Ed Bickert chords and diatonic cycles

[pamosmusic]

I've been working quite a lot lately on an effective way of laying out rootless shell voicings for students. Over time, I've developed something of a sequence, and part of it has been figuring out how to practice them in a technical way. Part of the use case for these voicings is that they're easy to play, and thus easy to move, and I've found that the Mick Goodrick diatonic cycles (or an approximation of them) are great ways of just working on finding and moving the chords.

Here's a big document with some of those ideas collected:

rootless shell voicings diatonic cycles - Score.pdf - Google Drive

Anyway ... a few points on how I've been teaching them.

1. I've been using diatonic cycles quite a lot, but I treat them like scales for single note playing. Extremely useful, but also can quickly reach the point of diminishing returns, so they should be used to get something cooking, but not as a substitution for tunes or characteristic progressions.

2. I start having them play those voicings with the root on top for quite a while. I've found that, as easy as they are to play, they're pretty hard to find and put in the right place once that root is gone. So the more time folks are willing to spend with the roots on top, the better.

3. This document is not something I just email students. I use bits and pieces here and there and print a page or two as we use it. So don't @ me, ya'll.

4. I reference rhythms a lot, and I'm essentially referring to that Red Garland format I spoke of on this thread

5. the formatting is a big work in progress, particularly as it pertains to distinguishing the approach chords from the main chords of the cycles

[Doublea A]

I've been working quite a lot lately on an effective way of laying out rootless shell voicings for students. Over time, I've developed something of a sequence, and part of it has been figuring out how to practice them in a technical way. Part of the use case for these voicings is that they're easy to play, and thus easy to move, and I've found that the Mick Goodrick diatonic cycles (or an approximation of them) are great ways of just working on finding and moving the chords.

Here's a big document with some of those ideas collected:

rootless shell voicings diatonic cycles - Score.pdf - Google Drive

Anyway ... a few points on how I've been teaching them.

1. I've been using diatonic cycles quite a lot, but I treat them like scales for single note playing. Extremely useful, but also can quickly reach the point of diminishing returns, so they should be used to get something cooking, but not as a substitution for tunes or characteristic progressions.

2. I start having them play those voicings with the root on top for quite a while. I've found that, as easy as they are to play, they're pretty hard to find and put in the right place once that root is gone. So the more time folks are willing to spend with the roots on top, the better.

3. This document is not something I just email students. I use bits and pieces here and there and print a page or two as we use it. So don't @ me, ya'll.

4. I reference rhythms a lot, and I'm essentially referring to that Red Garland format I spoke of on this thread

5. the formatting is a big work in progress, particularly as it pertains to distinguishing the approach chords from the main chords of the cycles

Looks great !
I will check it out.
Thanks for all your hard work

AA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pingu]

Wow that's very generous Peter

Thanks so much

[wolflen]

one of the most valuable lessons with chord studies was: learn them in ALL keys..

yep its hard and you really have to push your self ..but..you will thank your self many time over for doing it.

what happens is..you begin to see the matrix..so to speak..

[pamosmusic]

one of the most valuable lessons with chord studies was: learn them in ALL keys..

yep its hard and you really have to push your self ..but..you will thank your self many time over for doing it.

what happens is..you begin to see the matrix..so to speak..

Well I suppose that’s true.

[Mick-7]

Very nice... noticed a typo on page 6 (underlined below).

SIDE-SLIPPING: side-slipping is less common in piano comping, but is a great place for guitar players to start incorporating passing chords because of the ease with which guitarists can play parallel chord voicings up and down the neck. Here, the cycle of fourths has been embellished with a side-slipping chord approaching every chord in the cycle from a half-step above. (should be "below").

Re: D#m7, G#m7, and A#m7, do you really want to call them that? (as opposed to Ebm7, Abm7, Bbm7). You won't see those chord names on a chart.

I think the only thing I do differently than what you've outlined is to think of the primary chord tones, the 3rd & 7th, as a core unit that I can add any other chord extension or altered tone to, rather than think of them relative to the chord's root. And then there's the subject of enharmonic chords, including b5 subs such as G7 (G-B-F) = Db7b5.

[pamosmusic]

Very nice... noticed a typo on page 6 (underlined below).

SIDE-SLIPPING: side-slipping is less common in piano comping, but is a great place for guitar players to start incorporating passing chords because of the ease with which guitarists can play parallel chord voicings up and down the neck. Here, the cycle of fourths has been embellished with a side-slipping chord approaching every chord in the cycle from a half-step above. (should be "below").

Noted -- thanks for that. Not going to re-upload, but corrected on my document.

Re: D#m7, G#m7, and A#m7, do you really want to call them that? (as opposed to Ebm7, Abm7, Bbm7). You won't see those chord names on a chart.

Yes that was intentional. They are leading tone chords. And sometimes, in charts where all those approach chords are written out, like big band charts of a certain stripe, you do see chords written that way. It's akin to G# F* G# being easier to read visually than G# G G# because you can see the shape of the line. Also just that the root of the chord is reflective of the chord's function. The leading tone of B isn't Bb ... it's A#. So I try to be thoughtful about that kind of thing.

I think the only thing I do differently than what you've outlined is to think of the primary chord tones, the 3rd & 7th, as a core unit that I can add any other chord extension or altered tone to, rather than think of them relative to the chord's root. And then there's the subject of enharmonic chords, including b5 subs such as G7 (G-B-F) = Db7b5.

I included that. The last couple pages are all the other extensions written out. In the OP I mentioned my reasoning for sticking with the roots on top for a while, but to elaborate:

I've tried starting people with just the third and seventh, because that's the simplest texture and the easiest to play, but people really really really struggle with those. Because there's no physical difference between Cmaj7 and Dmin7, other than just where they go relative to the root, people have a really hard time finding where they're supposed to go. This is something Ed uses a lot, particularly when he's comping for his own solos, but it's easier to start with a three-note texture and then ditch one note than to start with two.

I've also tried having people learn the extensions off the bat because they're so easy to play and they're such a big part of why I like these voicings and why they're useful, but it doesn't go much better.

Using the roots first, and for a good long while, helps people be able to visualize the chords and orient them on the fingerboard before they start adding all the cool stuff. It's also worth mentioning that, those easy counter-melodies by way of extensions are so useful, but there are two melody notes you can never put above the third and seventh ... and those are the third and the seventh. So you need upper structures just to have a full complement of melody notes in the first place. On top of that is just a matter of priority -- movement and rhythm before complex voicings. Once you have the movement and rhythm, you can imagine how rich an accompaniment could be when you're approaching an upper structure and also using the thirteenth on top or something.

[Tal_175]

I'd say G7 shell voicing is a rather uncommon upper structure for Cmaj7. It's definitely quite a big leap from the innocuous Emin7 as an upper extension. Gmaj7 is more common as an upper structure for Cmaj7 then G7 I'd say.

Otherwise, I think it's a pretty good material for a student who is trying to move away from cowboy chord view of the fretboard.

[pamosmusic]

I'd say G7 shell voicing is a rather uncommon upper structure for Cmaj7. It's definitely quite a big leap from the innocuous Emin7 as an upper extension. Gmaj7 is more common as an upper structure for Cmaj7 then G7 I'd say.

Otherwise, I think it's a pretty good material for a student who is trying to move away from cowboy chord view of the fretboard.

From the section on the upper structures:

”The most common upper structure used by accompanists is up a third from the original harmony, which gives us the 9th as it relates to the bass. With minor, dominant, and half-diminished, we can also use the chord up a fifth. With the major, we play off the sixth.”

The cycles are exercises, so the idea is to include all the various diatonic movements, even when they’re not one we’d use all the time.

[AllanAllen]

Nobut it's easier to start with a three-note texture and then ditch one note than to start with two.

I have found this to be true in my own studies.

[Tal_175]

With minor, dominant, and half-diminished, we can also use the chord up a fifth. With the major, we play off the sixth.”

The reason for my comment was that in the compound cycles page, the first bar of cycle 4 (upper structure 5ths) feature G7 as an upper structure of Cmaj7.

[pamosmusic]

The reason for my comment was that in the compound cycles page, the first bar of cycle 4 (upper structure 5ths) feature G7 as an upper structure of Cmaj7.

Right. I was explaining that the purpose of the cycles is exhausting the diatonic motion. They’re technical exercises and might end up scooping some movements that aren’t necessarily ones you’d apply immediately in the wild.

Which isn’t to say there is no practical application for that movement … extensions of Dm7 come to mind. Also the fact that they aren’t complete chords so can imply other chord sounds. They’re also kind of interesting open sounds and work well for modal playing.

[Christian Miller]

I'm having you done under the trade descriptions act m8

[Christian Miller]

I'll have a look at them. Remarkable how difficult this stuff can be when conceptually it's very simple.

For the first example are also the same as what is called a tied bass suspension chain in baroque circles. Eg
Cmaj7/E Fmaj7/E Bm7b5/D E7/D Am7/C etc, but always with the first inversion chord on the weak stress and the third inversion chord on the strong.

There's a nice example of this type of thing in Giuliani's Fughetta, albeit without the leaping melody

Really pretty with those seconds

Will look at the other cycles too.

[Christian Miller]

One of my favourite voicings for a tied bass/cycle 4 inverted thing is this, quite hard, but gorgeous

It's not a guide tone sequence - although guide tones are common for cycle 4, there's other ways. The Derek Remes voice leading compendium is nice for this type of thing.

[Mick-7]

I perused your pdf quickly - lots to think about there....

those easy counter-melodies by way of extensions are so useful, but there are two melody notes you can never put above the third and seventh ... and those are the third and the seventh.

I double the 3rd at times (and Jim Hall does it), not so much the 7th I think, and may add both to an octave, e.g., E-B-E or B-E-B for Cmaj.7, and B-F-B & F-B-F for G7.

Using the roots first, and for a good long while, helps people be able to visualize the chords and orient them on the fingerboard before they start adding all the cool stuff.

To me it makes more sense to relate the guide tones, 3rd & 7th, to the chord root beneath them rather than above them, since the top note will be the melody note.

[pamosmusic]

I double the 3rd at times (and Jim Hall does it), not so much the 7th I think, and may add both to an octave, e.g., E-B-E or B-E-B for Cmaj.7, and B-F-B & F-B-F for G7.

I don’t know. Maybe. In isolation it’s a dull sound, to the point of being disruptive to the texture. I’m sure there are uses for it though.

To me it makes more sense to relate the guide tones, 3rd & 7th, to the chord root beneath them rather than above them, since the top note will be the melody note.

Well this is a bit separate but I *always* start students with plain root on the bottom shells, even if they think they know them already. So that would’ve been step one, it’s just something I do a little separately. But you should assume someone is transitioning into these chords from those, at least for my purposes. Another reason why starting with the root on top is a good transition into these voicings … they’re used to playing the shells with the root on the bottom. It’s a useful intermediary step between root-on-the-bottom and no-root-at-all

[Mick-7]

I don’t know. Maybe. In isolation it’s a dull sound, to the point of being disruptive to the texture. I’m sure there are uses for it though

Well, used sparingly lest you start to sound like Roger McGuinn: x-x-3-3-1-1.

And we gazed upon the chimes of freedom flashing....

[pamosmusic]

I guess I also have this bias or something ... I just really feel like most of the time (definitely not all, but probably most of the time) we mistake movement for complexity. We think Wow those chords are so hip! When really they're very simple and they're just moved around in interesting ways. And I wasted looooooads of time trying to playing cool voicings for dense chords. So when I teach, I have a very very strong bias toward getting people to start moving with the chords before distracting them with cool voicings. The upside being that, in this case, the cool voicings are not much harder to play than the others, so once folks feel comfortable moving around, the hip shit just kind of jumps out too.

[Christian Miller]

Tbh I’m having so much fun with three voices I might never get into four.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

Tbh I’m having so much fun with three voices I might never get into four.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are not lying.

[Mick-7]

I guess I also have this bias or something ... I just really feel like most of the time (definitely not all, but probably most of the time) we mistake movement for complexity. We think Wow those chords are so hip! When really they're very simple and they're just moved around in interesting ways.

KISS is a good bias to have.

And I wasted looooooads of time trying to playing cool voicings for dense chords.

Me too, jazz guitarists seem to be susceptible to that disease - and some never get over it.

[Reg]

Yea Peter... lots of great work.

They seem more in the direction of getting the fretboard together. Which obviously most need to do etc...

It seems like way to much for most and then there still needs to be an application for use. By themselves...they are mechanical sounding.

Where I'm going is.... at some point one would need to develop a way of using musically as compared to mechanically.

Yes we all use licks... which do become mechanical because we begin to hear longer sections of space with targets.
And eventually we start using voicings as another tool or effect for shaping what we play. Longer licks.

So generally that simple principle... use something 2 times then change on the 3rd etc... really works. When one has more organizational methods or tools being used at the same time.... you have more possibilities of having that "change" thing going on.

Things like 2nds on top become more of an effect rather than a method of stringing together voicings.

Long story short... combine tools. Voicings with lead lines and the lower note movement.

Develop patterns or licks that imply ... tonal targets. Then learn how to change those licks to imply different targets.

Simple example ex. a "I VI II V" be able to change that chord pattern, (lick), to imply... Maj, Min Dom...and eventually Functionally.... Tonally Tonic, subdom and Dom.

Then use voicing tools to be create different versions of those Chord Patterns.

Anyway... Your heading in a good direction with Compound cycles and extension.... but maybe expand what your working with... lead line and voicings with expanding the diatonic references.

Another thing to maybe work in... we're playing a guitar. Think of that as an advantage. We can do what pianist or single line players can't...

Still great stuff and most at some point need to get these concepts together. But they do seem to become bottomless pits.

[pamosmusic]

They seem more in the direction of getting the fretboard together. Which obviously most need to do etc...

It seems like way to much for most and then there still needs to be an application for use. By themselves...they are mechanical sounding.

Where I'm going is.... at some point one would need to develop a way of using musically as compared to mechanically.

Thanks … lots of interesting thoughts so I’m going to respond as I have time. The above are great points all kind of along the same lines.

I definitely consider these to be technical exercises, ear exercises at their best. That’s sort of what I meant by treating them a bit like scales in single line playing. Really really good for learning a key and incorporating new ideas in context. But also just reaches diminishing returns. If you’re trying to do it all, you just get stuck and the benefits kind of wane. I’ve been telling folks maybe ten minutes of this at a time and then you **have** to move on to chord progressions from tunes and applying rhythms.

Still great stuff and most at some point need to get these concepts together. But they do seem to become bottomless pits.

You’re not kidding. Bottomless pits are my specialty, unfortunately.

[pamosmusic]

Then use voicing tools to be create different versions of those Chord Patterns.

Im glad you’re using this term. Obviously not quite what’s going on here but I definitely had that term come to mind a few times while I was putting this stuff together and it does feel like a sort of chops building preliminary step to assembling those chord patterns.

I’ll have more thoughts on that at some point.

Also putting a pin in the compound cycles. I have some thoughts there too.

(it might sometimes seem like Im not listening, but I’m stealing eeeeeeveryones stuff.)