-
Nothing to see...
Originally Posted by jazzpazz
Pano: My question remains the same, just substituting "real" with "full" or "complete".
Lion: That progression is called a jazz cadence. You mention them in their root position, which we pianists would never play, we invert
We pianists also use very commonly the 5(1-5) in the bass. Using the 5th will NOT make it sound weak. The unstable characteristic of dominant is the tritone between 3-7. If one want it more unstable one can just toss in (altered) colour tones. Dominant is the real kitchen sink of accepting pretty much every colortone.
You are just talking about something like that.
Bass motion with shell voicings.
-
10-23-2023 05:22 PM
-
Well then what are you trying to learn here? Originally Posted by jazzpazz
a seventh chord is 1357 … a shell voicing is 137, so they are self-evidently not complete.
-
In fact I think he asked the wrong question.
He wonders if he can play 5 3 7 instead of 1 3 7 but he made knots in his mind.
He made a confusion between bass and voicing.
A shell voicing is just 3 & 7.
You add the bass you want, he calls it 5th but he may say second inversion.
Since there is quite nothing in the voicing it becomes like this.
CM7 = G6 (neutral, weak or old fashionable)
C7 = Gm6 or Gdim
Cm7 = Eb bass G
Shell voicings are there when someone else plays a bass line in order to give room to the soloist.
It is the simplest thing to do.
There is nothing about adding.
-
What are you talking about? I know very well the difference between root and bass. What you are talking about is called ROOTLESS. Shell voicings do have the ROT Originally Posted by Lionelsax
-
No. Originally Posted by jazzpazz
You don't need the root if someone else plays it.
You just need 3 & 7.
When you add something else it's not a shell voicing anymore.
-
This thing is about shell voicings.
-
This thread is briefly my favorite place on the internet.
-
But does he mention 'real' or 'not real' chords? I'm not going to trawl through any old video unless I'm told it satisfies the criteria. Haven't got time. Originally Posted by Lionelsax
-
Yes. If you google it (which you should do anyway, not just rely on us all the time) it's there clearly and repeatedly. I'll do it for you. Here's the google page. Originally Posted by jazzpazz
Here's a G7 shell voicing.
3x34xx (R-7-3)
If you put in other notes, like the D on top:
3x343x
That's a regular G7 chord. Don't say that every ordinary chord is a shell voicing 'with extra notes', that's a wrong way of looking at it. Rather say the shell voicings are ordinary, general-use chords stripped down to their basic components.
In any case, a lot of chords played by jazz players aren't root, 3rd and 7th. For example, this D13b9:
xx4547 (3-7-b9-13)
I can't comment on YouTube videos I haven't seen. If you could post up an example it would make answering simpler. If you've been watching them the links will still be in your history.Rag: Well, the YouTube guys must refer to something when they talk about "real"? I think you need this explained. The prefix real is short for the real deal. Which is an expression. And when we talk about the real deal jazz chords in general, we simply refer more sophisticated chords than the regular block chord. So yes, there are "real"chords
-
Here it's better explained.
Luckily people make videos, if I had to explain it by my own it should be 30 euros per hour for this lesson, I'm not expensive.
When you pay you understand better, when it's free you don't want to understand.
-
Are you awake? This isn't my thread and not my problem. Address the OP. And charge him accordingly :-)when it's free you don't want to understand.
-
If you know jazz harmony it is no different for guitar than piano or vibrophone or other instruments. Originally Posted by jazzpazz
Rather than talking about "specific guitar chords" it might more sense to talk about guitar friendly voicings.
Shell voicings without fifths are used both on guitar and piano. And I don't see any value in categorizing them as "real" or not.
There might exist a term for chord voicings that include all the chord notes, but even if the term exists it doesn't mean that such voicings are better, "realer", preferred or that they sound better.
Pianists and guitarists both use voicings where they omit some of the chord notes.
Regardless of whether you play guitar or piano you need to rely on your ears. If it sounds good, it sounds good.
If you want to play jazz guitar, you want to know shell voicings and you want to know how to add the fifths to them. Then it's up to you to determine when it sounds better to use a 5th in the voicing and when you think it sounds better to omit the fifth. Whether some youtuber claims the voicing/chord is less "real jazz" doesn't make it sound better or worse.
But since we are on the topic of guitar friendly voicings and good sounding voicings.
1.
On I and IV maj7 chords you might want to try if you think they sound sound better with a 6 instead of a 7. Try adding 9s too (regardless of whether they are written).
2.
Be cautious when putting 7th in the top voice or in a high register, sometimes it works fine, but it can sound quite bad. One particularly bad voicing I don't like is playing C7 with xx5556 (5, root, 3, b7).
On piano I also dislike 7 chords in root position (root, 3, 5, b7).
3.
this
-
Ah ! You ! If you took music lessons you would lose your house and more. Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Why do you think I haven't got a house? And I've already lost my mind, which was careless
-
Lion: No you need the rot in shell chords. If not its rootless shell chord. Im talking about shell chords on guitar. Which ive been taught is built with roots.
Pano: Yes it a gordian knot. Hope I one day will get the answer
Rag: Ive googled and got multiple answers. Which is why im asking you guys experienced professional jazz guitarist.
So that means you are basically saying that its true that ordinary chords are shell voicings with notes added?
I did link a video earlier in this thread. Let me see if I can dig more. Why do more videos help tho? There's already a video there proving my questions value.
Orri: Yes with specific guitar chords, Its assumed I mean guitar friendly chords. What else would guitar specific chords be? It's good using ears. But its as important building a chord foundation at the bottom.
Don't I want to put colortones on the high top string? Or is it just the 7th that can possibly sound bad?
-
@jazzpazz, it's ok, say whatever you want, you're right, we are all wrong.
-
I understood exactly what you meant with "guitar specific chords". I just made the point that to me it makes more sense to refer to them as guitar friendly voicings. (but that's my personal opinion based on how I view these terms). Originally Posted by jazzpazz
Doesn't "guitar specific chords" sounds like that there are chords that can only be played on guitar an no other instruments?
Starting with a shell chord shape and then adding notes on top of it is totally fine. It often sounds great and most great players use those kind of voicings.
ragman1 has issues with the terminology if you say "shell chords with added notes" because in their mind they stop being shell voicings as soon as you add notes to them.
They are only nitpicking on your terminology. They are not saying that it is not a valid way to build chord voicings.
I personally think it is a logical way to describe voicings because I know exactly what you're talking about. I also do think of many voicings as shell voicing on the bottom with added notes on top. I understand the argument they make from a logical perspective, but I don't think it is crazy useful to get stuck up in terminology technicalities.
It's kind of like saying you shouldn't describe what you made for dinner as a cheeseburger with lettuce but without the cheese. Everybody will understand what you're describing, and it is a totally "valid dinner" but some people will probably feel it is important to make it clear that if you remove the cheese from a cheeseburger, it's not a cheeseburger anymore, and that you should rather call it a hamburger with lettuce. How you refer to it doesn't change what you made for dinner or how it tasted or how it felt.
I think you need to learn a lot of chord voicings and make up your own mind on which ones you like.
In general the 9, 11 and 13 go well above the 3rd and 7th.
For instance 1, 3, b7, #9 sounds great while 1, #9, b7, 3 sounds horrible. (but don't take my word for it, listen to it and come to your own conclusion).
however 1, 11, b7, b3 is a nice voicing for m11 chords, where the 11 is below the 3rd and 7th.
Also be cautious of what you put in each register. For instance playing only the 3rd and 7th (with a bass player) on the G and D string is solid and usually sounds good but if you play only the 3rd and 7th on the high E and B string they sound piercing and penetrating. (again, you should listen to how it sounds rather than taking my word for it).
You could check out the book Chord Chemistry by Ted Greene. (personally I've struggled with how I should approach studying that book).Last edited by orri; 10-24-2023 at 05:19 AM.
-
Jazz chords?
While I wouldn’t say there’s no such thing, I notice you can find most of the common jazz grips in classical music. The difference is in how they are used - specifically in classical, a bit more freely in jazz.
A bit of advice - work up some chord melodies. That’ll teach you more than youtube videos made by randoms and JGO posts haha
Shells are versatile and expandable. They are a good resource.
-
Well, this is why we're having such a bad time of it, isn't it? Although I'm not sure you see it. Originally Posted by jazzpazz
I posted the Google page to demonstrate that one doesn't get multiple answers. You can see the same thing repeated down the page (circled in red). They're the same answer every time.
No, I said precisely and exactly the opposite, didn't I?So that means you are basically saying that its true that ordinary chords are shell voicings with notes added?
'Don't say that every ordinary chord is a shell voicing 'with extra notes', that's a wrong way of looking at it. Rather say the shell voicings are ordinary, general-use chords stripped down to their basic components.'
You did, I forgot that because I didn't watch it. I've just looked at it now. Lo and behold, at 1.09 he says:'Shell voicings are reduced versions of extended chords'.I did link a video earlier in this thread. Let me see if I can dig more. Why do more videos help tho? There's already a video there proving my questions value.
Actually, he's using the word extended wrongly. He means altered chords.
Usually an extended chord is one that has diatonic additions, like G13. In that case, the ordinary G7 (R-3-5-b7) has been extended to include the 9 (A), the 11 (C), and 13 (E) which are in the C major scale. On a guitar, playing all the notes isn't practical so a G13 at the 3rd fret would be played without the 9 or 11:
3x345x (R-b7-3-13)
When a chord has added non-diatonic ( # and/or b) notes it's considered altered. A G7#5b9 is an altered chord, often written G7alt.
Then he goes on to show how complex chords can be reduced to simple ones using, again, the root, third and seventh. Which is what we said earlier.
That video is half an hour long and I'm not going to sit there and wade through it for you. I'm sorry, I just don't have the time. Or the interest, if I'm honest. And, really, you shouldn't expect me to do it.
What I wanted, in order to answer your question about 'real' or 'not real' chords, is a video (that you said you saw) where those terms were used. Otherwise I don't know how they were being said, or by whom.
-
One last comment, jazzpazz, then I'm out of here. Please read it carefully. Don't misquote it later!
It's true that all complex chords are built from a simple R-3-5 triad. And it's true that a shell voicing is the reversal of that process.
But you'd do yourself a vast disservice if you thought that shell voicings are a magic solution to playing jazz. They're not, they're just a simplified version of the rich sounds of jazz harmonies.
It's like reading a book that only uses words no longer than 4 letters. Hardly literature. More like books for young children.
So don't get hung up on shell voicings as a shortcut. Learn your stuff properly. Then you'll know when to abbreviate a chord and when not to.
It's that simple. And that difficult.
-
You seem to have forgotten how the story of the Gordian knot ends. Originally Posted by jazzpazz
-
I take your point here, but honestly I think shell voicings are more useful than just simplified versions of the big chords. There aren’t shortcuts to anything, but rootless shells with extensions are pretty rich sounding on their own. Originally Posted by ragman1
EDIT … also you’re correct about the term “extended”, but I’m not quite sure what to call a 13 over a shell voicing otherwise. Not an alteration, but maybe “extension” as a descriptor works even when the chord isn’t fully extended. Whatever.
-
I can't keep repeating it... It's so exasperating. How long is this going to go on for?
Look, beginner guitarists learn chords, like C and Am, etc, right? Then they get more advanced and try CM7 and Am9, etc. And so on. Then they hear about shell voicings, not before.
It's the blasted theorists that come along and try to undo that process by saying complex chords are just extensions/alterations of the basic triad. Quite right, they are. But that's not the way to think of them in practical terms. Learn the chords properly, then learn where and when shells are useful.
This mixture of practical and theoretical is not helpful to learners.
Jazzpazz is already confused enough. I bet you when he plays jazz piano he doesn't play basic triads all the time. It's silly, not good jazz piano. But apparently it's okay when learning guitar. I say it's not. You're trying to impose advanced theory on an untutored mind.
-
What on earth are we talking about? Originally Posted by ragman1
-
I'll show you. Take this chord:
3x345x
That's a G13. It's a dominant triad (R-b7-3) with the top 5th (D) replaced with the 13th (E).
It is NOT a shell voicing with an added E extension. Thinking of it as an extended shell voicing is confusing to a learner. Thinking that complex chords are all shell voicings with things added on produces confusion.
He just needs to know that shape is how to play a G13. There's also this G13:
x8998x (b7-3-13-R)
If he thinks of that as a shell voicing with something added on he'll just get discombobulated. He'll start believing he's got to learn every possible inversion/variation of shell voicing before he can play simple extended/altered chords.
He doesn't. He just needs to know that's another shape for a 13 chord, that's all.
Reply With Quote
How is the Steve Howe 175?
Today, 05:54 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos