Ive heard groups take popular non jazz songs and make them jazzy by slowing them down having the drummer play something on the ride symbol and revoice the chords to make them sound.... jazzy

Now im not really a jazz guy but this intrigues me. How do you revoice the chords like that, and whats the theory behind it? like how would you make a standard Am/G/F/E pregression sound jazzy?? and whats the bass players part in all this? just some arpeggiation with some chromatic walking?? thanks guys.

It really depends on the specifics of the tune...melody, song structure, etc.
An appropriate substitution for one tune might be grating in another context.
Pretty helpful, eh?

Maybe suggest a particular song rather than a mere progression...?
Also a lot depends on the type of jazz you want to emulate.

im thinking of a smooth jazz context, maybe sorta kinda like norah jones, if that makes any sense.

Here's a jazzier version of your chord progression.

:Am7 / / /| GMaj7 / Gm7 C7|
|FMaj7 / / / |Bm7b5 / E7b9 / :|

I doubt that many jazz musicians would call what Norah Jones does "jazz", including the fine musicians that work with her.

There's a whole world out there of jazz bass playing. Maybe you are getting interested enough to look into it.

Yeah, walking bass is just some arpeggiation with a few chromatic notes mixed in. Tell that to Ron Carter.

Forgive my ignorance Jeremy, could you go a little deeper into theory behind that substitution, and maybe some recomended listening.
I noticed you eluded to certain chords by building a chord 5 intervals above from the chord you were about to resolove to (C7 before Fmaj7) is this common in jazz? I Have been listening to some Weather report as of late, but its not the slower smooth type of jazz that im interested in.
thanks again.

Here's something more...
For the bass lines you could first try simply substituting other chordal tones for the roots to see which seemed appealing but that may not be particularly jazzy or even focused unless you have a harmonic plan.

Exploring harmonies, one way to start is by adding 7ths, 9ths, etc., to the chords in various combinations (note what Jeremy did). Sixths & 9ths are handy for the folk-pop or jazz-lite sound of Norah Jones. When you find some that you like then you can start substituting other chords if you want (it's hardly a necessity), depending on their similarity to the chords in the progression.

When I played around with this last night I came up with something quite like JC.
For the Am you could try Am7 or Amadd9 (these led me to Cmaj7 as a sub); for G a similar tack led me to Bm7b5 (Bhalf dim.; so called because the 7th is only flatted not a double flat); for F, try Fmaj7 or Fadd9, etc.; for E, try E9, E7b9 or even Bdim/G#dim.
That brings us around to some of the chromatic motion you mentioned. Using the examples above you could move Am9/Cmaj7 to C6 to G9/B half dim to B dim to Fadd9 to Fmaj7 to Fdim to E to G#dim back to the Am.
[Of course, the enharmonic equivalence of diminished chords allows them to be called by different names for the same notes; I've named these by the top note in each voicing rather than what may be their strict theoretic function.]

Returning to bass functions, once you have an idea of the harmonic treatment you want to give a tune then you can use the bass to define the movements more clearly or effectively. For ex: chords like Am7 & Cmaj7 or G9 & Bm7b5, which have identical (or nearly identical) notes can often be defined differently by the bass note.

As for theory, there are a lot of people who follow "rules" for substitution but personally I think one's better off working from the sound & listening for similarities rather than following prescribed functions.
To me that latter action leads more to an effect of conventionality of even staleness instead of inspiration. It also tends to give one the idea that following a set of "rules" is musical style but does little to develop one's thinking for why certain things work the way they do.
Chord substitution, for example, has many rules that some may cite but those are not arbitrary, they're based on (as mentioned above) the prescence of similar notes in the relative chords.
If you learn that idea you can easily explore harmonies to develop your own rules or at least see how to analyze those rules others present to you.
Also never forget that inspiration, if effective, trumps "rules".


[edited for spelling only]

Mike Dimin has a good book on this subject.

He mentions doing things like leading a chord with its relative dominate. and substituting dominate chords, with its relative dominate (secondary dominate). You can usually lead a dominate with a sub dominate like a ii or IV, but its matter of listening like MJ's nose said. If you are interested the info is out there all you gotta do is look it up.

I brought this subject up once, got flamed and then was told to look up Mark Levine's book.

That's as common in jazz as power chords are in punk. A dominant chord (such as C7 or E7b9) a fifth above pulls you to a tonic (Fmaj7 or Am7 in this example) very strongly, and here's why.

C7 has the following notes: C E G Bb
Fmaj7 has these: F A C E

Notice you've got a C and E in common. But it's the half-step differences that pull your ear. The Bb to the A (major third), and the E to the F (root). That's a strong pull.

E7b9 has these notes: E G# B D F
Am7 has these notes: A C E G

Look at that: B pulls to C, G# pulls to G, and F pulls to E. It's a very strong resolve. Beware not to overuse that kind of resolution though. You might tire the listener with cliché, or give away your next move!

II V I or m7 followed by 7 followed by Maj7 is the most common chord progression in jazz.

Get The Standards Real Book and learn all the tunes and analyze the chord progressions.

Then you can begin to start to understand what is going on.

Teaching someone what substitution chords to use is a way bigger topic than can be covered with posts in a Forum.