Minor Harmony in Jazz Theory Discussion

Chords, scales, harmony, melody, etc.
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

I found this info on the topic i brought to light in another thread. It basically says that you dont HAVE to use strict diatonic chords that are based on melodic(jazz) minor scales. And you will want to borrow from harmonic minor, or natural minor, to get a robust jazzy sound. So basically the only real important note that you want to always leave is the minor 3rd from the tonic relationship, So you can have whatever melody playing with natural notes etc. with the tonic in ie. C...and also have chords that are based on natural, melodic or harmonic scales

For instance,
Using G7(B natural) in a song in Cm(3 flats), i like that sound, the V7 to i, sounds more legit to me, sound more gritty and robust. The 7 or (natural) 7 whatever you want to say, sounds more jazzy to me...at least in isolation. But that would be diatonically based on the Melodic minor scale in fact, yet not diatonically part of Cm natural... Context is everything obviously.

:arrow: https://tamingthesaxophone.com/jazz-minor-harmony
Minor Harmony in Jazz Theory
With minor harmony we can build diatonic chords on each degree of any of the modes, just as we can with the major scale:

ex 6a: Dorian mode diatonic harmony

But it’s a bit more complicated because there are more scales that we can use. You will remember from Modes that the Dorian, Phrygian and Aeolian modes are all minor scales, i.e. the interval between the root and 3rd degree is a minor third.
Out of these modes, the Aeolian mode is probably the most common. Note that in this mode the chords on I, IV and V are all minor. (Ex: 6c)

ex 6c: Aeolian

However the harmonic minor scale is very similar, the difference being that the 7th degree is raised a semitone to provide a leading note, i.e. a semitone leading from the 7th to 8th degree of the scale, which supplies a satisfying perfect cadence:

ex 6d: Aeolian and harmonic cadences showing the raised leading note.

It is very important to play this on a keyboard to listen for the differences between the modal and leading note cadence.
We can see in ex 6d how the raised 7th in the harmonic minor allows for a “conventional” V-I cadence, where the V chord is a dominant 7th rather than a minor 7th.
If the harmonic minor scale is used melodically the augmented second interval between the 6th and 7th creates an exotic middle eastern sort of flavour.
This is not the case with the melodic minor as it also has a raised 6th which makes it a closer relation to the Dorian mode. (ex 6e). In jazz this scale is used both ascending and descending.

ex 6e: Dorian and melodic minor cadences.


To understand “tonal” (non modal) minor harmony we need to build chords on the scales as we did with the major scale in ex 1b.
Note that there are two possibilities for the root of the VI chord, depending on whether the harmonic or melodic scale is used.

Ex 6f: Variations in minor harmony

So is minor harmony really this complicated?
Apart from the fact that this is rather complex, there are some other things to think about here. The alterations to the 6th and 7th degrees of the scales were made for melodic not harmonic considerations. Using these scales to create chords is unsatisfactory in some cases, so in practice alternatives are “borrowed” from modal harmony, usually the Dorian or Aeolian:
Chord I. The major 7th is fine in some cases but the leading note is harmonically unnecessary and can sound slightly dissonant or too sophisticated for certain styles. It also clashes unpleasantly if there is a tonic in the melody. Other chords that can be used for chord I in a minor key are Im (triad), Im6 (from Dorian or melodic) or Im7 (from Dorian) – see ex 6h.
Chord II. The harmonic version (half diminished) is usually more satisfactory.
Chord III. The leading note (B natural) is ungainly and unnecessary as the chord is rarely if ever used as a chord in a cadence. A Bb (Dorian or Aeolian) is usually better.
Chord IV. Either chord is suitable. The m7 gives more of a minor flavour, but the dominant 7th on the IV is common, especially in latin jazz or funk sequences with 2 chords repeated, e.g. Cmin7/F7/.
Chord V. Raised 7th is good as it allows for the conventional V7-I cadence.
Chord VI. Either chord can be used, depending on the preceding or following chords.
Chord VII. Could be either but the one built on the leading note (diminished) is more common. The VII chord is sometimes used as an alternative to a V7 chord and the diminished 7th makes a more satisfactory cadence.
Although this appears more complex than major harmony it allows for a great deal of variety. To simplify we could use a combination of chords based on harmonic minor harmony with some “borrowed” modal chords.

ex 6g: Minor harmony with some “borrowed” modal chords.


As mentioned above there are several possibilities for tonic chords in a minor key (ex 6h).

ex 6h: Tonic minor chords.

Note that in a m6 chord the added 6th is always a major 6th. In jazz earlier than the 60s a minor 7 is rarely used as a tonic minor and should be not be used to avoid confusion with IIm7.
Melodic and stylistic considerations need to be taken into account when choosing which type of tonic minor chord to use. (Eg. m maj7 and m6 may sound too sophisticated or too old-fashioned in some styles). When using RN analysis a minor triad, m6 or m maj7 often indicate a minor tonic, – useful for locating new key centres. (m6 or minor triad could be chord IV, of a minor key, but if so this will be obvious by the presence of a minor tonic nearby)
It is important to show which root the VI and VII chords are based on when doing an RN analysis in a minor key:
Chord RN
VI chord whose root is a minor sixth above the tonic bVI
VI chord whose root is a major sixth above the tonic VI
VII chord whose root is a minor seventh above the tonic bVII
VII chord whose root is a major seventh above the tonic VII
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

zethus909 wrote:I found this info on the topic i brought to light in another thread. It basically says that you dont HAVE to use strict diatonic chords that are based on melodic(jazz) minor scales. And you will want to borrow from harmonic minor, or natural minor, to get a robust jazzy sound. So basically the only real important note that you want to always leave is the minor 3rd from the tonic relationship, So you can have whatever melody playing with natural notes etc. with the tonic in ie. C...and also have chords that are based on natural, melodic or harmonic scales

For instance,
Using G7(B natural) in a song in Cm(3 flats), i like that sound, the V7 to i, sounds more legit to me, sound more gritty and robust. The 7 or (natural) 7 whatever you want to say, sounds more jazzy to me...at least in isolation. But that would be diatonically based on the Melodic minor scale in fact, yet not diatonically part of Cm natural... Context is everything obviously.
This has always been standard practice with the minor key (it's still diatonic).
As I said in a previous thread, I recommend thinking of it as one thing with the sixth and seventh degrees being variables; they can be freely sharpened (or not) as context demands (this is not chromaticism).
Unfamiliar words can be looked up in my Glossary of musical terms.
Also check out my Introduction to Music Theory.

Post

this is the problem with music theory is it becomes overly prescriptive and not descriptive. because u think that you have to pick a key and the write a jazz song in that key. that's a recipe for completely boring over-genre-fied music.

like if I have a verse in Cm and a chorus in Dm how do u notate that in a sheet ? do u just put 3 flats in 1 bar and 1 flat in the next bar ?

because when I am writing I don't want to be thinking about music theory at all. I don't want to be consciously planning from change to change, I want the music to dictate itself free from any prior prescriptions :hihi:
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

zethus909 wrote:this is the problem with music theory is it becomes overly prescriptive and not descriptive. because u think that you have to pick a key and the write a jazz song in that key. that's a recipe for completely boring over-genre-fied music.
Is this directed at me? Because I never said anything of the sort.
zethus909 wrote:when I am writing I don't want to be thinking about music theory at all.
Good composers don't; they don't need to, it's second nature to them. Just how good writers don't need to consciously think about the rules of grammar all the time.
zethus909 wrote: I don't want to be consciously planning from change to change, I want the music to dictate itself free from any prior prescriptions :hihi:
Fine, you are of course free to do whatever you like. But in that case, why the OP?
Unfamiliar words can be looked up in my Glossary of musical terms.
Also check out my Introduction to Music Theory.

Post

lol I wasn't directing it to you it just popped into my head and I needed to public ally reaffirm it. why this thread? because I've never seriously attempted any jazz composition and I felt the inherent need to reference some sort of theory on the topic . lol but now that I have this basic elemental info, I am now going to push it far far back into my subconscious and pretend I never learned it. at least when I am actively in the creative process (ok maybe reference a few times for now lol )
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

have you made any jazz songs ? if like to hear a sample :)
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

Is there a question for the group here? :?

Here's a lot of lingo trying to formulate concepts towards recipes, but there is no context, no musical situation, it's more just tossing theory at the wall and seeing what sticks. No, the choices we make are driven by musical thought.
Besides which, "minor harmony" copped from 'classical' or Common Practice Period 'theory' wouldn't thru itself seem to promote jazz praxis much IME.

Ironic that you railed at theory so hard - "never use music theory to create music" (in more than one manifestation now) - because this is the very epitome of the problem of asking 'music theory' to do too much. Confer the adage <a little knowledge is a dangerous thing>. Jazzbos have to know their shit all the way down, to where they can forgot about what they know. Cf., "You can't think and play at the same time" - Sonny Rollins.
Last edited by jancivil on Sun Oct 23, 2016 4:46 am, edited 2 times in total.

Post

zethus909 wrote: lol but now that I have this basic elemental info, I am now going to push it far far back into my subconscious and pretend I never learned it. at least when I am actively in the creative process (ok maybe reference a few times for now lol )
Have what again? You show a partial reception of some reading and an inchoate conception. It'll take some time, and tons of woodshedding. Learn patience.

Post

these are my findings so far

Im7
IIm7b5
bIIImaj7
III7
IVm7
Vm7
bVImaj7
VIm7b5
bVII7
VII7
scale is Dorian (but use major 3rd) (making it Mixolydian) (or call it major with b7th)

i would rather think of it as Dorian with major third
Last edited by zethus909 on Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

zethus909 wrote:i would rather think of it as Dorian with major third
That's a bit nonsensical, sorry to say.

The quote from the article you posted correctly states that Dorian is considered one of the minor quality modes. What exactly do you think makes it a minor quality mode?

It's the MINOR THIRD. That's why Dorian, Phrygian, and Aeolian are considered the minor modes. They all have minor 3rds (and perfect 5ths, which is what separates Locrian into its own category).

So if you're playing over a Dm7 chord and you play a major third above D (F#) then you are not playing a chord tone but rather an embellishment that will sound like it wants to resolve down to the actual 3rd of the chord (F). If you never resolve to the F and simply play the F# over the Dm7, then the chord will sound like a D7.

Post

zethus909 wrote:this is the problem with music theory is it becomes overly prescriptive and not descriptive. because u think that you have to pick a key and the write a jazz song in that key. that's a recipe for completely boring over-genre-fied music.
In itself, choosing a key/writing in key can't possibly be responsible for 'completely boring blahblah'. It's not a recipe for anything except that one aspect, eg., "this will be in Bb".

Evidently you have no real conception of what's in the mind of a composer there, you just said this is your first effort. Choice of keys, if there's Bb and Eb horns in the arrangement, one may not want the key to be <B>. Or! Giant Steps. Three keys, the structure is move (but quick!) by major thirds: B to G to Eb to G. People make musical choices, or plain reasonable choices such as 'this key'...

You thought to copy/paste something from the internet you liked (source = "Minor Harmony in Jazz - Taming the Saxophone"). Are you teaching that guy's material?

That one begins with "Dorian mode diatonic harmony". So there is one difference from natural minor, a 6th degree a semitone higher. So, minor potentially has variant 6 and 7. The wheel has not been reinvented /because jazz/.

"In jazz earlier than the 60s a minor 7 is rarely used as a tonic minor and should be not be used to avoid confusion with IIm7." should not be used in pre-60s jazz, or what? A lot of the time, the arrival point, after a dominant, is a m7 chord for the purpose of <i is the new ii> to promote modulation. :shrug:

What's the actual point of all this? This is the problem with music theory; but nobody worth a shit takes *prescriptions* out of /edit: contextless/ information, nor *recipes*.
You state yourself as a neophyte but you seem to want to state conclusions out of this information.
What's the question, you should be asking questions. You are not at the point where, having sussed this guy's article, in the back of your mind you "have" all this so you're ready to be 'free of theory'.
How many tunes have you worked with minor harmony in, jazz or otherwise? How long have you been in actual musical practice.

This is the internet age, people that think they're rearing to go with a little bit of half-digested information (which may itself be suspect), expecting reading in lieu of working is the trick.

Let me be clear: this type of article is the problem with reliance on the internet for musical knowledge. The benefit:cost, the signal:noise is so low here. All this bringing in names of modes to talk about the 6th and 7th degree in minor... you don't need to have this crap in your head at all, it's simpler than all this.
Last edited by jancivil on Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:54 am, edited 2 times in total.

Post

neither of u noticed my error. I had it written bIImaj7, it should be bIIImaj7
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

stringtapper wrote:
zethus909 wrote:i would rather think of it as Dorian with major third
That's a bit nonsensical, sorry to say.

The quote from the article you posted correctly states that Dorian is considered one of the minor quality modes. What exactly do you think makes it a minor quality mode?

It's the MINOR THIRD. That's why Dorian, Phrygian, and Aeolian are considered the minor modes. They all have minor 3rds (and perfect 5ths, which is what separates Locrian into its own category).

So if you're playing over a Dm7 chord and you play a major third above D (F#) then you are not playing a chord tone but rather an embellishment that will sound like it wants to resolve down to the actual 3rd of the chord (F). If you never resolve to the F and simply play the F# over the Dm7, then the chord will sound like a D7.
it's jazz though , Jazz is nonsensical isn't it? what I mean is the major 3rd is just a possibility , there is no rule to it, I can play any notes really, with either the minor 3rd or major as options along with raising the 7th as well. but I find that these specific chord options give me what I feel is "jazz " sound . the point with Dorian is that it IS Dorian. that's the flavour I like for the basis of jazz . Dorian is perfectly symmetrical. did u know that ? and so raising the 3rd of Dorian pattern allows for that extra flavour . I can use both though. minor AND major third

I even also like the sound of a minor 2nd as a slide note

the beauty of it is the more exotic I make the scale notes, the less it matters what chord harmony I'm using :hug:
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

jancivil wrote:
zethus909 wrote:this is the problem with music theory is it becomes overly prescriptive and not descriptive. because u think that you have to pick a key and the write a jazz song in that key. that's a recipe for completely boring over-genre-fied music.
In itself, choosing a key/writing in key can't possibly be responsible for 'completely boring blahblah'. It's not a recipe for anything except that one aspect, eg., "this will be in Bb".

Evidently you have no real conception of what's in the mind of a composer there, you just said this is your first effort. Choice of keys, if there's Bb and Eb horns in the arrangement, one may not want the key to be <B>. Or! Giant Steps. Three keys, the structure is move (but quick!) by major thirds: B to G to Eb to G. People make musical choices, or plain reasonable choices such as 'this key'...

You thought to copy/paste something from the internet you liked (source = "Minor Harmony in Jazz - Taming the Saxophone"). Are you teaching that guy's material?

That one begins with "Dorian mode diatonic harmony". So there is one difference from natural minor, a 6th degree a semitone higher. So, minor potentially has variant 6 and 7. The wheel has not been reinvented /because jazz/.

"In jazz earlier than the 60s a minor 7 is rarely used as a tonic minor and should be not be used to avoid confusion with IIm7." should not be used in pre-60s jazz, or what? A lot of the time, the arrival point, after a dominant, is a m7 chord for the purpose of <i is the new ii> to promote modulation. :shrug:

What's the actual point of all this? This is the problem with music theory; but nobody worth a shit takes *prescriptions* out of information, nor *recipes*.
You state yourself as a neophyte but you seem to want to state conclusions out of this information.
What's the question, you should be asking questions. You are not at the point where, having sussed this guy's article, in the back of your mind you "have" all this so you're ready to be free of theory.
How many tunes have you worked with minor harmony in, jazz or otherwise? How long have you been in actual musical practice.

This is the internet age, people that think they're rearing to go with a little bit of half-digested information (which may itself be suspect), expecting reading in lieu of working is the trick.
yea the minor 3rd and minor 7th is what makes The sound...but if I raise the 3rd, chances are the chord I'm playing beneath it is actually not even really part of the Dorian intervals . so for that instant the melodic aspect is actually not in Dorian . I am just using Dorian as the "Mother" mode.
Sincerely,
Zethus, twin son of Zeus

Post

stringtapper wrote:
zethus909 wrote:i would rather think of it as Dorian with major third
That's a bit nonsensical
It's illustrative of why one should probably not have all these 'jazz theory' terms in one's head.
That's just confused. Dorian with major third is nonsense, if you want a scale name with the sophistimacated mode name, that one'll be 'Mixolydian'.

If there is a musical reason to do F# rather than F, do the damn thing. It's not Dorian anything; this is the problem with (this kind of conception of) music theory, it's crap, it's *lingo* that is the opposite of useful.

Post Reply

Return to “Music Theory”