"Giant Steps" article in September BGM

[thepurpleblob]

If you've read this article, can anybody explain to me what the hell is going on here as I have no clue and the Janek dude who wrote it fails to explain. Could be me being stupid (of course)

My dilemma... He claims that the chords in the examples are a substitute for a II-V-I progression. That is in Eb (which seems to be the example key although the examples lack a key signature) that Bmaj7/D7/GMaj7/Bb7 can substitute for F-7/Bb7/Ebmaj7. I have absolutely no idea what he is talking about I have a vague (very vague) notion of chords substitution for other chords but can't understand how it works in this example - there are even different numbers of chords in the substituted progression so it becomes impossible to compare directly (I think).

Can anybody shed any light?

[XB26354]

Hi,
These are "Coltrane Changes" - something that John Coltrane popularised with Giant Steps.
The two progressions should be as follows:

Original
Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |EbMaj7 / / / |

Coltrane changes
Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / | EbMaj7 / / / |

Note that both sequeces are three bars and end V7-Imaj7.

The idea is that one goes "outside" the regular changes in order to create more tension before resolving to the I chord (in this case, EbMaj7).
Coltrane changes are characterised by moving key centres down in major thirds. Bar 1 starts Bmaj7, bar2 goes down a major third to Gmaj7, bar three down another major third to Ebmaj7

You can start this idea off like this:

1. Original - Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
2. Original replacing Im7 with I7 (secondary dominant) - F7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
3. Use a tritone substitution on the F7 to get B7 - B7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
4. Obtain the major third movement by adding Gmaj7 at the beginning of the second bar, and put the relevant V7 chord D7 just before it to create sound root-movement - B7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
5. Finally change B7 to Bmaj7 so that the first chord in each bar implies a Imaj7 in keys descending in major thirds - Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |

If you then improvise over 5. whilst chordal players play 1. you have an introduction to playing outside the changes. As long as the ideas mean something to the progression in 5., then your improvising will sound sophisticated over 1. The general advice is play something inside (i.e. diatonic to 1.), then go outside by improvising as if the chords were 5., then come back inside to the original sequence.

There's lot more about this kind of sequence in print - notably Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Book, which devotes an entire chapter to it.
Hope this helps
Cheers
Mat

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='XB26354' post='596744' date='Sep 12 2009, 06:41 PM']Hi,
These are "Coltrane Changes" - something that John Coltrane popularised with Giant Steps.
The two progressions should be as follows:

Original
Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |EbMaj7 / / / |

Coltrane changes
Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / | EbMaj7 / / / |

Note that both sequeces are three bars and end V7-Imaj7.

The idea is that one goes "outside" the regular changes in order to create more tension before resolving to the I chord (in this case, EbMaj7).
Coltrane changes are characterised by moving key centres down in major thirds. Bar 1 starts Bmaj7, bar2 goes down a major third to Gmaj7, bar three down another major third to Ebmaj7

You can start this idea off like this:

1. Original - Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
2. Original replacing Im7 with I7 (secondary dominant) - F7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
3. Use a tritone substitution on the F7 to get B7 - B7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
4. Obtain the major third movement by adding Gmaj7 at the beginning of the second bar, and put the relevant V7 chord D7 just before it to create sound root-movement - B7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
5. Finally change B7 to Bmaj7 so that the first chord in each bar implies a Imaj7 in keys descending in major thirds - Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |

If you then improvise over 5. whilst chordal players play 1. you have an introduction to playing outside the changes. As long as the ideas mean something to the progression in 5., then your improvising will sound sophisticated over 1. The general advice is play something inside (i.e. diatonic to 1.), then go outside by improvising as if the chords were 5., then come back inside to the original sequence.

There's lot more about this kind of sequence in print - notably Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Book, which devotes an entire chapter to it.
Hope this helps
Cheers
Mat[/quote]

Yike! Ok... the issue is that I don't understand these substitutions at all. I guess if I really wanted to get it I would need to do some reading

EDIT: As usual, Wikipedia to the rescue - [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltrane_changes"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltrane_changes[/url]

Edited September 12, 2009 by thepurpleblob

[Major-Minor]

[quote name='XB26354' post='596744' date='Sep 12 2009, 06:41 PM']Hi,
These are "Coltrane Changes" - something that John Coltrane popularised with Giant Steps.
The two progressions should be as follows:

Original
Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |EbMaj7 / / / |

Coltrane changes
Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / | EbMaj7 / / / |

Note that both sequeces are three bars and end V7-Imaj7.

The idea is that one goes "outside" the regular changes in order to create more tension before resolving to the I chord (in this case, EbMaj7).
Coltrane changes are characterised by moving key centres down in major thirds. Bar 1 starts Bmaj7, bar2 goes down a major third to Gmaj7, bar three down another major third to Ebmaj7

You can start this idea off like this:

1. Original - Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
2. Original replacing Im7 with I7 (secondary dominant) - F7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
3. Use a tritone substitution on the F7 to get B7 - B7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
4. Obtain the major third movement by adding Gmaj7 at the beginning of the second bar, and put the relevant V7 chord D7 just before it to create sound root-movement - B7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
5. Finally change B7 to Bmaj7 so that the first chord in each bar implies a Imaj7 in keys descending in major thirds - Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |

If you then improvise over 5. whilst chordal players play 1. you have an introduction to playing outside the changes. As long as the ideas mean something to the progression in 5., then your improvising will sound sophisticated over 1. The general advice is play something inside (i.e. diatonic to 1.), then go outside by improvising as if the chords were 5., then come back inside to the original sequence.

There's lot more about this kind of sequence in print - notably Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Book, which devotes an entire chapter to it.
Hope this helps
Cheers
Mat[/quote]
Beautifully put Sir !

The Major

[jonny-lad]

[quote name='Major-Minor' post='598355' date='Sep 14 2009, 04:18 PM']Beautifully put Sir !

The Major[/quote]
+1

[thepurpleblob]

Multiple smart-arses

I got completely lost around the term 'secondary dominant', then it got worse round about 'inside' and 'outside'. I know my place :-)

[Sean]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kotK9FNEYU&feature=related"]This [/url] is fun.

[thepurpleblob]

It occurs to me that having started this thread that I'd never actually listened to Giant Steps. Now I have.... so I don't have to again

(Shuffles off back to Kasabian, or Pixie Lott, or anything......... )

[velvetkevorkian]

[quote name='Sean' post='598540' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:06 PM'][url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kotK9FNEYU&feature=related"]This [/url] is fun.[/quote]
That's actually quite nauseating to watch.

[XB26354]

Actually a sizeable number of well-known jazz musicians hate playing it and steer clear of it wherever possible, because the changes are so angular that it requires a lot of practice to develop anything resembling smooth lines over it. It often works better at a slightly less frantic tone, because even though the tune was groundbreaking when it was released, it's not particularly listenable after a few solo choruses. Even Coltrane repeats a few ideas over and over with slight variations. It does however open up more interesting ways to think about traditional II-V-I sequences - it was after all formulated as an exercise of sorts. Don't get stuck with Giant Steps the tune though - the album has some absolute classics (e.g. Naima), played at a much more reasonable tempo

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='XB26354' post='598575' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:30 PM']Actually a sizeable number of well-known jazz musicians hate playing it and steer clear of it wherever possible, because the changes are so angular that it requires a lot of practice to develop anything resembling smooth lines over it. It often works better at a slightly less frantic tone, because even though the tune was groundbreaking when it was released, it's not particularly listenable after a few solo choruses. Even Coltrane repeats a few ideas over and over with slight variations. It does however open up more interesting ways to think about traditional II-V-I sequences - it was after all formulated as an exercise of sorts. Don't get stuck with Giant Steps the tune though - the album has some absolute classics (e.g. Naima), played at a much more reasonable tempo [/quote]


Ok... I've listened to Naima on YouTube now. Nope... random notes. Not fun to listen to. I'm a philistine I suppose

EDIT: Actually I have a question. Is this stuff learned or was he improvising as he went? Sorry... I have no concept of how jazz works.

Edited September 14, 2009 by thepurpleblob

[Hot Tub]

[quote name='velvetkevorkian' post='598559' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:24 PM']That's actually quite nauseating to watch.[/quote]

That's actually quite nauseating to listen to.

[jonny-lad]

[quote name='thepurpleblob' post='598590' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:40 PM']Ok... I've listened to Naima on YouTube now. Nope... random notes. Not fun to listen to. I'm a philistine I suppose [/quote]
Naima is a great tune IMO.

If you can find the live version where Eric Dolphy takes the solo on bass clarinet, it's well worth a listen...I found it on one of the cheap CDs you can get in HMV called 'John Coltrane Plays it cool.'

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='jonny-lad' post='598595' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:43 PM']Naima is a great tune IMO.

If you can find the live version where Eric Dolphy takes the solo on bass clarinet, it's well worth a listen...I found it on one of the cheap CDs you can get in HMV called 'John Coltrane Plays it cool.'[/quote]

I've been trying to give Jazz a fair crack and I've accumulated quite a few recommendations off this site. I just don't get it. Most just sounds like some guy on a - insert instrument here - arpeggiating some dead hard chords at a fearsome speed. It's the same reason I don't enjoy listening to the likes of Wooten. I understand it's difficult but I don't want it on my car stereo thanks.

It brings me back to my original question. I think when a chord substitution is so far removed from the original like this it just sounds to the uninitiated (e.g. me) like the band is playing two entirely different progressions. It's not musical. Not to me anyway.

Sorry

[Ray]

[quote name='XB26354' post='596744' date='Sep 12 2009, 06:41 PM']Hi,
These are "Coltrane Changes" - something that John Coltrane popularised with Giant Steps.
The two progressions should be as follows:

Original
Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |EbMaj7 / / / |

Coltrane changes
Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / | EbMaj7 / / / |

Note that both sequeces are three bars and end V7-Imaj7.

The idea is that one goes "outside" the regular changes in order to create more tension before resolving to the I chord (in this case, EbMaj7).
Coltrane changes are characterised by moving key centres down in major thirds. Bar 1 starts Bmaj7, bar2 goes down a major third to Gmaj7, bar three down another major third to Ebmaj7

You can start this idea off like this:

1. Original - Fm7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
2. Original replacing Im7 with I7 (secondary dominant) - F7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
3. Use a tritone substitution on the F7 to get B7 - B7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
4. Obtain the major third movement by adding Gmaj7 at the beginning of the second bar, and put the relevant V7 chord D7 just before it to create sound root-movement - B7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |
5. Finally change B7 to Bmaj7 so that the first chord in each bar implies a Imaj7 in keys descending in major thirds - Bmaj7 / D7 / |Gmaj7 / Bb7 / |Ebmaj7 / / / |

If you then improvise over 5. whilst chordal players play 1. you have an introduction to playing outside the changes. As long as the ideas mean something to the progression in 5., then your improvising will sound sophisticated over 1. The general advice is play something inside (i.e. diatonic to 1.), then go outside by improvising as if the chords were 5., then come back inside to the original sequence.

There's lot more about this kind of sequence in print - notably Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Book, which devotes an entire chapter to it.
Hope this helps
Cheers
Mat[/quote]

Fantastic post. Thanks.

[Major-Minor]

[quote name='thepurpleblob' post='598602' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:49 PM']I've been trying to give Jazz a fair crack and I've accumulated quite a few recommendations off this site. I just don't get it. Most just sounds like some guy on a - insert instrument here - arpeggiating some dead hard chords at a fearsome speed. It's the same reason I don't enjoy listening to the likes of Wooten. I understand it's difficult but I don't want it on my car stereo thanks.

It brings me back to my original question. I think when a chord substitution is so far removed from the original like this it just sounds to the uninitiated (e.g. me) like the band is playing two entirely different progressions. It's not musical. Not to me anyway.

Sorry [/quote]
Actually John Coltrane is not the best place to start if you are trying to understand the wonderful world of jazz and improvisation ! I've been playing jazz all my life and I still struggle with Coltrane.

Have a listen to some of the more crossover styles. I'd start with Bob James' Fourplay which includes the wonderful bass playing of Nathan East (who is coming to Bass Day 2009 in November at the RNCM).
Or try Chick Corea (Return to Forever, the Acoustic Band, The Electric Band) or Pat Metheny or the Yellowjackets. There's loads more - these are just the first names that spring to mind.

Also don't forget that the recording quality on some of those early bebop sessions was rather poor. Our modern ears are used to something with more clarity and bandwidth.

Keep trying - its well worth it in the long run.

The Major

[51m0n]

[quote name='XB26354' post='596744' date='Sep 12 2009, 06:41 PM']Hi,
These are "Coltrane Changes" - something that John Coltrane popularised with Giant Steps.
The two progressions should be as follows:

....


There's lot more about this kind of sequence in print - notably Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Book, which devotes an entire chapter to it.
Hope this helps
Cheers
Mat[/quote]

Thanks for the single most informative post (not to suggest anyone else here hasnt provided great info in their time but...) on how substitutions work - I think I'm even starting to 'get it' now!

If only this had actually been explained in the article I might have had the tiniest chance of keeping up

[Bilbo]

Giant Steps is undoubtedly a bit rich for people who have been brough up on a diet of, errr, Pixie Lott... but, PLEASE. can people get the word random out of their vocabularies when discussin gjazz. Its is never random. It can be bad and you may not like it (I don't give a rat's..) but it is NEVER, EVER randon

Jazz is a VERY broad church and many of us who visit regularly would suggest that Fourplay just aren't jazz (they told Larry Carlton NOT to play blue notes - how CAN that be jazz ). I'll give you the rest, Major.... but all of that is an argument for another thread.

The trouble is that people keep going to listen to the hard stuff without developing the ear required to 'get it'. Yes, most of this stuff is improvised - that, at least, is one variable that is common to most things that sit under the umbrella term 'jazz', but some of it is beautifully written too.

Try some Duke Ellington stuff: go to Spotify and look up Johnny Hodges playing ''Isfahan', Day Dream', or 'Blood Count' or look for 'Such Sweet Thunder' or 'And His Mother Called Him Bill'. If you don' t 'get' that, you are dead from the neck up - I am not saying you have to like it, that would be too much to ask, but you should 'get it'.

Try Medeski, Martin and Wood playing 'Julia', 'Tequila and Chocolate' or 'Legalise It'. John Scofield playing 'Georgia On mY Mind' or Pat Metheny on 'Don't Know Why'.

T'ain't rocket science, guys.

[Prosebass]

[quote name='Sean' post='598540' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:06 PM'][url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kotK9FNEYU&feature=related"]This [/url] is fun.[/quote]


[quote name='velvetkevorkian' post='598559' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:24 PM']That's actually quite nauseating to watch.[/quote]


[quote name='Hot Tub' post='598594' date='Sep 14 2009, 07:42 PM']That's actually quite nauseating to listen to.

[/quote]

It sounds better with the vocal....

[Major-Minor]

The argument about "what jazz is" could be very long and painful, so we will leave it, as you say, for another time.
However, my reason for suggesting that Fourplay is a good place to start is quite simply because of their easy accessibility to someone who might be used to hearing more rock/ pop styles.
All the players in Bob James' outfit are great improvising soloists, but in this band the arrangements and compositions take precedence over long improvised solos. They rarely use swing or bebop styling but the harmonic structures owe a lot to the jazz/blues cannon and the solos are short, neat and well played.
For anybody new to the world of jazz, I'm a firm believer in edging them in gently, in the same way that I wouldn't suggest somebody new to orchestral music should start with Messian's Turangalila (much as I love this piece).
If somebody doesn't "get it", then they need help from those that do. Like any appreciation of the arts, it takes time.

The Major

Edited September 15, 2009 by Major-Minor

[velvetkevorkian]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='599069' date='Sep 15 2009, 11:21 AM']Giant Steps is undoubtedly a bit rich for people who have been brough up on a diet of, errr, Pixie Lott... but, PLEASE. can people get the word random out of their vocabularies when discussin gjazz. Its is never random. It can be bad and you may not like it (I don't give a rat's..) but it is NEVER, EVER randon

Jazz is a VERY broad church and many of us who visit regularly would suggest that Fourplay just aren't jazz (they told Larry Carlton NOT to play blue notes - how CAN that be jazz ). I'll give you the rest, Major.... but all of that is an argument for another thread.

The trouble is that people keep going to listen to the hard stuff without developing the ear required to 'get it'. Yes, most of this stuff is improvised - that, at least, is one variable that is common to most things that sit under the umbrella term 'jazz', but some of it is beautifully written too.

Try some Duke Ellington stuff: go to Spotify and look up Johnny Hodges playing ''Isfahan', Day Dream', or 'Blood Count' or look for 'Such Sweet Thunder' or 'And His Mother Called Him Bill'. If you don' t 'get' that, you are dead from the neck up - I am not saying you have to like it, that would be too much to ask, but you should 'get it'.

Try Medeski, Martin and Wood playing 'Julia', 'Tequila and Chocolate' or 'Legalise It'. John Scofield playing 'Georgia On mY Mind' or Pat Metheny on 'Don't Know Why'.

T'ain't rocket science, guys.[/quote]
How are you meaning "get it" here Bilbo? Do you mean appreciate the technical aspects even if it doesn't speak aesthetically?

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='599069' date='Sep 15 2009, 11:21 AM']Giant Steps is undoubtedly a bit rich for people who have been brough up on a diet of, errr, Pixie Lott... but, PLEASE. can people get the word random out of their vocabularies when discussin gjazz. Its is never random. It can be bad and you may not like it (I don't give a rat's..) but it is NEVER, EVER randon

Jazz is a VERY broad church and many of us who visit regularly would suggest that Fourplay just aren't jazz (they told Larry Carlton NOT to play blue notes - how CAN that be jazz ). I'll give you the rest, Major.... but all of that is an argument for another thread.

The trouble is that people keep going to listen to the hard stuff without developing the ear required to 'get it'. Yes, most of this stuff is improvised - that, at least, is one variable that is common to most things that sit under the umbrella term 'jazz', but some of it is beautifully written too.

Try some Duke Ellington stuff: go to Spotify and look up Johnny Hodges playing ''Isfahan', Day Dream', or 'Blood Count' or look for 'Such Sweet Thunder' or 'And His Mother Called Him Bill'. If you don' t 'get' that, you are dead from the neck up - I am not saying you have to like it, that would be too much to ask, but you should 'get it'.

Try Medeski, Martin and Wood playing 'Julia', 'Tequila and Chocolate' or 'Legalise It'. John Scofield playing 'Georgia On mY Mind' or Pat Metheny on 'Don't Know Why'.

T'ain't rocket science, guys.[/quote]

Well... it's all semantics is it not? You could argue that any improv has a certain 'randomness' to it. That's the point surely? But, yes, I take your point. I think that if the most complicated chord you have ever encountered is a major seventh chord and then you come to this stuff it's going to be a difficult listen. Like all music, it's mostly about what you are used to hearing. The Coltrane stuff just sounds like a bunch of wrong notes to me - totally discordant. This makes a discussion of his changes very hard to grasp as I keep asking, "why would you want to do that - it makes it sound all wrong?".

BTW... one thing I really don't get. If these chord substitutions are over a II-V-I progression. Who is holding down the basic progression. Am I right in thinking that the sax is playing the substitutions and the bass is playing the basic chords? I'm struggling to see how the basic progression doesn't get completely lost in the melee

EDIT: I think rocket science might just be a little easier to understand. I still haven't heard anybody explain WHY this works - or is supposed to work. My ear says it doesn't, yours says it does. I don't know where that leaves us

Edited September 15, 2009 by thepurpleblob

[thepurpleblob]

Another question......

[quote]2. Original replacing Im7 with I7 (secondary dominant) - F7 / / / |Bb7 / / / |Ebmaj7 / / / |[/quote]


I don't understand how I7 is the secondary dominant of Im7 or am I reading this wrong? A secondary dominant is still a fifth away from the 'root' of the chord even if it then has notes outside of the key. That's how I thought it worked anyhow

[XB26354]

It's the secondary dominant of the next chord because the basic flavour of the chord has been changed to make it a V leading into the next chord - F7 leads to Bb (which itself becomes the dominant for EbMaj7).
As far as substitutions go, in Giant Steps chords and melody and soloing are all playing the substitutions - there are no "original" chords as such.
If you wanted to use Giant Steps as a basis for improvising outside the original chords then chordal players need to be hip to this and play the original chords, or else the improvising and harmony will get rather lost as you say. This is a matter of experience (like "feeling" the right thing to play at the right time, as in every other style of music).

I don't lay any special claim to having an ear for jazz - I just ended up listening to a lot because I liked it. As basically no-one knows about jazz nowadays unless they're pretty old (and therefore probably grew up with it) or they're a musician, is it any wonder that it appears alien and hard to "get"? Take your favourite songs. I'd imagine you've listened to them dozens of times, you probably know the lyrics off by heart and can probably play the song (or already have done). Imagine if you knew some jazz that intensively? Heard it on the radio every day, in bars and clubs all over town. Maybe if it was all around you like the X Factor it would be more familiar and hence more acceptable (or not!) You don't have to like it. Really. If you stick with learning and listening to jazz and after a couple of years you still don't like it, don't listen to it or play it. It will still be there in some form or another. And it will have improved both your ear and your ability as a musician, so nothing wasted!

Edited September 15, 2009 by XB26354

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='XB26354' post='599637' date='Sep 15 2009, 09:36 PM']It's the secondary dominant of the next chord because the basic flavour of the chord has been changed to make it a V leading into the next chord - F7 leads to Bb (which itself becomes the dominant for EbMaj7).
As far as substitutions go, in Giant Steps chords and melody and soloing are all playing the substitutions - there are no "original" chords as such.
If you wanted to use Giant Steps as a basis for improvising outside the original chords then chordal players need to be hip to this and play the original chords, or else the improvising and harmony will get rather lost as you say. This is a matter of experience (like "feeling" the right thing to play at the right time, as in every other style of music).

I don't lay any special claim to having an ear for jazz - I just ended up listening to a lot because I liked it. As basically no-one knows about jazz nowadays unless they're pretty old (and therefore probably grew up with it) or they're a musician, is it any wonder that it appears alien and hard to "get"? Take your favourite songs. I'd imagine you've listened to them dozens of times, you probably know the lyrics off by heart and can probably play the song (or already have done). Imagine if you knew some jazz that intensively? Heard it on the radio every day, in bars and clubs all over town. Maybe if it was all around you like the X Factor it would be more familiar and hence more acceptable (or not!) You don't have to like it. Really. If you stick with learning and listening to jazz and after a couple of years you still don't like it, don't listen to it or play it. It will still be there in some form or another. And it will have improved both your ear and your ability as a musician, so nothing wasted![/quote]

Thanks for clarifying the secondary dominant thing - I get it now.

To be pedantic - I'm losing the grip on how these are substitutions if the "originals" are lost. How do you know they are substitutions at all? Why could he not just have thought "oh, that (the final) chord progression sounds good". Then someone comes along and says, "well, if you really twist it about you can see a way to describe these as substitutions over II-V-I"

Re. taking any kind of interest in this. I am the sort of person who doesn't like to not understand things. It's just the kind of sad person I am. There's a whole bunch of craziness in jazz that doesn't seem to turn up anywhere else. As I say, I'm not quite yet convinced it's all particularly musical which makes it even trickier.