Chord Substitution Ideas

[Joseph]

If I may, I think we need to put forth the understanding (as I see it) that chord substitutions in the way we seem to have begun the discussion served the purpose of providing some variety for musicians playing songs relentlessly in performance (public or private). Lets say putting some footprints on the road less traveled, especially for the improvisers in the band. Once you suspend the 'rules' applied to a certain style, from the point of view of a composer chord "substitutions" become irrelevant because you are creating anew. By defining the word substitution there is the implication that something already exists and something else is pushing it out to stand in its place.
As substitutions became more complex, as the improvisations got freer, it is no longer always easy to see the relationship to the pre-existing material. To some extent I think re-composition might be a truer explanation.  Another detour to the cabin in the woods.  
As to Kevin's last comment, ". . . As I do not deal with such things it does not help me . . ."
 if you (big you, not Kevin you) are a composer who relies on "chord changes" in your process, the idea of substitutions might just provide a broader vocabulary for your work.  But I will offer that someone who does not rely heavily on chord progressions will probably find their way to similar sounds for being less tied to the doctrine.  
Some other ideas, I am not sure that I'd necessarily consider upper extensions (what Shillinger, I believe, considered part of strataharmony) to be substitutions. Same for altered chords which are just typically serving the function of red pepper flakes over aleppo pepper; similar but spicier.

Aside (sort of) I would point out where Andy offered the sample chord progression C - G in repetition, someone coming into the aural conversation in the middle of the thought would just as easily hear G - C.  And of course the D may just as easily confirm a diatonic relationship in C major as  well as G major. Adrian also points out how the blues discards the tradition of the dominant 7th by using it freely on each of the primary major chords in the progression.  The music of the Impressionists is often credited with freeing up many of the alterations allowing their existence without the need to respond to a diatonic expectation. I confess to not being learned enough to defend or prosecute that position.  But I know the notes often float by. :-)

THIS IS A GREAT THREAD!!  So much sharing of ideas is exactly the reason I come to SOS. 

Atreyu & Falcor

ah yes, All The Way, what a great tune, Andy!!

[adrianallan]

Jul 27, 2013 16:10:01 GMT Kevin said:

I can appreciate all the theory(and experience) that has gone into these posts but As I do not deal with such things it does not help me. I am in awe of those of you that have such tools to hand without having to think about them!

Ok, but things can be made to sound more complicated than they actually are.

At some point in our musical evolution we, collectively, became a little tired of plain old perfect cadences, so the idea came about of adding more notes on to chords.

Adding a 7th is nice, but you can add a 9th and then an 11th and even a 13th.

In the key of E, the dominant is B major, so the dominant 7th is B7 or B Dsharp F sharp A
More interesting might be B 11 which is B D sharp F sharp A C sharp E.

No need to have all the notes of this chord, a B in the bass will suffice.

B11 to E gives a nice lift to plain old perfect cadence

It has migrated into pop music as the first cadence of this song shows, ie the first few seconds

[Kevin]

But if one is writing in a quasi classical style then using these chord extensions will sound out of place?

[adrianallan]

Jul 27, 2013 20:02:13 GMT Kevin said:

But if one is writing in a quasi classical style then using these chord extensions will sound out of place?

Yes, in the sense of classical being 1750 to 1820 , but in the 21st century, I think it is fine to incorporate lots of different harmonic influences into our music.

If we all wrote like Mozart, Im sure people would rather listen to the real mozart.

[Kevin]

Not quite what meant! ! My knowledge of harmony/melody etc is really restricted to what I like and not some people de is right or wrong. Unfortunately my knowledge of things in this thread are zip so I have to carry on my way and hope that some of my music is pleasing to players and listeners alike.

[Ed Sharpe]

Jul 27, 2013 19:59:03 GMT adrianallan said:

Jul 27, 2013 16:10:01 GMT Kevin said:

...

Adding a 7th is nice, but you can add a 9th and then an 11th and even a 13th.

In the key of E, the dominant is B major, so the dominant 7th is B7 or B Dsharp F sharp A
More interesting might be B 11 which is B D sharp F sharp A C sharp E.

No need to have all the notes of this chord, a B in the bass will suffice.

B11 to E gives a nice lift to plain old perfect cadence

...

I never use the unaltered 11th in a Dominant Chord I always rasie is, id est #11. So in the above example I would use E sharp, not E Natural. This has always sounded better to my ear. It is also the rule that I was given by my commecial arranging teacher, Bob Curnow, (Arranger/Composer/producer for Stan Kenton).

[adrianallan]

Ed, a quick internet search tells me that you are right on that, that the 11th tends to be sharpened.

It gives a totally different feel to the chord, and for me the sharp 11 wants to resolve up to the 12 to make the ocatve third of the chord.

I still think that the non sharpened 11 is used quite often though, in romantic pop, maybe. and it resolves down.
Here is another example.

In this case the key is G major, but the secondary dominant of C is used, a secondary dominant on the flat side of the key.



23 seconds singing


C11 Fmaj7 D11
Lovely as a summers day

[wizzarts]

Jul 27, 2013 16:00:38 GMT Ed Sharpe said:

For those of you who would like to know more about Jazz Theory (including Chord substitution I highly recommend "The Jazz Theory Book" by Mark Levine:

www.amazon.com/Jazz-Theory-Book-Mark-Levine/dp/1883217040/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1374940645&sr=1-1&keywords=jazz+theory

Yes.... this is a absolute must-have for jazz-musicians but also for those who compose in the "Post-Gershwin" modern musical art.

I also got the jazz-piano with all the good voicings for ie. Cmj7 add#11.

Thanks for sharing the link. This is a very good start for those who are interested.

[wizzarts]

Jul 27, 2013 20:02:13 GMT Kevin said:

But if one is writing in a quasi classical style then using these chord extensions will sound out of place?

Kevin, please remember your own masterpiece "Desert.... " ? Strings are creating a nice pad in :Db: major while the oboe plays its tune on :Eb: and :Bb: .

So in fact you already have used this in a delightful way.

[Joseph]

Jul 27, 2013 21:23:33 GMT adrianallan said:

Ed, a quick internet search tells me that you are right on that, that the 11th tends to be sharpened.

It gives a totally different feel to the chord, and for me the sharp 11 wants to resolve up to the 12 to make the ocatve third of the chord.

I still think that the non sharpened 11 is used quite often though, in romantic pop, maybe. and it resolves down.
Here is another example.

In this case the key is G major, but the secondary dominant of C is used, a secondary dominant on the flat side of the key.



23 seconds singing


C11 Fmaj7 D11
Lovely as a summers day

I think you are correct Adrian.  The Pop market seems to be more attuned to a straight on 11th chord while the jazz market will lean toward the #11.  My favorite 11th chord  is that glorious "AHHH"  exaltation right before the Boys return to singing "I'm picking up Good Vibrations!"   dob)

[Joseph]

Jul 27, 2013 20:02:13 GMT Kevin said:

But if one is writing in a quasi classical style then using these chord extensions will sound out of place?

Mozart's Dissonant Quartet, any number of Bach works, and then there are the Romantics, you pick your favorite.  I think you'd have no trouble finding altered chords.  (not to mention Piston's text!)

[Kevin]

Bob Curnow was a tutor of yours Ed? That must have been some learning curve.

[Kevin]

Jul 27, 2013 22:11:20 GMT wizzarts said:

Jul 27, 2013 20:02:13 GMT Kevin said:

But if one is writing in a quasi classical style then using these chord extensions will sound out of place?

Kevin, please remember your own masterpiece "Desert.... " ? Strings are creating a nice pad in :Db: major while the oboe its plays its tune on :Eb: and :Bb: .

So in fact you already have used this in a delightful way.

Did I?

That is seething of what mean though. I would have had no idea. The more knowledgeable of you can analyse a piece and discover all these things. People like me just write what they like without thinking of such things.

[Christian Natta]

I just want to say that knowledge is important. Conciously I don't use nowadays substitutions, but I am sure that studying that, opened my mind and give me inside my head, a great stuff. I'm not the kind of people that analyze my own works, but I'm sure that unconcionously (wow such a word!)or wathever, I've used them.
I'm nowadays just kind of "free spirit" when I compose, but be sure that I think I've used unintentionally subtitutions, as other things that I've learned. So, I compose what I feel, but I have my background inside. I still learning as much as I can, and maybe naturally when I compose, I use something of it. I always thought that all that cames out, must go inside on the past.

[ceg]

widening out the topic, chord substitutions don't just happen in jazz. In English diatonic dissonance for example it is rife (if you count the secondary seconds as substitution chords). And the opening of the final slow movement of Mahler's 9th symphony is audacious in the way that he harmonises the great chorale melody.

There is the final verse harmonisation of O Come All Ye Faithful by David Willcocks in Carols for Choirs 1 - in fact last verse re-harmonisations are a staple feature of at least Anglican church traditions.

At a more subtle level, right before the end of Pachabel's Canon, there is the substitution of the flattened 7th rather than the raised which suggest all sorts of exotic harmonies and false relations, to signal that the piece is coming to an end.

With substitutions, very often there is the assumption that the audience is aware of the "normal" chord - and the better known it is, the more outrageous the substitution can be. IIm V I is so ubiquitous, that once the expectation is there for that sequence, you can substitute just about anything for the middle chord (except the first chord or the third chord) and people will 'read' it as a substitute chord.

Starting with the hackneyed
IIm V I, you can move through
IIm7 V7 I6 to the following (for example):
II7 V7 I7
II7 bII7 I7
II7 bIImaj7 I6
II7+9 bII7+9 I7+9
IImaj7 splat Imaj7

!!

Three examples of chord substitution that I've learnt from are Charles Mingus' "Goodbye Porkpie Hat", which is an incredible harmonisation of a pentatonic tune; the Gil Evans / Miles Davis version of Sketches of Spain, comparing it to Rodrigo's original and Gavin Bryar's "Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet"

[Joseph]

Jul 28, 2013 22:37:10 GMT ceg said:

". . . There is the final verse harmonisation of O Come All Ye Faithful by David Willcocks in Carols for Choirs 1 - in fact last verse re-harmonisations are a staple feature of at least Anglican church traditions.

Indeed, the organist is freed to strut his/her stuff - but I wouldn't necessarily lump together chord substitutions with re-harmonizations even though there is a perceivable link![/font][/b]

With substitutions, very often there is the assumption that the audience is aware of the "normal" chord -

A fair perspective but as before I submit substitutions are not for the listener as much as for the player to initially relieve boredom but later to discover new paths.[/b][/font]

II7 bIImaj7 I6 -

seems awkward but if you make it work who am I to say!

". . . the Gil Evans / Miles Davis version of Sketches of Spain . . ."

just incredible!!  If anyone can possibly be unfamiliar with this, which I doubt, be sure to listen.  Thanks Charles for putting this out there (I didn't really want to re-direct the thread but its worth it to hear this magnificent recording!!!)[/font][/b]

[wizzarts]

Sure, re-armonisation is a big and also common tool in Jazz. But in the same way Gershwin added the Blues and extended chords to his music we can use this knowlegde to enrich our music as well.

Please have another listen to the side-theme of "At night" (starts at 2:30).

There are all sorts of extended chords and also II-V as substitutes. The first final chord is a F9 (bar 90) resolved into G one bar later.

https%3A//soundcloud.com/andrew-noah-cap/at-night-v4-wip

Hier ist noch das Seitenthema .... oops .... Here is the sidetheme as Sbi6- and Sib7-files.

xxx_at night2_74-x_SIB6.sib (310.8 KB)

xxx_at night2_74-x.sib (302.71 KB)

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2013 22:48:49 GMT wizzarts said:

Well Adrian, upwards is not the common direction of a 7. That's the point. The 7 usually builds a tension with the direction downwards to the 3, - the dominant-effect.

With a standard voicing you are absolutely right. When using the tritonus-substitute I almost always use a, in this case, Cmj7.

A tritone-substitude is a substitude of the dom7-chord where the base-note is a tritone away from the base-note of the dom7-chord.

Example: II - V - I will become II - bII - I. This means that you have already used the tritone-substitute. Dm7 - Db7 - Cmj7

This works because the tension-builder in the dom7 will stay, - the 3 and the 7. But the 3 becomes a 7 and the 7 becomes a 3 in the chord.

Due to a tonal cadenza the funtionality of both notes remain. That means that even when the B turns into a 7 (instead of a 3 in G7) the function of the note itself is the 3. So when using Db7 in C major the B tends to go upwards instead of downwards.

In the C major-scale the 3 of G7 is the "Leitton" (Lead note?) of C major and the 7 is the "Gleitton" (gliding note?)

When you have a Db7-C without something like a cadenza it just means nothing but Db7-C because the Db7 directs to a Gb (B goes to Bb and F goes to Gb).
But with a cadenza these notes keep the direction given by the scale.

German is much more precisely and this is way to hard for me to explain in english. Sorry.

But I bet my head some guys explain this much better.

PS: A scale is horizontally, a chord is vertically. But in a cadenza there is only horizontal movement because every single note of a scale follows its function.

So, I think wizzarts explains, in his PS, much of what I referred to in my initial response i.e. that my analogy of single notes being like the single letters of the alphabet and stacked notes being like 'words' because in both, there is the function of them that must be understood. Unless one deliberately sets out to write gibberish, then the rules of vocabulary must be followed in speaking and writing and likewise, it is so with music. So, at this point (and I must say that I have not yet absorbed the enormous amount of information that has been put in this thread), it occurs to me that just as some people say to-MAY-to and others say 'to-MA-to' or some people write 'color' and others write 'colour', then due to culture, musical education and background, and simply how one understands or personally 'spells' chords (context), then there must exist the possibility that occasionally, chords that are the 'same' are perhaps named in different ways. A very simple example of this is that a 'G' chord is a V chord in the context of C major, a I chord in G major, a IV chord in D major. Also, I've noticed along the way that German 6th chords on the piano resemble V7 chords; however, due to the CONTEXT, even though they LOOK like a V7 chord while sitting alone, they are NOT V7 chords when spotted in its function in the music. (By the way, I am NOT saying that German 6th chords ALWAYS look like V7 chords -- I am not enough of an 'expert' to make any such statement.)

Anyway, on a personal note, I am now 'starting over' with all of this chord stuff. And while I'm at it, I plan on incorporating rhythmn. I've discovered youtube has some good basic videos that will help me to learn to 'play around' at all of this. I agree with others that this thread is excellent.

[ceg]

a few quick points:

I disagree with Adrian, that you can substitute C major with E minor. I would say that you can substitute C major with A minor (C major 6 being A minor 7, rearranged). Using substitutions on substitutions, that would imply that you can substitute A minor with E minor, which definitely doesn't sound right.

I'm curious about the way that Zepposnonno sees re-harmonization and chord-substitution as different things - can you expand?

how about starting a rhythmic substitution thread Anne? That would be really interesting!

[adrianallan]

Jul 31, 2013 12:12:52 GMT ceg said:

a few quick points:

I disagree with Adrian, that you can substitute C major with E minor. I would say that you can substitute C major with A minor (C major 6 being A minor 7, rearranged). Using substitutions on substitutions, that would imply that you can substitute A minor with E minor, which definitely doesn't sound right.

I'm curious about the way that Zepposnonno sees re-harmonization and chord-substitution as different things - can you expand?

how about starting a rhythmic substitution thread Anne? That would be really interesting!

If the notes of the melody are either E or G, which are both common tones with C major chord, I cant see what the problem is. If the original chord is C major 7th, then that is just like an E minor chord but without the bass note.

This is from another web site

Here are some guidelines used in creating the new chord progression:

One equals three equals six
Two equals four
and Five equals seven

Welcome to Musician's Math. Let's explain these.

Look at the following figure, which shows the chords in C Major. "One equals three equals six" means the C major chord (the One), the E minor chord (the Three), and the A minor chord (the Six) sound enough like each other to replace each other. They do sound different from one another, but compared to the other chords, they sound similar enough to serve as substitutes for one another.


That means when I see a C major chord on a song chart, I can try out an A minor or an E minor instead. The sound I get might or might not be an improvement. If it isn't, it probably won't sound bad.

"Two equals four" means I can substitute D minor for F major. "Five equals seven" means I can substitute G7 for b* and vice versa.


www.maximummusician.com/articlechordprimer.htm

[adrianallan]

I think that chord substitution kind of suggests those jazz ideas that we have discussing, such as the tritone substitution.

A re harmonisation of a melody has been around for a few hundred years, eg, theme and variations, and to me suggests the older methods.

But in effect they both blend into each other. We have the jazz methods and the traditional at our disposal, and as you have said, modern audiences are subconsciously aurally trained to accept unusual changes to a perfect cadence...so lets make us of them!

[Joseph]

Jul 31, 2013 12:12:52 GMT ceg said:

a few quick points:
". . . I'm curious about the way that Zepposnonno sees re-harmonization and chord-substitution as different things - can you expand?"

Since you asked,
From my perspective chord substitution doesn't really seek to change basic relationships in the overall work. While it may grow the harmonic content and stretch the relationships, sometimes to an extreme, it is just what it states, a substitution, one/some sound/s for another most often leading to the same endpoint.  Is it a path to somewhere else?  I am sure it absolutely may be.  But I think empirically that is not the function.  Chord substitution's purpose, IMO, is to 'spice' things up.  Again, this idea has been taken to the extreme by many performers.  I am sure we could debate endlessly the intrinsic purpose of chord substitutions.  But in my simplest explanation its just using one harmonic structure in place of another to get to the same place.  

While at the root the idea may seem similar, with re-harmonization, all bets are off, the basic harmonic relationship relating to the melody is altered, changed, sometimes most dramatically, often with little relation to the original harmonic structure.  If you want to consider that a grand substitution I wouldn't argue with you.  It's just not how I see it.

Joseph

[wizzarts]

Too many things to say, - too bad english to explain

But there is one question no-one really answered yet. Why?

Is it only to make lousy chord-changes look professional? (kidding, but some of my students are tending to over-do)
What benefit will a score have when adding substitudes?
Will it give more tension? Will it soften the edges which come along with a diatonic turn-around?

The III is called "Dominant-Parallele" and "Tonika-Gegenklang" in german. Even in a modulation it is one of the worst chords.

[Deleted]

Then there was the Nashville bluegrass banjo player, bought in for a jingle session, who looked at his chart and exclaimed "Hey, some guy has stuck his phone number next to my G chord!"

[adrianallan]

Jul 31, 2013 22:40:55 GMT @johnsummers said:

Then there was the Nashville bluegrass banjo player, bought in for a jingle session, who looked at his chart and exclaimed "Hey, some guy has stuck his phone number next to my G chord!"

Ha Ha

I wonder if there is anyone on Sons of Sibelius who is skilled enough to sight read a line of extened chords on either guitar or piano.

Something like Bbmaj9 b5, E7 b9, Ebmaj9sharp11, Am7add11b5, Ab maj9

I could work these out, but slowly, and not necessarily with the best voice leading or fingering.

[Kevin]

I expect that if you are used to reading these chords it would be quite easy. I cannot imagine that a player would cover all the notes in the chord, just the essential ones.

[adrianallan]

Aug 1, 2013 7:38:03 GMT Kevin said:

I expect that if you are used to reading these chords it would be quite easy. I cannot imagine that a player would cover all the notes in the chord, just the essential ones.

,

Well for starters I think that the 5th is not always needed, but the third is because it defines the tonality of the chord.

I normally would used octaves in the left hand plus whatever else is needed in the right, but that is probably incorrect.

Is it generally the case that the extensions, eg the 13th have to be the highest notes, or can they be tucked in the middle

I presume that with 9th and 11 and 13th chords the minor 7th is also needed, because the other type of 9th chord without the 7th is just called add 9.

Somebody here will know a lot more than me, and there are text books of course.

[ceg]

Am7add11b5 - you mean A half-diminished 7th with added D, or even Ebmaj9th/A ...

:-)

The chords you mention aren't too off the wall. As people have said, if often about knowing what notes to miss out. Where you have a "standard" rhythm section including bass, the guitarist / piano player will often leave out the root, on the assumption that the bassist will play it (at some point).

And 13th's definitely don't need to be at the top.

As Adrian says, the "essential" notes of the played tend to be the 3rd, 7th, and top extension (root is optional!) though there are exceptions, e.g. around flat 5's. So if you have to miss a note out of C Eb Gb Bb, the "obvious" one to go would be the Eb

[Joseph]

Bbmaj9 b5 sounds suspiciously like a dominant C chord.   Adrian, as a guitar player you know just how many chord formations may be designated with different names. So though a set of notes may be designated in various ways it's function will determine what you call it, right? As far as what to leave out, that is more a guitarist's issue.  The pianist should have no trouble playing all of the notes in a vertical stack.  And I think Charles pointed out, though you may feel the 5th is expendable, if it is altered it is not.  Same with any other altered tone, otherwise why bother to alter it?  And my personal opinion on the 13th, if it's not on top, to me it sounds like an added 6th.  But I think stacking order doesn't matter as much as the overall voicing of the stack.  Does it sound good?  Does it allow for good voice leading (if that is a part of your design)?  Does it do what you want it to do? After a century of garbage cans, brake drums, and plops in a bucket I think our ears are ready to accept most anything if the composer/performer can be convincing in their dialog.

[ceg]

Aug 1, 2013 15:33:12 GMT Joseph said:

Bbmaj9 b5 sounds suspiciously like a dominant C chord.  

Or a whole-tone scale...