What do I really need to practice

[pamosmusic]

Maybe we have a different definition of shell voicings. The shell voicing are root, third and 7th.

Rootless shells.

3 7 and something on top.

[Tal_175]

Rootless shells.

3 7 and something on top.

It sounds like it's a terminology issue.
So the very basic rootless C9 voicing
x
8
7
8
7
x

is also a shell voicing? To me that's a drop2, Shell voicing has a particular meaning in the way I use it. It means a striped down voicing. If you put other notes, it's no longer "shell".
For example, there are way more drop type voicings here than shells. Sure most of them contain 3 and 7 (not necessarily at the bottom):

[pamosmusic]

Shell or “rootless shell” is a pretty normal way of talking about these voicings. There is overlap with drop two voicings when you get up to four voicings but the sound of someone comping with rootless shell voicings and get the occasional drop two by happenstance (Ed) is very very different than the sound of someone comping with a lot of drop twos and getting the occasional unusual voicing (maybe Wes).

This from about a year ago …

Ed Bickert chords and diatonic cycles

[pamosmusic]

For example, there are way more drop type voicings here than shells. Sure most of them contain 3 and 7 (not necessarily at the bottom):

Not going to watch the video right now but literally every chord in the first twelve measures (or the thumbnail) is a shell. Low note and a third or seventh. Third or seventh and a color note.

Again a lot of overlap with drop twos but he almost never plays inverted drop twos, which Wes plays all the time. So he’s probably (not definitely) coming to those voicings by way of adding notes to the two and three note voicings he uses rather than dropping and inverting

[Tal_175]

Shell or “rootless shell” is a pretty normal way of talking about these voicings. There is overlap with drop two voicings when you get up to four voicings but the sound of someone comping with rootless shell voicings and get the occasional drop two by happenstance (Ed) is very very different than the sound of someone comping with a lot of drop twos and getting the occasional unusual voicing (maybe Wes).

This from about a year ago …

Ed Bickert chords and diatonic cycles

I wouldn't say that non-shell voicings in Ed Bickert's comping are "occasional" (see the transcription above for example). It seems like what you are referring to as shell voicings is the thought process of building a voicing, rather that voicing itself. I am very familiar with that process but I would not call the resulting voicings "shell" as there is a well defined notion called shell voicings. If a pianist using a shell voicings, that typically means they are laying down the basic chord sound with their left hands.

[Tal_175]

Not going to watch the video right now but literally every chord in the first twelve measures (or the thumbnail) is a shell. Low note and a third or seventh. Third or seventh and a color note.

I think you are conflating the concept of a "voicing" with the process of coming up with a "voicing". The resulting voicing is called drop2, not shell if that's what's played.

Shell Voicings

[pamosmusic]

I think you are conflating the concept of a "voicing" with the process of coming up with a "voicing". The resulting voicing is called drop2, not shell if that's what's played.

Shell Voicings

Tal this might be a good time to point out that the “drop” naming conventions literally describe the process by which someone arrives at the voicing. So if I’m conflating anything, it’s no more than you.

If someone is arriving at those voicings by way of a different process, then I’m not sure why it’s so important to call them that.

Some passing familiarity with Ed’s music would show a reliable handful of drop style voicings almost exclusively arranged such that the lowest two notes are the third and seventh of the chord he’s looking for.

C G B E, for example as an extended Am chord … or something like that.

Itll also show you TONS of shells with roots, third and seventh diads, and rootless shells with single melody notes in top.

And the link you’ve provided there is talking about piano voicing. Guitarists pretty routinely drop the roots from pianistic voicings. Freddie Green on down the line.

I don’t particularly care about the naming beyond the degree to which it’ll be reflected in the sound you produce. Think of drop chords all you won’t. You probably won’t sound much like Ed.

[Christian Miller]

Drop voicings kind of sound bad for comping a lot of the time as well... Especially drop 2s

[pamosmusic]

Drop voicings kind of sound bad for comping a lot of the time as well... Especially drop 2s

Just easier to come up with good voicings without worrying about the drops too.

That C G B E for Am7 could go to

C F# B E and I wouldn’t have to call it a maj7b5 off the b7

then to C F# B Eb and I wouldn’t have to call it a dim(maj7) off the b7.

then to C F# Bb Eb and I wouldn’t have to call it a m7b5 etc.

Then to B F# A D and I wouldn’t have to call it etc etc.

It’s just getting absolutely locked in on the small voicings and moving stuff around on top all pretty like. Probably the closest we can get to the way a pianist plays.

Those were all drop chords but it would’ve been cumbersome for a dullard like myself to have to think of them that way.

[Tal_175]

Tal this might be a good time to point out that the “drop” naming conventions literally describe the process by which someone arrives at the voicing. So if I’m conflating anything, it’s no more than you.

I think you didn't understand my point. The name "drop" comes from the way the resulting voicing is constructed, just like the name "shell" comes from the the way the voicing is constructed. What you are conflating is shell voicings with any voicing which can be derived from shell voicings b which are no longer constructed as shell voicings. Do you see the difference? That's more like someone calling a two note bass and fifth voicing "drop2 voicings" because they come up with it by stripping notes from the drop2 voicings they know. That would no longer be a drop 2 voicing.

If someone is arriving at those voicings by way of a different process, then I’m not sure why it’s so important to call them that.

Some passing familiarity with Ed’s music would show literally almost zero inverted drop invoicings and a reliable handful of drop style voicings almost exclusively arranged such that the lowest two notes are the third and seventh of the chord he’s looking for.

So you have a theory of how Ed Bickert came up with his comping voicings. To me many of his voicings are the bread and butter jazz guitar voicings played with or without a root. I don't know what he was thinking or whether he had a blanket concept for everything he played.

And the link you’ve provided there is talking about piano voicing. Guitarists pretty routinely drop the roots from pianistic voicings. Freddie Green on down the line.

I don’t particularly care about the naming beyond the degree to which it’ll be reflected in the sound you produce. Think of drop chords all you won’t. You probably won’t sound much like Ed.

Yes many players use rootless voicings. But I think when you say you're practicing "shell voicing" on a verbal medium, it is useful to distinguish between the actual definition of the term with the thought process you are using to drive other voicings if that's what you mean.

[Tal_175]

Drop voicings kind of sound bad for comping a lot of the time as well... Especially drop 2s

That's because many think drop2's are what they learned from basic 1 3 5 7 chord charts in chord books and must have 5ths. Many of Ed Bickert's drop 2's sound great and do not contain a 5th.

[Christian Miller]

Just easier to come up with good voicings without worrying about the drops too.

That C G B E for Am7 could go to

C F# B E and I wouldn’t have to call it a maj7b5 off the b7

then to C F# B Eb and I wouldn’t have to call it a dim(maj7) off the b7.

then to C F# Bb Eb and I wouldn’t have to call it a m7b5 etc.

Then to B F# A D and I wouldn’t have to call it etc etc.

It’s just getting absolutely locked in on the small voicings and moving stuff around on top all pretty like. Probably the closest we can get to the way a pianist plays.

Those were all drop chords but it would’ve been cumbersome for a dullard like myself to have to think of them that way.

It's a bit like all that sort of stuff - it's not guitar stuff.

Learn the guitar stuff first, play the grips and the licks. Shells are great but it's things like classic jazz guitar grips and little 'comping licks' as well.

Maybe don't listen to horn players and pianists are saying in books etc, until you have the musical and instrumental background to be able to apply what they are telling you - until you can already PLAY JAZZ. (I 100% include Barry Harris in that. Most guitarists are simply not ready for that stuff.)

Comes back to this point - paying jazz doesn't require a complete understanding of the fretboard and chord voicings, in fact. It's not a prerequisite for comping decently and playing effective solos and it has never been.

[Christian Miller]

That's because many think drop2's are what they learned from basic 1 3 5 7 chord charts in chord books and must have 5th. Many of Ed Bickert's drop 2's sound great and do not contain a 5th.

Then I probably wouldn't think of them as drop 2's even if you can construct them as such. Unless I was writing post-modal horn soli or something.

[AllanAllen]

Tal, you should go through the Peter's PDF, then you'd get it. Here's the thread.


Ed Bickert chords and diatonic cycles

[Tal_175]

Then I probably wouldn't think of them as drop 2's even if you can construct them as such. Unless I was writing post-modal horn soli or something.

It becomes natural to see drop 2 possibilities once one moves away from seeing chords only as grips but starts exploring what's inside them. I don't think you need to be a big band arranger to see harmony on the fretboard as voices. Of course drop voicings aren't the only way of doing that but Randy Vincent has a great book on Drop 2's that reads much like a soli arrangement book (it's based on Mark Levine's piano book). I was already moving voicings by the time I bought the book, thanks to Barry Harris, but the book is more approachable and different in important ways then the Barry Harris drop voicing approach.

[AllanAllen]

It's a bit like all that sort of stuff - it's not guitar stuff.

Learn the guitar stuff first, play the grips and the licks. Shells are great but it's things like classic jazz guitar grips and little 'comping licks' as well.

Maybe don't listen to horn players and pianists are saying in books etc, until you have the musical and instrumental background to be able to apply what they are telling you - until you can already PLAY JAZZ. (I 100% include Barry Harris in that. Most guitarists are simply not ready for that stuff.)

Comes back to this point - paying jazz doesn't require a complete understanding of the fretboard and chord voicings, in fact. It's not a prerequisite for comping decently and playing effective solos and it has never been.

You got a video on comping licks? Also, isn't the proper term turnarounds?

Like the Db7 C7 B7 Bb7 lick in Blue Moon is a turnaround to Eb

[Christian Miller]

You got a video on comping licks?

Don't think so - I should do one, in which I teach only the comps and don't name any of the chords haha.

Also, isn't the proper term turnarounds?

Like the Db7 C7 B7 Bb7 lick in Blue Moon is a turnaround to Eb

No - at least not the way I use the term.

A turnaround is a type of chord progression that sets you up to go back to the I chord. Usually (but not always) ends on V7.

So a II V I isn't a turnaround. I call it a cadence.

You can have 'comping licks' for those.

[pamosmusic]

That's because many think drop2's are what they learned from basic 1 3 5 7 chord charts in chord books and must have 5ths. Many of Ed Bickert's drop 2's sound great and do not contain a 5th.

Wait what?

Drop 2s that don’t contain a fifth?

Citation needed.

[AllanAllen]

Don't think so - I should do one, in which I teach only the comps and don't name any of the chords haha.

You have to cut time somewhere

So, is a lick more like pedaling between 7 and 6 on a static chord?

[Christian Miller]

It becomes natural to see drop 2 possibilities once one moves away from seeing chords only as grips but starts exploring what's inside them. I don't think you need to be a big band arranger to see harmony on the fretboard as voices. Of course drop voicings aren't the only way of doing that but Randy Vincent has a great book on Drop 2's that reads much like a soli arrangement book (it's based on Mark Levine's piano book). I was already moving voicings by the time I bought the book, thanks to Barry Harris, but the book is more approachable and different in important ways then the Barry Harris drop voicing approach.

I would be failing in my duty as a jazz educator if I didn't teach more advanced guitar student drop nomenclature because it comes up a lot. People teach it because they were taught it, as with so many things in music (and life) it's just one of those things.

It makes sense to talk about Wes playing drop 2's in a chord solo for instance, but how relevant is it to note that the basic G7 voicing on tenor banjo is a drop 2/4?

If you are thinking about voices, I would contend you want to focus on the voices, rather than labelling voicings. Think about the interval enclosed by the chord, what note is in the top voice and the bass, what motion they are moving with and then what goes on in the middle. Then you can transpose the various voices up and down by octaves. For instance, find every inversion of a three voice 'shell voicings' of a cycle of fourths.

The basic procedure is the same, but I wouldn't be able to tell you what drops they were without some thought, because mostly it's not relevant. Of course I know the theory that I could give you an answer if I taught about it.

There's no need to label any of that stuff that way. I think of the basic shell voicing as enclosed by a tenth or a seventh, for example.

But that's counterpoint really. And drops come specifically from semi-parallel big band reed choir writing which is where they make the most sense.

It is true that a lot of guitar educators think along these lines though. A lot the Barry Harris people seem to want to define counterpoint in terms of changing drop voicings which I find incredibly clunky and gives me a headache. Maybe they have better brains than me?

Anyway that's all a bit beside the point for 'people learning to comp well.' The best comper I know on guitar doesn't seem to think that way.

[Tal_175]

Wait what?

Drop 2s that don’t contain a fifth?

Citation needed.

Why do you think that drop 2's must contain a fifth? If you have a closed major #4 (1 3 #4 7) voicing (or minor 11) and drop the 2, what do you get?

[Christian Miller]

You could say a shell voicing is an incomplete drop voicing, but to me that just seems like hassle.

[Christian Miller]

You have to cut time somewhere

So, is a lick more like pedaling between 7 and 6 on a static chord?

Yeah. 'Tea for Twoing' as I call it. And then there's 'James Bonding'. And 'My Funny Valentining'. Or what Alan called 'Monk Moves'

I think it's fun to connect them to something familiar. Helps you hear them. You just need to know where to slot them in. 'That's something you can swap out for a II V I , or a static I, or a static V' etc.

There's zillions of them of course.

[pamosmusic]

Why do you think that drop 2's must contain a fifth? If you have a closed major #4 (1 3 #4 7) or augmented voicing and drop the 2, what do you get?

Well at this point the only relationship to “drop 2” is by way of describing the process by which you arrived at the chord. Drop 2 with a standard arranging process for including an 11th. I guess you could call it a b5 instead of a sharp 4 and meet the strict definition.

And to mine and Christians point … if you can find that chord where the 1 is the root of the prevailing harmony, call me.

Thats one of the chords I mentioned above … eg … C F# B E. Almost always we’re talking about a D7 voicing for that chord. So drop 2? Sure, but it’s incidental.

[pamosmusic]

Yeah. 'Tea for Twoing' as I call it. And then there's 'James Bonding'. And 'My Funny Valentining'. Or what Alan called 'Monk Moves'

I think it's fun to connect them to something familiar. Helps you hear them. You just need to know where to slot them in. 'That's something you can swap out for a II V I , or a static I, or a static V' etc.

There's zillions of them of course.

James Bonding is an underrated device. Heard it in an Old Dominion song the other day. It’s also in Single Ladies.