# Jazz Chord Symbol discussion



## JJP (Jul 17, 2012)

This discussion started here:
http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26785&highlight=

I've started this new topic to avoid hijacking that thread any further.



KEnK @ Mon Jul 16 said:


> And poorly written 9's, 4s, 5's and 6's can cause confusion.


Good point, but they generally are more discernible than the difference between a circle and sloppy triangle. Plus, there is some difference of opinion about exactly what a triangle represents even among jazzers. I've seen it used to represent both a major triad and a major 7th chord! Likewise with a circle for diminished and diminished 7th. :!: 



> Then there's this: Bb9. Do I mean a "B" w/ a flat 9 or a "Bb" w/ a 9?


Ah, this one is a big deal for me
Bb9 = Bb with dominant 7th and added 9th
B(b9) = B triad with added flat 9th. This is an odd chord, but the parentheses make your intent clear. If you wanted the dominant 7th version it would be B7(b9).



> Like it or not, these symbols are an accepted standard in Jazz notation.
> ø takes up a lot less space than min7b5.


I started in the jazz world myself, so I fully understand your point here. Nonetheless, I always want to put something on the page that leaves no doubt as to what is desired. A narrow font will often make a big difference in space a well but keep things readable.

If I have to spread the music out on the page a little more to make things clear and remove debate, that's fine. As long as the players have good page turns, I'll take an extra page rather than give them something that's hard to read. Paper is cheap, rehearsal and studio time are not.



> These symbols work, and I never hear pro jazz players complain about them.


One thing I've found is that good players will rarely complain. I even see players who will read a bit ahead and play the right note or chord even when it's written incorrectly. :shock: They want things to go smoothly and feel bad if they make a mistake even when it wasn't their fault. They don't want to be the person who slows things down for any reason. They get called because they make things work in any situation.

Whether they will complain to other players when you are away is an entirely different matter!



bryla said:


> JJP, if both M and m and all the hieroglyphs are not recommended is there a particular style you could recommend?



Major triad = no suffix (preferred) or Maj or MA
minor triad = min or mi
Major 7 = Maj7 or MA7
minor 7 = min7 or mi7
half diminished = min7(b5) or min7b5 or mi7b5 
diminished = dim
diminished 7th = dim7

While these may take more space, they give less opportunity for confusion about what is intended. Most of the copying and orchestrating work I do is meant to be sight-read. That means very little or no rehearsal. The emphasis is enabling the players to play it right the first time without confusion, debate, or discussion. Clarity is paramount. The standards that develop for this type of notation may differ slightly from publishers.


----------



## bryla (Jul 17, 2012)

Once again thank you for taking the time to share your experience!


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 17, 2012)

You and I are definitely on the same page. Though I still prefer triangles and dashes and circles, it usually comes down when I'm reading, I get what you're writing. I haven't seen any handwriting issues lately, since it's rare that you come across handwritten charts these days, unless someone makes a request on the gig and I or the pianist quickly pen it out during the break.

Funny thing about major triad and major 7th: I've always been taught that these chords are almost always interchangeable, at least in bop. The only exception is if the melody lands on the tonic, then you would probably rather have a 6th to avoid the rub with the melody note.


----------



## JJP (Jul 17, 2012)

BopEuph @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Funny thing about major triad and major 7th: I've always been taught that these chords are almost always interchangeable, at least in bop. The only exception is if the melody lands on the tonic, then you would probably rather have a 6th to avoid the rub with the melody note.


This is very true in combo type setting. As I'm sure you know, many jazz leadsheets for this type of playing will only have 7th chords indicated unless it's an altered chord. Even then you might just see "alt". Players are usually left to their discretion whether to play a 7th, 6th, triad, or even 9ths and 13ths. That's the beauty of small group jazz. The player brings her own harmonic interpretation to a song.

However in a big band situation precise harmonies are often needed to compliment or avoid clashing with the horn writing. The same is true with a lot of pop/show tunes, or when a tune is trying to emulate a particular period or style. That's why it's important for the chord symbols to be clear.

If the situation is a recording for a film or tv show, again you have to follow precisely what's on the page because it may be creating a specific color for the scene. Again, the need for clarity becomes important.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 17, 2012)

Very good point. Around here, you rarely get to play in or write for big bands any more, so I forget that part.

I don't do much of my own writing these days any more anyways, but I am wanting to change that. An extra source of income? Yes, please.


----------



## windshore (Jul 17, 2012)

JJP @ 7/17/2012 said:


> This is very true in combo type setting. As I'm sure you know, many jazz leadsheets for this type of playing will only have 7th chords indicated unless it's an altered chord. Even then you might just see "alt". Players are usually left to their discretion whether to play a 7th, 6th, triad, or even 9ths and 13ths. That's the beauty of small group jazz. The player brings her own harmonic interpretation to a song.



I'm not sure I would consider "alt" chords as non-specific as this suggests. With any spelling of almost any chord, it's up to a player's discretion to omit notes - as the 5th is often left out of voicings. If a player chooses to play an alt chord without the #11 etc, it doesn't necessarily make it different from leaving the 5 out of a minor 9 chord. (I'm not really sure you're implying anything different... just sounded like you were suggesting alt chords are special cases.)

The only one of your recommended symbols that messes with me is MA7. Visually, it is weird. I got used to it more years ago because that was a default in Sibelius, but still don't like. Maj7 feels clearer to me. For Minor min7 or m7 works fine. Again mi was a default in Sibelius so I've gotten used to it.


----------



## bryla (Jul 17, 2012)

around here 'alt' usually means that voicings should be derived from the altered dominant scale, and that's why you use it as a substitute for writing B7(b9#9b5b13) or something to that effect.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 17, 2012)

windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> For Minor min7 or m7 works fine.



M7 and m7 can get very confusing if you're sightreading, and especially at very fast speeds. Even if printed in Finale or Sibelius, you tend to second guess yourself, and when the quarter note is 250+, that can be a very bad thing.

Another important thing to note, is if you use the jazz font in Finale, the lower case letters look identical to upper case, but are smaller. How's THAT for confusing?!


----------



## wst3 (Jul 17, 2012)

Love this thread!

Chord names are ambiguous, and while I am not the reader I once was, I still prefer notation! I might have to wrestle with it at first, but it's clear.

FWIW, I was taught the following convention:

C or CM or CMaj - C Major triad
Cmin or Cm - C minor triad
C7 or CDom7 - C Dominant 7
CM7 - C Major 7 (or the triangle)
Cm7 = C minor 7 
C# = C Augmented

so far so good - no ambiguity at all!

Cdim, maybe C-= C Diminished
Cdim7 = C diminished 7

Sadly, a lot of folks mean half diminished when they write this. It's usually easy to tell, when played in context, which they really wanted<G>!

Then there are the suspended chords. I was taught that a suspended chord replaced the 3rd with the 4th or the 2nd, some folks want both tones. Fortunately you can't go too far wrong replacing. And then call it a CMadd9 or CMadd11 if you want the suspended step added to the chord instead.

And then the fun begins!

C9, to me, means C Major with a b7 and a 9, but some folks mean C Major with the added 9, which I think ought to be writen as C7add9 or C7(9).

As you go further each chord brings into question whether or not it is all the steps, or not, and there is always a question about whether or not the 7 step is flat or not, e.g.

C11 - do you want 1,3,5,7,9,11? Do you want 1,3,5,b7,9,11? Do you want 1,3,5,7,11, or 1,3,5,b7,11, and so on.

So I encourage my students to write the most meaningful chord name they can to avoid ambiguity. And of course I never forget to do so<G>!

Further complicating this, at least for me and my students, is that it is darned difficult to play more than six notes on a standard guitar. So if you have a chord that contains seven notes, which one do you leave out? Heck, even if you have a six tone chord you may be forced to leave one out because of spacing and the length of your fingers!

It's messy! If you are writing charts the best bet is to be as clear as you can be - or just write it out... or both!


----------



## bryla (Jul 17, 2012)

wst3 @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> C7 or CDom7 - C Dominant 7


I wouldn't want to see the word 'Dom' in any chord symbol.



wst3 @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> C# = C Augmented


how's that for confusing? I would reckon C# meant C-sharp


----------



## scpax (Jul 17, 2012)

bryla @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> around here 'alt' usually means that voicings should be derived from the altered dominant scale, and that's why you use it as a substitute for writing B7(b9#9b5b13) or something to that effect.



Agreed. Alt means both the 5th and 9th are altered. And because the b5 and #5 and b9 and #9 are are functionally similar, they can be freely interchanged in the alt chord.

My gripe with chord symbols these days are the C5 and C11. Maybe I'm old school but those chords don't make any sense. Totally misleading in my opinion though I accept them when I come across them. I just try to encourage people not to use them.


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

JJP @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Whether they will complain to other players when you are away is an entirely different matter!





BopEuph @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> ...I haven't seen any handwriting issues lately, since it's rare that you come across handwritten charts these days, unless...



Good idea to make this a separate thread, 
I was feeling a little awkward about continuing "topic B" in the other thread, 
but Bob did have a hand in semi-derailing his own thread. :wink: 

My experience with two quotes above is quite the opposite.
I guess it depends on the circles of people you're in. 

I play in the SF Bay Area, and handwritten scores are either as commonplace or more common place than computer notation.

I've had some very creative and excellent players chide me 
for using computer notation at all! 
One guy used to call me "Mr. Sequencer" to poke fun at my nice neat clear scores.
(He's also the most incredible reader I've ever had the pleasure to work with.)

Most of the Jazz players I work directly with here are not using computers as part of their music. 
They're doing live gigs, not making midi mock-ups or using samples.
They invariably use hand written scores if they're not using a fake book chart.

And nobody has been shy about pointing out a questionable enharmonic spelling,
oddly placed chord symbol or any other notation issue.

I'm in kind of a "tough love" circle of excellent players.
They are always supportive and make the music work, 
but love to actually point out errors or ways to make things clearer.

Nobody is shy about debating whether or not to use an Fb instead of an E.

k 

btw JJp- I brought up the "Bb9" thing only as another example of a possible lack of clarity. 
I've actually seen that king of thing far more often that I've seen a ∆ look like ø.


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

wst3 @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> FWIW, I was taught the following convention:
> 
> ... C# = C Augmented
> 
> ...


Can't say I've ever see C# used for an augmented chord.
IME it's Caug or C+ or C+7 or C7#5.

As to C11 or sus chords in general, you need to look at the context.
Usually the answer is in the melody or surrounding chords.
For me, the question is what does the 11 want to resolve to?
That's where you find out which 3rd or 7th is implied.

I'm a guitarist. It sort of a given that only another guitarist is going to know how to write for a guitar. 
"Implied harmony" is a key concept.

I rarely play more than a 4 note chord. Again what to omit is about context.
What's the soloist or melody doing? 
An approach I use is to stagger the harmonic tones of a dense chord.
Meaning if a see an Falt, near beat 1 I'll put the #9 on top.
On the next appropriate beat, I'll put the b9 or #11 on top. (or vis versa)
Sometimes I can arpeggiate a chord to get more tones in than a fingering will allow.

Another key element to how to write for guitar is the tone.
An electric guitar is similar in tonal density to an electric piano.

A pianist will usually use thinner voicings on an e-piano (or organ) than on an acoustic,
to avoid mud. This same principle needs to be applied for guitar voicings.

That said- I actually play a Godin Multiac Nylon string.
I can actually get away with more low end dissonances on nylon strings than electric.
It becomes more "pianistic".

k


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 17, 2012)

KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Good idea to make this a separate thread, I was feeling a little awkward about continuing "topic B" in the other thread,
> but Bob did have a hand in semi-derailing his own thread. :wink:


Hey, I wasn't going to say anything. I was hoping nobody noticed! :twisted: 



KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I play in the SF Bay Area, and handwritten scores are either as commonplace or more common place than computer notation.


I have a very good friend just getting started in that scene a few years ago on bass bone. He keeps begging me to go out there. But it would be a shame to lose all the work I've spent in getting into the Orlando scene.



KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Most of the Jazz players I work directly with here are not using computers as part of their music.
> They're doing live gigs, not making midi mock-ups or using samples.


Lucky guys. I'm always trying to learn more skills to find more ways to be able to buy groceries and pay rent.



KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> btw JJp- I brought up the "Bb9" thing only as another example of a possible lack of clarity.
> I've actually seen that king of thing far more often that I've seen a ∆ look like ø.


On C7, C9, C11, C13, etc.: I've always seen those as dominant chords.

As in, 1,3,5,b7,9,11,13...and there's a good chance that 11 is going to be sharp.

But I'm only there to specialize in getting from one root to the next, anyway. :D


----------



## wst3 (Jul 17, 2012)

bryla @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> wst3 @ Tue Jul 17 said:
> 
> 
> > C7 or CDom7 - C Dominant 7
> ...



Really? I've seen it, not often, but I know I have charts around here that use that.


bryla @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> wst3 @ Tue Jul 17 said:
> 
> 
> > C# = C Augmented
> ...



Yeah, sorry about that - completely fat fingered it, I meant to type a "+" not a "#" - perhaps I've been reading to many coding books lately?

UGH!

(although actually it is an amusing typo)


----------



## wst3 (Jul 17, 2012)

KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Can't say I've ever see C# used for an augmented chord.
> IME it's Caug or C+ or C+7 or C7#5.


Yeah - that's embarrassing! But I'll live...



KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> As to C11 or sus chords in general, you need to look at the context.<snip>
> 
> I'm a guitarist. It sort of a given that only another guitarist is going to know how to write for a guitar.
> "Implied harmony" is a key concept.





KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I rarely play more than a 4 note chord. Again what to omit is about context.
> <snip>



Many years ago I was introduced to this five sets of four string chords idea. It blew me away, it was simplicity itself. With these 20 basic starting points I could play pretty much any chord I needed. It also helped, sometimes, with the whole which notes to omit thing since my fingers are finite resources.

That same teacher challenged me to stretch the approach to 3 string chords. I've heard some players do that brilliantly, but I end up spending too much time thinking about it, and eventually stumble. It is a very cool sound!

Lately I find I'm playing a lot more 5 and 6 string chords, and a lot more in the open position. Just a phase I'm going through, I'm sure... but it is a lot of fun!



KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Another key element to how to write for guitar is the tone.
> An electric guitar is similar in tonal density to an electric piano.


Tone, use of effects (both electronic and physical), there are so many variables. I am sure if I knew more about other instruments it'd be the same idea, but the only other instrument I played seriously was F Horn, and while you could coax a wide range of tones from it, the variables were not quite as numerous. There was right hand position, embouchure, how much wind you were pushing through it, and of course the instrument itself, and the mouthpiece... dang, never really thought about it before, but I guess the whole tone thing is a multi-variable problem for any instrument.

I wonder if my previous thinking is the result of spending too much time in front of the computer?


----------



## JJP (Jul 17, 2012)

BopEuph @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:
> 
> 
> > For Minor min7 or m7 works fine.
> ...


You nailed it here, Bob. Just don't get me started on the lower case jazz font characters. ;/c]

I also agree with windshore that "MA7" looks odd. I don't like it myself, but I see it a lot and at least it's clear. I prefer "Maj7" and "min7". They look more phonetic to me.

@ KEnK: We are definitely of like minds. I miss the "tough love" of the club scene where people can have opinions and voice them without fear of losing their jobs. The studio scene can be a bit weird that way.

I know you were merely making a point with the "Bb9" thing. That just hits a nerve because people will sometimes write "B b9" rather than "B(b9)". It's just asking for trouble, which I think was exactly your point.

I also totally dig what you're saying about implied harmony. I'm a vibraphonist so four notes are all you get.

Too bad more people don't understand thinning voicings for range and timbre. I think you start to develop an innate sense for that sort of thing by learning how to 'comp well. It transfers directly to orchestration. I see too many people trying to load up the bottom end to make things sound "big". If you comp with that much mud, somebody's gonna turn around and tell you to shut up or go home. 

What a great discussion this has become! Lots of differing opinions, ideas, and info without a hint of aggression. 8)


----------



## StraightAheadSamples (Jul 17, 2012)

wst3 @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Many years ago I was introduced to this five sets of four string chords idea. It blew me away, it was simplicity itself. With these 20 basic starting points I could play pretty much any chord I needed. It also helped, sometimes, with the whole which notes to omit thing since my fingers are finite resources.
> 
> That same teacher challenged me to stretch the approach to 3 string chords. I've heard some players do that brilliantly, but I end up spending too much time thinking about it, and eventually stumble. It is a very cool sound!
> 
> Lately I find I'm playing a lot more 5 and 6 string chords, and a lot more in the open position. Just a phase I'm going through, I'm sure... but it is a lot of fun!



As a guitar player, I base nearly all my comping off of 3-note chords. Lots of nice voice leading possibilities in there. I've always toyed with the idea of writing a small book about it.


----------



## StraightAheadSamples (Jul 17, 2012)

My big pet peeves are:
1. C9: it's unnecessarily ambiguous (although technically it should be a dominant chord)
2. any half-diminished chord: it's -7(b5)!!!! it's usually acting as the ii chord, so….


----------



## wst3 (Jul 17, 2012)

StraightAheadSamples @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> As a guitar player, I base nearly all my comping off of 3-note chords. Lots of nice voice leading possibilities in there. I've always toyed with the idea of writing a small book about it.



See, and that's the part that kills me on the 3 note chords. There are too many possibilities, and my mind can't keep up with itself.

It's different it I am writing, or playing a chart where the voice leading has already been thought out.

But if I am reading a chart, and not even for the first time, I'm trying to figure out where I want to go, what position I need to be in to get there from here, and so on, and then my head explodes and makes a real mess all over the floor. And then people start to complain!

I can't remember which columnist it was, but back in the 70s Guitar Player had some great ones, and one of them spent five or six columns on these great three string patterns, he didn't emphasize that they were chords even. Everything was played on strings 3 and 4, and then either 5 or 6... the exercises sounded great, and how often does that happen? 

I think that was one of the things that started my interest in harmony!

Please let me know when you write that book!


----------



## JJP (Jul 17, 2012)

Oh yeah, and like some others have mentioned, "C11" makes me want to punch somebody. Technically that should include 1, 3, 5, b7, 9, and 11, but often people don't want that. If you have just rhythm slashes, there's no way of knowing the context... especially if they want it on the downbeat. You could have given me C7(11) or C9(11) or even C7(add 11) and it would have been perfectly clear.

While I'm venting, "Csus" is also a pain. Especially in rock tunes where "sus2" is common. Do you want a "sus2" or a "sus4"? Tell me which note you want sustained! Plus you get people who write "sus2" but want the third included! That's not a "sus" chord! That's an add 9 or add 2!
>8o
Thanks everyone. I feel much better now. 0oD


----------



## bryla (Jul 17, 2012)

and opening that one:

when is it an 'add9' or 'add2' and the same with 'add6' or 'add13'?

Add13 should be when you're including 7 and/or 9, since the buildup of thirds continues. You could have a Cadd6 but not C7add6, that would be C7add13.
But you only got the 7 in between the triad and the 9th.

VI, the place to vent


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 17, 2012)

I don't understand the confusion.

C-7 always means C minor 7.

C7 always means C7 - C dominant 7.

C∆7 always means C maj 7 always means C major 7.

C+7 always means C augmented 7.

C13 always means what BopEuph says: C with b7, 9, #11, and 13; you specify alterations if you want them.

C-7b5 is easier to read than the little half diminished circle, but both are pretty standard. And of course the little circle is unambiguous.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 17, 2012)

And by the way, condensed letters are always hard to read. It's not just with chord symbols, it's the cramped spacing.


----------



## StraightAheadSamples (Jul 17, 2012)

I think simplicity is the key. One thing that gets me is when there's unnecessary details(tensions) in the chord symbols. 

An example: A measure of G7; and in the melody it goes from an E to and Eb. Then resolves to a Cmaj7 with a D in the melody. 

And the chord symbols for this are, G7(13) / G7(b13) / Cmaj7(9)

You don't need to tell me that. I can see/hear it. And frankly, if the melody goes from an E to Eb, i'll probably stay away from 13's altogether in the comping. 

I want chord charts to tell me the *harmonic progression*, *NOT which chords to play*.


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I don't understand the confusion...
> 
> C13 always means what BopEuph says: C with b7, 9, #11, and 13; you specify alterations if you want them...


Hi Nick-

I don't agree that C13 always implies a #11.

For example this progression [ G-7add9, C13, F∆7 ]
I would only add a #11 on the C13 if the melody or soloist included an F#.
Or, if I purposefully wanted to push the tonality a little out.

In most cases a progression like the one above is deliberately sweet.
I generally let the soloist decide how much spice he wants in his vanilla.

And the confusion continues :wink: 

k


----------



## windshore (Jul 17, 2012)

I stand corrected. m7 is only good if the font is right... better generally to use min.

The killer is when people write 11, but it's a minor 11. Don't ever write E 11 when you mean E min11.

I happent to think 2 is a legit chord description. I don't think it's useful to write Gsus4/C. C2 works great. It comes up so often and it's really more of a tonic sound. Don't feel it's a 9 chord because it's not an extension. IMO


----------



## wst3 (Jul 17, 2012)

StraightAheadSamples @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I want chord charts to tell me the *harmonic progression*, *NOT which chords to play*.



I think you've hit it!

I can write C-E-G-A as C6, or maybe what I meant was A-C-E-G (Amin7), or did I mean...

Part of the reason I might write C6 or Amin7 is because I want the guitar player to be thinking one way or the other for something else coming up in a measure or two.

There will always be ambiguity, my peeve is the unnecessary ambiguity, and C9 is probably my favorite example. I usually assume that it is C-E-G-Bb-D, and I assume if they REALLY wanted C-E-G-B-D they'd write CMaj9. But I'm not always right, and even worse, sometimes either B or Bb won't sound right and what they really wanted was either a C(add9) or maybe even a Csus2 - although at that point I leave out the E.

Except if I am playing guitar - oops, that's what I play. I love the D on the B-string against the open E, it's a bit cliche, but it works for me, and I'll use it for both Sus2 and 9 chords, sometimes.

In my day job, as an audio system designer, we've come to apply "it depends" to almost anything and everything. You would think that a field that is based, at least a little, on science and engineering would not need "it depends", but we use it a lot!

It makes far more sense to use it in music<G>!


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I stand corrected. m7 is only good if the font is right... better generally to use min.
> 
> The killer is when people write 11, but it's a minor 11. Don't ever write E 11 when you mean E min11.
> 
> I happent to think 2 is a legit chord description. I don't think it's useful to write Gsus4/C. C2 works great. It comes up so often and it's really more of a tonic sound. Don't feel it's a 9 chord because it's not an extension. IMO



Then there's this famous example.
The chord is D7sus4.
No hint in the melody about the 3rd.
Looking at it, you'd think "Dominant", but you'd be wrong.

What's required there is a D- sus.

Mods- Hope I didn't breach copyright protocol by posting 14 bars of a Wayne Shorter tune. My impression is that portions of songs are allowed for educational purposes.

k


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 17, 2012)

windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> The killer is when people write 11, but it's a minor 11. Don't ever write E 11 when you mean E min11.



See, I even think if you wanted Emin11, the extensions mentioned aren't really required. In this day and age, a piano or guitar player would most likely imply that, whether or not there was an 11 or just a 7 written there. The soloist will most definitely hit those extensions if he's playing runs, anyway.



StraightAheadSamples @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I want chord charts to tell me the *harmonic progression*, *NOT which chords to play*.



Agreed. Though, sometimes, I've heard pianists complaining when their part includes the bass note, like C7/F#. I'd like to think if I were a pianist, I'd want to know that chord was coming up, so I could play with the extensions more.



KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I don't agree that C13 always implies a #11.



A natural 11 over a dominant can create even more dissonance than a #11. It clashes with the third. I've always expected the soloist to hit the #11, anyway.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 17, 2012)

> I don't agree that C13 always implies a #11.
> 
> For example this progression [ G-7add9, C13, F∆7 ]
> I would only add a #11 on the C13 if the melody or soloist included an F#.
> Or, if I purposefully wanted to push the tonality a little out.



#11 really is assumed, KEnk, but if you want you could write C13#11. Nobody will play F natural unless you write D-/C (or D-/C7, or C7sus4, or some other variation). I didn't invent this stuff - it's about as standard as b9 being assumed if you write #9.

Similarly, "G-7add9" is an unusual way of writing G-9.


----------



## windshore (Jul 17, 2012)

KEnK @ 7/17/2012 said:


> windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:
> 
> 
> > The killer is when people write 11, but it's a minor 11. Don't ever write E 11 when you mean E min11.
> ...



This is a different case right? It's notated as a D7sus4 not a D11. This is also the first chord of the piece so naturally hints at "tonic". D immediately followed by a 9, 11 would generally indicate a mixolydian chordscale. I understand that you can view this as the same chord however. This is another case where ambiguity can get you in trouble but the fact that the key signature reflects a dorian sound is a giveaway - in this particular case. (& OT... Wayne happily plays all sorts of "wrong" notes in his soloing and sounds amazing doing it...)


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> > I don't agree that C13 always implies a #11.
> >
> > For example this progression [ G-7add9, C13, F∆7 ]
> > I would only add a #11 on the C13 if the melody or soloist included an F#.
> ...


Well Nick-
We'll just have to agree to disagree about this.

I'm kind of an old fart.
Been playing professionally since about 1972.
(I'll be 55 in a few weeks, I started young :wink: )

Actual decades of playing this music tells me that while a dominant 13 can include
a #11, 'it ain't necessarily so'. 

Sometimes a II-V can be melded into a single sus chord, ala McCoy Tyner's early work.
In that case, you wouldn't automatically go to the #11
Dom13's are all over Blues tunes, with and without #11s.

Personally, I stick as many b9 and substitute chords in as the players I'm working w/ can handle- so I'm by no means a "vanilla player". 
I like out, but I like "right" better, and this varies from player to player even in the same tune.

The thing is, "Jazz" is a word used to describe everything from Bix Beiderbecke to Cecil Taylor. 
A 'one size fits all' approach is in practice, neither possible nor preferred.

So there has to be variations in practice according to style.
Such as what is or isn't implied by a given chord, progression or rhythm for that matter.

k

btw- I wrote G-7add9 to imply a particular voicing.
When I make charts, I use very few color tones.
I like to leave as much as I can to the individual players


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 17, 2012)

KEnk, I'm even older than you (56), so I have to be right. 

Seriously, I would never dispute that context is everything.


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> This is a different case right? It's notated as a D7sus4 not a D11.


Hi Windshore-

As a guitarist, fingering and voicing limitations necessitate that 
I see a sus4 and 11 as the same thing. 

But your original point was about what 3rd is implied in a given 11 chord.
This fakebook version of Yes or No is not only ambiguous,
you could also argue that it's wrong.

D7sus4 does imply mixolydian, yet this song is dorian until the D∆7.
IMO it should notated D-7sus.

I certainly don't think the mistake is Wayne Shorter's.
Pretty sure that's not his chart.
Errors abound in these fake books.

k


----------



## KEnK (Jul 17, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> KEnk, I'm even older than you (56), so I have to be right.


Hah! :mrgreen:


----------



## scpax (Jul 17, 2012)

KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:
> 
> 
> > This is a different case right? It's notated as a D7sus4 not a D11.
> ...




Forgive my ignorance, but what indicates that the first four bars of Yes or No is dorian?


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 17, 2012)

KEnK @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Then there's this famous example.
> The chord is D7sus4.
> No hint in the melody about the 3rd.
> Looking at it, you'd think "Dominant", but you'd be wrong.
> ...



I'm pretty certain this is designed for tension. I don't think I would want any of the rhythm section players playing a third until it resolves down from the fourth in the DMaj chord. Pretty much a 4-3 suspension, while the 7th would go up from minor to major. It's kind of a cool contrary movement when you would think of voice leading purposes.

I would, however, agree to it being dorian, if only for the fact that the third rubbing against the 4th would create a harmonic confusion. The minor third would probably be felt more like a #9.

Then again, I would avoid the third altogether, but I'm just the bassist! o-[][]-o


----------



## bryla (Jul 18, 2012)

StraightAheadSamples @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> An example: A measure of G7; and in the melody it goes from an E to and Eb. Then resolves to a Cmaj7 with a D in the melody.
> 
> And the chord symbols for this are, G7(13) / G7(b13) / Cmaj7(9)
> 
> ...


In big band parts I – as a pianist – would WANT to see those alterations although they may clutter the sheet and take longer to comprehend than the simple V-I.

This is a great thread that sheds light on the subject, but it seems like there are different ways to write it for different situations: session, pit, big band, combo at the club aso.


----------



## trumpoz (Jul 18, 2012)

A C13 chord is generally taught (in Australia at least) to contain a #11 unless the melody dictates otherwise. Of course when improvising the soloist/bass/piano/guitar will have to listen to each other to ensure the same 11th is consistent throughout the ensemble. 

C11 is an insteresting one - if it were to be voiced as a block chord, C-E-G-Bb-D-F then yes it would sound somewhat dissonant. I ran in to a chart when I was at uni with a C11th chord written and when I queried the composer it was voiced with the third on top C-F-G-Bb-D-E...... more like a C9sus4(add 10) chord. 

From my perspective the difference between Cadd9 and Cadd2 and C6 and Cadd13 is in the voicing. A C add2 would be voiced C-D-E-G and a Cadd9 would be C-E-G-D, same with the C6 vs Cadd13.

Personally I've never used triangles for major chords and circles for diminished chords. Again, it is down to how I was taught. In a club on a hand-written chart if the triangle and circle are poorly written then they are harder to distinguish. 

The D7sus4 being discussed, the 7th refers to the quality of the 7th in the chord, major or minor, and the sus4 indicates that the 4th replaces the 3rd. 



> This is a great thread that sheds light on the subject, but it seems like there are different ways to write it for different situations: session, pit, big band, combo at the club aso.



I'd like to add there are different ways of writing chords in different countries and depending on what 'school' of jazz education you are from. I know Jamie Aebersold has tried to put together a definative list of chord symbols and what they mean, but even then everyone is going to have their own ideas depending on what they have been taught (just like some scale names that is a whole other bug-bear of mine).


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Jul 18, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> KEnk, I'm even older than you (56), so I have to be right.
> 
> Seriously, I would never dispute that context is everything.



Nick, i am also younger than you, but Kenk is right. 
A dominant 13th doesn't imply a #11, even thought that upper structure triad is a cool sound.
Take a basic Cma7/D-7/G7/CMa7 for example. A G13 would get a chord scale including the perfect 4th, not an augmented one...

Cheers old man o-[][]-o


----------



## windshore (Jul 18, 2012)

KEnK @ 7/17/2012 said:


> windshore @ Tue Jul 17 said:
> 
> 
> > This is a different case right? It's notated as a D7sus4 not a D11.
> ...



I agree fully. Certainly nobody consults composers before writing changes in a fakebook. I would argue that it is wrong and is an example of what I complained about in my previous post.

Although in the context of that particular leadsheet, it's pretty easy to figure out it should be a minor sus or minor 11, it is really clearer to simply write it that way.

A chord root immediately followed by any number (6,7,9,...etc) implies that the chord scale contains a major 3rd. Obviously this is HUGELY important and the lack of specificity is hard to justify. (This applies equally when they are spelled as 11 or min11.)


----------



## KEnK (Jul 18, 2012)

scpax @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but what indicates that the first four bars of Yes or No is dorian?


Windshore pointed out:
_This is another case where ambiguity can get you in trouble but the fact that the key signature reflects a dorian sound is a giveaway - in this particular case._

Meaning the key sig is C.
So a Dmin (dorian) could be implied from that.

However In my opinion and experience a D7sus4 implies mixolydian.
And placing that chord there would supersede the dorian mode of the key sig.

In other words, that chord is wrong.
The only way to know what to do is to have heard the song played correctly,
or have a player who knows the tune tell you what to do.

k


----------



## KEnK (Jul 18, 2012)

windshore @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> I would argue that it is wrong and is an example of what I complained about in my previous post.



Yes- I thought it was exactly what you were talking about.
And this mistake has remained uncorrected in several edition of the Real Book.
I have a student coming today who has the most recent edition.
I'll check it out and report back.



windshore @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> Although in the context of that particular leadsheet, it's pretty easy to figure out it should be a minor sus or minor 11, it is really clearer to simply write it that way.
> 
> A chord root immediately followed by any number (6,7,9,...etc) implies that the chord scale contains a major 3rd. Obviously this is HUGELY important and the lack of specificity is hard to justify. (This applies equally when they are spelled as 11 or min11.)


I don't think it's so easy to tell what's right from that lead sheet.
As you say above, the D7Sus4 implies mixolydian.
It's the wrong chord and misrepresents the composers intent.

I recall reading an interview w/ Wayne Shorter (maybe the liner notes?)
He said the song was called Yes or No because of the back and forth interplay of major to minor.

k


----------



## KEnK (Jul 18, 2012)

BopEuph @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> I'm pretty certain this is designed for tension. I don't think I would want any of the rhythm section players playing a third until it resolves down from the fourth in the DMaj chord. Pretty much a 4-3 suspension, while the 7th would go up from minor to major. It's kind of a cool contrary movement when you would think of voice leading purposes.
> 
> I would, however, agree to it being dorian, if only for the fact that the third rubbing against the 4th would create a harmonic confusion. The minor third would probably be felt more like a #9.
> 
> Then again, I would avoid the third altogether, but I'm just the bassist! o-[][]-o


Hi Bob-

As I said in the previous post or two, the chord written in that chart is wrong.
The tune is designed to go from minor to major in those first 8 bars.

But here's another interesting point to add to the discussion:

Most times in the fake book, when you see a sus chord stretched over one or more bars,
it doesn't actually mean that you only play one chord there.

What's implied is actually a "style" of tonality. 
A lot of things can and should happen there.

Tension release of the 4th-3rd, 
juxtaposing II Vs, 
use of stacked 4ths or major triads shifting chromatically.
All of that is usually but not always superimposed over a minor pentatonic,
which acts as a guide or anchor of all the shifting of tonality.

That's what I do when I see D-sus or D7sus4.
That's what pro jazz players expect to hear there.

k


----------



## scpax (Jul 18, 2012)

windshore @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> I don't think it's so easy to tell what's right from that lead sheet.
> As you say above, the D7Sus4 implies mixolydian.
> It's the wrong chord and misrepresents the composers intent.
> 
> ...




I'll ask the same question I asked above. Why is the first four bars of Yes and No Dorian? And why is D7sus4 incorrect? McCoy Tyner played piano on JuJu and he played in the first four bars: Am7/D, Bm7/D, Cmaj7/D, and Bm7/D.

If I were writing this chart I'd probably write C/D or Am7/D for the first four bars to indicate that the D is acting like a pedal to the resolving Dmaj7 chord.

And I don't believe Dm7sus is a legitimate chord as a suspended chord is neither major nor minor.

It's a quirk I admit that a C9 necessarily contains the 7th, and a Cm11 contains the 7th and 9th, but when players see C13 they do NOT include the 11 (which is ludicrous) and rarely include a #11. A 13 chord is usually voiced with 7,9, and 13.


----------



## KEnK (Jul 18, 2012)

scpax @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> I'll ask the same question I asked above. Why is the first four bars of Yes and No Dorian? And why is D7sus4 incorrect? McCoy Tyner played piano on JuJu and he played in the first four bars: Am7/D, Bm7/D, Cmaj7/D, and Bm7/D.


 :shock: 
Fascinating scpax!

The fact is I've been "playing" this tune for years but haven't listened to Shorter's
version in a very long time. 
I play those 1st 8 bars dorian because that's what everyone I play with it expects to hear.
And these are some serious local heavy weight cats.
That's how they do it.

I think it evolved from one guy wanting it minor-ish 
and a lot of people respect and play w/ him,
so it seems to have become a local standard or bastardization of the tune.

The 1st few times I played it w/ them I went for a mixolydian base for the 1st 8.
But I was specifically told "minor".

So it's a case of an arrangement becoming a local standard.
Really surprising to find I'm _so_ wrong about that. :roll:
Just got really used to how we do it. 



scpax @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> And I don't believe Dm7sus is a legitimate chord as a suspended chord is neither major nor minor.


I think "Dm7sus" is an apt description of things like Impressions and a whole host of "Modal" type tunes.
There's an oral and aural history to this music. 
When a jazz player writes or says "play a sus chord", 
to me it refers to an approach rather than a specific chord.
Legit or not, it seems to represent what's done in "Modal type modern Jazz". 



scpax @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> It's a quirk I admit that a C9 necessarily contains the 7th, and a Cm11 contains the 7th and 9th, but when players see C13 they do NOT include the 11 (which is ludicrous) and rarely include a #11. A 13 chord is usually voiced with 7,9, and 13.


At least I got something right, eh?
:wink: 

k


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 18, 2012)

Okay, so maybe I'm wrong. It happens occasionally.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 18, 2012)

By the way, I was thinking about playing the chord, not the chord scale.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Jul 18, 2012)

Still, including a Dd on a G13 in the key of C wouldn't be first choice...


----------



## scpax (Jul 18, 2012)

KEnK @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> I think "Dm7sus" is an apt description of things like Impressions and a whole host of "Modal" type tunes.
> There's an oral and aural history to this music.
> When a jazz player writes or says "play a sus chord",
> to me it refers to an approach rather than a specific chord.
> ...



As a pianist, I prefer lead sheets that are simple and give me the freedom to be creative with the changes. My Real Book shows Impressions and So What as D-7 and Eb-7. If I didn't already know the tune I'd look at the chord progression and assume it was modal. D- and Eb- would suffice. Or D7sus and Eb7sus.

Maiden Voyage is another well known standard that is modal and is notated with just sus7 chords, and incidentally has the wrong chord in the Real Book as Db7sus4 when it should be Dbm13 (which is how Herbie plays it at least).

The great thing about comping in jazz is that it's not necessarily vertical. Players who comp well are often thinking linearly and that's why having a G13 CAN include a C# if that's the way the line in moving in the accompaniment.

Anyway... bottom line when notating jazz chords I'd argue for keeping it simple haha!

o-[][]-o


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 18, 2012)

> Still, including a Dd on a G13 in the key of C wouldn't be first choice



Right, and we agree.

But I was using Cx as the example without reference to key - talking about chord symbols in general.


----------



## Mike Greene (Jul 18, 2012)

StraightAheadSamples @ Tue Jul 17 said:


> C9: it's unnecessarily ambiguous (although technically it should be a dominant chord)


It's been a few years since I did any real jazz reading, but I always thought C9 meant a dominant 7th, and C∆9 meant a major 7th. (Along with a normal 9th, of course.)

In fact, I could swear that I'd sometimes get charts where the arranger would want a C major 7 and would just write C∆ instead of C∆7.


----------



## windshore (Jul 18, 2012)

C9 - would include a b7.
C add9 - would not include any 7th


----------



## Mike Greene (Jul 18, 2012)

windshore @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> C add9 - would not include any 7th


Right, but I'm saying if you wanted a 9th _with_ a major 7th, then it would be written C∆9.

I could be wrong, though, which would explain the dirty looks I'd always get while we were playing. :mrgreen:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 18, 2012)

No, the dirty looks were for other reasons.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 18, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> In fact, I could swear that I'd sometimes get charts where the arranger would want a C major 7 and would just write C∆ instead of C∆7.



I do that in my arrangements all the time.


----------



## JJP (Jul 18, 2012)

BopEuph @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> Mike Greene @ Wed Jul 18 said:
> 
> 
> > In fact, I could swear that I'd sometimes get charts where the arranger would want a C major 7 and would just write C∆ instead of C∆7.
> ...


Aaaand this thread finally went full circle.
o[])


----------



## windshore (Jul 19, 2012)

Mike Greene @ 7/18/2012 said:


> windshore @ Wed Jul 18 said:
> 
> 
> > C add9 - would not include any 7th
> ...



Sorry Mike, that's exactly right, Cmaj9 would include a major 7.... Dirty looks were for sneaking bringing the scotch on stage & not sharing....


----------

