Hi all--a funny thing happened on the way to double bass playing--suddenly started listening (and loving) jazz and also decided to delve deeper into aspects of music theory. What is it about this instrument?
Anyway, would like it if someone would explain tritone substitutions and how they might be useful in the real world. My take thus far--you are swapping the III chord in a scale with a chord 3 steps up. Is this correct? Does everyone do this or do you arpeggiate the subst. while the others stick with the original chord? Does this make sense?
Thanks!

oops--meant the V chord, not the III. Won't edit in case someone is responding as I type.



[Edited by double dad on 02-09-2001 at 08:15 AM]

Technically speaking, a tritone substitution generally refers to substituting one dominant chord for another which shares the same tritone.

Ex.

G7
3rd...7th
.B.....F
7th...3rd (B is an enharmonic spelling of Cb)
Db7


The net tonal effect of using a dominant tritone sub is the same as altering the dominant chord while changing the bass to a note that typically resolves down by half-step. For example, the following are common piano voicings for both chords (assume enharmonic spellings):

G7#9(#5)
3rd...#5..7th...#9
.B....Eb...F....Bb
7th..9th..3rd...6th (a common color tone for Dom7 voicings)
Db7

In many cases it is best to use a lydian dominant scale for the Db7, which makes it the same scale that would be used for the G7#9(#5), as they are modes of each other. Don't worry about which is the "chicken" and which is the "egg" - it really doesn't matter.

As a bassist, if you are going to use dominant tritone subs a lot (many folks even "sub" entire ii-V progressions, but that's another story), it helps to be playing with a pianist/guitarist who has big enough ears to do the following on the spot - either:

a)alter the dominant chord appropriately when hearing the bass note change, or
b)switch to the related "sub" chord, which usually amounts to the same thing.

Hope this wasn't too confusing.

Chris

This kind of bumps into the reservation I have about a theory discussion board. It's so much harder to convey the information without the student and the piano being right there. An explanation can be accurate without necessarily being understandable. That's an underestimated art. And that may be the part that intimidates the lurkers. They think that if they don't get the explanation, it's their fault. Not necessarily, folks. If you don't get something, ask again, just the way I had to re-explain my "Explain the shift" theory. It's my obligation to make it clear.

Now we're into a second theory thread, still in the Miscellaneous board. I think we should move. I have some random things on different aspects that could be helpful, but I don't know where to put them so that newbies can find them.

Thanks Chris and Don--I will definitely have to get the piano and bass and play around with this--I'm not one to "grasp" spoken or written ideas as much as the "hands on" approach.
When I spell out the lydian dominant scale I get a G# (assuming #4, b7). What am I doing wrong?
Should this be under technique, or are we trying to get admin to create a new DB topic?

To add to what Chris wrote, the defining feature of any dominant chord (V7) is the presence of a tritone between the third and seventh intervals of the chord. A tritone is half and octave, this causes it to sound the same regardless of which note is on top or on the bottom. In other words, an inverted tritone is still a tritone, unlike a third which inverts to a sixth. Ya still with me? The result is that you can spell V7 chords a tritone apart and the the notes forming the tritone within the chord will remain the same.

As I mentioned the tritone is the defining feature of the V7, so it stands to reason that V7 chords a tritone apart, containing the same tritone will function in an identical manner.

Example: Dm7->G7->Cmaj7 = Dm7->Db7->Cmaj7
ii7->V7->Imaj7 = ii7->bII7->Imaj7

Check out the chromatic motion in the example on the left. That's probably the most common use of the tritone sub.

I wanted the roman numerals to line up w/the chords in the line above but couldn't do it. Picture that part lined up



[Edited by David Kaczorowski on 02-09-2001 at 01:55 PM]

Originally posted by double dad
Thanks Chris and Don--I will definitely have to get the piano and bass and play around with this--I'm not one to "grasp" spoken or written ideas as much as the "hands on" approach.
When I spell out the lydian dominant scale I get a G# (assuming #4, b7). What am I doing wrong?
Should this be under technique, or are we trying to get admin to create a new DB topic?

If you're trying to spell a lydian dominant scale in Db, it would be:
Db, Eb, F, G, Ab, Bb, Cb(B), Db

Is that what you were asking?

By the way, I'm sure most people knew this already, but for any "Silent Lurkers" who might be confused, those voicings in my last post were rootless; that is to say, they were what a pianist might play if (s)he was assuming that the root was going to be played by the bass. You'll have to plunk out the root along with them on the piano if you are alone.

About the other thing, I agree we should have a dedicated Theory Topic (or Forum, or whatever it's called)...how do we go about requesting that?

Yes Chris, that's what I meant. Thanks.

WOJOHOWEICZ,

I had the same problem about things lining up. Theory without notation is difficult! To get things to line up I have to use these........as.........spacers. It's a pain, but it seems to work most of the time.

A Lydian Db is a Db scale played on an Ab key signature. Then minor the 7th (C becomes Cb[B], which is the same note as the 3rd in a G7 chord). In essence, Db7-5 = G7-5. You can find this device in Mozart's Requiem, among other places.

Now, you can get a headache with this by questioning whether a G natural in a Db chord is a flatted 5th (Abb) or an augmented 4th (Gb raised to G) or, to impress the folks, an augmented 11th. The ear doesn't care. Use it. Enjoy it.

May I add that I don't know what the hell I did to cause the capital letters. You know that's not my style

Wow. That's embarassing.

[Edited by Don Higdon on 02-09-2001 at 02:11 PM]

Don,

That was pretty funny. I suspect that for some unknown reason, you pressed [ , B , ] , only without the commas. To cancel, press [ , / , B , ] . That usually cancels it.

[,B/,] This is a test. Stop laughing, dammit. What happened was, I wanted to put Cb(B) with the B in brackets since I was already inside parens.

[Edited by Don Higdon on 02-09-2001 at 02:25 PM]

Originally posted by Don Higdon

May I add that I don't know what the hell I did to cause the capital letters. You know that's not my style


Don,
I can't help it...everytime I even think about the above sentence in total visual context, it makes my ribs hurt. Sorry...but hey, you made someone's day without even trying.That ought to be worth something, right?

P.S. - I'll tell you how to control that in the future if you'll promise not to change the original post until everybody has had a chance to see it. Waddaya say?

Proudly, I accept my new sobriquet. I even prefer it.
With this post, I solemnly vow always, with vigor and dedication, to justify the faith you have expressed by living down to the expectations implicit in the title you have bestowed upon me.

[Edited by Don Higdon on 02-09-2001 at 03:07 PM]

Thanks for explaining the boldface type, Don--I was afraid you lost it partway through and were yelling at me!

David:
Example: Dm7->G7->Cmaj7 = Dm7->Db7->Cmaj7
ii7->V7->Imaj7 = ii7->bII7->Imaj7

does this mean that the tritone sub chord is always one-half step up from the chord it resolves to? Seems like an easy way to "grab" it quickly.

still have to grab the bass and play over this stuff.

Yep, that's what it means, which makes it a pretty easy "grab" for most of us bassplayers. You can choose to do it almost at will in any minor ii-V-i, since it is pretty much assumed that the V chord will be altered anyway...but remember - if YOU choose to stick in a tritone sub in a major key ii-V-I and the piano player DOESN'T catch it (and therefore doesn't alter his V7 voicing) things can get pretty messy pretty fast. Lots of trial and error in the practice room is advised before whipping a bunch of these out on a gig with an unsuspecting pianist/soloist.

David - sorry if I stole yer thunder. I was taking a practice/dinner break & couldn't control my itchy post finger...

I have no thunder, Chris.

Originally posted by Mark Steel
Hi all--a funny thing happened on the way to double bass playing--suddenly started listening (and loving) jazz and also decided to delve deeper into aspects of music theory. What is it about this instrument?
Anyway, would like it if someone would explain tritone substitutions and how they might be useful in the real world. My take thus far--you are swapping the III chord in a scale with a chord 3 steps up. Is this correct? Does everyone do this or do you arpeggiate the subst. while the others stick with the original chord? Does this make sense?
Thanks!

oops--meant the V chord, not the III. Won't edit in case someone is responding as I type.
[Edited by double dad on 02-09-2001 at 08:15 AM]


I was rehearsing with a piano player last night and he suggested I use the tritone sustitution of a particular chord. I asked him how he consrtucted the tritone sub (and what that exactly meant). But, he isn't very articulate (in fact he's a little bit of a bully). So I'm running to the comfort of the dark castle to see if I could gleen any insight from you guys.

I ran a search for "tritone substitutions" and came across this thread, but I'm still not getting it.

I understand now that a tritone sub is 6 half steps up (or 3 whole tones) from the chord you are subbing, but I don't understand why or how this works. My pianist buddy said something about splitting the octave? :confused:

From reading this I'm not sure if you apply it to only the V chord of the scale or if it can be applied to the whole scale?

Many Thanks

Lime,

I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you be more specific, and perhaps post an example or two? It would be easier to illustrate Tritone sub questions with some specific material to work with.

Okay, Thanks

I was just rereading the thread on Melodic Soloing and Blanket Scales. It answered most of my questions.

I'm going to spend some more time exploring the theory links. Again, thank you.

I alway thought the tri-tone was the aug 4th or dim 5th as in a to e flat also called the devil in music. I was instructed to do almost anyting to avoid that interval.

Joe

Originally posted by Joe Taylor
I alway thought the tri-tone was the aug 4th or dim 5th as in a to e flat also called the devil in music. I was instructed to do almost anyting to avoid that interval.



Tritone is simply another name for the aug4/dim5 interval, but who told you to avoid them, a Medieval monk? In the early days of Gregorian chant, this notion of avoiding tritones was more commonly accepted as wisdom, but by the time of Bach, tritones were all over the place - in fact, they had become a cornerstone of the tonal system. All dominant 7th chords feature this interval between the 3rd and 7th...much western pop and most jazz use them so often that it's hard to go 8 bars without seeing at least one.

Ed,

You are right about modern music. I guess the thing about using the tritone is resolve it quickly.

Joe

Originally posted by Joe Taylor
Ed,

You are right about modern music. I guess the thing about using the tritone is resolve it quickly.

Joe

Ed??? Well, I suppose I'll take that as a compliment even though I am not currently in possession of a ponytail. :)

OOPS!

Sorry Chris

Joe

LOL

nice pic

Bump.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski
...

Example: Dm7->G7->Cmaj7 = Dm7->Db7->Cmaj7
ii7->V7->Imaj7 = ii7->bII7->Imaj7

...

I wanted the roman numerals to line up w/the chords in the line above but couldn't do it. Picture that part lined up
...Try preceding the "lined-up" text with [ code ] (omit the spaces), then end the section with [ / code ] (omit the spaces). This forces monospaced text, and retains all your multiple spaces instead of parsing them out. Should turn out right, such as:
Example: Dm7->G7->Cmaj7 = Dm7->Db7->Cmaj7
ii7->V7->Imaj7 = ii7->bII7->Imaj7

Originally posted by Joe Taylor
I guess the thing about using the tritone is resolve it quickly.

I wouldn't say so. Personally, I think the idea that tritones are to be avoided is absolute crap. Jazz, and popular music are *full* of tritones, literally. And they don't necessarily resolve at all, let alone quickly :D

Take blues - which is based on dominant 7th chords. And, the blues scale, with the flattened 5th. Tritones are a hugely important part of blues, and you don't have to resolve them.

Entire works have been based on the tritone (West Side Story, The Simpsons theme :D).

In fact, in Jazz, I might even say if there's one interval *not* to avoid like the plague it's the tritone :D

A bare tritone often forms the core of my piano voicings. Very often, actually.

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald

In the early days of Gregorian chant, this notion of avoiding tritones was more commonly accepted as wisdom, but by the time of Bach, tritones were all over the place

this is because the tuning system used by Gregorian chant music was based on Pythagarius, and the tuning system used by JS Bach was "well tempered", resulting in the tri-tone sounding completely different and to Bach's ears, much more useful and tuneful.

Originally posted by David Kaczorowski


Example: Dm7->G7->Cmaj7 = Dm7->Db7->Cmaj7
ii7->V7->Imaj7 = ii7->bII7->Imaj7


Just wanted to make one small correction here. It is not ii7->bII7->Imaj7. It is actually ii7->subV7->I. There really is no bII7, it is actually called the subV, also the "I" chord does not have to me a major 7th. It could be another dominant, 6th, minor, etc

Originally posted by Mike Dimin


Just wanted to make one small correction here. It is not ii7->bII7->Imaj7. It is actually ii7->subV7->I. There really is no bII7, it is actually called the subV, also the "I" chord does not have to me a major 7th. It could be another dominant, 6th, minor, etc

I think for the purposes of illustrating what the chord progression is using roman numerals, bII7 is correct, though Mike, you can use subV7 if you want to. I have yet to see subV7 in a chart, I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but to me bII7 is a heck of a lot clearer.

you are correct that you won't see "subV7" in a chart, but it is the "term" used in college level music theory courses. the rational is that since we are talking about a ii - V7 - I progression, and we are implementing a tritone substition, it is correct to say ii - subV7 - I, since by definition are you subbing on the V7. This insures that whatever instrument is doing the comping uses a good voicing. An G7 chord with a Db bass voiced by a good pianist will sound different than a straight Db dominant chord. Most of this stuff is just "the rules" and in practical application they sound very similar, but there is a difference to be sure.

The term "SubV" is used at some universities, but certainly not all. It was used at Berklee, but it doesn't get taught here at UofL even though the subject of tritone substitution is covered extensively, and to the best of my knowledge it doesn't get used at the Aebersold summer workshops either. It's good to know what the term "SubV" means, but I don't think it's wrong to use the term "bII7" either - as Phil said, it's actually much clearer as a chord indication. That said, whatever works is whatever works.

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald
The term "SubV" is used at some universities, but certainly not all. It was used at Berklee, but it doesn't get taught here at UofL even though the subject of tritone substitution is covered extensively, and to the best of my knowledge it doesn't get used at the Aebersold summer workshops either. It's good to know what the term "SubV" means, but I don't think it's wrong to use the term "bII7" either - as Phil said, it's actually much clearer as a chord indication. That said, whatever works is whatever works.

The reason that you might not want to use bII7 is that functionally speaking a bii would not be a dominant chord. That is why the sub V makes more sense .. oh and I went to Berklee (that's where my brain washing come from)

Mike

Originally posted by Mike Dimin


The reason that you might not want to use bII7 is that functionally speaking a bii would not be a dominant chord. That is why the sub V makes more sense ..

Agree and disagree. Back in the old school days of "Legit" theory (i.e. - Walter Piston, et. al...) when Roman numerals were not appended with uppercase and lowercase designations to denote chord structure, the term "bII7" might have been confusing. But these days, as the uppercase is almost universally used to show a Major chord, I think that the term "bII7" shows dominant function pretty clearly. YMMV.

oh and I went to Berklee (that's where my brain washing come from)



Me too. At least the first part of it. :)

As an aside, I used to play in a band which used several different singers, and many of our charts were written in simple Roman numerals in order to facilitate transposition to "odd" keys, which was a lot easier than trying to write 3 different charts and then figure out which chart to play. It worked well as a shortcut.

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald


If you're trying to spell a lydian dominant scale in Db, it would be:
Db, Eb, F, G, Ab, Bb, Cb(B), Db


Chris, ol' pal. You got more learnin' than me, but I thought lydian was lydian, period, and a Db lydian was a Db scale played on an Ab signature. Looking again, I see you said 'lydian dominant', which I guess means the 7th a whole tone below the octave, hence the Cb in your illustration. My point is that to me, the mode names described every note in the scale. In every modal piece I've sung, the integrity is not breached. Having said that, it seems alot easier to dispense with the mode names altogether and use the appendages we're all used to anyway, e.g., +4 or +11, depending on how you intend the voicing to be. Actually, I think it's more efficient.

This relates to a lingering concern I have about academic exercises, left brain/right brain, hearing vs. processing, etc. which I'll put forth in a future post. Lest anyone think I'm going to make a case against academics, guess again. They're right up there with curled fingers on the left hand.

"Lydian Dominant" is a different mode, not the same as "Lydian". Lydian Dominant is the 4th mode of the melodic minor. It's the same as Lydian, but with a b7. Likewise, Lydian Augmented (which is the 3rd mode of the melodic minor) is the same as Lydian, but with a #5.

Originally posted by moley
"Lydian Dominant" is a different mode, not the same as "Lydian". Lydian Dominant is the 4th mode of the melodic minor. It's the same as Lydian, but with a b7. Likewise, Lydian Augmented (which is the 3rd mode of the melodic minor) is the same as Lydian, but with a #5.
I was thinking in terms of what others call the authentic modes.
While you're at it, you might as well specify ascending, not descending, which gets back to what I said about the efficiency and clarity of citing the appendages.

It's also good to remember that the modes of melodic minor are not functional in the same way as are those of major. In a major key, the modes function in exact relation to the diatonic chord whose root they share. In melodic minor they do not, as the "mode" corresponding to ii-7b5 does not contain a b5, the "mode" corresponding to V7#9 (or V7b9, or V7"alt", if you prefer) contains neither a b9 or a #9, the iv chord would be major, etc.... for this reason, I find the idea of the modes of melodic minor more useful as theoretical abstractions than as practically applicable scales that can be readily applied to improvisation in harmonic context. Again, as always, YMMV.

Originally posted by DONOSAURUS REX

Chris, ol' pal. You got more learnin' than me, but I thought lydian was lydian, period, and a Db lydian was a Db scale played on an Ab signature. Looking again, I see you said 'lydian dominant', which I guess means the 7th a whole tone below the octave, hence the Cb in your illustration. My point is that to me, the mode names described every note in the scale. In every modal piece I've sung, the integrity is not breached. Having said that, it seems alot easier to dispense with the mode names altogether and use the appendages we're all used to anyway, e.g., +4 or +11, depending on how you intend the voicing to be. Actually, I think it's more efficient.

This brings up several interesting points. First, it serves to underscore the fact that jazz nomenclature is in no way a "finished product", or even in many cases a standardized one. Here in the Bluegrass, the term "Lydian Dominant" is fairly commonly understood, but in other places, people scratch their heads when you use the term. I had an extremely talented Canadian student write a chart in one of my ensembles this last year in which he used the chord symbol, "D7b9sus" as the tonic chord of an original arrangement he'd written, and you should have heard then mess that occurred when all of the Americans tried blowing over it...turns out he wanted a Phrygian sound, and that was the common way of notating that where he came from.

Second is the question of "do or should chords in and of themselves always always indicate specific scale choices, or should context have something to say about that?" This may be a starter topic for another thread, so I won't go into it here, but I find it many approaches and views people have on this topic very interesting.

This relates to a lingering concern I have about academic exercises, left brain/right brain, hearing vs. processing, etc. which I'll put forth in a future post. Lest anyone think I'm going to make a case against academics, guess again. They're right up there with curled fingers on the left hand.

Fire when ready, Cap'n! This forum could use some more action. :)

Originally posted by moley
"Lydian Dominant" is a different mode, not the same as "Lydian". Lydian Dominant is the 4th mode of the melodic minor. It's the same as Lydian, but with a b7. Likewise, Lydian Augmented (which is the 3rd mode of the melodic minor) is the same as Lydian, but with a #5.

So, who the hell is this "Lydia" anyway???

"Lydia, oh Lydia, say, have you met Lydia?
Lydia the tattooed lady
She has eyes that folks adore so
And a torso even more so
Lydia, oh Lydia, that encyclo-pidia
Oh Lydia, the queen of tattoo
On her back is the Battle of Waterloo
Beside it the Wreck of the Hesperus, too
And proudly above waves the red, white and blue
You can learn a lot from Lydia..."

(obviously...)

- Wil

Originally posted by Don Higdon
While you're at it, you might as well specify ascending, not descending, which gets back to what I said about the efficiency and clarity of citing the appendages.

Ok, yes, sorry I was thinking in Jazz mode there, rather than legit mode :D

Originally posted by Wil Davis
So, who the hell is this "Lydia" anyway???

"Lydia, oh Lydia, say, have you met Lydia?
Lydia the tattooed lady
..."

(obviously...)

- Wil Hooray for Captain Spalding!

How is tritone substitution relevant to the melody in jazz. Eg; if the melody hits a Flattened or sharpened note out side the key is that when you might use a tri tone substitution chord. Desa finado sounds like what I suspect is what you "pro's" are discussing.

Slightly puzzled and half baked:eek: Thats me

Originally posted by Don Higdon
[B]This kind of bumps into the reservation I have about a theory discussion board. It's so much harder to convey the information without the student and the piano being right there. An explanation can be accurate without necessarily being understandable. That's an underestimated art. And that may be the part that intimidates the lurkers. They think that if they don't get the explanation, it's their fault. Not necessarily, folks. If you don't get something, ask again, just the way I had to re-explain my "Explain the shift" theory. It's my obligation to make it clear.

I suggest if people used specific examples of songs to put the discussion of ideas into context. Eg Connecting chords last post on "how high the moon"



;)

Originally posted by contraman
How is tritone substitution relevant to the melody in jazz. Eg; if the melody hits a Flattened or sharpened note out side the key is that when you might use a tri tone substitution chord. Desa finado sounds like what I suspect is what you "pro's" are discussing.

Slightly puzzled and half baked:eek: Thats me
The Db in the 3rd bar is a good example of when not to use the tritone substitue. The purpose of the note is to create tension - Db against G7 - which is resolved in the next phrase - D against Gm7. Remember the translation of the title is "slightly out of tune." The tritone sub would put Db against Db7. Consonant and bland.
When the melody note is either the 3rd or 7th of the chord you can use the tritone sub safely, creating a little ambiguity or tension which you resolve when you complete the cadence.

Originally posted by Don Higdon
When the melody note is either the 3rd or 7th of the chord you can use the tritone sub safely, creating a little ambiguity or tension which you resolve when you complete the cadence.

Agreed - trading the third for the 7th or vice-versa is pretty much an equal trade off. Sometimes the "normal" chord is so ingrained on the consciousness of the listener that the tritone sub will therefore seem "exotic", but that's about it. But when the melody note is a color tone of a dominant chord you are considering subbing for, there's a formula which can help you predict whether the TT sub is worth the trouble.

Melody note,............Melody Note,
Original Chord..........Tritone Sub
....Root.......................b5
.....b9.........................5
......9........................#5
.....#9........................13
.....3rd.......................7th
.....b5........................Root
......5........................b9
.....#5.........................9
.....13........................#9
.....7th.......................3rd

As DONOSAUR mentioned, trading the b5 of the original chord for the root of the tritone sub is usually a bad choice, as you are trading a very colorful note with lots of tension for one with none. In general, the most "colorful" tritone subs are those which create a situation in which the melody note is an altered color tone of the substitute chord, giving it more flavor that the original harmonization.

An easy way to look at it is like this: trading a 3rd for a 7th is basically a wash (although I feel the 3rd is a bit stronger). Beyond that, if the melody note of any resolving dominant chord is an unaltered color tone (root, 9th, 5th, 13th) the tritone sub will give you a more "pungent" sound because the melody note will then become an altered color tone (b9, #9, b5, or #5). Which is a good thing if you're looking to create tension.

Extended tritone subs (those that contain a related ii-7 chord) are another story altogether. Suffice it to say they rank among the most annoying and overused substitution techniques that I can think of, and if not used with great discretion, can make a set of changes sound more like a musical obstacle course than a breeding ground for melodic development. But that's just my 2 cents...

Intersting stuff, ta chaps... especially the advice on where and how to use tritone subs. I undertand the concept and recognise it in progressions, but using it myself in improv, well...

It's mad how something as blindingly simple as "a tritone divides the octave" can be a revelation!

Band session to work on new material tomorrow .. time to try out some of these subs where I can get away with making nasty sounds :)

H

Originally posted by Howard K

Band session to work on new material tomorrow .. time to try out some of these subs where I can get away with making nasty sounds :)

H

I think before the 1940s these kind of things sounded nasty to most people's ears...but nowadays, when you have had Schonberg, Stockhausen, Messiaen,Ornette Coleman, Sun Ra, Miles' electric period etc. I don't know?

To me, it doesn't sound nasty, so much as "Jazzy"! ;)

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
I think before the 1940s these kind of things sounded nasty to most people's ears...but nowadays, when you have had Schonberg, Stockhausen, Messiaen,Ornette Coleman, Sun Ra, Miles' electric period etc. I don't know?
...or the guy who wrote the Ode to Joy theme, Mozart, in his Requiem

Folks keep talking about how nasty the tritone sounds. I ask, how can you make a decent walking bass part WITHOUT using the tritone? It's one of the absolutely basic ways of moving from one chord to another a fifth away. By this post-jazz point in the development of our ears and musical language, what's so weird about the tritone?

Maybe it's just a language thing and there are a bunch of cats out there who use the tritone but just think of it in terms of passing tones, a tone that gits ya from here to there.

To me, it doesn't sound nasty, so much as "Jazzy"!
Folks keep talking about how nasty the tritone sounds.

No no, dont get me wrong. I'm not adverse to the sound of tritone, far from it, I dont think it sounds nasty at all.

I meant that, for example, tonight my band will meet to work on new material, I will try out tritone subs on any V7 chords I find in the material the guys have come up with, just to see how it sounds. Given that I dont really know what I'm doing, it might sound good, it might sound bad? - I'll be experimenting on new material - hence 'get way with nasty sounds'.

Basically, I'll try and sneak some in there, but I might get caught and told off :rolleyes:

I'm just learning about this stuff now, and This thread is dizzying.

So, a tritone sub is when you do what?

:confused:

Sorry, durrl, but it was your first post that really confused me


G7
3rd...7th
B.....F
7th...3rd (B is an enharmonic spelling of Cb)
Db7


lemme try and make sense of this:

G->B is a 3rd
B-> Db is a min3rd
Db is the 5th of G7
F is the 7th of G7
F->Db is a tritone



okay...so...I'm confused... :(

I really shouldn't be trying to cram this stuff in at 4 AM, maybe that's what it is...I think I'll go to bed now.

Wrong Robot - my advice would be to sit at a piano or keyboard and check these things out.. it "looks" a lot easier on a piano... IMO anyway

Play G7 (G,B,D,F). The tritone (three steps) within this chord is between the 3rd, B and the 7th, F.

Now play Db7 (Db,F,Ab,B). The tritone here is still between the 3rd, F and the 7th, B (would be Cb). The only difference is that the notes themselves are "reversed" in which has the lowest pitch.

Now, you know how a 3rd when inverted becomes a 6th, so C to E is a 3rd, while E to C is a 6th?

Well, because a tritone is exactly half an octave the interval is the same regardless of which note is the lowest pitch in the chord. It is still a tritone regardles of where the B and F are played.

B,C,Db,D,Eb,E,F,Gb,G,Ab,A,Bb,B

You also know that the 3rd and 7th notes of a chord define it's quality, major, minor, 7th, etc, etc... So when you perform a tritone sub you are not changing the interval between the two most important notes in the chord.


This particular tritone sub is a bII7. This should make more sense when you actually play/hear it, but here goes...
G7 is the V chord in C Major, D is the II chord - making the Db7 a tritone sub for the V chord which resolves nicely to the tonic, C. So when your perform this particular tritone sub the harmonic function of the chords is the same, it's still basically a II-V-I progression, but the root motion is now chromatic downward... which is REAL nice! :)

On your bass, try playing D-7, Db7, CM7 - just root 3rd and 7th will do. I gurantee you'll have heard this sound all over the shop!


Disclaimer: this is how I understand it! If this doenst quite work for you I'm sure many others here can explain it better!
Also, if there are any mistakes above (I dont think there are?), my apologies! :)

On the mark howard....I blame the late night for me mental block.

makes right sense to me now, thanks!

Originally posted by Don Higdon
...or the guy who wrote the Ode to Joy theme, Mozart, in his Requiem

Well - that was the point I was making - so before the 20th Century, when we got far more dissonant stuff - the tritone was used as standing for the Devil and so the parts in Mozart's Don Giovanni for example, where he is portraying Hell, really stand out against the rest of the music and would have sounded "nasty" to listeners in the Classical period.

But our ears have been acclimatised to this for many years, so it doesn't have the same impact for us.

Here's a passage from a work on Ghosts in Opera, which explains what I meant, better than I can :

"In Act II of Der Freischütz, for example, Weber’s rendering of the Wolf’s Glen (where the devil has his dealings) is a benchmark of horror-scoring for orchestra, radical for its own time and revisited ever since. Stagings of this phantasmagoria will always differ, but the images painted in sound are indelible. A bell chimes midnight in a distant tower; nocturnal flying creatures screech in the woodwinds, answering the hissing incantations of Caspar, the devil’s henchman. Samiel—the devil—is identified by a tremolando in the violas and low winds that surges into the high strings, with throbbing timpani beneath. Where Samiel is, there too is the diminished seventh chord, and also C minor, "the key of dark powers," prevails throughout. Weber invokes earth, air, fire, and water in disembodied voices from offstage. Under that ominous chorus, in the bass, is a "tritone" progression—the augmented fourth, called the diabolus in musica because it was so difficult to tune that it was once "forbidden" by music theorists."

also C minor, "the key of dark powers,"

Got it.. kinda like D minor is "the saddest of all keys"...

I was just going to start a new thread entitled someone please explain tritone substitutions for me but you've all done it already!

Ok, my bass teacher went over the tritone substitution and after reading this thread I think I have a pretty good grasp of what it is and what it can be used for, but I still have some questions. I'm just gonna write down what I think I know, and I would be very thankful if someone with some theory knowledge could confirm or steer me in the right direction concerning this.

A dominant V chord can be substituted by another dominant V chord that includes the tritone, right? For instance G can be substituted for Db, since they both include the B and F, which forms a tritone. My teacher showed me a chord progression (II V I), and said that the V chord resolves to the I chord, since the V chord includes the 7th degree of the key your playing in, and this note wants to "flow" into the root of the key. The b7th of the V chord wants to "flow" into the 3rd note of the I chord aswell.

My teacher also talked a bit about temporarily changing keys in a song, using modes or something like that. He was using the jazz standard "Autumn leaves", when showing me this idea, but I didn't really understand what he was getting at.
He wrote down a few chords : G7, Cmaj7, B7, and Em7, where the B and Em chords are in another key.
Ok, this is where it starts getting messy.

So, I'm guessing the song starts out in C and as you hit the G, the V chord, you substitute it for Db, which temporarily puts you in the key of G, right? Now, here's another question for you. The fifth chord of a major scale resolves to the I chord. Does the same apply to a minor scale, or is it some other chord that resolves to the I chord of the minor scale?
The reason I am asking this is because my teacher showed me that the B7 chord (the V chord of E-minor) resolves to E-minor, and I'm guessing this hints that the temporary key of the song here is E-minor (which is the relative minor of G-major) but only if the V chord of a minor scale resolves to the I chord, just like in the major scale, which I'm not sure it ever does...

Ok, if this made any kind of sense to you, feel free to help me. :)

The fifth chord of a major scale resolves to the I chord. Does the same apply to a minor scale, or is it some other chord that resolves to the I chord of the minor scale?

Yes. But, it get's a little tricky. The strongest resolution of a dom7 chord is up a 4th. The Vdom7 does resolve to the Imin7, but like in the major key, the dom7 chord has to have a maj 3rd and a flat 7th in the chord. If, in E minor, you try to build the fith chord off of the Emin7 scale (dorian or Aeolian), you won't get a major third (D#) in that chord.

I feel it's easier to get away from trying to build chords off of scales and keys. It's better just to know what chord tones belong in any particular chord. In E minor, the V chord needs to have a B, a D#, and an A. It usually also has an C, or the flat 9, in minor keys.

You can get this knowlege by knowing that a V chord from E harmonic minor works, but then you have to think of a scale rather than just remembering that the V in a minor key needs a root, a major third, a flat seventh, and a flat nine.

I recommend sticking with conventional harmonies and resolutions before subbing out your dominants and trying to modulate to temporary key centers. Once you can hear basic voice leading, that stuff will just become clear because you'll hear the tendancy of certain notes to resolve to others.

Okay, so I'm digging into tritone subs right now and I have a couple questions myself...

1 - When I asked my teacher about them, he got kind of excited and talked about them being a great device for walking lines. At the moment, I don't know any musicians who are even close to my age (and hence, schedule) that play guitar or piano that I practice "hearing" these with and leading into them.

That is to say, until September when I go to school, I won't have much opportunity to practice leading into tritone subs or hearing a piano player leading into it, so when it DOES happen during a jam session at school, I don't want to be embarassed and land my ass on a G7 while the piano player is playing a Db7. I'd really like to be able to hear that coming and go along. Are there any specific examples -- from both perspective of the piano and the bass (I'm lookin' at you, Durrl) that I can practice so I can know what to do? I've spent a few hours over the last couple days working on my piano playing so that I can really get the sound of this locked in.

2 - Is it "okay" to miss the tritone and hit the G7? How "bad" is it to miss it? Are we talking accidentally hitting a slightly out of tune root on the downbeat bad, or are we talking playing in the wrong key for 8 bars bad?

3- That said, I've heard talk on the AAJ forums that it's okay for soloists to hit the tritone sub without the rhythm section following, because then it just sounds like a G7alt. What's the deal on this? If I were to go into a tritone sub during my solo and the piano player didn't catch it, is it just going to sound like a G7alt, or is it going to sound like me futzing around?

My teacher also talked a bit about temporarily changing keys in a song, using modes or something like that. He was using the jazz standard "Autumn leaves", when showing me this idea, but I didn't really understand what he was getting at.
He wrote down a few chords : G7, Cmaj7, B7, and Em7, where the B and Em chords are in another key.
Ok, this is where it starts getting messy.



OK, I'll take a shot at this.

As I see it, that B7 is working as a V7/III in Cmaj. This means, its the V7 of Em7 as you mentioned, but I don't think its really changing keys rather than been used as a secondary dominant (not sure bout that term in english) to lead you strongly to that Em7. See, in any major key, you have seven diatonic chords, only one of them is dominant (V7), but you can use non diatonic dominant chords to lead you to any diatonic chord, since the tritone disolution that happens when a dominant chord resolves up a fourth. This gives you, in theory, six new chords for the key.

Guess that's about it, let me know if I messed up somewhere

Er, if he's using Autumn Leaves as an example, shouldn't those be Bm7(b5) and E7(b9), not Em7 and B7? Hence, it's a minor ii-v in Am?

I wouldn't know. Surprisingly, I'm not familiar with that tune:rollno:

I just analized that particular chord progression.

That would make sense...but I doubt we're getting a reply, as that post was from more than 2 years ago :eek: .

This is the most interesting thread I've ever read. As a bassist who believes that learning theory is so important, I'm so glad to see people asking theory questions instead of questions about their amp/cabs and basses. I think too many bassist's are worrying about what equipment they have and if they have the best tone out there, where the most important thing (theory) kind of just slips their mind. My teacher always says that before you're a bassist, you're a musician. Thus, it is just as important for learning music (theory) than it is technique and the elements of playing bass (electronics). Kudos to Mark Steel!

That is to say, until September when I go to school, I won't have much opportunity to practice leading into tritone subs or hearing a piano player leading into it, so when it DOES happen during a jam session at school, I don't want to be embarassed and land my ass on a G7 while the piano player is playing a Db7. I'd really like to be able to hear that coming and go along. Are there any specific examples -- from both perspective of the piano and the bass (I'm lookin' at you, Durrl) that I can practice so I can know what to do? I've spent a few hours over the last couple days working on my piano playing so that I can really get the sound of this locked in.

In essence, in most cases a tritone sub is really just a "darkening" of the original dominant sound (IWO, there is essentially precious little difference between "Dmi-G7alt-C" and "Dmi-Db7-C". Conversely, there is also little difference between "Dmi-G7(unaltered)-C" and "Dmi-Db7alt-C". Put in plain English, when you as the bass player play a tritone sub on a ii-V-I, what you are essentially doing is altering the Dominant chord. For starters, I'd take any any ii-V playalong stuff you might have and practice hearing/playing the sound of descending chromatic root motion under the (unaltered) piano voicings. "Darkening" works for me, but you might find another adjective that brings it home for you. Most people find that bass player-initiated TT subs tend to sound more "organic" on minor ii-V-i progressions.



3- That said, I've heard talk on the AAJ forums that it's okay for soloists to hit the tritone sub without the rhythm section following, because then it just sounds like a G7alt. What's the deal on this? If I were to go into a tritone sub during my solo and the piano player didn't catch it, is it just going to sound like a G7alt, or is it going to sound like me futzing around?

Kinda hard to say. If you were hearing a Db7 melodic line over the TT sub, it would probably just sound like G7alt. I try not to think when I play, so when I use those sounds, it seems more like just an alteration of the original harmony to me.

In my experience, I have found major or minor Tritone Subs work over DOM7 chord. Sometimes it's good to mix it up. You will find that if you get to play with a really good musicians, it feels more like you are communicating telepathically & you might just play the same chord, you might not. you really don't have time to think about things too much. (That's where all the private reahearsal comes in!) All the substiution chords, in effect are related in some way.If you play any Db7 over any G7 chord it will always work. You will find that Gigging will help you make all this knowledge second nature anyway. If you make mistakes it's a learrning experience anyway. You will find that if you lay down the groove with the root note sub or no sub that will givew the piano/guitarist plenty of room to play around with different harmonies!

Thanks a bunch, guys. I used it a few times to get the feel of it today at rehearsal on ATTYA and Embraceable You...IMO, sounded really cool and seems to be a really important way to make 2-5-1's sound just a bit more interesting and different every once in a while. Also used it in my solo on Fly Me To The Moon today at our gig, sounded pretty neat.

On a side note, at rehearsal, I noticed in Insensatez (How Insensitive) there's already a tritone subbed 2-5-1...or just chords moving chromatically down, I guess. It's riddled with Dm7 - Db7 - CM7. Sounds really cool, but I wonder how a tritone sub would sound on that (making it a regular 2-5-1.)

Thanks for explaining the boldface type, Don--I was afraid you lost it partway through and were yelling at me!

David:
Example: Dm7->G7->Cmaj7 = Dm7->Db7->Cmaj7
ii7->V7->Imaj7 = ii7->bII7->Imaj7

does this mean that the tritone sub chord is always one-half step up from the chord it resolves to? Seems like an easy way to "grab" it quickly.

still have to grab the bass and play over this stuff.


wait... I'm confused... if the next chord resolves a half step down, why wouldn't you use a diminished chord? Wouldn't it flow better? :confused:

The diminished chord is a special case usually. But it's function as a half step above chord to the target I is not effective because it doesn't have cadential quality.

For example D-7 C#dim Cmaj? C# dim and Cmaj share too many tones in common. The C# just sounds like a wierd flattening and color adjustment. If you have Bb in there again where does that go? The most common uses of the dim are:

Upward moving bass tone dominant sub: C C#o D- (in lieu of C A7 D-). It's like playing the leading tone to the next root.

Diminished I sub for color (ie Ebo to Ebmaj, like Star Eyes for ex). In many ways I look at this is V7b9 of III which subs for I. For ex. D7b9 to G-7 which subs for Ebma7. This why the D7 Ebmaj progression in Another You and Someone in Love works.

You might ask, then yeah but so many tunes have a diminished chord on bIII going to II. Doesn't this prove it's ok to have dim half step above? I would say, yes and no. Only if it occurs right there. Because the quality of chords and substitutions are often governed by the overall heirarchy (where there are in the overall scheme to get to I).

Generally the bIII II case (ie the Song Is You, Embraceable You etc) is effective for that cadence to II effect. The bIII passes to II. To set up the real cadence of V-I. You hear this type of thing on the related common typical ballad intro with V in the bass with the chords: I/V Io/V / II/V V7. In this case Io is identical to bIII

hm... ok I think I see what you're sayin'.