On Jan 24, 2008, at 12:35 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
[But I do find this a bit ironic, since I believe you are still
adamantly opposed to the "geometric" chord symbols popularized by
Aebersold and now widely used (C∆, C-∆, Co, Cø, etc), on the
grounds that some older musicians are not familiar with them? And I
found myself on the opposite side of that argument, making the case
that the newer nomenclature was superior (more compact and quicker
to read), and if we just kept using them, even the old-timers would
eventually get used to them!]
Oh, I wouldn't say "adamantly." I just don't think they are as
universal as the alpha-numeric ones. And it isn't just the older
musicians who don't know them; lots of younger musicians who aren't
jazz musicians principally don't know them either. Not to mention
they are harder to type, though you don't seem to have any problem
getting them into your email!
Right -- a much better example would have been "Fxdim7 - G#MA7"
I'm having trouble thinking of a place where I might need G#maj7.
Maybe an alto part where the concert chord is Bmaj7? But I would try
to keep V-I or VII-I relationships spelled correctly as much as
possible. So I might respell the whole group to Gdim7 - Abmaj7, but I
wouldn't respell just one of them.
A tune like Con Alma is a real tough nut to crack, especially on the
transposed parts! (I had to wrestle with it recently - first chord
C#maj7 on the alto sax, and it only got worse! Common tones in the
melody and harmony parts only complicated things.)
I would draw the line at most double sharps or double flats (most,
not all!)
So it's *not* a hard-and-fast principle! And if you are willing to
bend the "rules" on doubles-sharps and double-flats in chord
symbols, and not be a stickler for enharmonic "correctness" *all*
the time, then it's just a matter of me drawing the line in a
different place, no?
Yes, I would say that sums it up pretty well.
For you, practicality trumps theory in a case like "Ebb7 - Dbmi" --
for me, when it comes to enharmonics in jazz and other highly
chromaticized music, practicality almost always trumps theory.
I think Cb in the key of Ebminor IS practical, that's our main
difference. Musicians generally know what key they are in; correct
spellings confirm it and make it EASIER to read (and play in tune!),
not harder. Also, more to the point, single flats and sharps on all
seven notes shouldn't be a problem for any musician past college level.
I also wouldn't spell the first two measures of Lush Life as Db6 -
Bmaj7; I would use Db6 - Cbmaj7, as does almost every lead sheet I
have ever seen. (Alto part, Bb6 - Abmaj7; WAY easier!)
I was talking about naming the extension correctly to match the
function and spelling. You write Fnat on a D7(#9) chord, don't you?
Sure, but I would also write E nat. on a Db7(#9) chord.
I wouldn't if it were a V7 in Gb, but I would if it were a bII7 in C,
as the E would be correct in C, but the Fb would be more correct in Gb.
I think a lot of our differences seem to stem from you not using key
signatures much in your music. We probably would not differ much in C
major, but once the flats and sharps start showing up in the key, I
suspect you would respell to C, while I would go with the key more
often than not.
I think most do, by convention if not by thought, and calling the
chord D7(b10) would match the chord spelling to the note spelling.
Again, that seems like reinventing the wheel to me. "D7(#9)" works
pretty well, and I am not persuaded that it needs changing.
I'm not sure it will ever change, either, but I was surprised (and
happy) as heck when b13 started showing up regularly on dominants! So
anything can happen in the world of notation conventions.
One more thing; I'm not trying to restore anything (like "whom"),
I'm trying to correct a fundamental misunderstanding dating back
to the start of jazz.
That's one view. The other would be that you are trying to apply
Classical-Romantic standards of enharmonic spelling to genre of
20th century music that is much more highly chromaticized -- and
I'm (so far) unpersuaded there is anything to be gained by this
approach.
More chromatic than Debussy, Ravel, Prokofieff, Bartok, etc? Not
always! Once again, I emphasise that while I am less willing to
respell out of convenience, I am not UNwilling, but I try to reflect
key relationships when they are clearly there. If the music is so
chromatic that the key is unclear, well then, man the Speedy 9 key
and stand by to repel boarders! Also melodic spelling in fast
passages may differ from correct harmonic spelling (see, I AM
practical!)
But I still would use Cb, Fb, E# and B# whenever I think them necessary.
Christopher
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
