Re: Chord Function?

"LJS" <ljschenck@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> "Patrick L" <go...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "Steve Latham" <llat...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>>
>> > Ok, I've seen many comments on "function" in regards to my previous
>> > question about Altered Chords.
>>
>> > So let's start simple:
>>
>> > I - ii - V
>>
>> > I = Tonic function.
>> > ii = Subdominant function.
>> > V = Dominant function.
>>
>> > I is likely to be (let's put it in C) C6, C6/9, CMaj7, CMaj9, and
among
>> > other things, CMaj7(#11).
>>
>> > Now, if it's #11, that's not really an "alteration" of 4 because it's
>> > coming from the Lydian Mode. Correct?
>>
>> A Tonic chord with a #11 is altered.   A subdominant chord with a #11
is
>> altered.
>>
>> You are confusing scales with chords.
>
> Well, in functional analysis, the natural extension of the IV chord to
> the 11th is not altered. It is the natural unaltered extension and one
> would not have to put the notation as IV#11 as the IV11 would be
> correct. However, with most people not being well versed in the UC/LC
> Functional numbers and concepts, one would be justified to write it
> here as a #11 as well although is it really in the key and thus
> unaltered when written with its functional RN.

True, if you are using analytical notation IV11 would mean the 11 is a 
tritone away from the root, however if you are using chord symbols you
would 
have to specify that raised 11 - e.g. Cmaj7#11 - to distinguish it from
the 
same chord with an unaltered 11 build on the root - e.g. Cmaj11. Thus if
you 
analized a chord sequence | Cmaj11 | Cmaj7#11 | you would say that one 
semitone difference indicates a key change from C to F and write it as: | 
I11 | IV11 |


Fiona