Why does this work?

[Clifford-D]

Why does this work?

from Bill Frisells Strange Meeting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT2OzWiKUMM

II: Cm7(#11) I D/F# I Abmaj7 I % I Abm7 I % I Cm7(#11) :II
-------------------------------------1------------
------4---------3--------1-----------0------------4
------0---------0--------0-----------3------------0
------4---------4--------3------------------------4
------3-------------------------------------------3
----------------2--------4-----------4-------------

I find it very harmonically interesting, truly some strange meetings.

So what are the functional connections??

[medrawt]

There may certainly be an obvious answer I'm overlooking due to ignorance or eggnog-overload. But - I'm not generally a big fan of trying to explain chord progressions like this from a "functional" perspective. What I find interesting here is that even if you strip out the elaboration of these particular voicings, where you get the same inner voices in the first two chords and then the moving similar structure on the second two, and just consider the basic triads of Cm -> D -> Ab -> Abm, it sounds fine, interesting, mysterious. It voiceleads pretty well. The two "unusual" moves here (D to Ab and Abm to Cm), isolated, are sounds I've heard in some triad based pop music (Radiohead, Smashing Pumpkins, probably other stuff), though obviously it's not run of the mill I-IV-V. I'd rather just look at voiceleading in a case like this than wonder whether the Abmaj7 is subbing for an Fm7, etc.

[willyboy]

It works because it sounds good. IF you want to view this from a functional perspective then one way is:

1) D/F# to Abmaj7 is a deceptive resolution of D7 which typically would resolve (thinking V7 in the key of G) to B-7, E-7, C#-7b5, Abmaj7, Bbmaj7, Ebmaj7 or Fmaj7 or any chord quality using those root motions.

2) Abmaj7 to Ab-7 is like a typical IVmaj to IVmin subdominant cadence as found in countless pop tunes and instead of resolving to the respective I (Ebmaj7) resolves to a substitute - C-7

Some of this definitely doesn't make sense functionally, like adding #11's to minor7 chords in this progression within the key, but those notes certainly add an interesting color and dissonance to the chords, and I certainly hear at the least the resolution of Abmaj7 and Ab-7 to C-7 as functional. It's all within the ear of the beholder.

[slyzspyz]

it seems pretty simple, especially after listening to it. It is in the key of Cm, the F# adds a blues quality which is continued in the next chord (secondary dominant). The AbMaj is the flat VI which is common in a minor progression. With the Abm7 the melody quickly goes to F making it Abm6/9 which can be viewed as substitute for G7b9#9, the altered V chord in the key of Cm

[Clifford-D]

Here, please listen to it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT2OzWiKUMM

[Neer]

I don't know what Frisell was thinking, but the way I see it is:

Key of Cm (the #11 or b5, as I prefer to see it, is in the voicing for the usual Frisell/Monk-like tension)
D/F# (I think of this as an Eb diminished chord, feel free to choose your root from F#, A, C or Eb)
AbMaj7 (a tritone substitution for Dmin7b5)
Abmi6/9 (a substitution for G7--b9 in the bass, with a #5 and #9, so essentially G7alt)

So, for me the progression would be:

Imin bIIIdim IIm7b5 V7alt

By the way, I really love the version of this from Power Tools. Check it out if you haven't already heard it.

[Neer]

Ah, here it is (really love this record from '87):

-l0zAUXTFqk

[russ6100]

This is non-functional. It sounds the way it sounds because of the way the intervals are stacked and the voice leading. Seriously, Jon Damian, one of Frisell's teachers at Berkley has a book that covers this kind of stuff - The Guitarist's Guide To Composing and Improvising. The chapters on 3 notes structures - The Palette Chart and the section on counterpoint are presented in such a way that you'll be able to create some amazing sound stuff in no time.

Same with Holdsworth's stuff - people wrack their brains trying interpret his stuff via making functional harmony jump through hoops, but it wasn't conceived that way.

Actually, the use of CST, the target of so much grief, really shines in this method of composition.

[stevel]

This is non-functional. - people wrack their brains trying interpret his stuff via making functional harmony jump through hoops, but it wasn't conceived that way.



Exactly. Not all harmony is functional, nor does it have to be.

Steve

[Neer]

But it is very easy to look at this in the context of functional harmony for theoretical and improvisational purposes. I think in the case of this particular song, it is functional harmony. It is a simple tune with a verse and a chorus.

Another way of looking at it could be:

Cmin (Im)->Gbdim (bVdim)-->AbMaj7 (VIM)-->Abmin6 (VIm)

Whatever gives you success with the tune.

BTW, thanks for bringing this tune up. I am definitely going to record my own version of it. It's an old favorite. Really love the version you posted with Holland and Jones.

[russ6100]

Exactly. Not all harmony is functional, nor does it have to be.

Steve

Isn't that what I said? I'm trying to say that people often try to view non-functional harmony through the lens of functional harmony, making in jump through hoops in some futile effort to "justify" that which doesn't need justification.

[Jamie_Mitchell]

This is non-functional.

what makes you say that?
what are the problem changes? D/F#?
everything else is dead simple. IV - iv, V - i...

how's it non-functional?

beautiful tune btw, love the changes, played this one many times

j

[Clifford-D]

This is non-functional. It sounds the way it sounds because of the way the intervals are stacked and the voice leading. Seriously, Jon Damian, one of Frisell's teachers at Berkley has a book that covers this kind of stuff - The Guitarist's Guide To Composing and Improvising. The chapters on 3 notes structures - The Palette Chart and the section on counterpoint are presented in such a way that you'll be able to create some amazing sound stuff in no time.

Same with Holdsworth's stuff - people wrack their brains trying interpret his stuff via making functional harmony jump through hoops, but it wasn't conceived that way.

Actually, the use of CST, the target of so much grief, really shines in this method of composition.
Yes, I agree
and don't forget to bend the neck plenty

[Clifford-D]

disregarding root movement

Cm.....D7...AbM7...Abm7..Cm
--------------------------
-4-----3-----4-----4-----4
-5-----5-----5-----4-----5
-5-----4-----5-----4-----5
---------------------------
---------------------------

Cm - Aeolian or Harmonic minor, needs b6
D7 - Mixolydian
Abmaj7 - Lydian
Abm7 - Dorian

Related minor pents
(two pents are "in" and one pent is "out" for each chord/pent group)

Cm - C, F, and G minor pents
D7 - E. A, and B minor pents
Abmaj7 - F, G, and C minor pents
Abm7 - Eb, Ab, and Bb minor pents

a simplified minor pent solution might be

Cm7 l D7 l Abmaj7 l Abm7 l
..C.....B.......C.........Eb<<minor pents

or

Cm7 l D7 l Abmaj7 l Abm7 l
..G.....A.......F..........Ab<<minor pents

Or whatever, mix it up

[dlguitar64]

My favorite version is the one on "This Land"-i love the horn arrangement.