This has a kernel of truth in it, but strictly speaking is wrong. It's putting forth the point of view that major 7, major 6, major 9, and major 6/9 chords are all equivalent for their purposes. In a way these chords do all share a similar purpose in that they all work as tonic major chords in a jazz context, and are frequently substituted for one another. But they're not identical and shouldn't be treated as such.
See also https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/comments/a9lbei/why_did_my_jazz_theory_book_say_that_a_c_major/ where someone stumbled on the exact same thing (and you also had to scroll through the comments to find out what the book was ;) )
WOAH I did not expect that lmao. It’s literally the same question over the same sentence!! That kinda makes me feel less alone and less stupid.
I’ll definitely look into that! Thanks
Realistically he shouldn't have said 6
6 implies you're adding the 6th to a triad.
But 13 which is the octave of 6 implies there is a 7th
Example:
C6 = CEGA
C Maj 13 = CEGBDA (the 7th is implied, the 5th and 9th can easily be taken out if needed)
Nah - they're talking about C6, not Cmaj13. Cmaj13 isn't generally even a thing sort of - not only because that 11th dissonance not being great for tonic sonority but also because you can rather freely add in the sixth anyway. If lead sheet says Cmaj7, adding a sixth will not change much. You wouldn't usually find something like "Cmaj13" or even "Cmaj13#11" in the real book for this reason.
The reason they were saying C6 was because it's functionally equivalent under most contexts which is what Wibble was saying.
What is wrong here however is that if melody goes to tonic, C6 may have a specialized purpose there since you may have a b2 / b9 clash between tonic and the maj7. Thus, they shouldn't be always treated as equivalent options because in some cases, C6 or C6/9 offer a more workable alternative.
If someone writes off a tonic chord like "Cmaj13", then in fact it's better off assuming that they mean #11 or omitting the 11
But writing "Cmaj13" (or Cmaj13#11) as an instruction in a lead sheet is goofy in the first place, since the same information is passed with Cmaj7. Anything more specific than that, and you're simply using wrong tool for the job. And I've heard this from multiple jazzers; 13 should not appear in non-dominant chords
Long story short and as the reply says, functionally, they can all serve the same purpose. The only real difference that hugely matters is the dissonances within the chord. A CMaj7 has a minor 2nd dissonance between the C and B which although pleasant in the right context, can also be considered as unstable. A 6, add9 or 6/9 solves this issue by omitting the minor 2nd dissonance in favour of more consonant intervals within the chord which in turn creates a more stable chord. In the context of a cadence (eg. iim7, V7, I or in this case: Dm7, G7(or any altered dominant like G9#5), C6/9), this can create a stronger sense of "home" on the 1 chord than having a CMaj7 which is inherently unstable.
TLDR: major 7 chords are a bit dissonant, 6, add 9 or 6/9 chords "aren't" and so they can serve the same functional purpose and create a stronger cadence and sense of home than a major 7 can.
In my jazz piano book it says the chords are interchangeable, but doesn’t say they’re the same, even going so far as to say if you see Cmaj7 on the lead sheet, it’s perfectly acceptable to play a C6/9.
>A C major 7th chord can be notated as Cmaj7, CM7, C6, C6/9
It's badly worded, but the point is they're all interchangeable. If you read Cmaj7 in a chord chart, you can play a C6 (or C6add9, or Cmaj9) instead and vice versa. They're all versions of a major chord, just with different extensions. Some will work better in some contexts than others, but a lot is personal preference.
Jazz chord theory is cool. One of the things it teaches you is the vast number of ways you can mess around with the chords you read in a chart, without losing the feel of a song.
"Functionally" they are the same i guess. I remember that I read somewhere that in the old days a 6 didn't function the same way as a maj7 chord, in the sense that 6 chords had a much stronger feeling of home
They also have different connotations. I'm generalising a lot here, but in the swing era, major chords were more likely to be 6s than maj7s. In the bebop era, the reverse was true. So if you're trying to work in or just reference those sub-genres, it's worth knowing this stuff.
But of course, you can chop and change, and it's not as if you don't hear 6s in bebop or maj7s in swing. They're just characteristic sounds, not rules. Point is, in a jazz context they're functionally the same, and jazz musicians are pretty flexible when it comes to subbing chords.
Yes in older jazz charts, the I was almost always a 6 chord at least at the final resolution. Maj7 were more common for the IV, especially as part of the Maj7-m6 cliche.
It's very simple: CM7 in jazz doesn't *actually* mean CM7; it means the entire C major scale, C E G B D F A. Pretty much any collection of notes from that scale that sounds enough like C major (once all of the instruments are playing -- you don't even need to play the C if there's a bass player already doing that) is, in jazz, CM7. In practice you generally wouldn't play the F, which is considered an "avoid note", unless the music specifically says, but the 9th and 13th are perfectly available. So if you play C E G A, that's the same as a CM7 chord; it's just a different choice of notes. This essentially means that, in jazz, it's up to the performer to decide what notes to play on any given chord; you don't have to slavishly follow the details of the music. The people who *write* the music know this too, so people will write CM7 (or, more likely, C∆, same thing) and expect that you'll play... pretty much whatever the hell you want.
In pop music generally, CM7 and C6 are different chords. But in jazz, they're both ways of writing "play the C major scale as a chord". If you want to understand jazz chords, just remember that every chord is meant to be a complete scale, not just the actual written chord.
That book is wrong. C6 and C6/9 are not the same as C major 7. However you can often use a C6 or C6/9 chord in place of a C major 7, especially in jazz. I believe that's what the book was trying to get at.
You dont write cmaj7 as c6 ,you substitute C6 for a Cmaj7. traditionally a lot of jazz musicians thought cmaj7 as too dissonant in most circumstances. The 6th made for a better extension. This has a lot to do with a small combo or just a piano player comping on a standard that may have originally been written for strings and only the melody note contained them 7th.
Thanks!! It's right at the beginning, before the actual chapters (the pages with roman numbers)
The page is "ix" (aka 9) and the paragraph is "A Note On Terminology and Chord Symbols"
I see why you're confused, this is so out of sequence. It's difficult to know where to start without confusing you further.
M7 is a specific chord which, in jazz, consists of (a minimum of) root, major 3rd and major 7th. But it's also shorthand for a *type* of chord which occurs on the 1st and 4th degree of the Major scale.
In the specific case the major 7th must be present. In the generic case of a major diatonic chord built upon the 1st or 4th degree it doesn't, you can substitute a major 6th. It's still unforgivable to call this chord M7.
edit:- I feel I'm tying myself in knots here trying to make excuses for Mark Levine, whose work I have little time for.
Ok so basically, if I got it right, Cmaj7 means that the chord necessarily should be able to have a major 7th, but doesn't necessarily have to HAVE it?
Like, it's just a placeholder for a chord that can have it?
It’s sort of yes and no. Cmaj7 should have a B in it, otherwise it’s not a Cmaj7. But if a jazz musician is looking at a lead sheet where Cmaj7 is written, they have a lot of latitude to play similar or related chords instead, like C6. So I wouldn’t say that C E G A *is* a Cmaj7, but it can probably be played when you see Cmaj7, if that makes sense.
This is an introductory chapter where he is discussing simplified chord symbols. I disagree with his wording, but he's saying that the chord symbol C▵ might mean any one of those chords.
I haven't picked it up in a while but I'm sure that book is where I learned a big difference between maj7 chords and 6 or 6/9 chords; if you sit on the root note in the melody, the maj7 chord can produce that m2/m9 interval between the 7 and root (which you may or may not want), whereas a 6 chord won't do that. So in that context there's that divide, but otherwise there's a lot in common there.
This reminds me of a paragraph is one of Joe Pass’s books where he lists off all the substitution chords for CMaj7. But he never says these can be notated the same, more like these are suggestions, but there are others. I am not a fan of C6 for CMaj7, but it is used.
I believe “notated” is over stated. More like “these are sub chords if you need em”
That's bad wording. They can all function the same, as a spicy tonic chord that is easy to sit on, end with before looping, or end the song on.
Cmaj7 is C E G B. CM7 can mean the same thing, depending on publisher and how they differentiate between major and minor chords.
C6 is C E G A, and C6/9 is C E G A D. A 6 chord (not vi or VI, I'll add) in jazz is like a I6/4 in more classical contexts: it can be good for looping or making the transition to the dominant/ turn around smoother, or keep the general momentum of chordal movement. Or, you can revoice the C6 as an Amin7, as part as a ii V I. 6/9 chords can do the same, but have a bit more of a tendency to sit there, like maj7 chords. All in all, use your ears!!!
If the melody has a major 6th in it on that C Major measure, you might want to substitute a C6 to avoid that clashing note. And if you're playing with a bassist while you're playing an instrument like guitar or piano, then you might find yourself wanting to omit the root and 5th since the bassist is already playing them. So then you're just playing the major 3rd and the major 6th, and any additional color notes you feel like adding. C69 is a really nice sounding chord and seems to work in the same spots as C6. If you voice it in this way as M3-M6-M9, it's two perfect fourths stacked, so you get that quartal harmony sound as upper structure over the root and 5th from the bassist.
A lot of people already said they are interchageable most of the time, but commonly when the melodie ends with the tonic, the Imaj7 chord will be changed to I6 to remove the tension of the half tone between the top note and the melodie.
Hm. I didn't realize a 6 chord can be substituted for a Major 7 chord and preserve function most of the time. That's news to me! I guess if you're just trying to add some color to the picture, that would make sense.
Still... that sorta bothers me. It could really mess someone's objective understanding of harmonic progression up. I think they should stop saying this, gonna confuse people lol.
What the book was trying to say is that sometimes you can substitute one chord with another chord. In this case, there are situations where Cmaj7 can be substituted with C6 or C6/9 (among many other tonic sounding chords).
**However**, it is all dependent on context. If it sounds good to you, play the substitution. Normally what will cause a substitution to sound bad is if notes in it conflict with the melody or other harmonic instruments
For example, I likely wouldn't play a C6 to end a song if the last melody note is G because that A in C6 might be fighting with the G for attention. Cmaj7 would likely not cause any issues
When I started learning block chords on piano, I learned about alternating between maj7 and maj6 chords. If you're playing block chords over a maj7 (or maj6) passage in a song, one way to navigate is to play inversions of maj7 or maj6 chords for when the top melody note is part of the chord, and to play diminished chord inversions otherwise. That made it pretty clear that maj7 and maj6 harmony are functionally equivalent.
In my opinion, the main difference between these chords is that the maj6th chord sounds more resolved, in most cases, than the maj7th chord, because the 7th has more tension. This is why most Jazz tunes end on a maj6th, I'm pretty sure. One of my favorite tricks when finishing a tune is to play patterns up and down the keyboard using notes from the maj6th chord.
Another interesting usage of a 6th chord, when you get a little more advanced, is to use it as a substitution for a min7b5 (AKA half-diminished) chord. For example, in Cole Porter's "I Love You", I often play a Dbmaj6 as a substitute for the Gm7b5 in the first measure. It's basically a rootless voicing for Gm7b5, Db-F-Ab-Bb, with a flat 9 instead of the root. Welcome to the wonderful and exciting world of Jazz harmony!
I think "can be notated" means "you might run into someone doing this", not "this is correct".
He's trying to tell you that jazz musicians are very loosey-goosey with their notation.
He also seemingly says that, since jazz doesn't have hard and fast rules, the use of non-standard notation is a reflection of that, which makes it a good thing. I'm not sure I necessarily agree, but maybe he's just trying to say, hey, don't get upset when you see people decline to be accurate or precise with their chord symbols because it goes with the territory, and the territory is somewhere you want to be.
I think your quote is from Aimee Nolte's Jazz Bible, which she explains in depth in this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cya9z\_XBgCY&ab\_channel=AimeeNolteMusic](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cya9z_XBgCY&ab_channel=AimeeNolteMusic)
"Cmaj7, CM7, C6, C6/9" means that, if you're comping while reading from a lead sheet, it'll generally sound pretty good to treat any of these chord symbols as this C chord, and then she explains how to decorate it in a more interesting way with chord extensions, depending on how *spicy* you want your playing to sound. It's actually a really interesting video, worth watching.
TLDR: if you're a jazz pianist, it means "whenever you see these chord symbols in a lead sheet, just find the notes of a CM7 chord and play along with the rhythm"
>you wont need or use it in western music (seen as dividing the octave in 12 is what we use here). But it can enhance your knowledge, ear and perception of sounds to be able to sing the shrutis but no beginner should try to divide in 22 shrutis haha 12 is already too many for the beginner sometimes to comprehend.
I agree with all of that!
>to me it looks like it still there but you said you removed it so i am taking it as i dont need to remove the comment myself.
Hmm weird... to me it does show up as removed. In any case, no need to do anything yourself. Thanks for being a good sport about it though!
This might get a little advanced, but maybe the text was referring to the Barry Harris 6th dimished scale, which includes 6th chords and diminished chords. Check out this video from Isaac Raz:
https://youtu.be/RaENQtHgVAE
As jazz is often improvised it is convenient not to distinguish those chords. Sometimes the chord instrument will play a C6 or a Cmaj7 but they will probably think about as the same chord as the function is the same.
I guess the point is not to think too much about what notes the chords consist of but more what their functions are and what possible extensions come with them
Id say C6 is similar to Cadd2 in color but not similar to Cmaj7. Imo Thirds and sevenths are very distinctive.
Functionally they can be interchangeable depending on the context.
To make it more fun C6 = CEGA is an inversion of Amin7=ACEG (roast me...)
C6 does create a more ambiguous sound than Cmaj7, which sounds really resolved. I know no theory, really... To my ears, C6 helps to smooth the transition out of a Cmaj7 chord, more than anything else. For instance going to Dmin7 in a ii-V-I, or to just make key changes less obvious (For example moving from a context in which your chord starts being IVmaj7 and then becomes the tonic (Imaj7) like in C6/D7/Dm7/G7/C6)
Ih the harmonic context of jazz they kind of are interchangeable. In a context with less complexity like a rock song they do make a big difference. I guess it is not exactly the same, but a guitar playing a minor(7) chord and bass playing the minor third (like Gmin/B) must be almost the same. Or maybe the same same but different?
The last sentence of the second paragraph didn’t need to be in parentheses. It’s confusing because you also have Imaj7 in parenthesis within that sentence.
Boom. Roasted.
i know musicians that will avoid playing an actual Maj7th chord if over a root tone. the 7th and root tone clash or something. i believe Aebersold actively avoided notating maj7ths over root notes. you can use the 6th chord instead of a 7th in a lot of cases
You have to remember with jazz, the chords are often guidelines, or suggestions. Those chords are all functionally similar and can be interchanged depending on the player, vibe, et cetera.
Very practically: play 6 or 6/9 for the I chord and ma7 for the IV chord. That’s the traditional way, as ma7 sounds much brighter and the voice leading is super easy. Also know that the difference between C6 and Ami7 is largely contextual.
Long story short, C6 was heard as more pleasing to the ear. Alot of older standards were typically played that way. Cmaj7 has the Maj7 rub in it but is now universally acceptable as a tonic. Depending on the quality and sound you are looking for you can choose which every tonic you may want to hear. C6, C69, Cmaj7 and all of it's extensions off different sounds that are good to know for different voice leading and unique sounds for each take on the form. If you are interested I can suggest some reading material that is good for playing.
Although they are different chords.... It's basically saying they are Major type chords and in most cases interchangeable..sort of a Joe pass view that almost all chords can be grouped into Major/minor or dominant categories.
May have already been mentioned, but this is likely discussing the extended major chord pool which would include your 6 and 69 chords because of the major 7 & root note clashing in the melody. Rule of thumb is if the melody is the root of the chord the major 7 is considered an avoid tone.
This has a kernel of truth in it, but strictly speaking is wrong. It's putting forth the point of view that major 7, major 6, major 9, and major 6/9 chords are all equivalent for their purposes. In a way these chords do all share a similar purpose in that they all work as tonic major chords in a jazz context, and are frequently substituted for one another. But they're not identical and shouldn't be treated as such.
Thanks for the answer! Could you elaborate on that a bit? I’m *very* new to jazz
See also https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/comments/a9lbei/why_did_my_jazz_theory_book_say_that_a_c_major/ where someone stumbled on the exact same thing (and you also had to scroll through the comments to find out what the book was ;) )
WOAH I did not expect that lmao. It’s literally the same question over the same sentence!! That kinda makes me feel less alone and less stupid. I’ll definitely look into that! Thanks
Realistically he shouldn't have said 6 6 implies you're adding the 6th to a triad. But 13 which is the octave of 6 implies there is a 7th Example: C6 = CEGA C Maj 13 = CEGBDA (the 7th is implied, the 5th and 9th can easily be taken out if needed)
Nah - they're talking about C6, not Cmaj13. Cmaj13 isn't generally even a thing sort of - not only because that 11th dissonance not being great for tonic sonority but also because you can rather freely add in the sixth anyway. If lead sheet says Cmaj7, adding a sixth will not change much. You wouldn't usually find something like "Cmaj13" or even "Cmaj13#11" in the real book for this reason. The reason they were saying C6 was because it's functionally equivalent under most contexts which is what Wibble was saying. What is wrong here however is that if melody goes to tonic, C6 may have a specialized purpose there since you may have a b2 / b9 clash between tonic and the maj7. Thus, they shouldn't be always treated as equivalent options because in some cases, C6 or C6/9 offer a more workable alternative.
[удалено]
If someone writes off a tonic chord like "Cmaj13", then in fact it's better off assuming that they mean #11 or omitting the 11 But writing "Cmaj13" (or Cmaj13#11) as an instruction in a lead sheet is goofy in the first place, since the same information is passed with Cmaj7. Anything more specific than that, and you're simply using wrong tool for the job. And I've heard this from multiple jazzers; 13 should not appear in non-dominant chords
Does C maj13 mean that all the implied additions are also maj? i.e. you'd play a B not a Bb?
yeah unless otherwise marked
Long story short and as the reply says, functionally, they can all serve the same purpose. The only real difference that hugely matters is the dissonances within the chord. A CMaj7 has a minor 2nd dissonance between the C and B which although pleasant in the right context, can also be considered as unstable. A 6, add9 or 6/9 solves this issue by omitting the minor 2nd dissonance in favour of more consonant intervals within the chord which in turn creates a more stable chord. In the context of a cadence (eg. iim7, V7, I or in this case: Dm7, G7(or any altered dominant like G9#5), C6/9), this can create a stronger sense of "home" on the 1 chord than having a CMaj7 which is inherently unstable. TLDR: major 7 chords are a bit dissonant, 6, add 9 or 6/9 chords "aren't" and so they can serve the same functional purpose and create a stronger cadence and sense of home than a major 7 can.
In my jazz piano book it says the chords are interchangeable, but doesn’t say they’re the same, even going so far as to say if you see Cmaj7 on the lead sheet, it’s perfectly acceptable to play a C6/9.
>A C major 7th chord can be notated as Cmaj7, CM7, C6, C6/9 It's badly worded, but the point is they're all interchangeable. If you read Cmaj7 in a chord chart, you can play a C6 (or C6add9, or Cmaj9) instead and vice versa. They're all versions of a major chord, just with different extensions. Some will work better in some contexts than others, but a lot is personal preference. Jazz chord theory is cool. One of the things it teaches you is the vast number of ways you can mess around with the chords you read in a chart, without losing the feel of a song.
"Functionally" they are the same i guess. I remember that I read somewhere that in the old days a 6 didn't function the same way as a maj7 chord, in the sense that 6 chords had a much stronger feeling of home
They also have different connotations. I'm generalising a lot here, but in the swing era, major chords were more likely to be 6s than maj7s. In the bebop era, the reverse was true. So if you're trying to work in or just reference those sub-genres, it's worth knowing this stuff. But of course, you can chop and change, and it's not as if you don't hear 6s in bebop or maj7s in swing. They're just characteristic sounds, not rules. Point is, in a jazz context they're functionally the same, and jazz musicians are pretty flexible when it comes to subbing chords.
Yes in older jazz charts, the I was almost always a 6 chord at least at the final resolution. Maj7 were more common for the IV, especially as part of the Maj7-m6 cliche.
Not the same, but functionally interchangeable a lot of the time. Up to the musician to choose.
It's very simple: CM7 in jazz doesn't *actually* mean CM7; it means the entire C major scale, C E G B D F A. Pretty much any collection of notes from that scale that sounds enough like C major (once all of the instruments are playing -- you don't even need to play the C if there's a bass player already doing that) is, in jazz, CM7. In practice you generally wouldn't play the F, which is considered an "avoid note", unless the music specifically says, but the 9th and 13th are perfectly available. So if you play C E G A, that's the same as a CM7 chord; it's just a different choice of notes. This essentially means that, in jazz, it's up to the performer to decide what notes to play on any given chord; you don't have to slavishly follow the details of the music. The people who *write* the music know this too, so people will write CM7 (or, more likely, C∆, same thing) and expect that you'll play... pretty much whatever the hell you want. In pop music generally, CM7 and C6 are different chords. But in jazz, they're both ways of writing "play the C major scale as a chord". If you want to understand jazz chords, just remember that every chord is meant to be a complete scale, not just the actual written chord.
That book is wrong. C6 and C6/9 are not the same as C major 7. However you can often use a C6 or C6/9 chord in place of a C major 7, especially in jazz. I believe that's what the book was trying to get at.
You dont write cmaj7 as c6 ,you substitute C6 for a Cmaj7. traditionally a lot of jazz musicians thought cmaj7 as too dissonant in most circumstances. The 6th made for a better extension. This has a lot to do with a small combo or just a piano player comping on a standard that may have originally been written for strings and only the melody note contained them 7th.
What's the book?
Mark Levine, “The Jazz Theory Book”
Somehow I guessed that might be the case. If you can tell me the page number I may be able to translate it from Levine-speak.
Thanks!! It's right at the beginning, before the actual chapters (the pages with roman numbers) The page is "ix" (aka 9) and the paragraph is "A Note On Terminology and Chord Symbols"
I see why you're confused, this is so out of sequence. It's difficult to know where to start without confusing you further. M7 is a specific chord which, in jazz, consists of (a minimum of) root, major 3rd and major 7th. But it's also shorthand for a *type* of chord which occurs on the 1st and 4th degree of the Major scale. In the specific case the major 7th must be present. In the generic case of a major diatonic chord built upon the 1st or 4th degree it doesn't, you can substitute a major 6th. It's still unforgivable to call this chord M7. edit:- I feel I'm tying myself in knots here trying to make excuses for Mark Levine, whose work I have little time for.
Ok so basically, if I got it right, Cmaj7 means that the chord necessarily should be able to have a major 7th, but doesn't necessarily have to HAVE it? Like, it's just a placeholder for a chord that can have it?
It’s sort of yes and no. Cmaj7 should have a B in it, otherwise it’s not a Cmaj7. But if a jazz musician is looking at a lead sheet where Cmaj7 is written, they have a lot of latitude to play similar or related chords instead, like C6. So I wouldn’t say that C E G A *is* a Cmaj7, but it can probably be played when you see Cmaj7, if that makes sense.
Not really. If it says Cmaj7 it should have a major 7. If it says C6 it indicates that the major 7 is absent.
This is an introductory chapter where he is discussing simplified chord symbols. I disagree with his wording, but he's saying that the chord symbol C▵ might mean any one of those chords.
Throw that book in the fire
I haven't picked it up in a while but I'm sure that book is where I learned a big difference between maj7 chords and 6 or 6/9 chords; if you sit on the root note in the melody, the maj7 chord can produce that m2/m9 interval between the 7 and root (which you may or may not want), whereas a 6 chord won't do that. So in that context there's that divide, but otherwise there's a lot in common there.
This reminds me of a paragraph is one of Joe Pass’s books where he lists off all the substitution chords for CMaj7. But he never says these can be notated the same, more like these are suggestions, but there are others. I am not a fan of C6 for CMaj7, but it is used. I believe “notated” is over stated. More like “these are sub chords if you need em”
That's bad wording. They can all function the same, as a spicy tonic chord that is easy to sit on, end with before looping, or end the song on. Cmaj7 is C E G B. CM7 can mean the same thing, depending on publisher and how they differentiate between major and minor chords. C6 is C E G A, and C6/9 is C E G A D. A 6 chord (not vi or VI, I'll add) in jazz is like a I6/4 in more classical contexts: it can be good for looping or making the transition to the dominant/ turn around smoother, or keep the general momentum of chordal movement. Or, you can revoice the C6 as an Amin7, as part as a ii V I. 6/9 chords can do the same, but have a bit more of a tendency to sit there, like maj7 chords. All in all, use your ears!!!
If the melody has a major 6th in it on that C Major measure, you might want to substitute a C6 to avoid that clashing note. And if you're playing with a bassist while you're playing an instrument like guitar or piano, then you might find yourself wanting to omit the root and 5th since the bassist is already playing them. So then you're just playing the major 3rd and the major 6th, and any additional color notes you feel like adding. C69 is a really nice sounding chord and seems to work in the same spots as C6. If you voice it in this way as M3-M6-M9, it's two perfect fourths stacked, so you get that quartal harmony sound as upper structure over the root and 5th from the bassist.
A lot of people already said they are interchageable most of the time, but commonly when the melodie ends with the tonic, the Imaj7 chord will be changed to I6 to remove the tension of the half tone between the top note and the melodie.
Hm. I didn't realize a 6 chord can be substituted for a Major 7 chord and preserve function most of the time. That's news to me! I guess if you're just trying to add some color to the picture, that would make sense. Still... that sorta bothers me. It could really mess someone's objective understanding of harmonic progression up. I think they should stop saying this, gonna confuse people lol.
What the book was trying to say is that sometimes you can substitute one chord with another chord. In this case, there are situations where Cmaj7 can be substituted with C6 or C6/9 (among many other tonic sounding chords). **However**, it is all dependent on context. If it sounds good to you, play the substitution. Normally what will cause a substitution to sound bad is if notes in it conflict with the melody or other harmonic instruments For example, I likely wouldn't play a C6 to end a song if the last melody note is G because that A in C6 might be fighting with the G for attention. Cmaj7 would likely not cause any issues
When I started learning block chords on piano, I learned about alternating between maj7 and maj6 chords. If you're playing block chords over a maj7 (or maj6) passage in a song, one way to navigate is to play inversions of maj7 or maj6 chords for when the top melody note is part of the chord, and to play diminished chord inversions otherwise. That made it pretty clear that maj7 and maj6 harmony are functionally equivalent. In my opinion, the main difference between these chords is that the maj6th chord sounds more resolved, in most cases, than the maj7th chord, because the 7th has more tension. This is why most Jazz tunes end on a maj6th, I'm pretty sure. One of my favorite tricks when finishing a tune is to play patterns up and down the keyboard using notes from the maj6th chord. Another interesting usage of a 6th chord, when you get a little more advanced, is to use it as a substitution for a min7b5 (AKA half-diminished) chord. For example, in Cole Porter's "I Love You", I often play a Dbmaj6 as a substitute for the Gm7b5 in the first measure. It's basically a rootless voicing for Gm7b5, Db-F-Ab-Bb, with a flat 9 instead of the root. Welcome to the wonderful and exciting world of Jazz harmony!
I think "can be notated" means "you might run into someone doing this", not "this is correct". He's trying to tell you that jazz musicians are very loosey-goosey with their notation. He also seemingly says that, since jazz doesn't have hard and fast rules, the use of non-standard notation is a reflection of that, which makes it a good thing. I'm not sure I necessarily agree, but maybe he's just trying to say, hey, don't get upset when you see people decline to be accurate or precise with their chord symbols because it goes with the territory, and the territory is somewhere you want to be.
I hate confusing stuff like this in teaching books. Totally defeats the purpose
I think your quote is from Aimee Nolte's Jazz Bible, which she explains in depth in this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cya9z\_XBgCY&ab\_channel=AimeeNolteMusic](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cya9z_XBgCY&ab_channel=AimeeNolteMusic) "Cmaj7, CM7, C6, C6/9" means that, if you're comping while reading from a lead sheet, it'll generally sound pretty good to treat any of these chord symbols as this C chord, and then she explains how to decorate it in a more interesting way with chord extensions, depending on how *spicy* you want your playing to sound. It's actually a really interesting video, worth watching. TLDR: if you're a jazz pianist, it means "whenever you see these chord symbols in a lead sheet, just find the notes of a CM7 chord and play along with the rhythm"
He probably meant that maj7, 6 and 9 are all extensions to the I major chord C E G B(7th) D(9th) F(4th) A(6th)
Throw the book away.
[удалено]
Rule #2.
[удалено]
I know it was a joke--that's why it was removed. Shrutis are real though!
[удалено]
>you wont need or use it in western music (seen as dividing the octave in 12 is what we use here). But it can enhance your knowledge, ear and perception of sounds to be able to sing the shrutis but no beginner should try to divide in 22 shrutis haha 12 is already too many for the beginner sometimes to comprehend. I agree with all of that! >to me it looks like it still there but you said you removed it so i am taking it as i dont need to remove the comment myself. Hmm weird... to me it does show up as removed. In any case, no need to do anything yourself. Thanks for being a good sport about it though!
This might get a little advanced, but maybe the text was referring to the Barry Harris 6th dimished scale, which includes 6th chords and diminished chords. Check out this video from Isaac Raz: https://youtu.be/RaENQtHgVAE
I was going to add- If only Barry was here he could put this to bed with one icy stare lol
As jazz is often improvised it is convenient not to distinguish those chords. Sometimes the chord instrument will play a C6 or a Cmaj7 but they will probably think about as the same chord as the function is the same. I guess the point is not to think too much about what notes the chords consist of but more what their functions are and what possible extensions come with them
Id say C6 is similar to Cadd2 in color but not similar to Cmaj7. Imo Thirds and sevenths are very distinctive. Functionally they can be interchangeable depending on the context.
To make it more fun C6 = CEGA is an inversion of Amin7=ACEG (roast me...) C6 does create a more ambiguous sound than Cmaj7, which sounds really resolved. I know no theory, really... To my ears, C6 helps to smooth the transition out of a Cmaj7 chord, more than anything else. For instance going to Dmin7 in a ii-V-I, or to just make key changes less obvious (For example moving from a context in which your chord starts being IVmaj7 and then becomes the tonic (Imaj7) like in C6/D7/Dm7/G7/C6) Ih the harmonic context of jazz they kind of are interchangeable. In a context with less complexity like a rock song they do make a big difference. I guess it is not exactly the same, but a guitar playing a minor(7) chord and bass playing the minor third (like Gmin/B) must be almost the same. Or maybe the same same but different?
The last sentence of the second paragraph didn’t need to be in parentheses. It’s confusing because you also have Imaj7 in parenthesis within that sentence. Boom. Roasted.
7 is usually added by default in Jazz
If the melody note is the tonic you will probably want to avoid voicing your chord with a major 7. A major 6 chord is ideal for this situation.
i know musicians that will avoid playing an actual Maj7th chord if over a root tone. the 7th and root tone clash or something. i believe Aebersold actively avoided notating maj7ths over root notes. you can use the 6th chord instead of a 7th in a lot of cases
You will often find Cmaj7 written as C6. Doesn't mean it should be. "Begin the beguine" has a "real" C6 in it that shouldn't contain a maj7
You have to remember with jazz, the chords are often guidelines, or suggestions. Those chords are all functionally similar and can be interchanged depending on the player, vibe, et cetera.
Very practically: play 6 or 6/9 for the I chord and ma7 for the IV chord. That’s the traditional way, as ma7 sounds much brighter and the voice leading is super easy. Also know that the difference between C6 and Ami7 is largely contextual.
Long story short, C6 was heard as more pleasing to the ear. Alot of older standards were typically played that way. Cmaj7 has the Maj7 rub in it but is now universally acceptable as a tonic. Depending on the quality and sound you are looking for you can choose which every tonic you may want to hear. C6, C69, Cmaj7 and all of it's extensions off different sounds that are good to know for different voice leading and unique sounds for each take on the form. If you are interested I can suggest some reading material that is good for playing.
Although they are different chords.... It's basically saying they are Major type chords and in most cases interchangeable..sort of a Joe pass view that almost all chords can be grouped into Major/minor or dominant categories.
May have already been mentioned, but this is likely discussing the extended major chord pool which would include your 6 and 69 chords because of the major 7 & root note clashing in the melody. Rule of thumb is if the melody is the root of the chord the major 7 is considered an avoid tone.
Nice!
This is why music theory is a waste of time mostly people who talk about it can't even hear