Theory & Impro B7b7 - Flattened 7th in a Dominant 7th?

You actually asked to come up with a scenario in the key of B or E minor so not just in the example. As above you can have a diminished interval and/or a diminished chord on any degree of the scale. Any degree of any scale can (theoretically) be altered some would be pointless but not the 7th which can be major, minor or diminished.

Nicely summed up in post 20
The example is in the key of E minor. That’s the point. We’re talking about a B dominant chord, preceded by an F#min7b5. Very obviously Ab has no chance of ever being a seventh. The chord tones provided: B-D#-F# also suggest very obviously that Ab will have no place here. A G# happily works as a sixth or 13th.

We’re not talking about a diminished 7th interval, we’re talking about the 7th of a B major chord; this is obvious and any attempt to go outside that is just being deliberately obtuse and understand confusing someone asking an obvious question.

So: as I said before, I think you’re both talking utter crap.
 
You may be looking for an argument where there really needn't be one. This is about expanding the conversation to give correct but more generalised music theory outside of the example (as you suggested it could be either in the context of the example - V7 in Em - or outside the context of the example - key of B)

I agree 100% with what you said here:

The example is in the key of E minor. That’s the point. We’re talking about a B dominant chord, preceded by an F#min7b5. Very obviously Ab has no chance of ever being a seventh. The chord tones provided: B-D#-F# also suggest very obviously that Ab will have no place here. A G# happily works as a sixth or 13th.


I'll find one more way to articulate this:
  • The chord symbol is wrong, it is not a Bb7b7
  • Cappers asked if flattening an already *flattened 7 in a dominant chord makes it a 6th.
  • I replied correctly that doing so makes it a diminished interval. I went on to say you couldn't actually have that in a dominant chord. The flattening of a minor 7 interval being called diminished applies across the board, it is basic interval theory.
*If we want to be absolutely correct we would not say a chord has a b7, or that an interval is b7 we would say it has a minor 7.

I really hope that makes it clear as I'm not going to continue an argument that shouldn't even exist.
 
I’m not looking for an argument. This started with someone trying be clever where there was no need for it. The answer was obvious, and it has nothing to do with any notion of enharmonic spelling. And instead of making that clear for the person asking, defensive “well I’m right” nonsense comes out, making it far more confusing for the person asking the question. It’s unnecessary, and happens far too often on these sorts of questions.
 
Last edited:
Did this thread actually reach page 3.....? 😳
Yes
1781459718456.webp
 
My apologies for not splitting off the off topic discussion/argument.
But again, this is where if you split the argument into a new post, then everything goes out of context. My entire objection to talking about an interval and enharmonic spellig of an interval is that the question isn't about intervals and enharmonic spelling is completely irrelevant - it's about chord symbols and a chord symbol that makes no sense (because it's a handwritten copy mistake).
 
Thank you one and all.
Perhaps we should end this thread now since my question was answered in post 6 & 7. The rest is irrelevant.
I didn't intend for it to turn into a bun fight over semantics!
Love and peace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Line drawn under it! 😉
 
Just for completeness, I spoke to our MD last night and he cofirms the B7b7 notation was a mistake, it's definitely B7b9. He was up late writing the sheets for all the instrument pitches and made a mistake.

While English is a second language, kinda new to me, I don't think "semantics" is the correct word, to describe the cause of the "bun fight". 🧐

semantics /sĭ-măn′tĭks/​

noun​

  1. The study or science of meaning in language.
  2. The competence of a speaker with regard to the interpretation of the meaning of linguistic structures.
  3. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition
 
I
While English is a second language, kinda new to me, I don't think "semantics" is the correct word,
I think the issue was about whether or not being enharmonically correct is important. There are two sides to that argument and I understand the value in each POV. But not really the same as semantics in my opinion. But I have been known to be wrong of course.
 
Will do a sensible recap later.

Right shoulder, old AC injury, peloton pileup, and newly frayed upper bicep muscle, makes it difficult to hold Flutes, and Air Pistols, So, I just might become, a born again, single reedman. ❤️‍🩹
Fabricating a shoulder stock, for the 10 meter discipline.
Bring home the Gold. 🙄
 

Social

New! Social Feeds

Look out for the navigation icon:

Follow CafeSaxophone

Latest Song of the Month

Trending

Forum statistics

Topics
32,036
Messages
577,564
Members
8,114
Latest member
Rodrigo Z
Back
Top Bottom