Why is it not called the "tenth"?

[telequacktastic]

[QUOTEBut he did always write it when he wanted it in a chord.][/QUOTE]

I have the 4 TG books, and yes he was a methodical creature that wrote out all the enharmonics in the chord spelling.

[telequacktastic]

Are you saying that when the score says G13, you can play G#11?

The Jazz musician in me will use the theory of the time, if I am playing say There Will Never be Another You, I won't use the #11 as much. If I'm playing E.S.P. I will use the #11 exclusively. Its an effect I've come up with.

I just caught myself. Doesn't the Real Book have a Pat Methany tune that uses a chord like a # 11 when that note is not present in the melody?

That's a good question! I have the PM fakebook and its littered w/ Pat's awesome style and some Maj7 #11s.

[brewwagon]

ted greene = gifted

[slowpinky]

This is part of the reason why Jazz theory in its raw(uninformed by counterpoint) form is misleading... harmony has to be viewed in the linear dimension as well as the vertical - i.e if you are talking G13 then what comes before it and what comes after it? - and by that I mean each voice as it moves through the chord - which G13 are you talking about where?

If you are talking an abstract ideal G13 - then sure - its a Lydian Dominant chord in consonant form - but hold on - here's Herbie Hancock playing a 13th chord with the natural 11th - and he's not avoiding the 3rd!

Beautiful.

The G13 I write for my guitar students may want to avoid the C# altogether - in which case it operates in Major scale harmony - simple - because as someone mentions, C# takes it out of C major.

The problem with treating each chord as an abstract entity means that the scale/chord relationship dominates the common sense of the progression and the tune- so if this discussion is to make sense - lets try and find examples of common usage - how about the first chord of Freddie Freeloader? I could have a lydian dominant 13th there - until the melody resolves to the 5th in the first bar - whoops - and then maybe the pickup chord to Stomping at the Savoy - I can tell you I got nailed for playing a #11 on that chord - until I figured out that if I resolve the D natural on the Ab13 to an Eb on Db 6/9 I could get away with it..

But the 13 #11 on the p/u chord of Misty? Thats weak to my ear because it sounds like its resolving to the melody note - the maj 7th.

Yes, jazzers think in lydian a lot but you'd never omit the # when writing chords. Even George Russell would write #11

.

Exactly. You can only assume something about a chord in the context its presented - and George's abstract ideas are really for the improvisational arsenal.

[klasaine]

Originally Posted by telequacktastic

Klasaine, what would be a Dominant 13th arpeggio? It would be Mixo-based?

On the other hand, I found another (account of the lyd chrom. concept) with notation by Gary Campbell book: Connecting Jazz Theory on this 13th chord as well: Connecting Jazz Theory, Chord Application Guide p.114 "dom.7 sus11, spelled G7 9 11 13; but then we have p. 116 dom.7#11 spelled G7 9 #11 13.

I've owned these books since UNT, now what do I do? What are the ingredients of a Dominant 13th chord? I guess its simply different schools of thought, right? Ted Greene is cool

A Dom.13, G13 is all mixo - G B D F A E
In the 'real' playing world - with all theory books cast aside - if a piano player says to you, "play a G13 at bar 9" do not assume he or she wants any type of 11th, natural, sharp or whatever. If they say, "just gimme some type of G dominant at bar 9" ... knock yourself out.

As for soloing over a G13 ... sure a raised 11th is usually gonna sound great, especially if the G13 is functioning as some type of V chord, even momentarily.

*TG knew more about harmony and how to use it 'musically' than anyone I've ever met so far and that includes all my profs in college.

[BigDaddyLH]

Originally Posted by BigDaddyLH

I've got Mark Levine's The Jazz Theory Book at home. I'll check it tonight.

So I checked the book last night. He doesn't explicitly talk about forming extended chords, but when he talks about the "lydian sound" he uses the notation "CMaj7 #4" and "G7 #11". He uses the triangle to notate "Maj7" and I don't know why he uses #4 for one and #11 for the other.

Again, I think we can all agree that the "lydian sound" is not uncommon with major or dominant chords, but it should be explicitly notated.

[telequacktastic]

What about the symbol "E7alt."? Would this include a #11?

[BigDaddyLH]

Originally Posted by telequacktastic

What about the symbol "E7alt."? Would this include a #11?

Alt implies your favourite mix of b9, #9, b5/#11, #5/b13.

[Tim Bowen]

Nomenclature trends evolve constantly, that's for sure. I see "2" chords listed all the time when "sus2" is what's wanted, not only in hand written charts, but in publications. In recent years, "sus" has come to mean or imply "sus4". I grew up with "sus2" and "sus4" and prefer the distinction if that's what's called for.

As for tenth intervals: even when talking double stops, I've had some rather scholarly types frown upon use of the terms major tenth and minor tenth, but whatever. That's what it is if it's not part of a triad or larger complete chord. It seems like a practical distinction from the third to me in this context. I use them quite often on guitar and bass to imply the underlying harmony, particularly in larger ensembles (applying more to guitar than bass here) where lots of harmonic information is already being supplied by other instrumentation.

[jazztele]

Originally Posted by Tim Bowen

As for tenth intervals: even when talking double stops, I've had some rather scholarly types frown upon use of the terms major tenth and minor tenth, but whatever. That's what it is if it's not part of a triad or larger complete chord. It seems like a practical distinction from the third to me in this context. I use them quite often on guitar and bass to imply the underlying harmony, particularly in larger ensembles (applying more to guitar than bass here) where lots of harmonic information is already being supplied by other instrumentation.

Which is odd, as the music academics I've met always approach theory from a piano perspective, and piano players use the term "tenths" all the time...but when playing the interval, not in chord naming...

[Tim Bowen]

Agreed, I found it odd indeed.

[Larry F]

A couple of points. The term suspended fourth means something different in classical theory than non-classical. In classical theory, one voice lands on a chord tone, then the chord changes with the same note being held. If this note is a perfect fourth above the root, then you have the makings of a suspension. However, suspensions need to resolve, which means that the fourth will move down by step to the third of the chord. Preparation, suspension, resolution. These are the three components of a suspension in classical theory. Another term in classical theory is the neighboring note. One of the most common forms of this is when a note is a chord tone. While the chord is maintained, that note will move up by step, then back down to the original note. This is what many guitarists do, especially in the Byrds-Dylan era where the third is played on the top string, then up to the fourth, then back down to the third. The Pinball Wizard model of sus 4 begins on the fourth, then moves down to the third.

My second point is that scholarly types and academics frown on things and disapprove of them. These are lousy teachers if they come across this way. Undergrad theory teachers have a vastly undeserved reputation for wagging their fingers at students' part-writing. They wag their fingers only in the sense that what the student is writing is not stylistically consistent with Bach's style. No teacher of any significant experience will frown on bad part-writing, which is not truly bad, but just not stylistically appropriate. Which is what the course is devoted to teaching. Yes, by all means write any way that you want to when you are not doing part-writing exercises in the style of Bach. If everyone followed Bach's example, everything would sound like Bach.

[telequacktastic]

Larry, you are a music professor. Which text do you use for teaching counterpoint? I have a translated Fux, and a book called "counterpoint in composition". Do you have one that you'd recommend?

I've always liked reading books. I like recommendations by folks that are interested and don't have the attitude that "its done this way, because I said...". The subject of spelling a thirteenth chord is one of different schools of thought. This I find quite fascinating. When a student learns from only one teacher or one book it kind of dates the knowledge that they have to work within. I appreciate a discussion, some avoid it like the plague and discuss the more mundane realities that are fact or fiction which are also important but not near as discussion worthy.

[slowpinky]

I did some classes with Mark Levine years ago -as far as I remember he refers to #4 when using chords in closed position. (The triangle on the major 7th is troublesome as it ends up looking too much like the 'diminished' circle when you are writing charts in a hurry - but thats just me!)

I seldom notate the '11' on a major chord - preferring sus4. If I want that beautiful Herbie chord I'd tend to notate it for a pianist - i.e G bass - B C E F A for instance - and in fact these days I am reading more charts with the chords fully notated.

But its pretty common practice to omit the 5th in extended chords on guitar - for playability reasons too of course , but its been burned into my psyche that 3rd and 7th plus whatever extensions are the essentials of any chord - and maybe its also because of the common use of the lydian sound as a soloing device.

[klasaine]

I've seen that Herbie chord notated like this more than a couple of times ...

G13 w/4 (and they mean natural 4).

[telequacktastic]

did he use this voicing in Maiden Voyage?

[slowpinky]

Thats cool - I guess the potential problems of leaving it up to the player is where the inherent dissonances of the chord lie - it can change the sound of that voicing utterly - i.e if the 4th is on top a b9 from the 3rd - or crammed up against it - same with the 7th and 13th..

but true - most piano players know this voicing and will orietate it to the melody...

[klasaine]

Originally Posted by slowpinky

most piano players know this voicing and will orientate it to the melody...

That voicing/notation was not in any books, just personal charts by piano players.

*The Maiden Voyage voicing is various iterations of Am7/D

Sometimes E on top, usually G.

[slowpinky]

Yeah I dont think it features so much in Maiden Voyage - but I know it comes up in his playing with Miles on various standards and Wayne Shorter tunes - where he was really trying to expose the upper structures in chords - I'll check it out and find some specifics..

NB Its also part of the quartal voicing family - G C F B E for instance -

[klasaine]

Originally Posted by slowpinky

Stomping at the Savoy - I can tell you I got nailed for playing a #11 on that chord - until I figured out that if I resolve the D natural on the Ab13 to an Eb on Db 6/9 I could get away with it..

But the 13 #11 on the p/u chord of Misty? Thats weak to my ear because it sounds like its resolving to the melody note - the maj 7th.

For 'Stompin' I play it Ab13/A (i.e., A13b9 with A in the bass) voiced low to high ... A Gb C F. Resolves perfectly to a Dbmaj7.

For 'Misty' I like this as a pkup chord: G13b9 with the b9 in the middle of the voicing. Low to high ... G Ab B E G (you can leave out the low G).