Anybody use the Goodchord Voice Leading Books?

[Liarspoker]

So after today's practise I had a bit of fun with the very start of volume 3.

This is typical of what I do. Learn the progression then do a little improv on it.

I'm loving the chords, nice and dissonant. As you see I mix up the chords and melodic lines. Nothing special though just having fun as I said.

How are you all doing?

Anyone want to make a short video playing something to show us your approach?

[Mick Wright]

Here's a tab based on Vol. 3 p. 168. It's one of Vol. 3's 'Analyze This' questions, so I won't give spoilers (if anyone is really stuck I can send clues by PM). I'm also puzzled about one thing. I'd be interested in anyone's opinion on the direction of the voice-leading arrows on the original page: in the lower voices these seem unusually random and confused. Many adjacent notes make leaps of sevenths instead of seconds: I don't think they're typos, since there are a dozen or so in one example, but they don't make musical sense (to me) with such open voicings, unless we're thinking of full orchestral range.

For my sketch, below, I've ignored the arrows but adhered to the given chord sequence and individual voicings to produce a sequence that jumps octaves in its own fashion and sounds musical to my ears. I could write more on this little gem, but I'll leave any discussion till later. It's fun to improvise with these satisfying dissonances and unfamiliar chord voicings.

All the best, Mick W

[Jimmy blue note]

I just spent a week hanging out with Bill Frisell, John Scofield, Julian Lage, Kurt Rosenwinkel and Mike Stern. It was a revelation talking casually about the musical world that brings us together.
Mike had asked me to give him my perspective on the Almanacs so I brought my Volume 1 with me.
Each time I brought out the book to discuss it with someone, a crowd of guitarists gathered 'round. I even met alums from the Goodchord camp that convened years ago.
Gilad Hekselman was talking about wanting to use more pianistic voicings and harmonies in his playing. I showed him the book but he was unimpressed. At a glance it was foreign and alien to anything in his world, so it didn't click. Common enough reaction.
Kurt sat down at my table as I was talking to someone who's been working on the books. It's unbelievable how much he'd gotten and none of it was even remotely like what I saw in the book. He used it in his studies of inversions.
It was a confusing to Kurt when he looked at it. I explained the repeating pattern of root movement (one way of riding root flow through the progressions of cycles), and the resolutions of individual voices (another way of guiding from one voice to another), and finally when I showed him the cannonic melody that wove throughout each voice something clicked. He said "Can I see that?" He took the book studied it for a minute, you can see he was "hearing" and "seeing" the chords on the page, reading the cycles.
And he said "I have to have this."
That, in a nutshell is the microcosmic process of introduction to linear thinking a la Goodchord.
It's going to be very interesting to watch Kurt Rosenwinkel given the same keys to the kingdom Ben Monder took residence in.

I'm going to propose to Joel Harrison that next year's Alternative Guitar Camp present some kind of workshop for Mick's harmonic liberation volumes. Maybe a new dialogue for guitarists to pack themselves with and run with?

Some of these discussions and illustrations will follow in posts. The camp was amazing in sorting out ideas and thoughts.

[Liarspoker]

Mick - very interesting post. Very dissonant chords. I love the C v B rub. In fact one of my favourite chords is just a Cmaj7 but C E B C. The open C chord with the added B on the G string.

I think with this almanac stuff I'll stick to voicings with 3 notes. Don't think my hands can take the 4 note voicings

I'll look at the cycle and voice movements a little later. I can see my boy coming home and I gave a question for David.

David, it sounds like your week was much more interesting than mine.
I guess that you have to be ready for books to come along. I've started novels then thought that they were rubbish only to pick them up later and be enthralled by them.

Quick question, is there truth to the almanacs being released again with additional insights from players that have spent time with the book?

Thank you

[Christian Miller]

Mick - very interesting post. Very dissonant chords. I love the C v B rub. In fact one of my favourite chords is just a Cmaj7 but C E B C. The open C chord with the added B on the G string.

I think with this almanac stuff I'll stick to voicings with 3 notes. Don't think my hands can take the 4 note voicings

I'll look at the cycle and voice movements a little later. I can see my boy coming home and I gave a question for David.

David, it sounds like your week was much more interesting than mine.
I guess that you have to be ready for books to come along. I've started novels then thought that they were rubbish only to pick them up later and be enthralled by them.

Quick question, is there truth to the almanacs being released again with additional insights from players that have spent time with the book?

Thank you

Major seventh chords don’t quite invert in a sensible way which is probably why modern players like them.

x 7 9 x 8 8
where’s that at lol?

someone was talking about Ben Monder liking minor 9ths in his chords; Lage too. You’ve got a nice one in that voicing for instance. It’s not a voicing that would be considered ‘legit’ in old school jazz arranging.

To me

x 7 9 x 8 8
x 2 2 x 1 3
x 3 5 x 5 7

sounds like a chord progression, not inversions of the same chord

[J.Lee]

Here's a tab based on Vol. 3 p. 168. It's one of Vol. 3's 'Analyze This' questions, so I won't give spoilers (if anyone is really stuck I can send clues by PM).

Back-of-envelope analysis, without benefit of the books:

1. Second-to-last chord of the first line, containing the notes B, C, D, F is "Triad over Bass Note II" with C as the bass note.

2. All A's and E's are flatted in the example; maybe the whole example is Tr/BN II over the C harmonic scale?

3. Starting with BDF/C, step each of those notes in parallel through the C harmonic scale to produce the scale tone chords of Tr/BN II:

I = CBDF
II = DCEbG
III = EbDFAb
(etc.)

4. Compare the notes of each chord in the example to the notes of the scale tone chords, and find: Each chord in the example is contained in Tr/BN II over C harmonic minor.

5. Assign the Roman numerals of the scale tone chords to the corresponding chords in the example, and find that the chords in the example are arranged IV, II, VII, V, III, I, VI, IV, II, VII, V, III, I, VI, IV, II, VII, V, III, I, VI. In other words, Cycle 6 shifted to start on IV instead of I.

6. Adjacent chords of the example switch from one drop voicing to another without regard to the "smooth voice leading" principle employed in the first two books.

7. Find another envelope to work out whether there is a pattern to the sequence of voicings used.

[J.Lee]

6. Adjacent chords of the example switch from one drop voicing to another without regard to the "smooth voice leading" principle employed in the first two books.

This doesn't seem quite right to me now.

From another angle, the voicings seem contrived to make a homophonic composition:

(1) a melody expressed in the the top voices, having some typical melodic characteristics (e.g. motive, sequence, upward leaps followed by descending notes, overall melodic curve); and

(2) a harmonization expressed in the lower three voices of each chord, where from chord to chord each voice creeps stepwise up and down in the scale of C harmonic minor.

So from this viewpoint there is attention to "smooth voice-leading" in the lower three voices.

This ignores the M.S.R.P. of Cycle 6 Tr/BN II, which I have not identified, and which I assume must still be there in the DNA of this chord sequence.

[Mick Wright]

Thanks, J.Lee, for the insightful comments. I think I can now see that the melody line that you mention is actually the 'bass' line of the sequence of the TBN2 chords, with the top note always the 2nd in these curious voicings of R,2,4,7 chords (e.g. interpreting the first two chords of the sequence as F G B Eb and D Eb G C and the rest of the sequence similarly). The top line is descending in thirds, while the lower three voices replicate a sequence of spread 3-part 4ths found in Almanac Vol 2. (Many of the sequences in the Almanacs are nested within other charts, and this is a great example.) In my copy I've numbered the main body of charts on the yellow/blue/pink pages - this one appears 25 pages into Vol.2’s set of charts.
I'll sketch out one of my improvisations on this sequence here soon. Meanwhile, it's great to see MSRPs: we haven't said a lot about MSRPs in nearly one thousand posts. There's some serious musical magic in this aspect of the Almanacs that I'm only just beginning to sense the potential of. For now I'll just post the two items under discussion, below. The cycle in the four-voice sequence begins on the final chord of the second-bottom line (system) of the three-voice page.
All the best, MWr

[Mick Wright]

... meanwhile, does anyone have any thoughts on the arrows indicating steps of sevenths in the four-part sequence? Are the resulting crossing voices a part of some musical intention, perhaps? The direction of the arrows is different from those in the 3-part fourths sequence. I still can't see the sense behind them.

[Jimmy blue note]

Meanwhile, it's great to see MSRPs: we haven't said a lot about MSRPs in nearly one thousand posts. There's some serious musical magic in this aspect of the Almanacs that I'm only just beginning to sense the potential of.

The MSRP is the melodic thread that permiates the running of the cycles. In the bass, it's the equivalent of the Cantus Firmus but it's repeated and run in each voice in different phases. In this way it's the melody that makes the cannon, or round. The arrows will indicate the direction of the next voice in relation to the present voice. In some cycles, and some chord groupings (families) there will NOT be the traditional narrow leaps only rule that is dictated by traditional Shenkerian voice leading. This is one of the ways these cycles diverge from traditions of western classical voice leading and counterpoint. Another is once you leave triadic or tertiary harmony (based on 3rds) you're going to encounter things like clusters (notes in smaller than 3rds) combined with notes spaced in wider leaps (greater than 3rds). These groupings are treated as other voice led voices but you can see that it necessitates voices that simultaneously ascend in some voices and others descend.
The melodic lines of the MSRPs in this case become very interesting because they'll have stepwise motion AND leaps.
This is one reason these groupings are sometimes left until one has a surer footing in tertiary harmonic situations, and there are some of these you just CAN'T play on the guitar...as written.

[Jimmy blue note]

On the topic of MSRPs, they are one of the more intuitive ways that one can understand the cycles in a truly horizontal perspective. I remember a workshop during the Good Chord summer camp. We divided into four groups, SATB the four ranges of a choir. Each group sang the MSRP that that cycle was based on. At different points, each voice would ascend or descend. Together everyone had a collective Eureka! moment as a piano played the chords of the cycle in more traditional root in bass voicing.
If the real value of the almanacs is to hear and think in a horizontal way, the MSRP is the linear movement that is at play. In more unconventional families, the melodic germ goes up AND down before it 'modulates'.
This is why I found it helpful to work with tertiary before I began to get into TBN and Spread Clusters.

[JakeAcci]

I just spent a week hanging out with Bill Frisell, John Scofield, Julian Lage, Kurt Rosenwinkel and Mike Stern. It was a revelation talking casually about the musical world that brings us together.
Mike had asked me to give him my perspective on the Almanacs so I brought my Volume 1 with me.
Each time I brought out the book to discuss it with someone, a crowd of guitarists gathered 'round. I even met alums from the Goodchord camp that convened years ago.
Gilad Hekselman was talking about wanting to use more pianistic voicings and harmonies in his playing. I showed him the book but he was unimpressed. At a glance it was foreign and alien to anything in his world, so it didn't click. Common enough reaction.
Kurt sat down at my table as I was talking to someone who's been working on the books. It's unbelievable how much he'd gotten and none of it was even remotely like what I saw in the book. He used it in his studies of inversions.
It was a confusing to Kurt when he looked at it. I explained the repeating pattern of root movement (one way of riding root flow through the progressions of cycles), and the resolutions of individual voices (another way of guiding from one voice to another), and finally when I showed him the cannonic melody that wove throughout each voice something clicked. He said "Can I see that?" He took the book studied it for a minute, you can see he was "hearing" and "seeing" the chords on the page, reading the cycles.
And he said "I have to have this."
That, in a nutshell is the microcosmic process of introduction to linear thinking a la Goodchord.
It's going to be very interesting to watch Kurt Rosenwinkel given the same keys to the kingdom Ben Monder took residence in.

I'm going to propose to Joel Harrison that next year's Alternative Guitar Camp present some kind of workshop for Mick's harmonic liberation volumes. Maybe a new dialogue for guitarists to pack themselves with and run with?

Some of these discussions and illustrations will follow in posts. The camp was amazing in sorting out ideas and thoughts.

Sounds pretty amazing! Excited to see what Mr. Rosenwinkel might come up with.

[Christian Miller]

?

The MSRP is the melodic thread that permiates the running of the cycles. In the bass, it's the equivalent of the Cantus Firmus but it's repeated and run in each voice in different phases. In this way it's the melody that makes the cannon, or round. The arrows will indicate the direction of the next voice in relation to the present voice. In some cycles, and some chord groupings (families) there will NOT be the traditional narrow leaps only rule that is dictated by traditional Shenkerian voice leading.

in the sense that if it’s not a step it’s harmony?

Yeah, not sure about that rule. Tbh I don’t know much about Schenker. The lines in for instance cycle 2 triads sound like melodies to me. I usually end up singing along haha.

If you are talking about cantus firmus it’s worth pointing out plainchant isn’t all steps either. Presumably when Bach or Palestrina or someone wrote a mass on a plainchant cantus they were hearing that line as a single melody? (Confiteor from the B minor Mass is a good Bach example of sort of thing, esp when the tenor starts belting out the plainchant cantus in the middle of the movement; they always tank it haha ‘Engage Pavarotti mode!’ .)

I do think there’s a tendency to hear harmony to the western ear especially in melodic sequences. monodic traditions such as Middle Eastern often have descending melodic sequences that are not originally based on harmonic thinking but in practice can be harmonised by cycle 4 progressions by, for instance, Middle Eastern jazz fusion musicians and ME pop arrangers where the maqam doesn’t contain quarter tones. The connection between melodic sequencing and functional harmony is really interesting to me. Presumably the former predates the latter.

(So for instance Cycle 4 as presented in 7th chords in VLA Vol 1 is a standard baroque realisation of a stepwise descending bassline.)

This is one of the ways these cycles diverge from traditions of western classical voice leading and counterpoint. Another is once you leave triadic or tertiary harmony (based on 3rds) you're going to encounter things like clusters (notes in smaller than 3rds) combined with notes spaced in wider leaps (greater than 3rds). These groupings are treated as other voice led voices but you can see that it necessitates voices that simultaneously ascend in some voices and others descend.
The melodic lines of the MSRPs in this case become very interesting because they'll have stepwise motion AND leaps.
This is one reason these groupings are sometimes left until one has a surer footing in tertiary harmonic situations, and there are some of these you just CAN'T play on the guitar...as written.

Unless you arpeggiate them as Mick points out iirc. Or are Ben Monder.

[Christian Miller]

Stop it Ben (please don’t stop)

[Liarspoker]

Stop it Ben (please don’t stop)

My favourite album. I think that I was the number 1 listener of that album on Spotify last year ...and probably will be this year too.
That transcriber got further with Emily than I did. If only I had more time

[Liarspoker]

Not quite Ben Monder but here's a little counterpoint on Afternoon in Paris. I should definitely have gone more outside.

[Jimmy blue note]

Not quite Ben Monder but here's a little counterpoint on Afternoon in Paris. I should definitely have gone more outside.

Very nice! Good movement in the voices and your time, dynamics and linear definition were right on. Thanks for sharing that!

[J.Lee]

The top line is descending in thirds, while the lower three voices replicate a sequence of spread 3-part 4ths found in Almanac Vol 2.

This strikes me as a cleaner explanation. Maybe TBN2 is superfluous.

[Mick Wright]

Thanks J.Lee – I liked your 'homophony' label too – that adds a little more light. Once again I'm amazed by Mr Goodchord's leap of imagination in finding that the 3-part fourths progression from Vol. 2 becomes an unusual TBN2 sequence. Several different voicings are created by the simple addition of a fourth voice as a soprano line: each note in the top line anticipates a tone in the following chord and the melodic pattern of this logically-derived line contrasts well with the close voice-leading in the lower three voices.
However, I'm still baffled at the arrows indicating intervals of sevenths in this particular example. The arrows usually make sense in the Almanac charts, and their functions are fairly obvious – so I don't think the rash of sevenths in the lower voices here are all typos – although I really can't figure out what musical intention these strange leaps and crossing voices would serve, even with a wind band or string orchestra: can anyone help with this one, please? (The chart is the four-voice one in my post #983.) Is it a recognisable or functional contemporary jazz orchestration technique?

[J.Lee]

the 3-part fourths progression from Vol. 2 becomes an unusual TBN2 sequence blending several different voicings with the simple addition of a fourth voice (the TBN2's 'bass' note) as a soprano line, which is also semi-independent of the close voice-leading that continues in the lower three voices.

If the TBN2 "bass" note is in the "soprano" voice of a TBN2 chord, then by definition the lower three voices of the chord must make a triad. But in this example, as you've pointed out, they don't. Rather, the lower voices of the chords all make quartal harmonic structures that don't count as triads in the Goodchord system. Therefore, if this example is TBN2, the "bass" note can't be in the soprano voice and must be found in the lower voices of each chord. At least, that's how it looks to me at the moment.

[J.Lee]

... meanwhile, does anyone have any thoughts on the arrows indicating steps of sevenths in the four-part sequence? Are the resulting crossing voices a part of some musical intention, perhaps? The direction of the arrows is different from those in the 3-part fourths sequence. I still can't see the sense behind them.

I don't know the answer, but the arrows in the "soprano" voice strike me as equally mysterious. If I'm reading them correctly, they require the reiteration of descending thirds to continue across a range of six octaves! What do you make of that?

[Mick Wright]

Re. 'six octaves' — I think I saw Michael Brecker do that once on his EWI ! Seriously though. I know octave shifts are usually an option with the Almanac sequences, but the arrows seem to be doing it in only one voice of a harmony, which seems strange to me. I'm wondering whether in this example the arrows might be indicating such ad lib. octave shifts without spelling all of these out in the other voices?

Re. 'TBN bass note in the soprano voice' — sorry, that's my mistake: I'll correct my earlier post this morning. My excuse is that I've confused myself by imagining a TBN created from a 3-part fourth structure with an added bass note. Chords such as these aren't a part of the Goodchord system, although it might be interesting to write out some of these with the conventional voice-leading. (The drop 3 voicing looks promising, for such an exercise.)
With this particular sequence I'm interested in how the soprano note of each of the four-part chords always appears again in a lower voice of the next chord (i.e. each melody step anticipates the root of the next close-voiced 3-part fourth, considered as 1 4 5). This process dictates each subsequent voicing, from one chord to the next (i.e. the use of several voicings isn't an arbitrary creative choice). More to follow on this.

[Mick Wright]

Zooming in on the details of the two examples we're discussing: I've also moved a chord to the front of the 3-part fourths sequence to make the two examples match up exactly.

[J.Lee]

Zooming in on the details of the two examples we're discussing: I've also moved a chord to the front of the 3-part fourths sequence to make the two examples match up exactly.

Hi Mick -

Here are some further observations:

Considering the 4-note voicings as TBN2 once more, it appears the soprano voice in each case is the third of the TBN2's embedded triad.

It looks as if there is only one note that can be added to any particular 3-part 4ths chord to make a TBN2, and it happens to be the 3rd of the resulting TBN2 triad.

That's easy to test - To make a triad, the added note has to be a third above one of the 3 notes of the 3-part 4ths chord. From a few tests, it seems that of the 3 possible cases, only one produces a TBN2, and the other two cases make a TBN1 and a 4-part fourth. I haven't worked with 3-part fourths enough to know why this might be so.

This suggests to me a possible procedure for constructing the 4-part example: Start with the 3-part 4ths/spread voicing/cycle 6, and add to each chord a soprano voice consisting of the one note that will make a TBN2 chord.

Then add or alter arrows to taste!

[J.Lee]

a TBN created from a 3-part fourth structure with an added bass note. Chords such as these aren't a part of the Goodchord system, although it might be interesting to write out some of these with the conventional voice-leading.

FYI, while looking at The Advancing Guitarist today I noticed that MG provides a start on this project, on p. 81.