<LINK_TEXT text="https://musescore.com/user/19075006/sco ... =copy_link">https://musescore.com/user/19075006/scores/7305488/s/yKanKf?share=copy_link</LINK_TEXT>

im not completely sure if i like the middle section contrast, looking for second opinions

edit: fixed the link and permissions

also how would you write chords that aren’t in the key as roman numerals? I have a christmas fake book in Bb treble for trumpet and tenor sax, i wrote the numbers over the chords so i can easily transpose. It still took a lot of brain power, but i made it work. It’s a fake book so it’s got jazzy chords i guess, and i don’t understand how to write the chords that are out of the key signature. I read somewhere that you can write it as a chord of a different key that’s in the real key. So like V/V in F would be G major? i think, i’m still not sure. Anyone have a way to write this that’s easier to comprehend, or could just explain stuffs?

[quote="Elow"]also how would you write chords that aren’t in the key as roman numerals? I have a christmas fake book in Bb treble for trumpet and tenor sax, i wrote the numbers over the chords so i can easily transpose. It still took a lot of brain power, but i made it work. It’s a fake book so it’s got jazzy chords i guess, and i don’t understand how to write the chords that are out of the key signature. I read somewhere that you can write it as a chord of a different key that’s in the real key. So like V/V in F would be G major? i think, i’m still not sure. Anyone have a way to write this that’s easier to comprehend, or could just explain stuffs?[/quote]

Well, for starters, analysing jazz progressions using tonal functional analysis is bound to yield mitigated results. They're different musical languages. In this particular example the progressions are mostly tonal so it works, but most of the time that won't be the case.

There is a number of different analysis models/systems that would interpret chords foreign to the key differently. But no matter the model, secondary dominants or progressions are a common reason for foreign chords. For instance in your example, one would typically analyse the E7 to A7 in bar 7 as V7/V - V7, and F#7 to Bm7 in 5 as V7/vi - vi7.

But you quickly run into problems because choice of chords in jazz tends not to always follow tonal conventions even in a mostly tonal context. For instance, that G7-F#m7-C9 progression towards the end, makes little sense from a tonal perspective. G7 should be the dominant of C, but C itself is out of the key and not easy to explain in the context, and they're separated by something that also wouldn't belong there in a tonal context. There is no problem with that progression, it sounds great, but it's not tonal harmony. So any attempt at analysing it as a tonal progression is not super useful.

[quote="Elow"]<LINK_TEXT text="https://musescore.com/user/19075006/sco ... =copy_link">https://musescore.com/user/19075006/scores/7305488/s/yKanKf?share=copy_link</LINK_TEXT>

im not completely sure if i like the middle section contrast, looking for second opinions

edit: fixed the link and permissions[/quote]
And here I was thinking the middle section was the only section I liked. I feel like you can use a different rhythm outside of quarter notes on beat 2 & 3 for the A section. Or at least switch it up within the phrase.

As far as roman numerals are concerned, why do you just call the E7 going to A7 an II7 instead of V7/V? You're not turning this in to a music theory professor or anything, it's strictly for performing, right? So just do what's easiest for you even if it might not make sense to anyone else. If it was me I would just write the actual chord in concert pitch (moving it down a whole step).

Thanks, that makes a lot more sense, because it made no sense yesterday. I wish i could take a theory class but my school doesn’t do that, so all my theory knowledge is talks with my recently graduated band director who is really good at anything theory. I wanted to record this for my grandparents and all my little cousins so they could sing along, so didn’t want to get to far from the melody everyone knows. I’m not sure if i can hit that F yet, maybe i’ll do some audicity magic

From the Fakebook:

If this is C treble clef, play it "down an octave", starting on A (top line of the bass staff). That should easily keep it in your range (top note is A one octave higher).

Prefer bass trombone? Take it down 2 octaves starting on A bottom space on the bass staff. Now it doesn't even go above the bass staff.

Don't like sharps? Read it as Bb treble and now it's in C with a high note of G.

Note: the words for the 2nd verse are not original. I like Figgy Pudding instead.

Now looking at your quartet arrangement, why not take the 1st trombone part down an octave. It will still be above the 2nd. Or drop the 2nd down when it isn't.

[quote="Elow"]also how would you write chords that aren’t in the key as roman numerals? I have a christmas fake book in Bb treble for trumpet and tenor sax, i wrote the numbers over the chords so i can easily transpose. It still took a lot of brain power, but i made it work. It’s a fake book so it’s got jazzy chords i guess, and i don’t understand how to write the chords that are out of the key signature. I read somewhere that you can write it as a chord of a different key that’s in the real key. So like V/V in F would be G major? i think, i’m still not sure. Anyone have a way to write this that’s easier to comprehend, or could just explain stuffs?[/quote]

You've got the gist of the Roman numeral analysis. You're also correct about the V/V chord, which are also sometimes called "secondary dominant" chords. The idea for analyzing non-diatonic chords is to look at how they function in the context outside of the key signature, so in the lead sheet you posted an E7 chord is properly labeled as a V7/V, rather than a II7 chord (not ii, as you have labeled in m.3, for example). Because the E7 chord moves to A7, it's better to note that it is a secondary dominant.

There are several non-diatonic chords in that lead sheet that are a little more difficult to analyze (but they are, strictly speaking, tonal progressions). The C9 chord in m.14 is a clear example of a "tritone substitution." This is a chord that is a tritone away from the dominant (F# is the V of B, C is a tritone away from F#). Note that the 3rd and 7th of the V and the tritone substitution are the same, just the 3rd of one is the 7th of the other (E is 3rd of C, 7th of F#, Bb/Ab is the 7th of C, 3rd of F#). A tritone substitution resolves with the root moving down a 1/2 step (C down to B). I would analyze most of the non-diatonic chords that resolve down a 1/2 step as a tritone sub, although some of them in this tune are not dominant 7th chords, but min7 chords. It's the same basic idea, though.

It's easier to explain this in person with a piano to let you see and hear how that works, but once you wrap your head around tritone substitutions in person you'll see them in a lot of jazz harmonies.

I recorded it, and it was a lot harder than i thought. This was my first multitrack type thing and really underestimated the time it would take, and overestimated my ability to play trombone. Either way, it’s done. I’ll make a post with the recording in a minute

[quote="Elow"]I recorded it, and it was a lot harder than i thought. This was my first multitrack type thing and really underestimated the time it would take, and overestimated my ability to play trombone. Either way, it’s done. I’ll make a post with the recording in a minute[/quote]

Nice! You learn a lot about yourself when you take on a "simple" project like this LOL