Re: Chord Function?

"Steve Latham" <llatham@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:XW4dk.1149$bn3.699@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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?
>
> And because it's a Tonic chord, it's unlikely to have b/#5 or b/#9
(unless 
> they're for color, not function). Correct?
>
> Now, let's say I put in an A7 between I and ii:
>
> I - V7/ii (or VI7 if you must) - ii - V.
>
> Now, this V7/ii has a Dominan function (locally if not globally). So it 
> can take on the same kinds of alterations any Dominant might?
>
> A7, A7b9, A7(#5 #9), etc.
>
> Right Track?
>

Hey Steve, long time no talky!!

I just saw a video by ted greene that discusses this very thing(I think). 
Essentially he says that alterations like this do not change function. He 
plays several progressions from different era's in time and styles and
shows 
how the style has different alternations but says they all function the 
same. (so in classical he says its a simple I-V, say without alterations
and 
in modern jazz it might be something like Imaj#9b9 - V9b5#5 or some crap 
like that).

I was listening to it and could kinda hear what he was talking about.