The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Using Barry Harris’ 6/dim system, designed for 8 string guitar (in which the Low E string on a six-string is re-named the 7th string and the high E string of the six string is renamed the 2nd string). It can work for six string guitars, you just won’t get the extra set of drop forms that you can get from the 8 string. (The Low A string, string 8, is not used in any of these open voiced drop forms).

    G6 and Gm6: So it includes the Related V7 and minor 6th derived from the associated diminished chords : D7 and and Am6 families. As well as A° family. In total: 11 chords (GM6 and Gm6; D7-F7-Ab7-B7; A°-C°-Eb°-Gb°; Am6-Cm6-Ebm6-Gbm6)


    Start with first Chord: G6
    Start with 1635 Drop 3 (on string 7). Then find the following:

    1635 Drop 3 an octave up on string 5 root.
    1635 Drop 3 on string 6 root. For M6 omit 5. (163 only). M6, full chord is doable.
    1563 Drop 2.
    1563 Drop 2 an octave up with string 5 root.
    1563 Drop 2 on string 6 root.
    1563 Drop 2 on octave up with string 4 root.
    1536 Drop 2 and 4
    1536 Drop 2 and 4 an octave up with string 5 root.
    1536 Drop 2 and 4 with string 6 root.
    1365 Drop 2 and 3.
    1365 Drop 2 and 3 an octave up with string 5 root.
    1365 Drop 2 and 3 on string 6 root.


    3156 Drop 3. (7th string root).
    3156 Drop 3 an octave up (5th string root).
    3156 Drop 3 with 6th string root.
    3615 Drop 2. (7 string root).
    3615 Drop 2 an octave up. (5th string root).
    3615 Drop 2 (6th string root).
    3615 Drop 2 (4th string root)
    3651 Drop 2 and 4 (7th string root).
    3651 Drop 2 and 4 an octave up (5th string root).
    3651 Drop 2 and 4 (6th string root).
    3516 Drop 2 and 3. (7th string root).
    3516 Drop 2 and 3 an octave up (5th string root).
    3516 Drop 2 and 3 (6th string root).


    5361 Drop 3. (7th string root).
    5361 Drop 3 an octave up (5th string root).
    5361 Drop 3 (6th string root).
    5136 Drop 2. (7th string root).
    5136 Drop 2 an octave up (5th string root).
    5136 Drop 2 (6th string root).
    5136Drop 2 an octave up (4th string root).
    5163 Drop 2 and 4 (7th string root).
    5163 Drop 2 and 4 an octave up. (5th string root).
    5163 Drop 2 and 4 2 (6th string root).
    5631 Drop 2 and 3. (7th string root).
    5631 Drop 2 and 3 an octave up. ((5th string root)
    5631 Drop 2 and 3 (5th string root).


    6513 Drop 3. (7th string root).
    6513 Drop 3 an octave up (5th string root).
    6513 Drop 3 (6th string root)
    6351 Drop 2. (7th string root).
    6351 Drop 2 an octave up. (5th string root).
    6351 Drop 2 (6th string root).
    6351 Drop 2 an octave up (4th string root).
    6315 Drop 2 and 4 (7th string root).
    6315 Drop 2 and 4 an octave up (5th string root).
    6315 Drop 2 and 4 (6th string root).
    6153 Drop 2 and 3. (7th string root).
    6153 Drop 2 and 3 an octave up (5th string root).
    6153 Drop 2 and 3 (6th string root).

    Repeat for remaining chords.

    I think this is the most thorough but targeted way of mapping out the fingerboard for chords and learning the drop forms, thoroughly an systematically. When you have these under your fingers like they were nothing, it really frees you up to improvise-comp, do arranging on the fly, in an improvised way. There are gaps in my practical usage of all these forms, I am trying to close that gap, so my ability to perform these seamlessly matches my intellectual understanding of them.



  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Nice. This is a good way to organize drop chords. But I'd like to ask you a question. Why would you want to strictly focus on drop voicings? Don't get me wrong, many of the drop voicings are the bread and butter of Jazz comping, they sound good and are easy to play.

    However there are also many drop chord inversions that don't sound very good (it depends on the individual musician which ones these are), some are not easy to play and some obscure the chord's function (like the 3 inversion Maj 7 drop 2 voicing).

    Why not for each chord type find a few voicings that harmonize each scale note with the chord's sonority but pick the voicings from a variety of voicing types (not just drops and inversions)? Also some notes can be better harmonized with diatonic passing chords, some notes can be harmonized with substitutions and obviously some with secondary dominants (similar to BH diminished passing chords). Then you're ready to comp melodically and come up with chord-melody on the fly more easily, no? Over the years, more ways to harmonize notes can be discovered and added to the comping vocabulary.


    Here is a video of Mimi Fox demonstrating this approach (many musicians in different styles also use this concept):
    Last edited by Tal_175; 10-17-2022 at 02:02 PM.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Nice. This is a good way to organize drop chords. But I'd like to ask you a question. Why would you want to strictly focus on drop voicings? Don't get me wrong, many of the drop voicings are the bread and butter of Jazz comping, they sound good and are easy to play.

    However there are also many drop chord inversions that don't sound very good (it depends on the individual musician which ones these are), some are not easy to play and some obscure the chord's function (like the 3 inversion Maj 7 drop 2 voicing).

    Why not for each chord type find a few voicings that harmonize each scale note with the chord's sonority but pick the voicings from a variety of voicing types (not just drops and inversions)? Also some notes can be better harmonized with diatonic passing chords, some notes can be harmonized with substitutions and obviously some with secondary dominants (similar to BH diminished passing chords). Then you're ready to comp melodically and come up with chord-melody on the fly more easily. No? Over the years, more ways to harmonize notes can be discovered and added to the comping vocabulary.


    Here is a video of Mimi Fox demonstrating this approach (many musicians in different styles also use this concept):
    I’m not disagreeing with you. This is not an exclusive or strict method, just stuff that I have to improve on. I know my dyads, intervals and triads, I know how to create a 1625 just using dyads or triads, up and down the fingerboard. Also: Barry’s family of 4 dominants and min6 actually cover a lot of different ways of harmonizing notes that can reflect the conventional ways people play and convey harmony( #5,b5, #9, b9, #11, b13, Lydian dominant, etc). It’s just a different, more compact and I feel more elegant way of doing it, IMHO.
    BH system is not needed to learn chords this way.

    Also: when moving to a new, more difficult instrument (the 8 string guitar is much harder than a 6 string guitar, physically and spatially), it’s best to go back to basics to make sure one is comfortable with it.

    I view these grips as basics. I need to get them down on an 8 string guitar. Going back to 6 string almost feels like a toy, in comparison. Almost. We can’t have the situation of the instrument being uncontrollable.

    Thanks for the Fox video. I’ll take a look.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Here’s an idea; group chords by the melody note. That’s where drop terminology comes from right?

    so do all the voicings systematically with 1 in melody, then 3, then 5, then

    close (arp if necessary)
    drop 2
    drop 3
    drop 2 and 3
    drop 2 and 4
    Anything else you can think of, with your 8 string there’s no doubt other options

    so

    x x 10 9 8 5
    x x 5 5 5 5
    x 7 x 5 8 5
    x 7 6 5 x 5
    x 3 5 x 5 5

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    Here’s an idea; group chords by the melody note. That’s where drop terminology comes from right?

    so do all the voicings systematically with 1 in melody, then 3, then 5, then

    close (arp if necessary)
    drop 2
    drop 3
    drop 2 and 3
    drop 2 and 4
    Anything else you can think of
    Yes, for sure. We should be able to harmonize any note with any chord, dyad, interval, root note, triad, cluster. As someone said, the art of “summoning” any of these at any time…TAKES A LOT OF systematic work to internalize. I would venture to guess that most people on these boards, other than pros, can’t summon a drop 2, drop 3, drop 2 and 3, drop 2 and 4 or anything you can think of at the drop of a hat.

    Barry is all about harmonizing notes with dyads, triads, drop voicings, etc. The classical guitar guy on YT has a great way of thinking about it, how to get from floor to floor via elevators. I think it’s a great analogy.

    8 string guitar is way harder than 6 string. But for me it’s worth it. The payback will be huge.
    Last edited by NSJ; 10-17-2022 at 04:40 PM.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    […] That’s where drop terminology comes from right? […]
    As I understand it the terminology of drop voicing comes from numbering the voices of a close voicing from top to bottom.

    • “soprano” = 1
    • “alto” = 2
    • “tenor” = 3
    • “bass” = 4

    The respective names describe which voice(s) is / are “dropped” down by an octave.

    The idea of practicing all different voicing types with either root, third, fifth or sixth / seventh on top together is of course a good one (if I got you right).

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Bop Head
    As I understand it the terminology of drop voicing comes from numbering the voices of a close voicing from top to bottom.

    • “soprano” = 1
    • “alto” = 2
    • “tenor” = 3
    • “bass” = 4

    The respective names describe which voice(s) is / are “dropped” down by an octave.

    The idea of practicing all different voicing types with either root, third, fifth or sixth / seventh on top together is of course a good one (if I got you right).
    yes the point is that we are thinking down from the MELODY not up from the BASS

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Miller
    yes the point is that we are thinking down from the MELODY not up from the BASS
    I (pedantic as I am LOL) would say that we hear the melody in an arrangement most prominently. And the unschooled listener even more. That is why being oriented to the top note makes most sense. Hair-splitting quibbling LOL.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    It’s very true. I always try to emphasize the top note, the melody, as well as the rhythm. All the rest is just how to dress it up so it sounds nice and dolled up. What kind of G6 goes with the melody?

    Chord solos need to express a melody that has contour and groove and rhythmic interest. That’s why 2 or 3 notes are the best, because they are modular, easy to move to and away from. Some of the harder four note drop 2s, I don’t play the note that makes them hard to get to when you need it.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Yes we're getting into arranging... But BH isn't about arranging, it's about using Dim. ... and voicings that are very neutral for his approach of using his 8 note maj. and min. 6th and 7th chord Dim. scales and chords from those scales and their Family relationships... or tritone relationships.

    It's very organized and seems to work great... if you like it. Obviously I don't, but who cares.

    Mimi's voicings of chords using related scale and picking a few types of voicings, 7th chords, 7thsus. 9th 13s and the one dim chord is cool, but pretty vanilla and rhythmically would need to be fixed to used beyond solo work.

    The better trick to creating moving chords or chord patterns.... is to use melodic material that has better Functional organization. By that I mean most jazz tunes have common harmonic movement, which can easily be expressed in functional terms.... Tonic, Subdom. and Dom. from analysis. (or by using your ears)

    You then end up with much more usable and many more patterns of.... whatever you want to label this type of comping or playing.

    And just as with BH approach of using subs and tritone relationships.... your also using the actual tune your playing to determine what actual voicings you use while playing different tunes. You have tonal targets... and then create chord patterns to connect them that reflect the Tune or players ...as compared to making all tunes conform to the patterns.

    You don't memorize a collection of voicings you learn different methods of creating voicings that support different melodic lines, melodies or licks. And yea you also use BH voicings sometimes... depending on who you are.

    But the approach NJS is using is probably a great to get to that point where you know the fretboard well enough to have options and make choices.

    I would also add... the number of notes one uses is generally just a reflection of ones skills. I play way too many notes and generally I'm always asked to turn up... LOL.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg

    And just as with BH approach of using subs and tritone relationships.... your also using the actual tune your playing to determine what actual voicings you use while playing different tunes. You have tonal targets... and then create chord patterns to connect them that reflect the Tune or players ...as compared to making all tunes conform to the patterns.

    You don't memorize a collection of voicings you learn different methods of creating voicings that support different melodic lines, melodies or licks. And yea you also use BH voicings sometimes... depending on who you are.

    But the approach NJS is using is probably a great to get to that point where you know the fretboard well enough to have options and make choices.

    I would also add... the number of notes one uses is generally just a reflection of ones skills. I play way too many notes and generally I'm always asked to turn up... LOL.
    I agree with this. especially learning different methods of creating voicings that support different melodic lines.

    Also: there’s no getting around really knowing one’s workspace. It’s an issue I’ve had to confront learning this beast of an instrument. It just has to get done. None of these drop voicings are hard, per se. But there has be an effort to really assimilate them so one knows one instrument comfortably.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    The better trick to creating moving chords or chord patterns.... is to use melodic material that has better Functional organization. By that I mean most jazz tunes have common harmonic movement, which can easily be expressed in functional terms.... Tonic, Subdom. and Dom. from analysis. (or by using your ears)

    You then end up with much more usable and many more patterns of.... whatever you want to label this type of comping or playing.

    And just as with BH approach of using subs and tritone relationships.... your also using the actual tune your playing to determine what actual voicings you use while playing different tunes. You have tonal targets... and then create chord patterns to connect them that reflect the Tune or players ...as compared to making all tunes conform to the patterns.

    You don't memorize a collection of voicings you learn different methods of creating voicings that support different melodic lines, melodies or licks. And yea you also use BH voicings sometimes... depending on who you are.
    Reg, based on the chord patterns you posted in the past (and also your youtube demos), I was under the impression that your approach was based on applying common, generic chord voicings creatively in different harmonic contexts to create interest rather than constructing novel voicings for different tunes. Am I mistaken? It's possible that you use the common voicings for demonstration of chord patterns out of context but use different voicings when actually playing tunes.

    It is also my understanding that what you mean by creating tonal targets is expanding secondary dominants. For example instead of targeting the ii chord with just its secondary dominant (V/ii), you'd play a rhythm changes pattern to target it ([iii vi ii V] / ii) or backdoor dominant/minor subdominant with melodic minor modal interchange chords (iv, bVII7, bVI aug etc.). Am I correct?

    Here is my question, aren't all approaches to comping about creating a harmonized counter melody line? The melody can be any of the voices the comper may choose to bring out with the movements. So does it really matter what approach one uses as long as they are fluent with the voices they use in the approach and execute them with a strong rhythmic feel and have sensitivity to what the rest of the band is doing? It seems to me that listeners respond to these latter elements more than the specific approach used in the harmonization, no?
    Last edited by Tal_175; 10-18-2022 at 12:06 PM.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175

    Here is my question, aren't all approaches to comping about creating a harmonized counter melody line? The melody can be any of the voices the comper may choose to bring out with the movements. So does it really matter what approach one uses as long as they are fluent with the voices they use in the approach and execute them with a strong rhythmic feel and have sensitivity to what the rest of the band is doing? It seems to me that listeners respond to these latter elements more than the specific approach used in the harmonization, no?
    I think this is a great way of putting it, framing what exactly needs to be done. This is why, to me, a chord solo and comping are not counterposed, but more or less the same thing:creating an organic, meaningful, melody (or counter-melody to the soloist or singer) that sustains rhythmic interest, has melodic and rhythmic contours, which requires, as you say, the comper to be FLUENT with the VOICES, able to summon, on the spot, any additional voices that can buttress and develop the fundamentally important melodic and rhythmic content.

    None of the stuff I posted in the OP is rocket science. It’s really bread and butter stuff, additional quivers in the musical arsenal, that, quite honestly, the pros have at their disposal and can use, as much as they want, when they want.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Reg, based on the chord patterns you posted in the past (and also your youtube demos), I was under the impression that your approach was based on applying common, generic chord voicings creatively in different harmonic contexts to create interest rather than constructing novel voicings for different tunes. Am I mistaken? It's possible that you use the common voicings for demonstration of chord patterns out of context but use different voicings when actually playing tunes.

    It is also my understanding that what you mean by creating tonal targets is expanding secondary dominants. For example instead of targeting the ii chord with just its secondary dominant (V/ii), you'd play a rhythm changes pattern to target it ([iii vi ii V] / ii) or backdoor dominant/minor subdominant with melodic minor modal interchange chords (iv, VI7, bVI aug etc.). Am I correct?

    Here is my question, aren't all approaches to comping about creating a harmonized counter melody line? The melody can be any of the voices the comper may choose to bring out with the movements. So does it really matter what approach one uses as long as they are fluent with the voices they use in the approach and execute them with a strong rhythmic feel and have sensitivity to what the rest of the band is doing? It seems to me that listeners respond to these latter elements more than the specific approach used in the harmonization, no?
    So kind of... LOL. Yes most of the material I use on this Forum is very common. And the chord patterns are very typical.
    But Most of the music on this form is just that,,, common etc. right?

    The differences can be where I use those simple chord patterns. It's not always just expanding chords by secondary relationships or Dominate subs with expanded chord patterns ...types of movement . I also use Diatonic relationship subs... also with subs and expanded etc, and use use Sub dominate movements., simple versions, related II and IV chords, and yes bVII's. But other harmonic controls I use are expanding the above with use of Modal as another control for expanding. And obviously I also use Jazz Blue Note Harmony... which can also use any of the above.
    It's still old standard common etc... I generally don't bring out the hipper or more modern harmonic approaches... just because most don't hear it and haven't been exposed etc... Just because one can play something doesn't mean ... Play it.

    So yes... I think I've always said I play very simply, it's not complicated. I do tend to not like Harmonic Min. and will modally go different directions harmonically when ever I can. (depending on gig etc...)

    And yes... I agree that the best comping as well as soloing is about using harmonized counter or some type of melody line... but... the difference is how one harmonizes that line... the organization of the harmonization.

    And I generally don't hear that on this forum... most of the harmonization is muddy or vanilla. I use the term vanilla as not bad, just basic, not roots but close etc...

    And I guess by fluent, you mean having them memorized and can use them anytime anywhere...? Which could be different from... fluent of the understandings of why they work, or at least different from the trial and error approach. More of being able to control the tension between using theory and playing by ear from understanding the harmonic organization and ... of course the technical skills to use both. Which would include those rhythmic skills etc...

    I generally play tunes different each time I play or see them... some work better that others, LOL I tend to not crash and burn from just having enough chops to make thongs work. (not always, there always the ensemble, and it's Live). I don't rehearse much and tend to try new approachs and material on gigs. And am known to verbally get it across if it's not heard, LOL. Not mean or disrespect like, just to help us all be on same page.

    And so yes to the form and youtube thing, all my vids are for this forum.

    Sorry for long reponse, I just though your questions were great and tried to keep it going.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    When I was learning, I never heard the term Drop 2 or Drop-anything.

    But, I learned a system for getting any note you'd want on top of any chord. Chuck Wayne's.

    There are some basic voicings to learn. Then you learn the fingerboard and the notes in the chords you use. After that, it's tunes. Chord melodies and then soloing on all those chords if you can do it.

    Playable voicings of X chord with Y melody note are finite in number.

    When you know a lot of voicings, no matter how you learn them, you still need to know what works in tunes. It seems to me that you learn that from tunes. Why not learn the voicings that way?

    I have yet to be in a situation where it helped me to know that a voicing is a Drop-n. I can see it in arranging horns and maybe as a way to be thorough in learning grips as a beginnner, but not in a playing situation. In playing, there's a chord, you know different ways to play it and what they sound like. You pick one. Then there's a chord change and you figure out what will sound good, often focusing on which notes change and which note stay the same to keep the voice leading smooth.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Just a clarification, These are the basic chords to learn. There’s nothing exotic or out there. There’s nothing exotic about them. We use them in tunes all the time. I learned them from my guitar teacher when I started. He showed me the 6 string roots and the 5th string roots. Everyone uses them. The terms drop 2 and drop 3 etc are pretty common among guitar players. We can’t play a lot of these chords without this arranging concepts, especially the inversions. You watch a Wes chord solo, he’s using drop 2s and drop 3s all the time, in a a linear fashion up and down the neck

    Ronnie Ben- Hurr’s 3 hour Chordability video covers drop 2 and drop 3 extensively. He explains where they come from, how they are arrived. My teacher had me go through that video, many years ago. What I posted in the OP is not much different than what Ronnie Ben- Herr proscribed in Chordability.

    The point of this thread was two fold: to recognize that I have some gaps in this practical knowledge (drop 2 and 3 and drop 2 and 4). And I really need to improve my knowledge of the 8 string fingerboard. I’m the sort of person who approaches things strategically and systematically.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    There’s some info on Wayne’s chordal approach on his Wikipedia entry
    Chuck Wayne - Wikipedia

    it seems like it’s pretty much the same stuff, just with a different terminology

    afaik drop terminology comes from arranging and parallel writing for sax choir (four way close, drop 2 being most popular) which was then applied to piano by George Shearing etc.

    one interesting thing is that horn players could apparently work out four part section harmonisations without an arranger doing it by just following these rules. As I understand this is the origin in the maj-6 and min-6 dim scales. So when someone says ‘drop 2’ the first tenor goes down an octave which iirc on the sax is really easy.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    I've been studying the Chuck Wayne Chords book with his method that uses 4-part harmony for a couple of years. I tried adding diminshed chords between the voicings using appropriate inversions (open, split or spread) as in the Barry Harris method and it works. The voicings of the major and minor sixth chords on the top four strings are the same as in the Barry Harris workshop examples.
    Last edited by zephyrregent; 10-19-2022 at 09:56 PM.