tonic chord. For example:
>
> C6 | Ab7 | C6 | E7 A7 | D7 | G7 | C
>
> Thinking 19th c. classical harmony might yield some clues, I came up
> with this at the piano (choose your own octaves):
>
> C C C B C
> G F# G F E
> E D# E D C
> C Ab G G C
>
> Or, I-?-I64-V7-I, where ? is some nationality of augmented 6th chord, I
> assume. So, the chord in question could be considered as decorating the
> tonic, but I thought I remembered that I64 chords were considered
> functioning more like a pre-dominant of some kind.
>
> I guess what I'm looking for is: Does bVI7 function in this case as a
> dominant chord, or is there another way to think about this? e.g., is it
> some kind of borrowed/altered submedient? A "rootless plagal cadence"
> :-)? Does anyone know of a reasonably meaningful name/description for
> this kind of progression, something that would be useful for pedagogical
> or theoretical purposes to teach/understand pre-modern jazz styles?
At Berklee (mid '70s), in the jazz harmony course, we were taught that
there are 4 basic harmonic functions in tonal harmony. The Tonic
Function, the Dominant Function, the Subdominant Function and the
Subdominant Minor function. Subdominant Minor Function is only relevant
to major key harmony.
All other chords (i.e secondary dominants, tritone subs and diminished
chords) were seen as being approach chords into one of these harmonic "areas".
In order for a chord to impart one of the harmonic functions it needs to
possess certain scale degrees of the key.
Subdominant minor chords all have scale degree b6. We were taught that a
whole range of chords had a Subdominant Minor function when they
contained b6:
IVm, IVm7, IVm(maj7), IVm6
bVII7
bVImaj7, bVIm7, bVI7, etc.
V7sus4b9
IIm7b5
Etc.
At the school where I presently teach I have noticed that they do not
mention the Subdominant Minor Function in their jazz harmony course.
They describe the same range of chords as being derived from the
"parrallel minor". This does not make nearly as much sense to me as the
Subdominant Minor Function concept though. What I call Subdominant Minor
Function occurs much too frequently to relagated to "borrowed chords".
--
Regards:
Joey Goldstein
Guitarist/Jazz Recording Artist/Teacher
Home Page: http://webhome.idirect.com/~joegold
Email: <joegold AT idirect DOT com>
John Z. McKay
classical harmony) is about tritone resolution. However, what drives the
resolution is strong voice-leading. Here, although a tritone is present,
the stronger voice-leading is in the resolution of the sixth. Tritones and
augmented sixths are dissonant intervals, and they tend to be the most
common intervals to drive voice-leading, and, by extension, the harmony. In
other circumstances, other (dissonant) intervals might drive the resolution,
and you might end up with what looks like a really strange progression.
But, in reality, the chord's "function" is not as important as the drive to
resolve dissonant intervals.
If you'd want to ascribe a function to the chord, I'd say the best analysis
is just to describe it as some sort of "predominant," i.e., a chord that
moves by strong voice-leading to the dominant. In most well-formed tonal
progressions, there has to be some movement through a predominant before you
can have a V-I cadence (although simple progressions might move to V
directly from I).
Anyhow, the chord here has some aspects of various predominants--the
tritone, as mentioned, makes it look like a secondary dominant to V. The
sixth interval, however, gives an extra push to the progression. (Note, by
the way, that I64 is essentially a dominant function chord--the E and C in
your progression are merely a suspension and appoggiatura. So, the move to
I64 is merely a delay in getting to a true dominant.)
As for your first example progression (I-bVI7-I), that seems to me to be
merely an example of a "common tone" progression, i.e., C is the common
chord tone that is held through (giving the chord a sort of "altered tonic"
feel--like a IV or a vi would feel like here). The other notes are neighbor
tones of sorts to the tonic, and because of the same strong resolution
tendency above, it makes it real easy to push right back to the tonic from
bVI. In other words, this chord really doesn't have a "function," per se,
it is a collection of neighboring tones that just happen to combine to have
a strong push back toward the tonic triad.
Anyhow, hope that helps.
Oh, and by the way, Ken, I've often heard your medieval cadence referred to
as a "double leading tone" cadence, for obvious reasons. It's just another
example of strong voice-leading as a drive to a cadence (although it sounds
a bit odd to our ears today).
-John McKay
Ken Durling wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:56:44 -0500, Howard Peirce
> <howard...@sdrc.com> wrote:
>
> >Or, I-?-I64-V7-I, where ? is some nationality of augmented 6th chord, I
> >assume. So, the chord in question could be considered as decorating the
> >tonic, but I thought I remembered that I64 chords were considered
Daniel M. Williams
"Bye, Bye Blues" and JR Morton's "The Pearls," to the original Star Trek
theme and "Honey Don't" by the Beatles. I see it as one of the nonresolving
dominants derived from the Io7 chord (II7, IV7, bVI7, and VII7). They all
relate to I by a cadential sound rather than any dominant function (no
tritone resolution, no down-a-fifth or -m2 root motion). I see the +6 is an
altered inversion of the V of V chord. The German +6 spells out
enharmonically as a bVI7 chord, but behaves differently. I believe the
chromatic components of functional chords indicate the chord's function. So,
bVI7 functions like a Cadential Io7, and it also has the subdominant minor
component, as Mr. Goldstein indicated. It's a great sound!
Sincerely,
Dan Williams
Ethel Jean Saltz
wrote:
>"parrallel minor". This does not make nearly as much sense to me as the
>Subdominant Minor Function concept though. What I call Subdominant Minor
>Function occurs much too frequently to relagated to "borrowed chords".
================================
I had the exact discussion with the Theory Prof last semester. I said,
there's no difference between some of the chords we are learning as
chord substitution and subdominants. He was extremely irritated. He
said learn them separately in their appropriate groupings because when
you meet up with these seemingly identical chords, they are used
functionally entirely differently. It's all about function, not the
alphabet. In fact, it was in private e-mail that Dr. Matt explained
all this to me when I was having problems memorizing for tests in
theory II. Understanding the basic "functionality" of things is
extremely important to me -- the fact that "functionality" is an
element in discussing chords. So I will eventually learn
"appropriateness".
Be-ahavah oo-ve-shalom, Queen Jean of Creekbend
Mac-Niet-Spin-Gal, 391 A.G. (after Galileo/5370)
mailto: nie...@airmail.net
mrw...@my-deja.com
Instead of
Ab/C/Eb/Gb
you thought of it as
G#/B#/D#/F#
Now it looks like a V+7
My gut feeling is that they do it in jazz that way because they like
the sound of it. Jazz was invented by musicians who had an
extraordinary intuitive sense of beautifully rich harmony. Jazz
afficianados oft repeat the axiom, "if you have to ask what jazz is you
will never know."
In short I think you are trying to pound a square peg in a round hole.
Just, understand it, use it, and enjoy it. I myself am partial to
tritones and use them all over the place. I guess we all have our
private madness.
Respectfully,
Don Crandall
In article <387FA9AC...@sdrc.com>,
Howard Peirce <howard...@sdrc.com> wrote:
> I'm looking for insights. I've been going through typical chord
> progressions and fragments in pre-modern (trad, swing, and early bop)
> jazz and pop songs, to try to isolate some basic chord
> progressions--small (2-4 bar) fragments on which from which other
> progressions are derived. E.g. dominant cycles, minor plagal cadences,
> diatonic root movement by fourth, etc. I've come across something I
> can't quite get a handle on.
>
> A dominant-seventh chord based on bVI of a major key is a very common
> chord in traditional styles of jazz. In many cases, it precedes a V
> chord, so it can be understood as a kind of secondary dominant (a
> tritone substitution for V7/V). However, sometimes the bVI7 is used to
> decorate a tonic chord. For example:
>
> C6 | Ab7 | C6 | E7 A7 | D7 | G7 | C
>
> Thinking 19th c. classical harmony might yield some clues, I came up
> with this at the piano (choose your own octaves):
>
> C C C B C
> G F# G F E
> E D# E D C
> C Ab G G C
>
> Or, I-?-I64-V7-I, where ? is some nationality of augmented 6th chord,
I
> assume. So, the chord in question could be considered as decorating
the
> tonic, but I thought I remembered that I64 chords were considered
> functioning more like a pre-dominant of some kind.
>
> I guess what I'm looking for is: Does bVI7 function in this case as a
> dominant chord, or is there another way to think about this? e.g., is
it
> some kind of borrowed/altered submedient? A "rootless plagal cadence"
> :-)? Does anyone know of a reasonably meaningful name/description for
> this kind of progression, something that would be useful for
pedagogical
> or theoretical purposes to teach/understand pre-modern jazz styles?
>
> Thanks,
>
> HP
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Howard Peirce
> At Berklee (mid '70s), in the jazz harmony course, we were taught that
> there are 4 basic harmonic functions in tonal harmony. The Tonic
> Function, the Dominant Function, the Subdominant Function and the
> Subdominant Minor function. Subdominant Minor Function is only relevant
> to major key harmony.
>
> Subdominant minor chords all have scale degree b6. We were taught that a
> whole range of chords had a Subdominant Minor function when they
> contained b6:
> IVm, IVm7, IVm(maj7), IVm6
> bVII7
> bVImaj7, bVIm7, bVI7, etc.
> V7sus4b9
> IIm7b5
> Etc.
This is interesting--so, what Berklee calls a "subdominant minor function" is
what I might call a "(jazz) minor plagal cadence," as in FM-Fm6-C, or FM-Bb7-C. I
was thinking this bVI7 might be some form of that.
Also, since as you know a dom7 can be replaced with the dim7 a major third above,
a roughly equivalent progression to C-Ab7-C would be C-Cdim7-C, which also shows
up quite a bit in pre-modern jazz. That opens up many further possibilities, but
none of those get me close to relating bVI7-I to ivm6-I.
Still, I'm growing increasingly comfortable with understanding the minor plagal
cadence of the IV-ivm-I variety, I'm struggling a bit with bVI7-I--I mean, I can
play the progression literally, but I'm still struggling to hear it as a unit.
Thanks,
HP
Howard Peirce
> As you well know, this harmonic behavior occurs in all kinds of tunes, from
> "Bye, Bye Blues" and JR Morton's "The Pearls," to the original Star Trek
> theme and "Honey Don't" by the Beatles. I see it as one of the nonresolving
> dominants derived from the Io7 chord (II7, IV7, bVI7, and VII7). They all
> relate to I by a cadential sound rather than any dominant function [snip]I
> believe the
> chromatic components of functional chords indicate the chord's function. So,
> bVI7 functions like a Cadential Io7, and it also has the subdominant minor
> component, as Mr. Goldstein indicated. It's a great sound!
Hi, Dan--
Yes, I was specifically thinking of Bye Bye Blues and The Pearls when I wrote
the question. And I realized the connection to Idim7 over the weekend. Can you
give me some more info on what you mean by "cadential" in this context? It's
been a looooong time since I had classical theory, and I was only thinking
"cadential" in terms of "authentic" and "plagal."
Thanks,
HP
Ken Durling
>you thought of it as
>
>G#/B#/D#/F#
>
>Now it looks like a V+7
Right, in the key of C#, sans the "+". It does not in the least look
an V7 in C with a raised 5th, if that's the point you're making, just
because it has a D# in it. It certailnly doesn't *sound* like one.
Someone already suggested that it resembled a V of bII, which is in
itself a "substitute" for V.
Sorry, don't mean to be contentious, but one of my pet peeves is the
assertion that "understanding," and "digging," or enjoyment, are
exclusive. For someone who has always straddled the jazz and
classical worlds, it's an old line.
Ken Durling
Howard Peirce
> What if you spelled it enharmonically
>
> Instead of
>
> Ab/C/Eb/Gb
>
> you thought of it as
>
> G#/B#/D#/F#
>
> Now it looks like a V+7
No it doesn't. It looks like #V7. V+7 is G B D# F.
> My gut feeling is that they do it in jazz that way because they like
> the sound of it.
Well, you could say the same thing about Mozart or Beethoven. Or Cage, for
that matter. They all wrote what they wrote because they liked the sound of
it.
> Jazz was invented by musicians who had an
> extraordinary intuitive sense of beautifully rich harmony. Jazz
> afficianados oft repeat the axiom, "if you have to ask what jazz is you
> will never know."
That's the myth, yes. Unfortunately, it doesn't square with history.
Important early composers like Morton or Spencer Williams were far from
autodidacts and savants. They were trained professional musicians, for whom
jazz was only a small part of their professional musical activities. And,
even if a given piece of music is composed and performed entirely aurally,
it can still be analyzed and understood by theoretical means.
The "if you have to ask" remark is a legacy of a time when the jazz market
was highly competetive, and musicians were less inclined to discuss their
methods. It is also an example of verbal Signification. The phrase
translates roughly to: "Quit bothering me. I'm not terribly impressed with
your intelligence. This interview is over."
Nowadays, of course, the phrase goes, "If you have to ask, just go to your
local library or bookstore, or participate in any of the public clinics and
master classes, or enter a degree program at any of hundreds of colleges
and universities."
HP
Dr.Matt
functions wsa developed in a pre-jazz context by Riemann.
--
My CD "Kabala": http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/cd.html
Matt Fields, DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
PGP Public Key http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/pubkey.asc
For spammers: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/uce.htm
Howard Peirce
> Just a side note to point out that this limited repertoire of harmonic
> functions wsa developed in a pre-jazz context by Riemann.
Thanks, I may check that out. I think classical theory can shed light on jazz
theory and vice versa, but I'm becoming more and more convinced they're not the
same. More like two languages that have a similar vocabulary but a very different
syntax and grammar (like English and some pidgins).
HP
Daniel M. Williams
in classical analysis. Cadential function" is merely to say that a chord
sound is heard in relationship to the tonic, but without necessarily a
dominant relationship. For example, in Misty, the 7th degree of the scale on
"Look at ME" could be reharmonized with a Io7 or a VII7 (or #IVm7(b5) VII7)
or even a II7(#11) before moving directly to the I Ma7 on the downbeat of
the next bar. These are a few examples of delayed resolution, even if it is
not dominant resolution. I'm sure you use them all the time.
"Howard Peirce" <howard...@sdrc.com> wrote in message
news:38834412...@sdrc.com...
Dr.Matt
Right, between classical theory and jazz theory the effect is very
much like the first scene of Stoppard's "Dogg's Hamlet, Cahoot's Macbeth".
Slab.
mrw...@my-deja.com
Howard Peirce <howard...@sdrc.com> wrote:
> mrw...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > What if you spelled it enharmonically
> >
> > Instead of
> >
> > Ab/C/Eb/Gb
> >
> > you thought of it as
> >
> > G#/B#/D#/F#
> >
> > Now it looks like a V+7
>
culpa. I should have said #V7 I stand corrected. Still a rose by any
other name....
>
> > My gut feeling is that they do it in jazz that way because they like
> > the sound of it.
>
> Well, you could say the same thing about Mozart or Beethoven. Or
Cage, for
> that matter. They all wrote what they wrote because they liked the
what I stated previously.
>
> > Jazz was invented by musicians who had an
> > extraordinary intuitive sense of beautifully rich harmony. Jazz
> > afficianados oft repeat the axiom, "if you have to ask what jazz is
you
> > will never know."
>
> That's the myth, yes. Unfortunately, it doesn't square with history.
> Important early composers like Morton or Spencer Williams were far
from
> autodidacts and savants. They were trained professional musicians,
for whom
> jazz was only a small part of their professional musical activities.
I was not aware that Louie Armstrong and his Peers attended the best
conservatories in Europe and America. I was under the impression that
he and his fellow "greats" had some training, but were in large
naturally gifted musicians. Regardless I still enjoy listening to
Sachmo, Ella, Holiday, etc.
And,
> even if a given piece of music is composed and performed entirely
aurally,
> it can still be analyzed and understood by theoretical means.
I never argued that it could not.
>
> The "if you have to ask" remark is a legacy of a time when the jazz
market
> was highly competetive, and musicians were less inclined to discuss
their
> methods. It is also an example of verbal Signification. The phrase
> translates roughly to: "Quit bothering me. I'm not terribly impressed
with
> your intelligence. This interview is over."
>
> Nowadays, of course, the phrase goes, "If you have to ask, just go to
your
> local library or bookstore, or participate in any of the public
clinics and
> master classes, or enter a degree program at any of hundreds of
colleges
> and universities."
>
> HP
>
>
Howard Peirce
> I was not aware that Louie Armstrong and his Peers attended the best
> conservatories in Europe and America.
They did not; nor would they have learned the skills they needed to
succeed. If you want to think in European terms, it's better to think of
the training of early jazz musicians as an apprenticeship program. No one
thinks less of, say, Josef Gingold in that he never attended a conservatory
(or so I was told); rather, he apprenticed with Kreisler. In the same way,
Armstrong apprenticed with Oliver and Perez.
Jelly Roll Morton (nee Ferdinand LeMenthe) was from a highly regarded
Creole family in New Orleans. He was given private music instruction from a
very early age. His early professional career in brothels consisted largely
of playing his own transcriptions of opera scores and Victorian parlor
songs and dances, often interspersed with amazingly vulgar blues ("Whinin'
Boy Blues, for example, would make 2 Live Crew blush). The Alan Lomax
recordings of Morton tend to focus more on the blues side of his ouvre, but
IIRC there are some examples of him playing more "legit" things.
Gunther Schuller, in his book "Early Jazz," argues that Morton's
often-ridiculed claim to have "invented jazz" actually has some merit, in
that Morton was most likely the first to wed the language of the blues to
that of late-19th c. popular music.
> I was under the impression that
> he and his fellow "greats" had some training, but were in large
> naturally gifted musicians. Regardless I still enjoy listening to
> Sachmo, Ella, Holiday, etc.
No more "naturally" gifted than any other musician. What I resent, as a
jazz musician, is the implication that jazz is not a highly exacting craft,
and that it is "felt" rather than learned. Moreover, it always has been a
learned skill, regardless of whether that learning took place in a
conservatory, or in a series of apprenticeships. There's a lot of mythology
surrounding jazz--much of it created by the musicians themselves--that
ultimately works against us. I'm not a huge fan of Albert Murray, but his
book "Stompin' the Blues" really lays out and nails down a full
appreciation for jazz (which Murray calls blues) as a learned craft.
HP
mrw...@my-deja.com
enjoy listening to. I personally don't have the "feel" to play it,
call me clumsy if you like. I really admire those who do and especially
the "greats" in the medium who I mentioned earlier. One derivative of
jazz I really love in particular is the "torch song".
Sorry if I was not clear earlier.
Don Crandall