Melody notes when comping

[MrTKsDaddy]

Hi all, my first post here!

I have been playing for 13 years and teaching for 6, but only recently started getting into jazz concepts.

I have just discovered drop 3 chords, and whilst what they are is clear to me, how and when to use each inversion so far escapes me.

I know that these chords can be used for comping, but what I'm not sure about is whether I should be aiming to highlight the melody notes with each inversion or to avoid them to leave room for whoever is playing the melody. Is voice leading and/or bass note movement more important than the melody when comping? And when playing chord melody, are drop 3 chords just as useful as drop 2 chords for mixing things up a little?

Thanks for your help!

Mike

[docbop]

I'd say this is one of the "it depends" questions. If playing solo want to get the melody going. If accompanying someone else playing the melody you want probably want to keep away. What style you play and trying to play a counter line with you chords or more sparse and doing chord fills. You working with a bad singer and having to feed them melody notes. Small duo or trio with horn and need to provide a lot of harmony, or a bigger group with a piano and big chord might not be the right thing.

Whole lot of it depends on the situation.

[MrTKsDaddy]

Thanks for that!

Of course, I'm not naive enough to assume I should stick with one idea over another, but was just considering guidelines to get me playing more confidently. There's so many different ways to approach the same chords I just need somewhere to start rather than fishing around many different concepts.

Thanks again!

[targuit]

I would agree with Docbop. It depends. One approach initially is to first play through the chord progression quite simply as arpeggios with attention to the meter and rhythm, perhaps in the first position or as close to it as the song's key permits. Then, do the same thing at positions higher up the fret board. Explore the chord possibilities at each fret position, remembering that good voice leading suggests the 'shortest distance between two points'. Of course, there are always exceptions, but this is a good first step to familiarize yourself with the melody, chord progression, and chord possibilities in terms of fingering.

Then, you can determine which chord 'shapes' to play out of. Often one buys a chord book - 1001 Chord Dictionary type thing - and people get lost in the maze of which grips to use. Out of those hundreds of chords, you will in practice need initially to become familiar with a fraction of them. Which ones? I would suggest considering investing in Joe Pass' method book which is a good start. You want to limit yourself initially until you get the hang of it and Joe was a master. You can work on the other 941 later. Berklee also has many resources on its web site, too.

Once you have done the arpeggio study of your tune, then you can drill down in your practice. I would suggest that you always practice in the context of a particular song that you want to learn out of the Real Book. At least you will learn a song as you gain experience. How you proceed then depends on the musical situation in which you are playing. Solo chord melody (CM) style versus comping in a band. There is a difference, especially if you are playing with a pianist. Joe suggested never playing full five or six string chords with a pianist because the latter is usually covering the harmony. In this context he suggest playing two or three note chord fragments that have some "ambiguity" so that they don't commit strongly to a particular flavor of the chord progression that might conflict with the pianist's ideas. Of course, as long as you don't play a minor chord when the pianist is thinking major, the third and seventh might suffice. Adding the bass is fine, unless you have a bass player covering that voice, where you don't want to step on his or her lines.

If playing solo CM, you need to cover the gamut of the voices. I prioritize the melody initially, though in practice I tend to think about the bass line and let my ears cover the rest for the sake of simplicity. That is not a skill one has initially, however, and takes time to develop. So to take a practical example, take a tune like Autumn Leaves in Em. If I were starting out, I would first play the melody on the high D, G, B, and E strings, since the melody is going to help determine the fret position possibilities. Now one could play the melody in this key starting with the E note on the second fret fourth string or the open first string, or the fifth fret second string . Ultimately, you want to learn to play this tune in various positions below and above the seventh and twelfth frets.

In each case, however, once you have picked out the melody a few times to get comfortable, start by adding the bass note on the lower string set - sixth, fifth, and fourth. If you already are an experienced player, the harmony will be evident to you just from the position in which you can articulate these two fundamental notes - the melody and bass. The important thirds and seventh notes that define the major, minor, or diminished character of the chords will be evident in the fret position in which you find yourself. The color tones - flat or sharp 5ths, 6ths, 9ths, etc will be with your reach in the relative fret board position.

Naturally, in practice it is a bit more complex, taking into account voice leading and ultimately being able to transition smoothly from the first position to up above the twelfth fret, but that comes with experience and confidence. One last point is that it may be helpful to think conceptually in terms of progressions played below the seventh fret and the same progressions played above the seventh.

And remember the important principle that melodies tend to move either in small steps or "leaps". So in the case of our example, Autumn Leaves in the key of Em, the arbitrary division of the fret board into "below the seventh fret" and above it works very well. Give it a try. And then, once you have the tune down well, transpose it to other keys, like the oft used Gm for this tune.

[targuit]

Not to go on too verbose here, but I mentioned that in practice I tend to think about the bass line as I'm playing for the sake of simplicity. It is not quite that straightforward, but the guiding principle I use is to think about the destination - where is the bass or root of the chord progression going. That frees me up to play creatively with counter melodies and articulating inner voices of the harmony. I tend to let my subconscious handle the last part. In my experience if you start "thinking about" what you are doing as you play measure by measure, you tend to lose the flow, though you have to be at certain skill level to trust your subconscious to take the wheel. But the outline above is a good schematic approach. As you gain experience and confidence, watch your skill grow.

[MrTKsDaddy]

Wow, thanks for such a considered response.

I am already familiar with a lot of what you suggest (I have a real book, as well as the Joe Pass chord book and he is my first inspiration as far as jazz goes) and I am experienced in playing in terms of melody and harmony albeit with more of a blues background. I have quite a lot of chord shapes already under my belt so I understand the fundamentals no problem.

What I have been unsure of though, particularly with jazz, is the "right" way to apply that knowledge (of course I use the term loosely). I know all the chord forms, 7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, altered etc in several positions so I have plenty to draw upon, but what is never explained very well is HOW to apply these chords in the most effective way. I know comping is different to CM, but what I want to do is make sure I don't "confuse" the two when applying what I know, which is why I asked whether or not I should voice according to melody or voice leading. Your advice is really welcomed, and I guess the gist of it is to use my ears. I just wanted to check in practical terms if there were preferred approaches just to get me started and in the right ballpark sound wise.

Joe once said that chord choice is as much about convenience - if you start a progression in one position, then the chords to and from that will be dictated by practicality as much as anything else. I like this idea as I don't like struggling with unnecessarily twisty or stretchy chords. I don't see the point; I'd rather be making music!

I have already started with what you said about taking a standard and working from there. I'm working on All the Things You Are as it's a personal favourite of mine. I can play the melody, I can play CM using drop 2 and 3 shapes and I can walk a bass line with the changes, so no problems with the basics. It was when I started comping when I thought about my voicings, as it was too easy for my ear to hear the melody and choose the chords based on that, rather than perhaps considering voice leading and let the melody do its own thing without me highlighting it.

What I might do is try to focus on root/bass movement and voice leading, whilst trying to stay as far out of the way of the melody as possible, to try and hear the harmony more instead. I am absolutely not in a rush to learn dozens of standards, so i'll stick with three or four of my favourites and develop my skills based on well applied knowledge rather than volume. I discovered very early on setting limitations on myself was a good way to avoid getting lost in the mountains of information involved in the jazz universe!

Finally, can I ask why you stress the importance of the chords above/below the 7th fret? It's not a problem for me to play that way, I'm just wondering what the significance of focussing on that concept is? Is it about transitioning between the two and exploring the different sounds/tones you get in different areas of the neck, or for finding the correct space in a band situation perhaps?

Sorry for the long post, I guess I'm somewhat verbalising my journey thus far!

I really appreciate your input! Thanks again!

[grahambop]

I never got into the whole "is it a drop 2 or a drop 3" thing. I never think about that, just what each chord type or voicing sounds like. I would get the Joe Pass Chord book, that's what I learned nearly all my jazz chords from. Joe only uses economical chord shapes with no awkward stretches, and there aren't that many really. The only slight downside is that he does not name all the chords in detail, so he just groups them into sections, i.e. a whole bunch in C major, then a load in D minor, then a load in G7 (if I recall correctly). Plus some diminished and minor7b5 ones.

But I don't think that's such a bad thing. I went through the book and wrote above each chord what extensions it was using, so one of the 'C maj' group might actually be C maj 11, or one in the 'G7' group might really be G7#5#9 for example. This really taught me how each one sounded, which was quite a good thing.

These are pretty good chords for comping. You can just leave the root off if you don't want to clash with a bass player. For chord melody stuff, you can probably find a voicing from this book with any required melody note on top. Obviously you need to transpose them to other keys, he only gives C, Dm, G7 as I stated. But that's easy on the guitar. And it means you learn just the required shapes which can be applied in any key, rather than 1000 chords like some books.

l'd say 90% of the chords I still use are the ones I got from that book.

[grahambop]

OK just after I posted I see you already have the Joe Pass book!

I think you are on the right lines already. You say this: "What I might do is try to focus on root/bass movement and voice leading, whilst trying to stay as far out of the way of the melody as possible, to try and hear the harmony more instead." Which sounds right to me.

[grahambop]

Also steep yourself in listening to the recordings, really listen closely to how the great pianists and guitarists comp behind horn players or vocalists for example.

Joe Henderson used to tell his students 'the answer to all your questions is on the records'!

[MrTKsDaddy]

Hi Graham,

That's pretty much the way I'm looking at approaching things as you say. I know I mention drop 2/3 chords but I'm only using that as a learning tool to group voicings logically. It just allows me to visualise voicings better with similar shapes, and of course it makes it really easy to alter/extend the voicings when I need to. It was just my way of starting somewhere and avoiding learning hundreds of unnecessary shapes. For example, I tried Jody Fisher's 4 book series and his way of presenting new chords was somewhat arbitrary to me, with no real sense of logic and therefore no real direction on what to use and when. He showed lots of shapes that I just don't see myself using all that often even if it's nice to know that they are there if I need them.

As I said, I just needed somewhere to start, and the dozens of voicings he shows could take a lot of my time to learn when I could be applying more logical voicings to actual music now, and leave the less obvious/useful voicings for after I have some experience. For me, I want to start actually applying what I know to standards and learn what works that way. At least Joe's book does exactly that - go away, learn these shapes and use. Fisher's approach was just the "go and learn these chords" with less on what to use and when. Don't get me wrong, I got lots out of his books, I just find I have to organise my thoughts differently!

Thanks for taking the time to respond, much appreciated.

[targuit]

I agree with Graham. I don't think or study drop 2 or 3, etc, It is more an automatic voice leading thing. Also on the weak beats or on a phrase where the melody is a whole note, for example, I like to listen to the inner voices and create a kind of trading off of interplay in the inner voices with the melody. Almost call and response thing.

TK, not knowing your skill level I was trying to lay out a generic step-by-step schematic approach, but you sound well beyond that. As for the above and below the seventh fret thing, that is for those uncomfortable about playing high on the fret board. When you think about the CAGED kind of approach, the artificial division seems to have some relevance, though in effect at this point I don't think it about when playing or even in the shed. I just focus on the bass line. I don't think about voicing the color tones because wherever I am by now on the fret board, I just hear them and play subconsciously really. But it was not always thus.

In truth nothing is black and white. More than anything now I focus on the root movement even if I am not playing the root. It is just to focus on the destination for simplicity and not to lose the flow. I think about the bass also because when I improvise countermelodies or the melody itself, I want to be in a listening mode, not plotting what phrase to play specifically. I leave that mostly to my subconscious. Thinking about the bass movement is kind of like chanting a mantra in meditation. Keeps my conscious mind from sitting above my performance critiquing how it sounds. Although you can kind of do that or sing the melody, I like to listen to it and let it happen. Be the vessel kind of thing.

[MrTKsDaddy]

All good stuff, and the video is spot on Kirk.

So is it a case with you guys who don't use drop 2/3 chords, and correct me of I'm wrong, that you are thinking bass movement, melody and 3rds and 7ths before anything else, partly since drop chords have the 5th which I suppose could be a wasted finger if I limit myself to those shapes?

That way you'd be thinking the bare minimum in terms of content - you have bass, melody and chord quality as your "canvas" with space left to improvise according to taste? I just tried playing like that and I must say I prefer that slightly lighter sound harmonically and I can now hear spaces within the chords that I could potentially use for new tones.

And is it ok to use the 4th string for bass notes if the 6th string stretch to the melody is impractical, or would you use a tone other than the root in that case? I'm talking in a solo context here.

I'm more than happy considering all of these ideas individually, it's just physically getting it all together and on the fly that's going to take some time to get the hang of I think. Slow and steady I guess!

Once I'm on the path to enlightenment then I'll stop bothering you guys (or at least bug you less!)

As ever, thanks for your help!

[targuit]

TKS Daddy - " It was when I started comping when I thought about my voicings, as it was too easy for my ear to hear the melody and choose the chords based on that, rather than perhaps considering voice leading and let the melody do its own thing without me highlighting it."

I actually like to record and play singing the standards, too. When I do that, with my voice handling the melody, the comping becomes much easier because you are not trying to articulate the melody. And with focusing on singing the melody well, I am "distracted" as I like to be, allowing my subconscious to handle the comping with the focus on bass and harmony. Everything has its sonic space and frequencies.

[dingusmingus]

I'm far from an expert, but I got a lot out of an exercise recommended by my teacher. I'll comp through a tune and try to make the top voice move up chromatically, or by diatonic steps. And then down. And then stay in one place. This really helps me get comfortable with what scale degree/melody notes represent what chord tones. For example, the 4th scale degree is the 3rd of the ii chord, and the 7th of the V chord. Etc.

I've concentrated on drop 2 voicings, with the top voice on strings 1 and 2. After many months (maybe a year?) those are pretty well internalized and I've started working with drop 3 voicings.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Hi all, my first post here!

I have been playing for 13 years and teaching for 6, but only recently started getting into jazz concepts.

I have just discovered drop 3 chords, and whilst what they are is clear to me, how and when to use each inversion so far escapes me.

Welcome to the forum, Mike. You put a ton of questions in that one. I won't try to answer all, nor am I qualified to. But your experience level sounds about like mine when I started with this and I had the same questions. I'll touch a little on my personal opinion re. drop 3's/drop 2's etc from reading several years of conversation about them.

Honestly, you don't need to worry about them so much in the beginning. That's endgame stuff for later IMO. I don't know how far along you are, but there are other things to consider starting out. Most pros didn't start out thinking about Drop 3's or 2's as far as I can tell. They learned the practical go-to voicings which their teachers/mentors showed them.

William Leavitt's Modern Method Book has rhythm studies all through it (can't remember what they're called, but the ones where you're strumming chords from chord grids), and they're sequenced by difficulty and importance as go-to chords for beginners. Generally they start out with root-position chords with roots on 5th and 6th strings. These chords have the 3rd/7th on the 3rd/4th strings. 3 resolves to 7, and 7 resolves to 3 of the next chord. Learning to hear this guide tone movement is more important than learning all 4 inversions of every type of 7th chord at once. This is what pianists do as well with scale cadences etc., at least it was when I learned. Chord inversions are later.

The thing is, the root-5 chords and root-6 chords aren't all the same chord type, nor should they be. With one being drop 2 and one being drop 3, you get (in your ears and under your fingers) the root-position bass movement and the 3-7/7-3 guide tone resolution in a beginning set of chords which are easy to find as starting-out jazz student. The thing is, you don't need to know any of that to play them. I

don't know the Joe Pass books, but I'd go with Joe's chords over learning every inversion of something, over every chord type, on all string sets in every inversion...just to find out that Joe's chords were pretty good. Don't reinvent the wheel. Learn the stuff the pros play and advocate.

"Why drop 2 and drop 3?" You should definitely know the answer to that question before you start learning all of them. You won't remember them, and you'll get burnt out on them, if you don't have a meaningful application of them in actual changes on real tunes. I think many people start learning them because they think they're "supposed to" and don't even know that many pros never bothered to really think about chords in exactly that way while still making great music.

Save the drop 2 and drop 3 study for when you get pissed at yourself for not knowing good ways to voice chords with different chord tones in the bass or melody. Save it for when you want be able to play a chord without changing positions. Save it for when you want to work on some lead line which you can only play on one chord type. Save it for when you want to really work on fretboard knowledge with chord positions which go with your multiple scale positions.

On the guitar we can't just stack 3rds the way pianists do. So, it's somewhat more difficult to work on all inversions of a chord or play around with altering chord tones. That's where things like drop 2's come in. Dropping that voice makes them lay out well on guitar you can work that G9-G7b9-G7 line that you like in one position, and translate it to others.

Working through all inversions of drop chords is as much about fretboard knowledge as it is about using and actually playing with all of them, kind of like learning to play a scale from any note, on any string, in any position, starting on any finger. That's an endgame thing IMO. There are a lot of other things to work on as well. I think it's about priorities.

[MrTKsDaddy]

Hi Matt, thanks for the response.

Just to be clear, my fretboard knowledge is very good. I'm happy with what the drop chords are and their inversions, as well as many other common "jazz" chords, and even how they relate to each other. This because of my personal studies and as a guitar teacher, although currently I don't teach jazz (and nobody has yet asked me to!).

My issue is simply one of application; I have the tools, so to speak, I just need the instructions to build the shed!

My background is more blues/rock and the methods of applying progressions and improvising are somewhat less complex than certain jazz approaches, and the problem I have is that at the moment my ears still "think" blues and rock, and so I am struggling a little to play things that sound more naturally jazz.

My modal knowledge is also very good as I have made it a focus of study for several years, so I find writing a chord/lead sheet comfortable. I can write jazz progressions theoretically as I am comfortable with concepts like back cycling, the be bop bridge, secondary dominants etc, but when it comes to adding my own style and flavour to the progressions as I play them I simply don't feel as comfortable in a jazz context.

I know much, if not most, of this will be purely experience and practise, I'm just looking for clarification and advice on which concepts to focus on at an early stage to start switching my jazz head on. Every now and again I nail something that sounds great, and it's getting better all the time. Thankfully, there's plenty of info here from yourself and others that's helping bring things into focus for me, and my playing is getting better every day.

Incidentally, I have Leavitt's book and love what it has to offer, but as I'm sure you're aware it's not possible to learn solely from books as they sometimes lack the context an individual might be seeking. As well, Joe Pass' book is excellent (I'm lucky enough I can identify his chords by sight more often than not which helps me put them into context not offered explicitly by the book, which I understand was the point) but for me the missing link is just putting it all together. I blame my jazz deficient ears (although the listening to records is helping) and the more I do the better I get.

I suppose really I'm asking for gentle guidance and advice from you guys who have been there before me and can tell what work on and what to avoid as much as anything else! And for that you have my thanks, as it really is helping solidify ideas in my head. I'm trying to keep my playing unique, and so far, in my limited way, I think I have achieved that!

Thanks again for you help!

[matt.guitarteacher]

Well, if you've got the nuts and bolts, you might do a forum search with "threads started by" selected, and "reg". Watch and transcribe all of his comping videos, and try to soak up some of what is in everything he writes. Most method books are very gradually progressive and reductionist, zeroing in on bite-size information which is easily digested. Reg comes from a somewhat different place IMO.

More holistic approach, defining everything in context of larger compositional forms... RELATIONSHIPS between rhythmic, melodic, and harmonic forms etc etc. ...focus on keeping the basic nuts and bolts simpler and really working on larger relationships. Hard to follow at times, especially if you're coming from the reductionist zombie education world that most of us do. But well worth the time and effort.

I'd think that many of those videos of his are of more value than a decade spent in a method book. The best resource we have here for aspiring players IMO.

[targuit]

You know it's funny. After all the stuff I wrote above, tonight I realized I had made a mistake in the initial post about where the first note of the melody of Autumn Leaves in the key of Em could be fingered. Geez! I corrected that. Then, guitar in hand, I recalled that when I play that tune in CM style or vocalizing the melody, that I prefer to play it in Dm. And as I played through a few tunes trying to analyze just how I play, I realize that any 'analysis' breaking down an organic process is somewhat artificial. I do use the bass as a reference, especially if the progression is complex, but I also realized that I'm hearing the melody and reacting to it.

It is almost like any attempt to break down the actual experience or process is somewhat artificial, in that it isn't like following a recipe to bake a cake. It is an organic process that involves all those steps but the whole is more than the sum of the parts, and it really cannot be dissected without falsifying the experience. I think in the end the fairest thing to say about my own approach is it is grounded in listening to an internal juke box playing in my head. Sometimes focusing on the melody, sometimes the bass, the inner voices....but always listening.

Maybe it is about developing the skills to make manifest that inner juke box. I've been playing over fifty years - classical guitar, rock, fusion, jazz, even country. All I know is I played pretty well at twenty, but I play much better and freer now and hope to improve. Developing the technique takes time and work - we all know that. But there does come a point where I don't believe you are limited so much in a technical sense - you don't have to "think about" the mechanics so much as listen to that internal juke box. And at that point it is about making what you play beautiful, meaningful, and creative. Maybe it is about freeing yourself from technical limitations as much as possible. And then coming up with something creatively vital and beautiful.

Why do we do this? What impels us to devote hours, days, years, decades of our lifetime to mastering an instrument and music? Why? I don't know. I'm just like an addict hooked on a drug since I was just a little boy. I just need that fix.