My band, Lovesjones (http://www.lovesjones.com/), has recently added the jazz standard All of Me to it's repetoire. We did it a couple of times last weekend, after minimal rehearsal (of that particular song) - Friday night swung but Saturday night's performance sucked so hard we used it to clean the dust off the floor....

The first two measures are notated with a C6 chord, which I've always assumed is built of I, III, V and VI (eg. C E G A). If I'm comping along with the chords, I'll tend to voice it I III VI.

However, doing a bit of work on my end of the tune last night, I tried looking it up in Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Workbook to get a solid idea of what kind of notes I could walk round underneath it. All I could find about X6 chords was:A C major 7th chord can be notated as Cmaj7, CM7, C6, ...:eek: :confused:

I couldn't quite figure that one out, so have come to ask at this fount of wisdom. How do you spell C6, how do you walk it on bass and, while you're at it, any suggestions for what to watch for in All of Me?

Cheers,

Wulf

You are right, C6 is spelled C-E-G-A, but rarely played that way. Most piano and guitar players that I've ever worked with treat it as a I chord, and play maj7, unless that 6 sound is really called for (like Glenn Miller type stuff).

I agree, what Levine said is a little confusing.

You're right in fact, C6 = C E G A.

The thing is, that with Jazz, the chord symbols represent an indication of the harmony, rather than any particular voicing. Very much open to interpretation.

When Levine said that Cmaj7, CM7, C6, C6/9 etc all mean the same thing, what he means is that they're all major triads with added notes from the major scale, and they're interchangeable. As Pac said, they're all I chords. From that point of view, they're all interchangeable, and when you see one, you can play any of the others. I'm not sure it's fair to say (like Levine did) that they're the same thing - I think it's more accurate to say they're interchangeable.

So, in effect, the chord might be written as C6, perhaps because of the notes in the melody line, but most jazz players would tend to substitute a major 7th instead.

Our keyboard player is very experienced, so I wonder if he's making these substitutions, maybe even without thinking about it too hard, and that's clashing with the 6ths that the rest of us are putting in.

Food for thought - something I can listen for on the recordings and discuss at our next rehearsal.

BTW, am I right about the melody being the first point of reference for how the basic chord (1, 3, 5) is extended with other notes (eg. 6, 7, 9, and various combinations)?

Wulf

Originally posted by wulf
So, in effect, the chord might be written as C6, perhaps because of the notes in the melody line, but most jazz players would tend to substitute a major 7th instead.

I'm wouldn't say it's really to do with the melody line. The notes of the melody over that first chord are: 1 5 3 1 2 1

Nothing in there really to imply 6 instead of 7. A Cmaj7 would work just as well as a C6. I think it's more to do with the fact that this is a standard, it's an old tune, and originally it might very well have been voiced as a C6 (or whatever key it's in). 6 chords used to be more common, before Jazz guys started playing all this dissonant stuff :D

Since then, maj7s have become much more common - perhaps as more dissonance has crept into music in general (maj7s are more dissonant than 6 chords). So, even though the chord symbols might follow the original, and call it C6, nowadays a maj7 voicing is more common.

That would be my guess as to why it's C6.

I used to play this tune with the big band I was in - and my piano voicing, if I recall, often had both a 6th and a major 7th in there (not in the same octave).

Our keyboard player is very experienced, so I wonder if he's making these substitutions, maybe even without thinking about it too hard

Probably. I do it without thinking about it.

and that's clashing with the 6ths that the rest of us are putting in.

Could be, but I don't think a 6th should cause too much of a clash with a maj7 chord?

BTW, am I right about the melody being the first point of reference for how the basic chord (1, 3, 5) is extended with other notes (eg. 6, 7, 9, and various combinations)?

Do you mean from the point of view of the way the tune is harmonized (e.g. why the composer decided to put C7 instead of C13) - or from the point of view of adding extensions to the chord symbols written (e.g. playing C13 instead of C7)?

Originally posted by wulf

BTW, am I right about the melody being the first point of reference for how the basic chord (1, 3, 5) is extended with other notes (eg. 6, 7, 9, and various combinations)?

Wulf

Well, that's all you've got to go on with "Standards" - but it might not always be the case. So - in Jazz workshops I've attended with Jazz pros as 'tutor', it's often been the case that they will bring along an original tune they have written and will talk about it and explain their thinking.

So - it might be a particular sound they are going for in the chords - sometimes these are specified in particular inversions by the use of slash chords...but it may not be to do with the melody and the composer might specify certain chords or modes for the blowing changes...

So a good example is Miles Davis' Modal period -e.g. "Kind of Blue" - where there might not be a melody and Miles has just specified improvising over certain modes.

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
So a good example is Miles Davis' Modal period -e.g. "Kind of Blue" - where there might not be a melody and Miles has just specified improvising over certain modes.

Yup, Flamenco Sketches would be a good example.

Originally posted by Pacman
You are right, C6 is spelled C-E-G-A, but rarely played that way. Most piano and guitar players that I've ever worked with treat it as a I chord, and play maj7, unless that 6 sound is really called for (like Glenn Miller type stuff). Talkin' about disrespect...to the composer/arranger, who obviously wanted the 6-voice.:rolleyes: And NOT the maj7-voice!:mad:

Originally posted by Suburban
Talkin' about disrespect...to the composer/arranger, who obviously wanted the 6-voice.:rolleyes: And NOT the maj7-voice!:mad:

No, not necessarily, at all. Nothing to do with disrespect, it's to do with your interpretation of the harmony.

The composer may have wanted the 6th chord, but that may well just reflect the harmonic fashion of the time. Dissonance creeps into music naturally, as great musicians like Trane come along and play what was previously thought of as dissonant, but they do it with conviction, they make it sound right, and it becomes part of the language.

Naturally, old songs will be reinterpreted in the context of modern day harmony.

It may well be that the 6 chord was written on the original because, at the time, it was much more common to play I chords as 6 chords. Perhaps maj7s weren't in the language to the extent they are now.

When you're talking about standards, you're talking about songs that were written a long time ago.

If it is a more arranged tune, like that of the afforementioned Glenn Miller, then you may want to play it in the style it would have been originally played - which means less dissonant harmony - 6 chords rather than maj7 chords perhaps.

But when we play standards nowadays, we're not trying to give a "stylistically authentic" performace, by definition - because a lot of those standards originally came from shows, they weren't written as Jazz tunes.

How about all the substitutions guys like Bird were doing on the rhythm changes? Were they being disrespectful to Gershwin by not using his voicings?

Originally posted by moley
I'm wouldn't say it's really to do with the melody line. The notes of the melody over that first chord are: 1 3 5 1 2 1

Nothing in there really to imply 6 instead of 7. A Cmaj7 would work just as well as a C6. I think it's more to do with the fact that this is a standard, it's an old tune, and originally it might very well have been voiced as a C6 (or whatever key it's in). 6 chords used to be more common, before Jazz guys started playing all this dissonant stuffI haven't quite internalised the melody... I'll have to check my real book later today, but I'll take your word for it at the moment.

The overall impression I'm picking up is that most of the harmonising is about making choices - as well as the main distinctions of major and minor, a whole range of other 'flavours' that can be added to the tune. There's not a rule about 'you must use a 6 chord here' - it's just one of the options, and one that is generally regarded as sounding a bit dated at present.

I think my homework is firstly to listen more closely to the recordings of the successful run through on Friday and the more 'avant garde' harmonies that came out on Saturday and see if I can figure out what changed. One thing I do recall is that on Friday I had a clear view of the lead sheet, whereas on Saturday I was going on what I remembered but sometimes having to fall back on attempting to fit in with the keyboard. I wonder if he was taking his harmonic choices from 'outside the box' both nights, with the difference being that one night I was providing a foundation for him to play off whereas the next night I was ending up unbalancing things by playing even further out.

With respect... ;)

Wulf

Originally posted by wulf
I haven't quite internalised the melody... I'll have to check my real book later today, but I'll take your word for it at the moment.

Hold on, I typed that wrong... it's 1 5 3 1 2 1 not 1 3 5. D'oh!

The 1 5 3 is descending. So, I guess you could say it's actually 8 5 3 8 9 8.

That sounds a lot more familiar ;)

Wulf

Originally posted by Suburban
Talkin' about disrespect...to the composer/arranger, who obviously wanted the 6-voice.:rolleyes: And NOT the maj7-voice!:mad:

Don't play a lot of jazz, do you?

Originally posted by Pacman


Don't play a lot of jazz, do you?

:D

Okay, further adding to the confusion, I've done some research on the chords. Below are several renderings of the first section - I'm assuming all would fit the melody if played in a straightforward way, although I can only speak for the first one from experience:

C6  | C6  | E7  | E7  |
A7  | A7  | Dm7 | Dm7 |
E7  | E7  | Am7 | Am7 |
D13 | D13 | Dm7 | G7  ||

According to The New Real Book (discounting a couple of suggested possible substitutions).

C  | C  | E7    | E7 |
A7 | A7 | A7 Dm | Dm |
E7 | E7 | Am    | Am | 
D7 | D7 | G7    | G7 ||

According to this site (http://www.ralphpatt.com/VB/a8.html).

C6/9 | C6/9 | Bm7 | E9  |
Em7  | A9   | Dm7 | Dm7 |
Bm7  | E9   | Am7 | Am7 |
Am7  | D7   | Dm7 | G13 ||

According to this site (http://www.4me4.us/realbook.asp).

The first two are quite similar, although there are a few relatively minor alterations:
- dropping the C6 in flavour of plain C
- representing m7 chords as just m
- holding over the A7 into the first couple of beats of bar 6 (melody note - a minim of G)
- using 7 rather than 13 in bars 13 and 14
- G7 rather than Dm7 in bar 15 (loosing the clear ii7-V7-I turnaround)

The third one departs further. I can see the relationship but would characterise it as being more explicit about the suggested harmonisation. Working on the basis that these are all 'correct' I guess that's why jazz is [so much fun | so confusing] (delete as applicable :D )

Wulf

The first one you posted there is what I'd consider to be the basic changes to All Of Me (well, the first 16 bars of them, anyway).

The other two have various substitutions. Mainly, they seem to have taken many of the dominant 7th chords and subbed ii-V for them. For example, E7 becomes Bm7 E9 etc. A common sub.

The difference between Am and Am7 is minor (no pun intended!) - since they're functioning as ii chords you'd voice them as Am7. It's just that one makes the 7th explicit, and one leaves the player to add it. They don't have to add it, of course, but they pretty much would.

Likewise, the difference between the D7 and the D13 is still relatively minor. A pianist or guitarist may very well extend the D7 chord to a D13 anyway. And likewise, sometimes you might even voice the 13 chord as a simple dominant 7th. You might do one thing on one chorus, and something different on the next.

Hokay... actually, I've just got news that our keyboard player can't make our next gig at the jazz club, so I can see us either withdrawing from that slot or a lot more of the harmonic function falling to the bass (the guitarist isn't an expert when it comes to jazz playing so I think I may end up comping along with the chords).

Still, that means:

a) I've got the wheel!

b) At least we'll be able to fit both the trumpet and sax on stage!

Wulf

The C6 is a substitute for a Cmaj7. It is used when the root (C) is in the melody so you don't have the 1/2 step clash between the B of the Cmaj7 chord and the melody note C

Mike

Originally posted by Mike Dimin
The C6 is a substitute for a Cmaj7. It is used when the root (C) is in the melody so you don't have the 1/2 step clash between the B of the Cmaj7 chord and the melody note C

Shouldn't you be on a break? :D

j/k Mike.

That's a good point, that I hadn't really thought of. Personally, I don't consider a C melody note against Cmaj7 chord to be a clash in any kind of unpleasant way - but it makes sense.

coupla questions on this stuff:
The difference between Am and Am7 is minor

What is the difference? The only way I could differentiate the two would be to say not to play a seventh on an Am chord.

I know that C6 is not the same as C13 really, but when I see C13, I think C7/13 (dominant triad with the 13th). Not the same for C6? Should it acutally be notated Cmaj6?

Originally posted by peteroberts
coupla questions on this stuff:


What is the difference? The only way I could differentiate the two would be to say not to play a seventh on an Am chord.

That's right. Am implies an A Minor triad - A C E. Of course, in Jazz, you're not so likely to play it as just a triad :D In this case, you'd add a minor 7th, maybe a 9th etc. If it were a I chord in a minor key, you might add a 6th, or a major 7th, 9th etc.

I know that C6 is not the same as C13 really, but when I see C13, I think C7/13 (dominant triad with the 13th). Not the same for C6? Should it acutally be notated Cmaj6?

As a general rule, numbers below 6 imply major (i.e. chord function is I), and numbers 7 and above imply dominant 7th (i.e. chord function V).

C13 means a dominant 7th chord with 9th & 13th. Whether you include the 9th is at your discretion. So, if you ask me, the chord symbol C7/13 is redundant - C13 covers it.

C6 implies a major triad with added 6th. It functions as a I chord, it's formed from the Ionian mode.

No, it should not actually be notated Cmaj6. I guess you *could* it that, but it's entirely unnecessary, and I've never seen it done, so it might well just confuse people. They might assume you mean Cmaj7(add6) or something, because the maj part implies maj7.

thanks for clearing that up! :D

Originally posted by Mike Dimin
The C6 is a substitute for a Cmaj7. It is used when the root (C) is in the melody so you don't have the 1/2 step clash between the B of the Cmaj7 chord and the melody note CYou know what this means? As soon as I get home, I'll be experimenting with C6 vs Cmaj7 for those first couple of bars and listening out for the clash ;)

BTW, I walked back to work reading All of Me out of the New Real Book, so it's sitting on my desk. Being ever the sceptic, I've turned to the next song (All the Things You Are, another standard of fairly similar vintage) to check the theory out.

I can find a couple of examples of the melody playing the root note with a maj7 chord supporting (G against Gmaj7 both times - bar 16 of the A section and bar 4 of the B section) but these are both on the third beat of the bar (ie. not the strongest position) and I can see how that dissonance works at that point in the song. And then, in bar 11 of the C section, a sweeter, more sentimental mood, we've got Ab in the melody and that's being played against Ab6 rather than Abmaj7.

It's helpful to find an example where you can see a theory at work - based on what was said earlier in the discussion, I'd assume that more recent songs are more likely to make use of root note in the melody against the maj7? (it's not a bug, it's a feature!)

Wulf

Originally posted by wulf

BTW, I walked back to work reading All of Me out of the New Real Book, so it's sitting on my desk. Being ever the sceptic, I've turned to the next song (All the Things You Are, another standard of fairly similar vintage) to check the theory out.

I can find a couple of examples of the melody playing the root note with a maj7 chord supporting (G against Gmaj7 both times - bar 16 of the A section and bar 4 of the B section) but these are both on the third beat of the bar (ie. not the strongest position) and I can see how that dissonance works at that point in the song. And then, in bar 11 of the C section, a sweeter, more sentimental mood, we've got Ab in the melody and that's being played against Ab6 rather than Abmaj7.

Wulf

That GMaj7 is supporting the B in the melody since for the most part in ATTYR, the chord to melody note relationship is a third.

Originally posted by moley




C6 implies a major triad with added 6th. It functions as a I chord, it's formed from the Ionian mode.



Another intresting thing is, I've always been taught when I come across a min6th that the actual 6th should be played major. For instance, if I see a Cm6, it should be played, C, Eb, G, A. Obviously, if you were basing the chord off of an aeloion or melodic minor scale, the A should be flat. I guess maybe they are basing it off of the harmonic minor scale? It just strikes me odd though, because when someone says Cm7, you are flatting the 7th (the chord extension the name is implying) along with the 3rd.

Originally posted by LiquidMidnight


Another intresting thing is, I've always been taught when I come across a min6th that the actual 6th should be played major.

Yes, that's true - m6 chords come from the melodic minor rather than harmonic/aeolian.

For instance, if I see a Cm6, it should be played, C, Eb, G, A.

Exactly.

Obviously, if you were basing the chord off of an aeloion or melodic minor scale, the A should be flat. I guess maybe they are basing it off of the harmonic minor scale?

Wrong way round. If it were harmonic it'd be flat, but it's melodic, so it's not. You knew that, though, it was just a typo ;)

It just strikes me odd though, because when someone says Cm7, you are flatting the 7th (the chord extension the name is implying) along with the 3rd.

Yes, I do see where you're coming from. In many ways, we're working with a flawed system here - you just have to know how it works.

When you see Cm6, or C-6 it's a minor triad with major 6th. According to Levine, if you see C-(b6) or somesuch, it's a minor triad with a minor 6th. This makes sense, but I've never ever seen C-(b6) (or anything equivalent) written. Generally, IME, you don't get a minor chord with an added minor 6th. If you do get that configuration of notes, then it's a maj7 chord. For example, instead of C-(b6), it's Abmaj7/C.

Originally posted by LiquidMidnight


Another intresting thing is, I've always been taught when I come across a min6th that the actual 6th should be played major. For instance, if I see a Cm6, it should be played, C, Eb, G, A. Obviously, if you were basing the chord off of an aeloion or melodic minor scale, the A should be flat. I guess maybe they are basing it off of the harmonic minor scale? It just strikes me odd though, because when someone says Cm7, you are flatting the 7th (the chord extension the name is implying) along with the 3rd.

That's because whenever you see minor (or it's abbreviations) in a chord symbol, it's referencing the 3rd (unless specifically stated)and otherwise the 3rd is assumed major. When major (or abbreviation) is used, it's specifically addressing the 7th. Otherwise the 7th is assumed dominant. Ergo: Cm7=C Eb G Bb; Cmaj7=C E G B; Cmin(maj7)=C Eb G B; C7=C E G Bb

Damn me and my constant melodic and harmonic minor confuzzlements. :p

Originally posted by moley


Generally, IME, you don't get a minor chord with an added minor 6th. If you do get that configuration of notes, then it's a maj7 chord. For example, instead of C-(b6), it's Abmaj7/C.

Very true, but by doing that, you may be changing the function of the harmony.

Originally posted by LiquidMidnight
Very true, but by doing that, you may be changing the function of the harmony.

Yes, but generally, when you see that chord played, it's functioning as an Abmaj7 chord anyway, I'd say. So, in that case, to call it Cm(b6) would be changing the function.

I'm not sure what function a m(b6) chord would have anyway - presumably I in a minor key. Either way, it's not common.

Originally posted by moley


Yes, but generally, when you see that chord played, it's functioning as an Abmaj7 chord anyway, I'd say. So, in that case, to call it Cm(b6) would be changing the function.

I'm not sure what function a m(b6) chord would have anyway - presumably I in a minor key. Either way, it's not common.

Well, I have seen those m(b6), and I don't think you can simply say they're equivalent to Abmaj7/C, even if the notes are the same. They're often voiced differently and just feel and sound differently, for lack of a more precise description. The scribe very often chose to write them as some form of Cm because in that setting just seem to have more essence of C minor than essence of Ab, if you like. As an analogy, you could call a Cm6 an Am7b5/C. The component notes are exactly the same. But most folks don't use them interchangeably, because the feel, or character, is different.

What complicates things in an improvisatory context, of course, is that many of these similar chords can be freely substituted for each other, or used in partial or altered form, or effectively changed by what other musicians you're playing with choose to play. (Example: a guitarist plays an Em7 up high. The bassist, however, being a contrary soul, plays a low C. Boy howdy! now it's a Cmaj9!)

Originally posted by Pacman


Don't play a lot of jazz, do you? :D :D

A: no, not too much.
B: I happen to like the 6!:eek:

:D :D

Originally posted by Phil Smith
That GMaj7 is supporting the B in the melody since for the most part in ATTYR, the chord to melody note relationship is a third.As I walked home, I was reading through ATTYR, and was struck by how much the third was used in the melody. It's opening up a whole new area of study to me - up to know, I've tended to look at the chords and build them using my knowledge of 'spelling' without making reference to the melody. Now I'm becoming much more aware of the relationship to the melody and thus, hopefully, a better musician because of it.

Wulf

Originally posted by Richard Lindsey


Well, I have seen those m(b6), and I don't think you can simply say they're equivalent to Abmaj7/C, even if the notes are the same. They're often voiced differently and just feel and sound differently, for lack of a more precise description.

I know. I'm not saying they're equivalent, I'm saying when I see a chord with that configuration of notes, I find it's an Abmaj7/C rather than Cm(b6), and it's functioning as such. I never said they're equivalent.

I don't think I've ever actually seen Cm(b6) in a chart. But if I had that chord, and it was functioning as a C minor chord, rather than an Abmaj7 then yeah, I'd write it Cm(b6).

Originally posted by moley


I know. I'm not saying they're equivalent, I'm saying when I see a chord with that configuration of notes, I find it's an Abmaj7/C rather than Cm(b6), and it's functioning as such. I never said they're equivalent.

I don't think I've ever actually seen Cm(b6) in a chart. But if I had that chord, and it was functioning as a C minor chord, rather than an Abmaj7 then yeah, I'd write it Cm(b6).

I should have said *functionally* equivalent, as that's what I was thinking. But in any case, I have seen those chords where they were, to my mind at least, undoubtedly functioning as Cm rather than a 1st inversion of Abmaj7. Now, ask me exactly where, and of course I can't tell you. Somewhere in the 1000s of charts I've seen over the years. My memory tends to be comprehensive but inexact!

Originally posted by Richard Lindsey


I should have said *functionally* equivalent, as that's what I was thinking. But in any case, I have seen those chords where they were, to my mind at least, undoubtedly functioning as Cm rather than a 1st inversion of Abmaj7.

Yeah, I believe you entirely. I don't reckon they're that common though.

An enlightening thread! Thanks guys.

i second that. very interesting, nice one :)