off chord

[David Doggett]

I agree V-of-V may give some theoretical explanation of why the II chord works, and why it almost invariably leads into the V. But I also agree that on the bandstand "II" is much better shorthand for the chord - it avoids the extra mental step of having to remember what the V chord of the V is.

Other very common chords that don't come from the "harmonized scale" set are the III (Tennessee Waltz), and the VIIb, in which the root is not even in the scale. I am always a little puzzled at people who seem to demand that only the harmonized scale chords are appropriate. That set of chords is only relevant to an instrument that can only play a single diatonic scale, with no chromatics, such as a child's xylophone. Most music is made with chromatic instruments that render the harmonized scale not particularly relevant.

In fact, in most three or four chord simple songs, if you walk up the scale with chords, you are more likely not to use the "harmonized scale," but instead simply use inversions of the I, IV and V chords. That's the kind of harmonized scale that is most useful to be able to execute.

[Speaking of which - I was hacking around in Bobbe Seymour's showroom one day, and he walked over with a frown on his face and said he'd like to see my execution - ka-ching! ]

[b0b]

I never heard this "5 of the 5" stuff before. Do you also call the b7 the "4 of the 4"? Goofy!

[Ga McDonnell]

5 of the 5 refers to chords not intervals. It's used all the time in jazz. If you have a chord for a whole bar, you can add a 5 of the 5 minor 7 for two bars for variety.

In fact you could use 5 0f the 5 for every beat in the bar. If you had G7 for a whole bar, it could be Em7 Am7 Dm7 G7 for the four beats of the bar. It's just back cycling.

[Stephen Dorocke]

Another way to look at the "5 of 5".... in the key of C, the dominant chord is G7,which harmonically wants to resolve to C, because the tritone, in this case the notes B and F, the 3rd and the b7th of the G7, "resolves" it's dissonance by moving the 2 notes a 1/2 step in opposite directions, B to C, and F to E. C and E being the root and the 3rd of the C chord. So, harmonically speaking, the "5" chord wants to resolve to the 1 chord, in this case G7 to C. The "5" of "5" would be the chord that wants to resolve to the "5" chord of whatever key you're in. In this case, in the key of C the "5" of "5" would be D7. The resolution has to do with the action of how the tritone "resolves."
An Am7, is the relative minor of the 4 chord, again in the key of C, and came be used as a substitute for the 4 chord, as long as it doesn't clash with melody notes, etc, etc. II-V-I... instead of IV-V-I.
A IIm7b5-V7b9 wants to resolve to a minor tonic.... but that's another discussion.... of course, these harmonic rules only apply to western european derived music, and don't have to be followed...
Off chords??? That's kinda dumbing it down, innit?? Is there a "on" chord, or a "standby" chord??

[Bo Legg]

I think the confusion here is that the term is commonly misspelled. It is spelled “awf chord” and pronounced “off chord”. The awf (pronounced off) is an abbreviation of the word awful (as in awful chord)
If you would like I’ll be happy to send you a copy of my College Thesis which covers this in very vivid detail
The College Thesis, usually a baffling activity for most students was relatively easy for me in that my project had a clear and unambiguous thesis statement for which I had no doubt I should have received The two Pulitzer Prize awards for achievement in Literature and Music Composition, not to mention the $20,000 prize.
I seem to have drifted a little awf topic here.

[Chuck Thompson]

ok - if im in the key of G and the A is the off chord, if there is an E is it the offer chord?

[J. Michael Robbins]

It appears that viewing the II chord (2 Major) as the V of V makes sense if you think of its introduction as an implied/truncated modulation to another key. For example, in the key of C with the II chord as D/viewed as the V of V (the D chord in the key of G), moving into and out of this V of V implies a modulation from the key of C to the key of G and back to the key of C.
Comments?
Thanks,
Mike

[Jon Light (deceased)]

Mike---I had a way-too-long post that I decided to shelve that went in the direction of your thinking. Yes, I view (and more importantly, hear) a II major as a mini-modulation, outside of the box of the diatonic chord/scales that would see a II minor. This is what gives it the fresh sound (well, not so fresh when you've played Hey Good Looking for the two hundred seventyeleventhousandth time).
When V of V comes up, in my mind it means a shifting root.

This discussion, I must say, does start to demonstrate the difference between music theory as academic exercise vs. the discussion and analysis of theory for the purpose of better understanding and communication of music and musical ideas. It's a line individually defined by the reader---there's no right or wrong and for sure there's no such thing as too much knowledge. But it would help (IMO) to keep the original intent of the discussion in mind.

That being said, I think it's a shame to dumb it down to point of calling it an "off chord", I term I'd never heard before, but if one intends to live in the land of three chordsville, I guess I see the point.
But you're screwed if you have a hankering for a little "The Waltz You Saved For Me" or some other radical cacaphony.

[J. Michael Robbins]

This discussion, I must say, does start to demonstrate the difference between music theory as academic exercise vs. the discussion and analysis of theory for the purpose of better understanding and communication of music and musical ideas. It's a line individually defined by the reader---there's no right or wrong and for sure there's no such thing as too much knowledge. But it would help (IMO) to keep the original intent of the discussion in mind.

Jon,
I hope I was keeping the original intent in mind. That was my intent.
Thanks,
Mike

[Jon Light (deceased)]

Definitely not directed toward you, Mike. General comment.

Let me add---I am not a theory wiz. I make no claims to know more than some basics. If that idea of calling this a modulation is not correct.....I will stand corrected.

[James Morehead]

But it would help (IMO) to keep the original intent of the discussion in mind.

Well, Jon, I wouldn't worry about the topic drift. Actually, the topic is still right on, if you can view the turn it's taken as the V of V of the original topic. It's merely a de-modulation, that eventually will modulate back onto topic.

[Jon Light (deceased)]

Well--I'll wait for it run the cycle and return to the gin and tonic--that's where I shine.

[J. Michael Robbins]

Good one James!

Several years ago some musician friends of mine who owned a local music store brought Bill Keith into town to conduct a "Banjo" Workshop. I attended, not because I was interested in the Banjo, but because I thought "surely I can learn something from this guy." I was really more interested in meeting the man and hopefully talking with him about his experiences with the PSG and what it was like knowing/playing with Clarence White.

All Bill wanted to talk about was the Circle of Fifths! His point was that if we wanted to be musicians, we needed to have some understanding of what music was about. I have never forgotten that.

Years later, an insurance man who had dropped by our home saw my guitar in the living room. He asked my (then) wife and me, "Who is the magician?" Apparently he could tell that I needed to study more music theory!

Mike

[J. Michael Robbins]

Well--I'll wait for it run the cycle and return to the gin and tonic--that's where I shine.

Sounds like we might be birds of a feather...I need to keep reminding myself to follow your sequence, though. The last time I returned to the gin & tonic and THEN ran for my cycle, I ended up with several shiny spots!

[Jon Light (deceased)]

From the "oh lord, please don't let me be misunderstood" department:
I am of the "to choose to not gain knowledge when it is there to be gained is just plain ignorance" school so, no mistake---I am not agitating against the discussion, teaching and use of music theory.

I'm just seeing an indistinct line separating practical, useful theory from Stephen Hawking rocket surgery string theory.
It doesn't matter---everyone's got their own saturation point where these discussions cross from applicable info to just a bunch of eye-crossing words & numbers.
I totally didn't mean to be a scold.
Carry on.

[J. Michael Robbins]

I totally didn't mean to be a scold.

Jon,

Your comments sound fine to me

Mike

[Ulric Utsi-Åhlin]

We´re approaching Situation Emperor´s New Clothes...
after all,we´re discussing a piece of terminology
that doesn´t exist in trad music theory.McUtsi

[Joe Miraglia]

What did Hank call it? Hay - Hay -Good Looking. Joe

[Bob Hickish]

is there an " off cord " in " Bad-Bad Le-Roy Brown " ???

[J. Michael Robbins]

We´re approaching Situation Emperor´s New Clothes...
after all,we´re discussing a piece of terminology
that doesn´t exist in trad music theory.McUtsi

McUtsi,
I get the analogy, but is the "piece of terminology" the "Off Chord," "II Chord," or one of the others mentioned?
Thanks,
Mike

[John McGann]

I never heard this "5 of the 5" stuff before. Do you also call the b7 the "4 of the 4"? Goofy!

I learned a few years ago that talking music theory on the Forum can lead to major smackdowns, including from the OP, ironically enough (in the thread about D# vs. Eb...)

[Ulric Utsi-Åhlin]

J. Michael,I was referring to the fabled "off chord".McUtsi

[Charlie McDonald]

Many saxophone and steel guitar players I worked with in the 50's and 60's would either say play the "off chord" or jump out of key. Hope this sheds more light than confusion.

Very interesting.
Maybe this terminology points at chord substitutions, like 'The off chord is another way to play the IV chord, unless your bandleader will fire you for playing minors.'

[Don Brown, Sr.]

I'm laughing now, as this is the longest thread that's said nothing, of value to date.

Folks either know music, and know what's happening, or they don't. That simply sums it up pretty much.

Now! Watch out, this one has an Accidental that pops in there! You'll hear it coming! ....... Don

[J. Michael Robbins]

Starting off from the I of a diatonic major scale,
the triad built on the II will always be a minor triad.McUtsi

In reading through the thread I have been thinking that the reason it's called the off chord is because it's not actually in the key in question. The supertonic chord is, in fact, a ii and not a II. In my experience, this off chord has always actually been a II7. That is, the V7 of the V7. But the "off" chord is kind of a funny thing to call it, I think.

Edward,
Here is an excerpt from the book "Scales Over Chords" which addresses "Modal Harmony" and appears to confirm and expand upon your premise:

"Exercise 59 is a study in playing Mixolydian modes over a series of dominant type chords where each chord creates its own key center; and we also introduce you to chord substitution. We use major chords (raised third in triad) for substitution for the minor iii-vi-ii chords. This creates a chord progression made up of major chords (III7-VI7-II7-V7-I). Since each chord is a dominant type chord, you must quickly determine the chord's parent scale, then play from the fifth note to play the correct Mixolydian mode."

Those posters who have suggested that the "off chord" terminology is a "dumbing down" of the musical theory may be on to something.
Other ideas?
Thanks,
Mike