#1
This question in particular is about the Dom 7th. And boy how I have grown in theory since the last time I've had to post here! I feel like I should l know this answer but here goes the question:

I've heard people say that when it comes to blues..... if lets say for example your 1-4-5 is made of 7th chords, that they are really V's so IE: G7 > V of C maj (G-B-F) although its understood to be the 1 of the progression. I understand this for example if you are approaching a G7 from a Cmaj scale mindset. The reason I bring this up is because I have been fiddling around with harmonizing thirds and again someone had suggested that when attacking a dom 7th such as in the case of the blues, it helps to treat the thirds from a C major aspect (meaning count the C-E third as the 1 rather than the G major G-B third as the tonal centre < I hope I used that term right).

If I haven't lost you, what do you suggest? This is obviously in terms of tension/resolve perspective!
#2
Your example is hard to understand. I don't know if I understand your question.

You're playing your blues in the key of G?

Then yes, G is your I. It's often a G7, even though G7 is not diatonic to the key of G. That's okay - the blues are generally not diatonic.
#3
No, if you have a 1-4-5 Blues progression in G, your G7 is considered the I of G maj, not the V of C major. Playing G minor pentatonic over this, that's kind of where the "Blues sound" comes from: Blending minor and major thirds over the same chords. Then you can ofc add the #4 to your minor pentatonic scale, or break into the actual Dom7 arpeggios for each respective chord aswell.
#4
If you're playing a blues in G (e.g, G7, C7, D7), then you have several options for how you treat any of these three 7 chords.

I absolutely would not start taking back to the parent major scale of each 7 chord ... totally the wrong sound by doing that. So, I wouldn't be playing C triad against G7, nor C major lines against G7. (I assume you're ok with idea of how to bring out the sound of a scale by emphasising the notes of the tonic).

Beyond playing normal G minor blues across the lot (and de-accenting any clashes as result, such as the b7 of G minor blues (F) against the 3 of C7 (E), you can

1/ play out the chord tones of each of the lower triads of each of the 7 chords (and mix up with G minor blues). So, play tones from G, C and D major triads. As a variation, play chord tones of each of the upper triads of each of the 7 chords (B dim triad in G7, E dim in C7, F# dim in D7)

You get more or less of a "triad flavour" from doing this depending how many times you use these particular tones cf the other stuff you're playing (such as the G min blues scale). The name of the game is to blur what's going on ... move between a triad tone and nearest G min blues scale tone). Same for all below ...

2/ play out the chord tones of each of the 7 chords (and mix up with G minor blues). So use tones from G7, C7, D7.

3/ add approach notes to the chord tones.

4/ play G mixolydian, C mixolydian and D mixolydian. I think of this as changing tonal centre each time. (I am not emphasising G triad throughout, nor basing my lines around G major or G major scale). But lots of people will argue otherwise.

This lot will give you a lot of expression and freedom. (There's a load more, but above should get you going).

cheers, Jerry
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Jan 13, 2015,
#6
I still haven't been able to figure out exactly why the magic of the blues exists. You could look at the G7 as though it is the V of the C7, as a sort of secondary dominant typed thing, but that C7, is the IV, which should be sevened as a major 7, not dom7, were it diatonic. The C7 can't be considered a secondary dominant of the D7, though D7 is certainly the V of G7.

All I know, is that it works, and that since it is some sort of hybrid typed thing, there are really many approaches you could take to playing it. It is very flexible. There is also no real melody to it which helps. A number of progressions can be ambiguous as to what mode they are in, but the melody will often lock it in.

Blues, for some reason, works with all these other things, and works fine with dom7s on the I and IV. I've not come across any sort theoretical reasoning that explains it. It just appears to me, as some anomaly. It just does sound good. Why you could play this or that over it, can be explained easily enough, but why you can just dom7 everything, and turn it into this super flexible sort of thing, idk. All I know, is that you just can, and it's pretty awesome.

You know what? Maybe it's because you go from C7 to D7, which is the same shape close by. You can always move a chord shape chromatically and it works, although in this case, it's the progression itself, and not embellishments , and the middle half step is skipped. I'm reaching, but that's the best explanation I can think of.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Jan 13, 2015,
#7
Quote by fingrpikingood
I still haven't been able to figure out exactly why the magic of the blues exists. You could look at the G7 as though it is the V of the C7, as a sort of secondary dominant typed thing, but that C7, is the IV, which should be sevened as a major 7, not dom7, were it diatonic. The C7 can't be considered a secondary dominant of the D7, though D7 is certainly the V of G7.

All I know, is that it works, and that since it is some sort of hybrid typed thing, there are really many approaches you could take to playing it. It is very flexible. There is also no real melody to it which helps. A number of progressions can be ambiguous as to what mode they are in, but the melody will often lock it in.

Blues, for some reason, works with all these other things, and works fine with dom7s on the I and IV. I've not come across any sort theoretical reasoning that explains it. It just appears to me, as some anomaly. It just does sound good. Why you could play this or that over it, can be explained easily enough, but why you can just dom7 everything, and turn it into this super flexible sort of thing, idk. All I know, is that you just can, and it's pretty awesome.

You know what? Maybe it's because you go from C7 to D7, which is the same shape close by. You can always move a chord shape chromatically and it works, although in this case, it's the progression itself, and not embellishments , and the middle half step is skipped. I'm reaching, but that's the best explanation I can think of.


Just musing here. Maybe a physical/cognitive affect? When two pitches are played that are close in frequency, you get "beating" (like when tuning the guitar and a pair of strings aren't quite in tune) but there is only one apparent pitch to the ears ... but as the distance widens in frequency, both pitches become distinguishable by the ear. Also, other recognisable frequencies get generated.

A semitone above any pitch is always a greater frequency distance away than a semitone below that same pitch.

We all know the sonic effect of playing a pitch a semitone above a chord tone is pretty unforgiving, whereas a semitone below (e.g. b3 against 3 or b5 against 5) "work". Perhaps something to do with the above? The blues pitch is guaranteed to be closer to the chord tone than the semitone above the chord tone (even more so, once the usual slight bend has been applied).

cheers, Jerry
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Jan 14, 2015,
#8
Quote by jerrykramskoy
Just musing here. Maybe a physical/cognitive affect? When two pitches are played that are close in frequency, you get "beating" (like when tuning the guitar and a pair of strings aren't quite in tune) but there is only one apparent pitch to the ears ... but as the distance widens in frequency, both pitches become distinguishable by the ear. Also, other recognisable frequencies get generated.

A semitone above any pitch is always a greater frequency distance away than a semitone below that same pitch.

We all know the sonic effect of playing a pitch a semitone above a chord tone is pretty unforgiving, whereas a semitone below (e.g. b3 against 3 or b5 against 5) "work". Perhaps something to do with the above? The blues pitch is guaranteed to be closer to the chord tone than the semitone above the chord tone (even more so, once the usual slight bend has been applied).

cheers, Jerry


Ya, you might be on to something, Idk. I just feel that there should be something about the blues, that would be reproducible in other situations. I don't often turn the IV into a dom7 going back to the I or to the V. And it's also not every progression that works with minor pent and major pent the whole way through. I have figured ou the secret behind that one either. Although I haven't really tried all that hard, to be honest, but I keep meaning to.
#12
This.

To put it all in a sentence for you, whoever suggested that to you is suggest you use a Mixolydian scale for each Dom7 chord, which is totally in line with CST.

However, as we know, you can generalize the entire progression to its I triad (in this case C7, the I of a C blues) by using major/minor pentatonic scales on C. Which is how a pentatonic scale works over chord changes.

Anyway, not to take away from the great advice in this thread, but there's a lot of info on the subject of chord scales, pentatonic generalizing, and harmonically specific improv here:

https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1658558&highlight=Jet+talks+JAzz

https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1659330&highlight=Jet+talks+JAzz

The other thing worth pointing out is that you want to play over the chords, not the key. You can use the harmonies from G mixolydian (same pitch classes as C maj, like you said), but the pitch G is 1.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#13
Dominant 7 chords are major/minor 7th chords using the dominant of a scale or key as the root or fundamental. 7 chords typically resolve down a 5th/up a fourth and can resolve to either a major or minor chord. The chord it resolves to is typically the tonic of whatever key you are playing in but this isn't always the case. For example, if you are playing in the key of G, D7 is your dominant 7 chord. However, if you are playing in the key of G minor D7 is also your dominant seven chord. But how can this be? Wouldn't key of G minor have a D minor 7 chord instead? I mean technically it could, but really it does't. The F in G minor is raised to F# to help with voice leading and to push harder to the resolution (G). It also allows a diminished leading tone chord to be present which can be substituted instead of a dominant chord (both resolve to the same chord). A little off topic: minor keys are not as fixed as major keys, for the sixth and seven intervals can be raised (or lowered) depending on harmonic context. That is why we have the natural minor, melodic minor, and harmonic scales, even though all three scales make up the minor key. Being back on topic, you can also have major/minor seventh chords that are not in your key and use them to resolve to chords that are in your key. These are called secondary dominant chords. For example., if you are in the key of G major and you are playing a I - IV - V7 - I progression, you could spice it up by playing a G7 for the first chord instead of a G major or a G major 7. The G7 is the dominant of C (the IV in G major) and wants to resolve down to C. The F in the G7 chord is borrowed from the key of C and isn't diatonic to G but still works. Another example, if you are still in the key of G and play IV - ii - V7 - I, you could spice it up by getting rid of the IV and replacing it with the dominate 7 of ii, which would be an E7 chord. (E7 resolves to the ii, or Am). Secondary dominates are written like this (using the last example) V7/ii - ii - V7 - I and in this case, is pronounced as the five-seven of two. Of course these chords are not diatonic, but they spice up progressions and are used by composers/artists to modulate to other keys. I hope this helps/makes some sense.
Last edited by mhillips at Jan 18, 2015,
#14
Quote by mhillips
Dominant 7 chords are major/minor 7th chords using the dominant of a scale/key as the root/fundamental. ....


???

Given the rest of your description (on how to use dominants), I'm guessing you mistyped this first bit?

A dominant 7 chord is different to maj 7 or min 7.

cheers, Jerry
#15
^Major/minor 7 is one way of classifying dominant sevenths. It means a major triad with a minor seventh. It's part of a more precise and explicit way to classify seventh chords:

Major 7th = Major Major 7 (MM7)
Minor 7th = minor minor 7 (mm7)
Dominant 7th = Mm7
Half diminished 7th = dm7
Diminished 7th = dd7

It's not totally necessary, but it's a thing.
#16
A dominant seven chord is a major triad with a minor seventh. Another name for dominant 7 chord is major/minor 7. No mistake, however I probably should have wrote Dominant 7 chords are major/minor 7th chords using the dominant of a scale or key as the root or fundamental to make it more clear.

EDIT: never mind this post, jazz_rock_feel beat me to it.
#17
Quote by FlexEXP
This question in particular is about the Dom 7th. And boy how I have grown in theory since the last time I've had to post here! I feel like I should l know this answer but here goes the question:

I've heard people say that when it comes to blues..... if lets say for example your 1-4-5 is made of 7th chords, that they are really V's so IE: G7 > V of C maj (G-B-F) although its understood to be the 1 of the progression. I understand this for example if you are approaching a G7 from a Cmaj scale mindset. The reason I bring this up is because I have been fiddling around with harmonizing thirds and again someone had suggested that when attacking a dom 7th such as in the case of the blues, it helps to treat the thirds from a C major aspect (meaning count the C-E third as the 1 rather than the G major G-B third as the tonal centre < I hope I used that term right).

If I haven't lost you, what do you suggest? This is obviously in terms of tension/resolve perspective!
A 7th chord based on the tonic note of any major scale is called a "major 7th chord. The seventh note, is the 7th note of the major scale, and is only 1 semitone down from the octave/root.

A "Dominant 7th, or, "V7" chord is a flat 7th, and its 7th is 2 semitones down from the octave/root.

The reason these chords are called "V7", is because traditional theory places them on the 5th note of the major scale. So, using Roman numeral identification of chords in a key the "dominant chord"is on the 5th degree of the scale. In Roman numerals "V", as we all know, is 5.

When, as in blues, you are exchanging the I, IV, & V chords, ( as in C, F, G, key of C), for all, "flat 7th", "dominant 7th, "V7", "or major/minor 7th chords", call them what you will.,you generate notes with those 7ths, that aren't within the key being played. So, those notes would be, "chromatic accidentals".

With that said, bear in mind that, "the blues", doesn't conform to traditional diatonic musical theory 100%. Otherwise, you wouldn't be very often playing minor scales, over major chords. In that case you are playing a scale with a "minor 3rd" over chords with a major 3rd, generating a half tone dissonance in combination. In E major the 3rd is G#, while in E minor pentatonic, the 3rd is G natural. And well, when those notes are played together, it helps generate the gloom which makes, "the blues", "the blues".

One thing to keep in mind, is all these explanations "of major/minor 7ths", are based on the chord being examined as the TONIC chord of its namesake major scale.

In other words, in C major the major 7th chord would be (C, E, G basic triad), and B natural.

Now, the notes that comprise a true "V7" chord only occur on the 5th degree of the major scale. In C major, that would be G major. So, we have the option of adding a 7th to the (V) chord a . The basic triad is G, B, &, D. When we add a "flat 7th to the chord, that note is F natural, and it occurs in the key of C!

When we make a "V7" or "Dominant 7th" chord on the tonic note of C major we come up with C, E, G, (the basic triad), and the flat 7th, which is Bb, which is outside the key of C major.
Last edited by Captaincranky at Jan 19, 2015,
#18
Yeah, but in that case, (C7 in C major), it would be I7. I see why you did so here, but labeling it a V7 is confusing.

Dominant 7ths are not always V7s. Dominant 7ths aren't even always dominant.

Other than that, good stuff.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#19
V7 and dominant seventh mean different things. V7 literally means the seventh chord built on the fifth scale degree, but any chord can be an x7 chord (I7, II7, etc.), which means the major/minor 7th chord built off of the given scale degree. All of them fall under the term dominant seventh chord, however, because in common practice these chords would always be functioning as a dominant of some kind. Now the dominant seventh can be understood as a colour chord and not necessarily functioning as a dominant (like in the blues), but the name sticks.
#20
Quote by Jet Penguin
Yeah, but in that case, (C7 in C major), it would be I7. I see why you did so here, but labeling it a V7 is confusing.

Dominant 7ths are not always V7s. Dominant 7ths aren't even always dominant.

Other than that, good stuff.
Quote by jazz_rock_feel
V7 and dominant seventh mean different things. V7 literally means the seventh chord built on the fifth scale degree, but any chord can be an x7 chord (I7, II7, etc.), which means the major/minor 7th chord built off of the given scale degree. All of them fall under the term dominant seventh chord, however, because in common practice these chords would always be functioning as a dominant of some kind. Now the dominant seventh can be understood as a colour chord and not necessarily functioning as a dominant (like in the blues), but the name sticks.
First let me say, I understand what both of you are saying, and you are both absolutely correct.

My inclusion of alternate terminology for a ""Xb7" chord was included to illustrate the number of potential euphemisms a beginner might encounter for said b7th cord.

Couple of points, in guitar transcription, or "guitar chords included" sheet music, you will never see"Cb7" annotated as such. It will be called "C7". This gives the immediate impression that a chord with a "flat 7th" is the norm, rather than the exception.

In fact the first chords a beginner is shown are I, IV, V7. So in C then, C, F G7. After trying to strum along for a while, you learn that I, IV, V, occur much more frequently. In fact, "V7", is included more often in the minor keys. (You know, the "voice leading" thing).

Is the principle of "stacked 3rds", more easily learned than "flatting the octave/root 2 semitones? I'm not sure, but counting down from the root 2 semis to arrive at the typical 7th is easier for me.

Our advanced theoreticians here, (present personnel included ), have an unfortunate knack for explaining things at the level of their knowledge, not necessarily that of the topic starter. Well the "Locrian Scale" has this sharped and that flattened. Face it, the TS may not even know how to create a major scale, let alone have the interval ear training to listen to a scale and tell you which notes deviate from a major scale.

Which is certainly not to say that he or she shouldn't be encouraged to develop those skills. And I also acknowledge that throwing someone into the deep end of the pool, can accelerate said individuals grasp of the concept, "swimming for your life".

A lot of beginning guitarists believe there is only the guitar, and it is entirely separate and immune to the laws governing the rest of the musical world at large.

I suppose on occasion, that does lead to creative breakthroughs, and at other times, heaping, steaming piles of.....er, "confusion".
Last edited by Captaincranky at Jan 19, 2015,
#21
I'm in total agreement, I just want to make sure we don't accidentally mislead people, as us advanced theoreticians often do

The real big reason you don't see it notated as Cb7 is because that would be this:

Cb Eb Gb Bbb

not this:

C E G Bb.

But yes, I understand why you included that terminology and it makes total sense, I just wanted to do the other thing us try-hards tend to do, which is be overtly thorough
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#22
Quote by Jet Penguin


The real big reason you don't see it notated as Cb7 is because that would be this:

Cb Eb Gb Bbb

not this:

C E G Bb.
But the real advantage for writing it as, "Cb, Eb, Gb, Bbb", is so nobody would mistake it for B7!
#23
Quote by Captaincranky

My inclusion of alternate terminology for a ""Xb7" chord was included to illustrate the number of potential euphemisms a beginner might encounter for said b7th cord.

Couple of points, in guitar transcription, or "guitar chords included" sheet music, you will never see"Cb7" annotated as such. It will be called "C7". This gives the immediate impression that a chord with a "flat 7th" is the norm, rather than the exception.

b7 isn't a type of chord though. The nomenclature is [letter][chord type]. The chord types are written (with some variation) as maj7, min7, 7, °7, ø7 and so on. I don't think there's any inherent normalcy attached to any of that; they're just indicating the quality of the chord. Like Jet said, Cb7 would indicate a "7" chord built on Cb. It would never indicate a C7 chord.

Quote by Captaincranky
Is the principle of "stacked 3rds", more easily learned than "flatting the octave/root 2 semitones? I'm not sure, but counting down from the root 2 semis to arrive at the typical 7th is easier for me.

100% yes. Stacked thirds is fundamentally how chords are built so understanding from that perspective means you can understand any chord's construction. Of course you can think of the seventh as being two steps down from the octave, but that's not indicative of the actual chord construction.
#24
Quote by FlexEXP
This question in particular is about the Dom 7th. And boy how I have grown in theory since the last time I've had to post here! I feel like I should l know this answer but here goes the question:

I've heard people say that when it comes to blues..... if lets say for example your 1-4-5 is made of 7th chords, that they are really V's so IE: G7 > V of C maj (G-B-F) although its understood to be the 1 of the progression. I understand this for example if you are approaching a G7 from a Cmaj scale mindset. The reason I bring this up is because I have been fiddling around with harmonizing thirds and again someone had suggested that when attacking a dom 7th such as in the case of the blues, it helps to treat the thirds from a C major aspect (meaning count the C-E third as the 1 rather than the G major G-B third as the tonal centre < I hope I used that term right).

If I haven't lost you, what do you suggest? This is obviously in terms of tension/resolve perspective!


Hey,
When I first read this post it completely confused me. I must have read it at least six times before finally understanding what you were asking. Now it seems really clear.

So you have dominant seventh chords and you are writing something over them that harmonizes thirds. In your approach if you come across a G7 you have been advised to use a C major scale instead of a G major scale.

There is only one difference between the G major scale and the C major scale - the F in the G major scale is raised to F# to give that major seventh scale degree.

The G7 of course uses the minor seventh but otherwise has a major tonality. Yes it is typically the V to a C major tonic. However, if it is a tonic chord you treat it as a tonic chord.

If G7 is the I chord our tonal centre is G and the tonic triad is G major specifically. Thus we would use a G major scale but in order to account for the minor seventh in that G7 chord you would lower our seventh to accommodate the F natural.

Thus we would use a G major scale with a lowered seventh. This is the same set of notes as the C major scale - which is why that person advised you to use the notes of the C major scale. But it's not the same as treating it as a V7 of C major.

If you were harmonizing thirds then C would harmonize with E in both the G major scale and the C major scale. BUT if G is the tonic then that would be a 4 and 6 not the 1 and 3. You would NOT use the C-E as the I. You would still use G-B the same as you would if it were just a plain old G major triad.

So if G7 is your tonic chord and you're wanting to harmonize a melody over that chord in thirds then you would harmonize the notes the same way you would the G major triad EXCEPT you would use F instead of F#. So you approach it as if you are using the G major scale - just making sure to lower the F# to an F natural.

Hopefully that makes sense.
Si
#25
+1.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#26
Quote by jazz_rock_feel
b7 isn't a type of chord though. The nomenclature is [letter][chord type]. The chord types are written (with some variation) as maj7, min7, 7, °7, ø7 and so on. I don't think there's any inherent normalcy attached to any of that; they're just indicating the quality of the chord. Like Jet said, Cb7 would indicate a "7" chord built on Cb. It would never indicate a C7 chord.
For me, the lack of an annotation to indicate the position of the 7th, tacitly announces a "flat 7th". Like I said earlier Cb, Eb, Gb Bbb amounts to B7. So, Indicating the position of the 7th in the chord alters the entire chord, but only by virtue of current protocols. You could call it, "C (b7)", putting the position of the 7th within parenthesis. Of course, that's sort of a half assed algebraic solution for the obvious; if a chord isn't specified "maj7", it's a chord with a flat 7th.


Quote by jazz_rock_feel
100% yes. Stacked thirds is fundamentally how chords are built so understanding from that perspective means you can understand any chord's construction. Of course you can think of the seventh as being two steps down from the octave, but that's not indicative of the actual chord construction.
Learning musical theory oftentimes happens in a piecemeal fashion.

Let's say I understand the structure of a major scale, (2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2, 1). OK we both know that. And we both know how to extract the chords that make up any key from that.

All I'm saying is, that pattern is all that's really necessary to form the chords in the key. That "template" stacks the thirds for us. We don't need to bring any additional 'rules', or, 'insights', to the game. Knowing how the major scale is built, gives us, 'self stacking thirds'. The concept of how thirds affect the structure of a chord is worthwhile knowing, but not completely necessary.

OK, we want a minor chord, what do we do? Flat the third of the same name major. Here again the operation stacks the thirds for us. Instead of 4, 3 semitones, we now have 3, 4 semitones. Yes the thirds have been restacked, but again, quite automatically.

Quote by 20Tigers
So if G7 is your tonic chord and you're wanting to harmonize a melody over that chord in thirds then you would harmonize the notes the same way you would the G major triad EXCEPT you would use F instead of F#. So you approach it as if you are using the G major scale - just making sure to lower the F# to an F natural.

Hopefully that makes sense.
This is where the "modes" discussion can be utilized, believe it or not, effectively.

I think in "chord scale theory", we would indeed use the G major scale over a G major chord, not matter what the key signature.

But if we're playing in C, and want to stay in C, we would use "G Mixolydian", which flats than durn ole F, for us....

And before you get all angry and red in the face; yes, I'm quite aware that doesn't make the music modal, it just gives a name to the modal scale we're technically using....

Oh sure, call me crazy, but I've seen a thread go on for pages, trying to determine what to call a G scale with an F natural in it. "Well, I'd call it G major with an F natural"! No, I'd call it G mixolydian! "I'd just tell the bass player to flat the F"!
Last edited by Captaincranky at Jan 20, 2015,
#27
We're doing that thing again where there's a disconnect between the polyphonic/voice leading perspective and the pop/contemporary music "vertical" perspective. We all agree on most everything here, we just say it differently.

Although I have to jump out and say that B7 and Cb7 are NOT the same, just as a #5 and b13 are not the same.

And yes, this is the biggest advantage of CST right here.

JRF refers to the stacking thirds because simply memorizing a rule to find 7ths doesn't help you with chord construction or behavior, in the same way memorizing multiplication tables by rote doesn't teach you how to multiply large numbers.

God forbid we delve into quartal harmony.

Just wanted to point out that everyone is more or less agreeing here

Anyway, I think OP has more than enough of answer.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#28
Quote by Jet Penguin
...[ ]...Although I have to jump out and say that B7 and Cb7 are NOT the same,....[ ]...
They're enharmonic equivalents on an equal tempered instrument. No?
#30
They are enharmonically equivalent but they don't behave the same, unless they are I7.

Spelling also tends to imply behavior, so in a more chromatic context (i.e. jazz), it can fog things up.

Which is why its important to be clear and precise with the spelling.

But then again, I'm probably just being neurotic at this point.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp