Voice Leading

[JakeAcci]

Cool! BDLH, this is a big part of Mick Goodrick's Voice Leading Almanac series.

I made a little chart recently: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...qSHZRNmc#gid=0

[Reg]

So what is voice leading... I'm not trying to be cute or funny, really. Is it an answer or solution to a question or problem.

I tend to think either... part writing or harmonic movement. There are individual parts or one big part or line.

So I'm thinking and hearing either guidelines that represent, individual parts, one big polyphonic part or some type of combination...

The result can either be counterpoint... with resulting voiceleading from predetermined harmony and part movement guidelines.

Line writing where the individual lines or parts determine the resulting harmony and voice leading. The voice leading
is resulting of each individual line... not pre-determined principles governing the movement or progression of parts.

Or I could have combinations of...

So I would believe one needs context and some type of reference to determine which method you would choose as guidelines for controlling parts or chords movement.

With jazz and on guitar I tend to try and not make what I'm playing the least amount of movement as possible and follow classic voice leading guide lines. My goal generally isn't to not be heard. Generally.

That being said... with out being aware of traditional references and possibilities how would one know.

So is your goal to be able to see common tones and least amount of movement... are you using guideline as far as what determines chord... what's implies and what's not.

I tend to always view my fretboard as one big grid... When I see or hear D-7... the fretboard becomes one large grid with all the notes from what ever note collection I choose to represent that D-7.

I see and hear the basic chord tones and usually view a few choices as to what the rest of the notes are. I can have D dorian. aeolian and phrygian fretboard grid patterns all dropped going on at the same time. I can drop G7 with it's options also on top of the D- patterns.

This is a guitar technique... neck pattern grids that represent harmonies. More of a fingering and neck awareness concept as compared to method of controlling voice leading. But the awareness make seeing... which becomes hearing fairly easy to work on, eventually becoming almost instinctive.

Anyway that's how I made my fretboard light up...

Reg

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

Voice leading and the rules of common-practice composition make sense for orchestras and choirs performing tonal music. A guitar is neither an orchestra nor a choir.

In a conventional combo, a rhythm guitarist respects relevant voice-leading by (usually)

1. diving below the bass or soaring above the melody only with a very good reason....
2. trying smoothly to change voices, especially the bass and highest voices.

Do any guitarists really worry about parallel fifths and octaves in their chord progressions?

[ecj]

Do any guitarists really worry about parallel fifths and octaves in their chord progressions?

Good point, Kiefer. Most jazz has tons of parallel and direct intervals in it. That's part of the sound of the music (half step approach chords, jumping up a fourth and fifth in blues, etc.).

Plenty of great jazz recordings have pianists and guitarists just playing the 3s and 7s descending in half steps. Bill Evans does this on "Tune Up" in the Miles Davis group, for example. I think that's a great way to start learning how to make chord motion smoother.

[Nabil B]

When I see or hear D-7... the fretboard becomes one large grid with all the notes from what ever note collection I choose to represent that D-7.

This is something I'd like to achieve. Right now, if I see or hear D-7, I'll view the D-7 chord shape closest to where my fretting hand is and one of its corresponding scales depending on what I choose to play. Then I can play D-7 all over the fretboard, but only by going from one D-7 shape to another, I can't visualize one large shape all over the fingerboard. What kind of exercises could help me learn that ?

[JayRivers]

I've been listening to a lot of Gerry Mulligan lately. His work is amazing, because a lot of it is sax and horn musicians comping each other on single note instruments. A lot of counterpoint and weaving between two single note lines.

I think listening to their style of music can really help develop the ear for voice leading, especially for accompaniment. It can help with creating the initial voice line and then building chord notes underneath.

For instance:

-Peace, JR

[Phil in London]

interesting thread. A couple of thoughts that I find useful to consider:

@ If we talk about voicings, the first Q to ask is which chord we are playing. This is not trivial, since even in ii/v/i one can play lots of substitutions. Sometimes the voicing of the substitution will impact its choice.

@ Short way progressions will often sound great, but not always. One rather needs to find the right timbre within the combo, which may require more radical position changes sometimes.

@ guitar comping is less and less the playing of full chords. Nowadays its often enough to play only two notes, possibly the classic thirds and sevenths, but potentially also quarts, seconds, etc, to add colour. One can even sometimes jump into such intervals, to create a jazzy effect (particularly if a bass player is there too). The classic rules as expressed e.g. in Knud Jeppesen's book on choral counterpoint have little applicability here.

@ From what I can see guitar comping in duos will often focus on creating some sort of melody that the comper emphasises, supported by the rest of the (chosen) chord tones. This melody will often be rhythmically variant towards the rest of the comping. I am far away from being in command of this technique, but I find it the most interesting way to organise voicings in this context.

[Phil in London]

A very interesting example for modern voicings is this:

JW uses lots of short way progressions between substitutions and extensions, often with chromatically lead top line, and more than once jumping into dissonances to create colour and tension. Incredible playing, giving lots of material for voicing ideas.

[NSJ]

What does this mean, in practical sense, that differentiates it from, say, playing changes? Same thing? Different?

I mean, I understand, very broadly speaking, the general principles of voice leading in the classical sense (4 part writing, independent lines in the soprano-alto-tenor-bass that generate a harmonic progression). And I get it when used in a jazz context (smoothest transition of notes as one changes chords, etc; i.e., 7th to the 3rd, 3rd to the 7th, 9th to the 5th).


But is there something different, from the point of view of generating lines, between voice leading and playing changes and targeting chord tones?

Seems to me it's the same thing, no?

What do you think?

[TH]

Horizontal movement of voices coincident with a harmonic structure. Of course they'd generate lines. They're following melodic movement through the harmony. Piano players do this ALL the time. What is confusing you?
David

[jordanklemons]

There's a big difference between playing melodic ideas that respect the changes, and just running through and arpeggiating the chord progression. He's talking about developing melodic lines and ideas that voice lead through the changes - meaning they recognize their existence and respect their contours... but they aren't just running through and outlining them.

Looking at the melody to just about any standard from the GASB and you'll see this at play. Like maybe Someday My Prince Will Come. There's only 1 or 2 melody notes per chord. It's not just playing changes. It's a melodic statement, built on thematic ideas, that respect and work with the harmonic movement. But not simply arpeggiating it.

[wolflen]

watching and hearing chord melody masters keep the melody alive through changes that are not expected/common voiced and have it make harmonic sense..that you want to hear more..you want the mystery harmony to give new life in a melody you have heard many times..but now its brand new and in between changes a melodic imitation line may connect two mystery chords .. then you have two choices..inspiration and practice with a new attitude or take up sky diving..

[Richard Luther]

NSJ, I watched Peter Bernstein's video on mymusicmasterclass. He demonstrates exactly what you are talking about.

He mentions a piano players ability to generate single lines by wiggling their fingers over chords.

Take a minor II V and three adjacent strings, tightly voice lead the II to the V to the I.

Now, like a piano player, wiggle your fingers over those tightly led three string chords to generate single lines.

Add enclosures, etc and there's your line.

Play with the intervals to create movement and incorporate elements of the melody to really create something different yet specific to the tune.

This section of both videos was an oh sh!/ moment for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[christianm77]

Longo has a book on this

[christianm77]

Right

Right, *tonal targets*, guide tones, chord tone targeting, etc. All that stuff I have a grasp of. As well as having a grasp of what voice leading is, both in the jazz and classical sense.

It just seemed odd and a bit confusing to use that phrase *generate lines from voice leading*.

Makes sense to me.

Just take your chords and turn them into lines. If you practice progressions with voice leading (everyone should practice comping right?)

You can stick the melody note on top.

[christianm77]

There's a big difference between playing melodic ideas that respect the changes, and just running through and arpeggiating the chord progression. He's talking about developing melodic lines and ideas that voice lead through the changes - meaning they recognize their existence and respect their contours... but they aren't just running through and outlining them.

Looking at the melody to just about any standard from the GASB and you'll see this at play. Like maybe Someday My Prince Will Come. There's only 1 or 2 melody notes per chord. It's not just playing changes. It's a melodic statement, built on thematic ideas, that respect and work with the harmonic movement. But not simply arpeggiating it.

This is a an interesting choice because the melody is pretty chromatic and the chromatic neighbour tones suggest harmonic movement very clearly.

Not all standards are like this..... many are mostly diatonic and the chromaticism is in the harmony.

Of course it was written by a properly trained composer, so as you say this harmony is emergent out of the melodic statement and the motives rather than the other way around.

As jazz players we have to get it working the other way around for changes playing

[NSJ]

OK, I presume by wiggle some notes around the chord that must mean something like this

Play a minor seventh chord with the voice dispersion of 157b3--- then you can easily find 4, 5, #5 and 13 from the top voice .

I would have assumed that 99% of people do this anyway. Sorry for the confusion. I think I understand now .

[NSJ]

The more I think about this, one of the real masters of wiggling a line from a chord would have been Barney Kessel. Chords and lines formed an integrated whole in his playing.

[jordanklemons]

This is a an interesting choice because the melody is pretty chromatic and the chromatic neighbour tones suggest harmonic movement very clearly.

Not all standards are like this..... many are mostly diatonic and the chromaticism is in the harmony.

SDMPWC was just the first tune that came to mind to offer an example. Feel free to pinpoint specifics within it or offer some insight from your perspective... or a different tune altogether... but as far as what I was getting at... I wouldn't break the tune down and analyze it this way. I don't think of it as being pretty chromatic. Besides the two extra 'chromatic' notes the entire melody is diatonic to the key of Bb. And depending on what you mean by chromaticism in the harmony, I might disagree.

Of course it was written by a properly trained composer, so as you say this harmony is emergent out of the melodic statement and the motives rather than the other way around.

"As you say" ??? I don't remember saying that, did I? I'm not a believer that harmony ALWAYS has to follow melody... and I'm usually pretty honest about that. I think in music, things can start and end and move in any direction. I think. Anyways, my only points here being that I don't think I said that, and that I honestly have not the slightest clue what Frank was thinking or how he was working when he wrote the tune.

As jazz players we have to get it working the other way around for changes playing

I agree with this... and it sort of loops us back to the OP. How do we do that? Is outlining and running the changes the same thing as improvising melodies that respect and offer insight into the changes the same thing? For me it's not. Others may disagree or simply not care about the difference. But to me, it's an important distinction. And it really gets to the matter of how I practice, improvise, compose, arrange, harmonize... all of it. And I believe it's what

[christianm77]

SDMPWC was just the first tune that came to mind to offer an example. Feel free to pinpoint specifics within it or offer some insight from your perspective... or a different tune altogether... but as far as what I was getting at... I wouldn't break the tune down and analyze it this way. I don't think of it as being pretty chromatic. Besides the two extra 'chromatic' notes the entire melody is diatonic to the key of Bb. And depending on what you mean by chromaticism in the harmony, I might disagree.

Sure, not sure if it's 'insights' exactly so much as stating the obvious, but: a tune that pops into my head is Stella by Starlight.

Looking at a chart reveals right away that while the harmony is pretty complex, but the melody is entirely diatonic to Bb major, with the exception of two notes.

The E when you have the temporary modulation into F around bar 10.

The Gb in bars 29 and 30.

So most of the chromaticism - for example - the famous Bbo7 in the first two bars - is harmony based, and can be put into the bassline or inner voices.

The melody is highly motivic, but not hugely harmonic in character, at least to my ears.

This also makes it an excellent candidate for reharmonisation. I think SDMPWC might be a bit trickier, but I haven't tried yet.

"As you say" ??? I don't remember saying that, did I? I'm not a believer that harmony ALWAYS has to follow melody... and I'm usually pretty honest about that. I think in music, things can start and end and move in any direction. I think. Anyways, my only points here being that I don't think I said that, and that I honestly have not the slightest clue what Frank was thinking or how he was working when he wrote the tune.

Apologies for putting words in your mouth then, obviously misunderstood your point.

Actually I have no idea what Frank Churchill's training was in music... I assumed he was classically trained like the majority of Tin Pan Alley songwriters, but this may in fact not be the case.

I can make an educated guess as to how classically trained composers go about writing a melody, or at least how they hone their chops in this area, as I have studied it a little (emphasis on little.)

I agree with this... and it sort of loops us back to the OP. How do we do that? Is outlining and running the changes the same thing as improvising melodies that respect and offer insight into the changes the same thing? For me it's not. Others may disagree or simply not care about the difference. But to me, it's an important distinction. And it really gets to the matter of how I practice, improvise, compose, arrange, harmonize... all of it. And I believe it's what

I care about the difference because I like to write music, and I think it's a different art to improvising on changes, although there are obvious overlaps. Also I think the study of one helps with the other.

Composition is such a deep thing. I feel pretentious calling myself a composer as I've never written an extended work like a string quartet using common practice methods - but maybe that's silly.

Jazz is, of course, a separate tradition, but the GASB standards were written often by composers who were not from the jazz tradition (some of them actively disliked jazz, AFAIK)... That's the interesting thing to me....

[christianm77]

So - my point is that, as I understand it, the practice of playing bop lines on changes and writing a melody for a song to be two completely different things.

For example, bop improvisers very relaxed about what happens with the 'extensions' in chords (because they were viewed simply as melody notes on chords). In general, if I understand the tradition right, bop players are not interested in preserving the melody on the chord in this way.

An example is Barry's advice to play a standard dominant scale through every dominant chord regardless of function as part of practice - bVII7(#11) in Cherokee? Don't worry about the #11. Accompanist (presumably) should leave the extension out.

Maybe you run the scale on the important minor, and you have that note. Maybe not.

Now there are players who try and square the circle of melody and changes playing - Jim Hall springs to mind... Peter Bernstein. It's a fruitful area for music making I think.

Lastly, many modern players view harmony and melody as a composite - for example there is an A on the Bbo7 in Stella, so that suggests a certain scale and the harmony is a Bbo7(maj7). That's a different thing again.

[JensL]

What does this mean, in practical sense, that differentiates it from, say, playing changes? Same thing? Different?

I mean, I understand, very broadly speaking, the general principles of voice leading in the classical sense (4 part writing, independent lines in the soprano-alto-tenor-bass that generate a harmonic progression). And I get it when used in a jazz context (smoothest transition of notes as one changes chords, etc; i.e., 7th to the 3rd, 3rd to the 7th, 9th to the 5th).


But is there something different, from the point of view of generating lines, between voice leading and playing changes and targeting chord tones?

Seems to me it's the same thing, no?

What do you think?

Just a few of my thoughts and my association with the quote..

Jens

[MarkRhodes]

The more I think about this, one of the real masters of wiggling a line from a chord would have been Barney Kessel. Chords and lines formed an integrated whole in his playing.

This seems a nice example of that, Kessel's take on "Indiana." It's not a chord melody by any means, but you can hear how the lines he plays relate to the changes of the tune without simply outlining them. (The horn and piano solos are nice too.)

[destinytot]

The answer may be simple - or obvious to those who (unlike me) are qualified to make such an assertion, but I'll ask the question anyway:

Can the statement in NSJ's original post be explained by seeing (mainstream) 'jazz' single-note/melodic improvising as a kind of counterpoint?

Cheers!

[jordanklemons]

The answer may be simple - or obvious to those who (unlike me) are qualified to make such an assertion, but I'll ask the question anyway:

Can the statement in NSJ's original post be explained by seeing (mainstream) 'jazz' single-note/melodic improvising as a kind of counterpoint?

Cheers!

Yeah, I think that's a classy way of summing the entire thing up.

I really wanted to take a course during my masters program analyzing some Bach. Apparently the teacher had a wonderful way of breaking down Bach's work by boiling a piece down into essentially a progression of basic triads with 'x' number of voices. And those voices were denoted by writing out the moving triads in the proper inversions so that each voice could be seen moving in snapshots through time.

Then the final project for the course was to compose a work of Bach style counterpoint by working backwards... begin by stringing together a series of triads in specific inversions that are enjoyable to the ear, then look at each note within the triad as a separate voice and connecting them with melodic statements based on a theme. Easy peasy right? haha

But it really isn't THAT different from what's happening in a jazz group. The bass player "walking" through different pivotal points, the soloist creating a melody that gravitates around certain notes at certain times, etc.

Mike, we were just talking about this very thing the other day. Even though I never got to take that course in school (too many other great courses to take and private teachers to study with), that process of utilizing triads as anchor points is still essentially how I do just about everything - composing tunes, arranging, improvising, harmonizing melodies, chord voicings, etc.
It kind of all comes from that. The same thing people have been doing for 100's of years.