tritone sub, altered dominant

dennis

nwilkins wrote:

Regarding chord subs and harmonic complexity in this music, I think we should also take into account Scot's great post regarding the separate folk (improvised yet Djangocentric with very particular rules and ways of doing things) and jazz streams of GJ. Fapy's comment epitomizes the folk school approach. ie - play simple chords like the original hotclub did, allowing the soloist to improvise within a certain well-defined set of boundaries.

hi, that's not exactly what I meant. You see, by keeping chords to their most basic function it allows the soloist to go in whatever direction he chooses. He can imply all sorts of whacky harmonies over these changes, something jazz players do all the time (ie coltrane playing the coltrane changes over a regular ii V I).

On the other hand, if the rhythm guitar player implied such changes, it limits the soloist's choices and it also affects the way ths song sounds...

my main beef is not the changes themselves but the musicians... you should be letting your ears dictate what you play not your fingers as a lot of people tend to do.

When I can accompany someone, I add all sorts of whacky changes myself but within reason (at least I hope!!!), I listen to the soloist and if I catch him doing something cool , I try to respond appropriately in my rhythm playing

marciero

what this accompanist did (who has no knowledge of theory whatsoever, he just likes to make things as "fancy" as possible) was drop the Am7 and go for 2 full bars of D7... for the first bar, however, he played the tritone sub Ab, thus in effect replacing the Am7 with Ab.....

Ahhh... This is different. Thanks.

There are lots of books out there aimed for beginners with crazy chord subs and it confuses the hell out of everyone ...

I tend to use books like this as a reference. Cosimini's book (vol 1) has illuminated some things for me, and I've gotten some good ideas, learned some gypsy voicings, etc., so it's been great. But I never treated it as an end all. So I am not bothered in the least that he has G/B in Just one of Those Things, where Django (at least in one version) and others 'clearly' play B6. (He also omits Bhalf dim entirely which does bother me a little-that warrants a mention at least as a variation.) I suppose that beginners do not have the musical maturity to make wise choices concerning all the "crazy chord subs" that may appear in books like this. Personally, with a book like this I like to see the author's interpretation of these possibilities. But for simply learning how to play a tune, these books should be a secondary or tertiary reference, with recordings and teacher being the primary and secondary (not necessarily in that order) .

Mike

nwilkins

Dennis,

I agree with what you're saying, and I realize that basic chords give more freedom to the soloist. I was just saying that adding harmonic complexity can spice up a song if done correctly, and if things are really working well it can create a dialogue between the soloist and accompanist which can lead to great things. I believe that this sort of thing would be welcomed less by Django-centric players who are used to doing things a certain way and thinking about songs a certain way, and don't want that status quo to be disturbed by "unusual" chords.

Passacaglia

Old thread. I've been combing the globe lately (e.g., HotclubUK), thinking on this subject. Basically, it would be nice to be able to have such knowledge of harmony, that one could pick up a book like the Cosimini series, "reverse engineer" it back to simple changes (understand and am in complete agreement with Dennis on the accompanist's job. I hope I've done right by such a creed, in focusing as I do on accompaniment), or have such knowledge in place that throwing a good part of it out is a conscious position.

I suppose that beginners do not have the musical maturity to make wise choices concerning all the "crazy chord subs" that may appear in books like this.

C'est moi. In a word, I've worked rhythm fundamentals for awhile, now. Everything I've tried to learn has centered on being clean, swinging, pulsing quietly but strongly, behind the soloist; resisting the ego's urge to step out and draw focus (and failing, all too often). Nowhere close, yet, and no plans to change - good chord choices, interesting, supportive changes played simply and well. But I don't have the theoretical chops to understand the discussions on the more complex harmony ideas. I'd like to learn this language. I've Jim Aikens's book on Chords and Harmony. Other suggestions?

Many thanks,

Paul

Jazzaferri

take any tune you know well and analyze the harmony in it. figure out the function of each chord, keeping in mind that that the key of a song may change. find all the ii V I' progressions. ii V's are just a hip way of playing a IV V progression ii being the relative minor of IV

The best way to learn tritone subs is to use them at first for a chromatic bass line run. so if a song has a ii V progression one bar of each leading to the I substitute the bII7 for the V7. the two notes in the V7 that for the tritone will form the tritone in then sub but their function is inverted.

In the example above D7 D F# A C the F# and C are the tritone interval in Ab7 the notes are Ab C Eb Gb(F#) and the C which was the seventh in D7 is the third and the Gg(F#) which was third becomes the seventh. Thats why tritone subs work..because for major, minor and dominant chords the notes that define the chord are the 3 and the 7.

Passacaglia

Thanks, Jay, saw you on here and knew I could count on you, man!

I should clarify, I'm talking more generally than this thread's discussion - more, wanting to learn (practical) harmonic theory, if for no other reason than I'm curious, when guys like you talk, and would like to share in some of the reasoning involved.

I've found it interesting, studying Nous'che's rhythm, how often the tritone comes up as a "typical Django thing" with a #9, and 5th in the bass on rhythm changes. Quite common, I'm sure, have seen it with a lot of players, but to understand its implications (with the bass, for example) is interesting to me.

Jazzaferri

what works best for me is to write out with a pencil the chord functions and key of each part of the tune and figure out what the melody line is doing and how the harmony is working with the melody line.

this usually takes me quite a while ......sometimes weeks, as i don't do it all at once, but phrase by phrase, during which time I will muck about with different harmonic ideas....arranging...how i want things to sound.

for those without my affliction, I would think it would be a few hours at most on a tune....getting faster as one's experience goes. best to start with tunes one knows best and once they are done moving on to new ones. after a year or two you will be hearing it as you play and the opportunities will just come to you.

to me, relating to some of the earlier comments, there are two schools in gj. those groups with soloists that talk all the time with an undercurrent behind them, and other groups where it is a conversation between different players. one isn't better than another just different. it is never polite to interrupt a conversation, which is what playing unexpected reharmonization is, but reharming as PART of the conversation is jazz at its most sublime...

Passacaglia

That's very interesting, thanks, Jay. I think above all else, I need to train my ears. It should probably go without saying, such an inane idea...but I've spent a ton of time, well, let's just say, not doing that. I know there are different schools of thought here, as with seemingly all other things. But it's time I really listen.