Oh Lady Be Good progression question

Passacaglia · September 2009

With some study mates, we're working on Oh Lady be Good - my teacher is in Co., dazzling folks, and I've a question on whether an Em-Em7M-Em7-Em6 we have in our notes is a way to add more color, a variation on an approach to a chord in the bridge, or a standard part of the bridge itself.

Also, a question on the 2 A sections - whether it is A A or A A', with a slight difference on the opening chords in A1. I don't have any available recordings to listen to, and we're working on it in our study group.

So far, what we have, is:

A: G6-C9-G6-Bm7-Bbm7-Am7-D9-G6-G#dim-Am7-D9
B: C-C#dim-G6-A7-D9-Em-Em7M-Em7-Em6

-I'm not sure, again, if there's usually an A'; and not sure if the phrase Em-Em7M-Em7-Em6 is supposed to be as written, or as a possible approach variation to another bridge progression.

Any help, thanks.

Paul

Jack · September 2009

Hi Paul,

It looks like you've got too many bars in the bridge; try something like this (one bar each):

C C# G G Em A7 Am D7

then try using some moving basslines in the last four bars, and you'll hear it. If you want to use the Em line, try fitting it into bars 5 and 6. You should be fine repeating the A; just resolve to G then G7 the second time to lead into the C.

best,
Jack.

Passacaglia · September 2009

Jack wrote:

Hi Paul,

It looks like you've got too many bars in the bridge; try something like this (one bar each):

C C# G G Em A7 Am D7

then try using some moving basslines in the last four bars, and you'll hear it. If you want to use the Em line, try fitting it into bars 5 and 6. You should be fine repeating the A; just resolve to G then G7 the second time to lead into the C.

best,
Jack.

Thanks Jack, helpful - revisiting theory to better understand, but I think I'm getting there.

I'm still somewhat lost, however, because looking at my notes again (a horrid mess - know I now to write more carefully, and to have my game brain on, as we go fast****), I'm seeing a possible bridge of:

B: C-C#°-G6-G6-A7-A7-D9-D9, with the

Em line perhaps replacing in for the second G6 and first A7, so we'd have:

(end of A'):...G7
B: C-C#°-G6-[B7/D#/Em7M-Em7/Em6]-A7-Am-D9.

I'm lost on the slash chord, didn't see the shape, and though I can come up with some shapes around the 4th fret (where the rest of the line comes), not sure I've got a right voicing there (coming up with X64445, or X64475).

At any rate, does this make sense:

A - ends on G; ...D9-G
A' - ends on G7 (shape we used, no 5th, so as with the A7 of the bridge, G7=3234xx); ...D9-G7
B: C-C#°-G6-B7/D#-E-Em7M-Em7-Em6-Am-D9
A

-Close?

*********************

****Something interesting, in terms of pedagogy, I've come to know, at this early stage. Prior to this class, I've been working with and embrace Denis Chang's approach; and I see the value of this kind of training in terms of fast-wiring the brain/body connection. Seems my teacher, too, isn't a fan of a lot of writing...as he said to us, "watch my fingers." Seems to me this approach allows for a much quicker understanding of everything, incl. progressions - backed up by book learning, at least the vocabulary of shapes, and enough theory to understand resolutions, etc....I know I'd be lost if I didn't have the voicings vocabulary, and at least some understanding of harmonic theory - but I'd also be lost if all I did was try to work this out on paper. Just a rambling thought...

Jack · September 2009

Passacaglia wrote:

I'm seeing a possible bridge of:

B: C-C#°-G6-G6-A7-A7-D9-D9,

Perfect!

Passacaglia wrote:

with the
Em line perhaps replacing in for the second G6 and first A7, so we'd have:

(end of A'):...G7
B: C-C#°-G6-[B7/D#/Em7M-Em7/Em6]-A7-Am-D9.

I'd say the Em line would simply replace the 2 bars of A7, giving you:
C-C#°-G6-G6-(Em-Em7M)-(Em7-Em6)-Am-D9

Passacaglia wrote:

I'm lost on the slash chord, didn't see the shape, and though I can come up with some shapes around the 4th fret (where the rest of the line comes), not sure I've got a right voicing there (coming up with X64445, or X64475).

For B7/D# you're probably looking for something like this:

-x--
-7--
-6--
-7--
-6--
-x--
(notice too that this shape is the same as the Em6, just on a different fret--which helps explain why the Em6 can so easily replace A7...with that fingering, Em6 is essentially A7 without a root.)

or you could try the B7 with the b9:

-x--
-7--
-5--
-7--
-6--
-x--

either way, I'm not sure you really need it...if you really want to use it, try using it to replace the last two beats of G before going to Em.

Good luck, hope that helps!

best,
Jack.

Passacaglia · September 2009

Lots to play with, thanks, Jack.

Forgive the theory confusions - as I knew no theory before a couple of months ago, still working on remembering it all, as well as learning a bit on when/how one "bends" the orthodoxy.

The first B7 shape you mentioned, x6767x - get it (I think), thanks. I can see how that would fit nicely, see that it's the same shape as the Em6. Technically a B9, just missing the tonic, yes?

Same logic, relating Em6 in this fingering to A7 - you've got your 3-5-b7-9, just missing the tonic, correct, otherwise it's an A9?

I see the second shape flattens the 9th, from C# to C. Any thoughts on what a flattened extension does to a chord - meaning, any thoughts on why you may or may not like these colorings?

Hope I'm not overworking this.

Just, as I said, I am new to theory, and as I've seen lots of cases with these added "colors," dropped notes, flattened extensions (I've come to really enjoy the walk from a m7 to a 13(b9) for instance) - making the chord not "technically" orthodox, I'm just wanting to see the parameters of play, in terms of why and when one would want to modify orthodox voicings, if some general guidelines and thoughts are available.

Many thanks again, Jack.

Paul

djangology · September 2009

Passacaglia wrote:

With some study mates, we're working on Oh Lady be Good - my teacher is in Co., dazzling folks, and I've a question on whether an Em-Em7M-Em7-Em6 we have in our notes is a way to add more color, a variation on an approach to a chord in the bridge, or a standard part of the bridge itself.

Personally, as a rhythm player I'd avoid the voice lead on the Em (for this particular song) and let the soloist use that tool if he wants...

Passacaglia · September 2009

djangology wrote:

Passacaglia wrote:

With some study mates, we're working on Oh Lady be Good - my teacher is in Co., dazzling folks, and I've a question on whether an Em-Em7M-Em7-Em6 we have in our notes is a way to add more color, a variation on an approach to a chord in the bridge, or a standard part of the bridge itself.

Personally, as a rhythm player I'd avoid the voice lead on the Em (for this particular song) and let the soloist use that tool if he wants...

Hear you, and agree. This was just something our teacher gave us to work on, if we were comfortable with the simpler progression. My bent is to learn as much difficult stuff as I can, so that backing off is a choice, rather than a necessity, due to limitations in knowledge and ability.

But I fully agree with you, in terms of roles. My personal goal, over the next couple of years, is to perfect a clean, dry pompe, master what I can of latin rhythms, and to be as impeccable a timekeeper as I can become. I believe mastering simplicity is key to mastering anything, so I've no desire to become a rhythmic wizard - just want to understand the possiblities.

Interesting note in this way - I've enjoyed playing along with Gonzalo Bergara's rhythm tracks, available on youtube, and recently got his book. I like something he said, on the goal of rhythm training, and playing:

Gonzalo Bergara wrote:

..And stop adding all those extra rhythm things in there, keep it nice, straight and simple, notice how most everyboy does a little something at the end of a verse, try not to, it'll be a much bigger challenge.

Matthias Lenz · September 2009

Passacaglia wrote:

The first B7 shape you mentioned, x6767x - get it (I think), thanks. I can see how that would fit nicely, see that it's the same shape as the Em6. Technically a B9, just missing the tonic, yes?

Same logic, relating Em6 in this fingering to A7 - you've got your 3-5-b7-9, just missing the tonic, correct, otherwise it's an A9?

I see the second shape flattens the 9th, from C# to C. Any thoughts on what a flattened extension does to a chord - meaning, any thoughts on why you may or may not like these colorings?

You got that right. Any m6 chord equals a half-dimished chord, which is a Dom7/9 shape without the tonic.
The other shape is a dimished chord and equals a Dom7/b9 chord.

Pick what your ears like more, but there is a theoretical background to this, and it´s derived from standard major and minor cadences. Adding the 9th to the dominant chord is simply done refering to the scale. Check the following two examples :

V / I in Cmajor is G7 / C, using a Dom9th shape makes it G9 / C, simply because the 9th tone in the scale (counting from G) is A.

V / I in Aminor is E7 / Am, and adding the 9th to the dominant chord (counting from E) gives you an f, so it´s an E7flat9 (written b9).

So, the 7/9 chord is related to the major key and the flat9 chord to the minor key, and both are "expected" to resolve to the related chord. But of course, you can use either one to add color to a progression, for example use a G7/b9 and then resolute to a Cmaj chord. The technical term for this is "modal interchange", and it can be used in many ways and places.

Caravan GSE · September 2009

Those look like the chords to Dinah. No?

Passacaglia · September 2009

Matthias Lenz wrote:

Passacaglia wrote:

The first B7 shape you mentioned, x6767x - get it (I think), thanks. I can see how that would fit nicely, see that it's the same shape as the Em6. Technically a B9, just missing the tonic, yes?

Same logic, relating Em6 in this fingering to A7 - you've got your 3-5-b7-9, just missing the tonic, correct, otherwise it's an A9?

I see the second shape flattens the 9th, from C# to C. Any thoughts on what a flattened extension does to a chord - meaning, any thoughts on why you may or may not like these colorings?

You got that right. Any m6 chord equals a half-dimished chord, which is a Dom7/9 shape without the tonic.
The other shape is a dimished chord and equals a Dom7/b9 chord.

Pick what your ears like more, but there is a theoretical background to this, and it´s derived from standard major and minor cadences. Adding the 9th to the dominant chord is simply done refering to the scale. Check the following two examples :

V / I in Cmajor is G7 / C, using a Dom9th shape makes it G9 / C, simply because the 9th tone in the scale (counting from G) is A.

V / I in Aminor is E7 / Am, and adding the 9th to the dominant chord (counting from E) gives you an f, so it´s an E7flat9 (written b9).

So, the 7/9 chord is related to the major key and the flat9 chord to the minor key, and both are "expected" to resolve to the related chord. But of course, you can use either one to add color to a progression, for example use a G7/b9 and then resolute to a Cmaj chord. The technical term for this is "modal interchange", and it can be used in many ways and places.

That's very cool, thank you Matthias. Will have to go and play with this across different keys, chords and scales - something like a musical analogue of counting fingers, lol - in order to anchor this home more fluently, but thank you, for showing the logic behind this; exactly what I was asking.

Edit: So, just to I confirm I've got it:

In G: V / I = D7/G, and the 9th is an E; therefore, D9/G;

In Eb: V / I = Bb7/Eb, and the 9th is a C; therefore, Bb9/Eb;

In Em: V /I = B7/E, and the 9th is a C; therefore, B7(b9)/E; and

In Fm: V / I = C7/F, and the 9th is a Db - therefore, C7(b9)/F.

-Yes?

Knowing this (if indeed I have it right), you've piqued me to look into modal interchanges, which were unknown to me - again, the logic of when/how/why one "breaks rules" with unexpected colors is interesting to me, so thanks again.

Paul