So what chord is this?

[stepay]

Originally posted by Dave Horne:

Four pages, one chord.

 

There should be a better way to communicate chordal construction. You know, there might actually be a ... it's coming to me .... wait, wait ... nope, it's gone.

 

Dave,

 

I'm going to have to decide that you're just hilarious. Made me laugh anyway.

[Eric VB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve Nathan:

This is awesome

 

And certainly there is less mental processing necessary to translate "C/Bb7" into the proper notes, especially when having to deal with guitar players and the like. But I'd imagine a guitar player that's used to reading Bb13(#11) all day long wouldn't miss a beat. [Or maybe, since 7#11 chords seem to be more familiar, Bb7#11(13).]

 

So, yes, seeing this "Etta James/At Last" chord as "Bb Ab C E G" is just as valid as the "root,b7,9,#11,13" voicing of a IV13(#11) chord in F. More mental processing in the latter case? Maybe not for those that are used to thinking of music in those terms.

 

In either case, Dave Horne's suggestion (I'm sure we'll hear it again on page 5 ) should be equally easy/hard for both views, and give the advantage to those that think of music primarily in terms of standard music notation.

[Dave Horne]

In either case, Dave Horne's suggestion (I'm sure we'll hear it again on page 5 ) should be equally easy/hard for both views, and give the advantage to those that think of music primarily in terms of standard music notation.

If the purpose is to communicate effectively there is really only one option - write it down.

 

The chord in question for me would be Bb7 +11,13 (with the +11, 13 in superscript).

 

I find it interesting that some would complain if this were written out in conventional notation as it actually requires more translation to convert the chordal notation to keyboard reality.

 

(Figured bass would be perfect in this instance since the intervals of the chord would be notated as numbers (with the appropriate accidentals) above the bass tone. What could be simpler?

 

I eagerly await page 5. Perhaps we could combine the sympathetic resonance discussion of the P120 with this chord. I haven't been so entertained since the literacy threads.

[latchmo]

I got your back stepay!

[Jazz+]

.

[latchmo]

If Harry Warren was still alive and you ran into him in a bar and said "Mr. Warren, I loved how you used that Bb7(9,#11,13) in "At Last"

and he replied " Whaduya mean ... the C chord with the Bb thingy in the bass"?

 

Would it change your opinion thought about the song?

or the writer?

or when you HEARD it being played?

[kanker.]

Originally posted by Jazz+:

Why would a jazz pianist need a dominant chord specified so exactly by including the 13th and 9th in the chord symbol?

Not everyone participating in this thread is a jazz pianist.

 

 

And chords still don't really exist.

[Jazz+]

[Steve Nathan]

Any of you guys playing for Etta James?

Hey y'all

Just reading, between takes with no time to write really, but I did want to drop a trivia note:

I have played for Etta. Not on the road, but I did make one record with her a number of years ago. I know most of us don't care, but I've learned that some do Gotta go.

C-y'all later

[Steve Nathan]

Oh......And come on page 5!

[Jazzwee]

This thread is getting more exciting with the side stories...Bring it on! (that'll bring us to page 5).

[latchmo]

maybe this ...

[latchmo]

will bring...

[latchmo]

us closer to...

[latchmo]

page 5

[Eric VB]

Originally posted by Dave Horne:

In either case, Dave Horne's suggestion (I'm sure we'll hear it again on page 5 ) should be equally easy/hard for both views, and give the advantage to those that think of music primarily in terms of standard music notation.

If the purpose is to communicate effectively there is really only one option - write it down.

Yes, Dave. Sorry, my qualification was only there to indicate that some people may actually view notes on staff paper in their head when they hear pitches. (More common was visualizing a key on a keyboard.)

 

This (my reply) was really pointless, except to bring on the much anticipated page 5.

[cnegrad]

Hey, let's argue over more convoluted, overcomplicated ways to spell "Page 5". After all, who really needs that newfangled "book learnin" anyways?

 

(Darn, I was sure that would put us over the top...)

[linwood]

Pages 1,2,3,4+/Page 5

[cnegrad]

ROTFLMAO!

[cnegrad]

pAjiZ wOn tHrEw pHyVe?

[cnegrad]

Originally posted by linwood:

Pages 1,2,3,4+/Page 5

Shouldn't that 4+ actually be a 4#?

 

There; that did it.

[linwood]

Not to a EIS'er.

[cnegrad]

LOL! Good luck starting an EIS discussion in this forum. Folks here aren't even willing to accept traditional harmony and theory; never mind an alternative method.....

[linwood]

That's why I stay away from those threads. I can imagine.....

[cnegrad]

Aaah; you're no fun at all.

[Steve Nathan]

There is an important distinction to be made between choosing a chord symbol to denote the function of a chord, as opposed to spelling a chord symbol to grasp a quick idea of how to play it on the physical keyboard.

Cnegrad, I understand you perfectly, but your earlier post could have been read to mean that the notes B D F A always makes a Bmin(b5) (or B min half dim).

I wanted to point out that is is entirely possible that in some context, it would be more correctly called a Dmin/B, entirly dependant on the surrounding progression.

For example (and this is as ridiculously simple as I can think up):

Say the progression was

Dmin Amin Dmin Amin

Dmin Amin B/D/F/A C/E/A/C

You might hear this as 6 bars of D- to A- followed by a bar of B-7b5 and a bar of C6. but

the ear should hear this as 8 bars of D- to A- with the bass "walking up" on the 7th and 8th bars or Dmin/B and Amin/C

Hence my insistance that the discussion of Bb,Ab C,E G in the context of the Etta James song was one way, and any discussion of those notes in a vacuum failed to recognize the essential nature of context.

 

I know that you can look a fly specks on staff paper and "see" the progressions. I have to hear them, and I don't think I'm alone in that respect. I know many many great musicians (with impressive credit lists) who don't, or barely read and yet somehow they know instinctively how to "solo properly". I don't want to be someone who tells anyone that there is only one path.

 

Now if we're just gonna BS our way to page 6, I'll move on

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by Jazz+:

Why would a jazz pianist need a dominant chord specified so exactly by including the 13th and 9th in the chord symbol?

 

Seeing Bb7 #11, a jazz pianist knows that he can choose to add or not to add the 9th and the 13th.

 

C/Bb7 is a good symbol, it is a compact symbol that specifies the Upper Structure Triad "C E G" over Bb7.

 

Jazz pianists also know that Bb7 #11, Bb7 +11, Bb7 #4 and Bb7 +4 all mean essentialy the same thing and the 13th and 9th are optional. You don't order jazz pianists how to exactly voice their Dominant raised 11th chords.

Oh, excuuuuse me, mustn't tell the precious jazz piano player what extensions to play! Ha, Ha!

[Jazzwee]

Floyd Tatum, since Jazz pianists don't get paid much, they are certainly going to put their foot down on being ordered around, especially on how to voice chords.

 

My teacher once said to me -- "jazz musicians don't get paid enough to even get rehearsal time". So we deserve to be prima donnas at least when it comes to voicings (since that is all we're going to get).

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by Jazzwee:

Floyd Tatum, since Jazz pianists don't get paid much, they are certainly going to put their foot down on being ordered around, especially on how to voice chords.

 

My teacher once said to me -- "jazz musicians don't get paid enough to even get rehearsal time". So we deserve to be prima donnas at least when it comes to voicings (since that is all we're going to get).

With an attitude like that, it's no wonder you don't get paid enough.

 

But seriously, though, like most things in life, it depends on the context. There are no hard and fast rules.

 

I like to see minimal chord changes most of the time, too, so that I can use my own judgment and experience to choose voicings and extensions. But I also realize that there are times when things need to get more specific, there's no need to throw a prima donna hissy fit over it.

[cnegrad]

Steve,

 

I've understood your train of thought all along. No argument. Originally the whole Dm/B thing was meant as an off-the-cuff joke. But since you asked about it, I decided to use it as an example to further illustrate my point. We don't disagree at all.

 

 

Floyd, regarding your statement:

Oh, excuuuuse me, mustn't tell the precious jazz piano player what extensions to play!

It's funny that you put it that way. From where I sit, regardless of whether we're talking about jazz, rock, pop or any other genre (except classical), my interpretation has always been, "Sheesh; is the pianist so lame that it's necessary to spell out absolutely every_single_note for him from beginning to end? Doesn't he have a mind of his own?" I doubt Steve would be thrilled to show up at a session and have a chart thrown in front of him where absolutely every note was written out. What's the point of hiring "a Steve Nathan" if you're not going to use him for his interpretive skills?

 

Nah, with the exception of classical music, feeding keyboard players and guitarists note-for-note for whole tunes is rather pathetic if you ask me. (I understand using this method when necessary on parts where things are very specific, but never a whole tune.)