Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 29 of 29
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    All,

    Over these changes (key of C):

    [...]
    D7 | % | Dm7 | G7 ||

    While soloing, when I play the tone Eb over D7 and then move to the tone D for landing on Dm7, it sounds good to me. In fact often times I just play some minor thirds (a D#dim7 arpeggio, Cdim7 or whatever you call it), and resolve the Eb to D or the F# to F. Sounds good. I guess such arpeggio can be seen as an implied D#dim7 substitution. But since I'm playing it over a D7 comping, I'm actually using the chord's b9.

    I'm curious to ask if you would voice this D7 as a D7b9 at all when comping. That is, if you chose not mess around with substitution but just use a flavour of D7, how do you actually voice that chord in practice?

    Cheers,

    Alex

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Depends on the tune. What’s the melody doing?

    I’m struggling to think of a tune with a II7b9 at least in a major key but that doesn’t mean there is one...

    Mostly the II7 is II13 or II13#11

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Thinking about it

    II7b9 is a great resolving chord to V
    II7#11b9 is a cool choice (dim scale)

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    A great question. I'll respond in two ways.

    What I've read is that you listen to what the soloist is playing and you voice accordingly. So, if the soloist is hitting that Eb against D7, you play D7b9. I might voice that as xx454x. I'll leave the low D for the bassist and the higher notes for the soloist, so no high E string.

    But, I have a couple of problems with that approach. One is that the soloist might not play that note the next chorus. Seems to me that I might end up comping what the soloist did on the previous chorus and not help him out on the current chorus. And, that's assuming my ears are good enough to figure this out on the fly -- which they probably aren't.

    The other problem is that sometimes the soloist will want the tension created between your vanilla chord and his use of the chord's extensions. So, for example, if the chords are Gm7 C7 Fmaj7, and the soloist wants to play a Gb7 arpeggio against the C7, that will sound cool. But, if you comp the Gb7, it will sound pretty corny. So, maybe, just because the soloist plays something, you shouldn't play it.

    In practice, I'm perfectly happy playing 3s and 7s xx45xx is my D7 chord. And, sometimes that makes good sense, especially if there's a busy pianist. Mostly, what I actually do is pick an octave to stay out of the soloists way. If the solo gets busy, I get sparse. If the soloist is playing long notes or leaving space, and nobody else is filling it in, I might get a little busier. As far as voicings go, I listen to the soloist and try not to get in his way -- I can do that, to some degree by ear. I'm not quick enough to say to myself, oh, he's using the alt scale in this particular situation and then find a bunch of melodic minor harmony that may fit. Better players may be able to do that.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Tbh I really like

    x 3 4 x x x

    Great for playing with other guitar players...

    it all depends on who you are playing with and how well you know their playing.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar View Post
    The other problem is that sometimes the soloist will want the tension created between your vanilla chord and his use of the chord's extensions. So, for example, if the chords are Gm7 C7 Fmaj7, and the soloist wants to play a Gb7 arpeggio against the C7, that will sound cool. But, if you comp the Gb7, it will sound pretty corny. So, maybe, just because the soloist plays something, you shouldn't play it.
    This is really interesting in relation to my question. I'm playing that Eb tone against a vanilla D7 at the moment. On top of my original question, I guess I was also wondering if a b9 in the comping would reinforce it or ruin it.

    Another way I'm looking at this is that I'm giving this D7 a flavour more in line to that of a minor II-V, that's a Am7b5-D7 rather than Am7-D7 or just D7. I always do that over E7, sometimes over A7 too, to imply a minor cadence. Obviously their corresponding II (namely Bm7b5 and Em7b5) are usual, but Am7b5 is not. My question was also related to that.

    Thanks a lot, guys

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    And then there’s the bopper’s favourite, Ebm Ab7 (in C) as a sub for Ebo7 or D7

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    And then there’s the bopper’s favourite, Ebm Ab7 (in C) as a sub for Ebo7 or D7
    Hey christian, can you tell me where that sub comes from ?

    Thanks, very much
    Mike

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    It’s a tritone sub for D7, or we are replacing the Ebo7 with Ebm7 Ab7

  11. #10
    Also, take into account harmonic rhythm . Almost anything works on beat 4 before a cadence.

    Failure to account for this leads to unintended "rules" regarding harmonic possibilities in playing which are based on asomewhat false dichotomy: "You can play anything as long as you phrase it well" vs "Don't play any extensions at all because you're implying too much".

    There's some truth in what both of these address, but I think it's more like they're "only seeing part of the elephant"... of harmonic rhythm.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    And then there’s the bopper’s favourite, Ebm Ab7 (in C) as a sub for Ebo7 or D7
    Bebop: two-fives and stupid tempos

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    And if it’s a not a ii V we’ll make into one because that is literally all we can do.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    Also, take into account harmonic rhythm . Almost anything works on beat 4 before a cadence.

    Failure to account for this leads to unintended "rules" regarding harmonic possibilities in playing which are based on asomewhat false dichotomy: "You can play anything as long as you phrase it well" vs "Don't play any extensions at all because you're implying too much".

    There's some truth in what both of these address, but I think it's more like they're "only seeing part of the elephant"... of harmonic rhythm.
    I really, really think you can play anything as long as you phrase it well.

    Not playing extensions at all is something you can do if you want

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by alez View Post
    I really, really think you can play anything as long as you phrase it well.

    Not playing extensions at all is something you can do if you want
    Indeed.

    One can play jazz on the triads, one can play jazz on the extensions. Or on the minor pentatonic. or basic chord grips.

    And you can play all the chord scales in every book and still not sound remotely jazz.

    That’s the first thing I demonstrate to students; that jazz is not in the pitch choices. You can take melodic material familiar to Mozart; or Albert Collins; and play jazz with it if you know what you are doing.

    People confuse raw materials for the music, usually because it’s a lot harder to talk about what jazz actually is... I don’t buy that’s it’s impossible to talk about or teach; but it does require a different attitude than a lot of music pedagogy.

    About 75% of bop is 1 3 5 and 1 3 5 7 anyway. Even contemporary players do a lot more basic stuff than you’d think from the time devoted to theoretical discussion. You need the plain stuff to make the spicy stuff taste of something.

    Not interesting to write about or talk about, but very important to spend a lot of time getting good at. Triads! What’s to discuss? You just need to throw sections of your life at it.

    Second thing; the more complex the progression the simpler the playing.....

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Part of phrasing is learning how to resolve. It’s amazing how few people are ever taught this. Instead players will focus on individual chords.

    Its as simple as saying, play through one chord into the next, stop and do the same.

    Which usually means; the bar line is not actually a physical barrier lol.

    But this is elementary music. Ever get a beginner guitar student, and ask them to play bars 3-4 of a piece and they just STOP at the last note of bar 4 and the phrase is unfinished?

    Even the basic way we teach music from notation is messed up.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    And if it’s a not a ii V we’ll make into one because that is literally all we can do.


    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    One can play jazz on the triads, one can play jazz on the extensions. Or on the minor pentatonic. or basic chord grips.
    Or the blues, like you said a few posts earlier. Etc. The possibilities are endless, really.

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    About 75% of bop is 1 3 5 and 1 3 5 7 anyway. Even contemporary players do a lot more basic stuff than you’d think from the time devoted to theoretical discussion. You need the plain stuff to make the spicy stuff taste of something.
    You have to do the basics, otherwise it sounds odd and weird The spicy stuff is optional, the plain stuff is required to an extent, even if it's a small quantity.

    I also find that it often sounds good simply out of melodic justification rather than harmonic. I play things that would look really weird if you looked at them purely from a harmony standpoint, but they sound perfectly natural to the ear.

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Part of phrasing is learning how to resolve. It’s amazing how few people are ever taught this. Instead players will focus on individual chords.
    Yes, this!!! In fact, more often than not, if you choose to nail the main changes, you can fill the gaps with pretty much anything you fancy.

    (Nail the main changes: phrase them using the very voice leading present in the harmony, not just land on a chord tone.)

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by alez View Post
    Yes, this!!! In fact, more often than not, if you choose to nail the main changes, you can fill the gaps with pretty much anything you fancy.

    (Nail the main changes: phrase them using the very voice leading present in the harmony, not just land on a chord tone.)
    In fact, this approach works so well for me that it is the one reason why I don't substitute too much lately (as that affects the original voice leading).

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    This morning I've been playing some weird stuff over D7 and over its two-five form Am7-D7 and I can confirm those can handle a fair amount of abuse without significant complaint from my ear Somehow it feels more flexible than other two-fives.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    I'd have a lot more fun with plain old vanilla D7 before exploring D7 alt. There is so much you can do playing around with that strong F# to F sound. If you're hell bent on D7b9 to Dm7 make sure it transitions smoothly and doesn't jump awkwardly. Here's some example I did just now.

    Voicing II7-screen-shot-2021-04-09-7-57-53-pm-png

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Still no context...

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Am I the only person who finds tab incredibly distracting? I can't stop staring at someone's fingerings and I get distracted from the music. I think fingerings are a very personal thing

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Tab has its uses.

    There is a book out of Guinga compositions done entirely in standard notation. It has numbers and circled numbers to guide fingering -- which I find tedious to decode.

    He's a very unusual guitarist -- bizarre stretches, chords high up the neck with open strings, thumb-over voicings and frequent unfamiliar grips/voicings.

    In that case I seriously missed the tab.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Am I the only person who finds tab incredibly distracting? I can't stop staring at someone's fingerings and I get distracted from the music. I think fingerings are a very personal thing
    I played the notated example in the previous post. Then I saw your post and had to go back to see that, yes, there was tab. That there was tab didn't even register to me when I played it, I just played from the music notation. So the answer is: To me not distracting at all.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fep View Post
    I played the notated example in the previous post. Then I saw your post and had to go back to see that, yes, there was tab. That there was tab didn't even register to me when I played it, I just played from the music notation. So the answer is: To me not distracting at all.
    I wish I was more like you, haha!

    It's like, I can know a tune really well, but put a chord chart in front of me and I will stare at it.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar View Post
    Tab has its uses.

    There is a book out of Guinga compositions done entirely in standard notation. It has numbers and circled numbers to guide fingering -- which I find tedious to decode.

    He's a very unusual guitarist -- bizarre stretches, chords high up the neck with open strings, thumb-over voicings and frequent unfamiliar grips/voicings.

    In that case I seriously missed the tab.
    Well it always seems to me with some classical guitar music too, you get so many numbers, numerals and so on, you may as well tab it out...

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    To any fellow guitarists starting out with "the old chord charts", whether your own or jazz standards, like Ralph Patt's internet site, I'd advise a modicum of flexibility when voicing the changes. It doesn't have to be all 6's and 9's. But it could be... Ralph Patt gave the bare-bone skeleton charts of most of the standards. He let's us fill in the blanks. The Jazz Pirates New Orleans Jam Book, Guitar Guy and Jim Bottorff's sites are just as good. Pop Coffee's site is a mainstay for Tune-Talk... Do a search on his site for "charts".

    I prefer to view the chord charts/lead sheets in my notebook as a guide only, with the chord symbols only suggesting possibilities. Each symbol is like a menu, from which I can select, from all the possible chord tones, just the ones that express the moment and resolve interestingly into the next voicing. But, till I learn the tune, the chart is a useful thing. And creates a reliable record of things I did years ago.

    Rather than playing every chord tone in the symbol, I can reduce the voicing on the first chorus and then embellish it on the next. In the key of C, G13-5-9 can be reduced to G7 while CMaj can be embellished to CM69. Of course, once you've warmed up to the tune, you can put the chart aside. You can eventually reduce or embellish chords on sight.

    The examples in the Johnny Rector Deluxe Encyclopedia of Chord Progressions use that format. Each example of four bars is written four times. Starting from the simple, original, old-style to "modern" 7ths, then 9ths, then 13ths, then altered, then with tritone subs, passing chords, inversions, ...

    Of course, the symbols I've written down on a chart will imply a particular sound and omit chord tones that I don't associate with the song. If I'd never buy a V13th in the song, then it might be written as a V79, with the option of playing a V7 or V79. Months later, I might add the 13th. I can slow the tempo and play the same tune as a ballad with richer voicings or speed up the tune and use three note guide tone grips. Again the chart is merely a guide and you will be able to do this on the fly.

    The chord symbols printed on sheet music are at best a snapshot or tonal-averaging of the measure. In the extreme, there could possibly be as many as 8 different chords in a measure. Usually this is boiled down to 2 "averaged" voicings on beats 1 and 3. However, it's best for the accompanist to pick and choose where and when the grip is applied to the melody so that the accompaniment harmonises the melody and coincides with the soloist or vocalist. Fingerstyle (PIMA) is very useful there. A lot of drama occurs between the beats...

    Perhaps the current way of placing chord symbols on sheet music is due to plectrum style strumming, where a measure of Dm7-5 on beats 1-2 and G7-9 on beats 3-4 must be dealt with quickly. Fingerstyle (PIMA) lets one pick and choose the extensions and alterations more conveniently, and not necessarily on the beats. Joe Pass...

    I always remind myself that chord charts are only a guide and were not meant to become a crutch. The more one uses a particular chart, song and key, the easier it becomes to start re-writing it on staff paper in musical notation. Memorising the tune is quite important as it makes for better ensemble playing, if you get the chance.

    Tab has it's place, too, as it will indicate, at a glance, the fingerboard patterns and positions. One can quickly view the field and strategise fingering. In fact, I read that much of early lute or guitar music was often written this way. Tablature and chord charts have their place on the journey to notation.

    One way I've found to beat "Real Book Burnout" is to reduce the harmony of the entire tune down to Tonics and Dominants. Re-write the chart on graph paper as IMaj and V7 (or im-V7). Eliminate all the 2-5's, o7's and passing chords, line cliches, inversions, extensions, alterations, turnarounds and substitutions. Then, play the tune that way and hear what it's really all about. Keep playing the reduced version until you can "hear" what is missing. Then slowly start to reassemble the song, one chord at a time, with your ear at the helm. You may end up back with the Real Book arrangement, but you could stumble onto something completely different. Less 2-5's perhaps. Stronger V7's. Either way, it's an enjoyable learning process and one may better appreciate the extra parts and their reason to be.
    Last edited by StringNavigator; 05-03-2021 at 01:55 PM.

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    Firstly, thanks for taking the time and effort. I really appreciate it. I really do.

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    It's like, I can know a tune really well, but put a chord chart in front of me and I will stare at it.
    I'm like that with chord sheets and lead sheets.

    Quote Originally Posted by StringNavigator View Post
    I prefer to view the chord charts/lead sheets in my notebook as a guide only, with the chord symbols only suggesting possibilities. Each symbol is like a menu, from which I can select, from all the possible chord tones, just the ones that express the moment and resolve interestingly into the next voicing. But, till I learn the tune, the chart is a useful thing. And creates a reliable record of things I did years ago.
    Same here. I write chord sheets using major, minor, m7b5, dim, 7, just like Ralph Patt. It's enough to see what the tune does. I don't really like it any more detailed than that in writing.

    Quote Originally Posted by StringNavigator View Post
    One way I've found to beat "Real Book Burnout" is to reduce the harmony of the entire tune down to Tonics and Dominants. Re-write the chart on graph paper as IMaj and V7 (or im-V7). Eliminate all the 2-5's, o7's and passing chords, line cliches, inversions, extensions, alterations, turnarounds and substitutions. Then, play the tune that way and hear what it's really all about. Keep playing the reduced version until you can "hear" what is missing. Then slowly start to reassemble the song, one chord at a time, with your ear at the helm. You may end up back with the Real Book arrangement, but you could stumble onto something completely different. Less 2-5's perhaps. Stronger V7's. Either way, it's an enjoyable learning process and one may better appreciate the extra parts and their reason to be.
    Pretty extreme re. chord type reduction but really interesting!

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    The way I've found to avoid 'Real Book Burnout' is to avoid the Real Book.

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    That should do, actually