Various chord progressions that I don't understand

[wrench45us]

there are a lot of ways to understand how a song works
first the song has to work then after the fact somebody analyyzes it
(Though oftentines some ideas from theory guide the song changes)

I guess the point it it can be very confusing to receive input from different sources based on different deconstruction methods

the chord scale book noted above and taught at Berklee is also (I believe) what Mark Levine covers in his Jazz Theory book. This is 'relatively' recent thinking that integrates the modal approaches developed from the mid 50's and 60's with more fundamental theory from swing and bebop and before
One of the more facinating things about studying this aspect of musicy is that it evolves and changes and it's very useful to have some notion of the historical movement
for me I don't feel very comfortable with modal evolution and I'm quite content to remain with bebop and 'standards' till that forms a base

[jancivil]

I see passages like:

E7 Em7

D7 Dm7.

First of all, how can II be m7 and not halfdim?

But more importantly, how do I explain those 7th chords?

It can be whatever it likes, why not?
It's jazz harmony. It's NOT CLASSICAL HARMONY, the idea of a 'two' chord in 'minor key' = diminished, is an After The Fact analysis of something which obviously occurred all the time, which is an obvious thing because it uses default notes of 'the key'. It has no meaning in itself.

If you are forced to explain something which isn't classical harmony in those terms, it's a little bit cart before the horse. Names are just names. Get over it.

2.

"Mahjong" is in Fm.

Its bridge goes like this:

D7 Eb-7 Ab7 Dbmaj7 Db-7 Gb7.

I don't understand what's going on in that part.

Ok. The thing of the 'two' chord changing quality we've been over before. II-V-I is your harmonic basis, period, in jazz. It's subdominant>dominant>tonic basically. With the change in quality from one to the other, ii to II gives you *domimant function* When You Need It. To get you home (tonic) quickly.
The 'magic' which mystifies you is just this.

NB: Secondary dominants occur in jazz reharmonizations in a special way that doesn't figure in most classical thought (although the basis for the b5 sub can be traced to eg., Wagner's use of the French 6th in a couple cases anyway).

A first principle here: a tonic is oftimes temporary.

Let's work backwards, since we know the 'goal' of the changes and work from there.
F minor you've given as the key. So, Gb7 relates to the goal, 'home' how?

It's a bII. Which is a kind of secondary dominant peculiar to this music. It's the tritone, the b5 substitute for the regular V, dominant chord, which is C7. C7b5 is C E Gb Bb, Gb7b5 is Gb Bb C (*spelled* 'Dbb' for the anal among us) E (Fb). Same deal, totally. If Gb7 = 'V', where's its 'ii'? Right there, Ab-7; it's ii-V-i 'in Cb' (B), which Can Result 'in F' as F has been shown to have equivalence with Cb/B. With this theory, *b5 sub*, that's good to go as your turnaround.

Ok, we got there from DbM7. That is a M7 chord, usually a plateau in a progression, you get that chord on I, or on IV typically. Here, we went to Db; which Ab7 is the dominant of, and Eb-7 is the ii chord (I call that subdominant as ii in first inversion is practically synomonous with IV) of.

Now, the possibly mysterious thing here is this D7 to Eb-7; you may notice that it's the same as Ab7; it seems obscure in its order here, but that's the way it goes sometimes.

That's sure all I have time for today. Jazz reharmonization is about substituting more colorful things than would normally happen in 'Tea for Two' or 'I Got Rhythm' changes, which isn't more than ii_V_I.

I'd suggest researching 'jazz substitutions'. The Big One since BeBop is the 7b5 one. It may not have escaped you that while I'm insisting on these as b5 subs where you've given no such indication, that omission is an indication that it's a given in this style, which I am familiar with. That's the crux of the biscuit in most of these.

[tapper mike]

JC
I really enjoyed reading your reply till your analysis of "I got Rhythm"
It infact is quite a bit more then ii-V-I With unique harmonic textures key, modulations and variation on the turnaround.

[jancivil]

JC
I really enjoyed reading your reply till your analysis of "I got Rhythm"
It infact is quite a bit more then ii-V-I With unique harmonic textures key, modulations and variation on the turnaround.

I didn't mean it like that, but it kind of reads that way, so my bad. I am merely referring to the etymology of 'rhythm changes'. Rhythm changes means ii-V-I, if someone calls that, that's all you have to know.

[DrawMusic]

Mmm, when I was at Berklee 30 yrs ago "rhythm changes" meant

|: I vi | ii V :|

[seacouch]

Mmm, when I was at Berklee 30 yrs ago "rhythm changes" meant

|: I vi | ii V

Rhythm changes is a 32 bar, AABA form that starts off with the I-vi-ii-V prog. Besides blues, it's probably the most common template for other jazz chord progressions. (It's been almost 30 years since I was at Berklee as well. Seems like just yesterday).

[Ogg Vorbis]

Mmm, when I was at Berklee 30 yrs ago "rhythm changes" meant

|: I vi | ii V

This should probably be a PM, but I just wanted to say I graduated from U of I in Music Composition and lived in Moscow for five years afterwards. I studied with Robert Dickow!

Crazy small world, eh?

Now, back to the thread already in progress...

[seacouch]

I was born in Moscow!

[Ogg Vorbis]

I was born in Moscow!

SHUT UP!

[seacouch]

I was born in Moscow!

SHUT UP!

It's true. My dad was a physics major there at the time.

[Ogg Vorbis]

I was born in Moscow!

SHUT UP!

It's true. My dad was a physics major there at the time.

Who knew that Moscow, Idaho is the center of the Musical Universe!