-
Could you help me understand the way voice leading works in jazz?
Until now my focus was on improvisation, and not much on harmony.
Now I'm starting to get into it. I know mostly the traditional theory 'rules', some can be applied and some can't.
I know the basics of 2-5-1, 3rd goes to 7th , 9 to 13, and so forth...
But that cant be it. by those rules, this example is 'wrong' (and i'm pretty sure it isnt):
Dm7 G7(#11)
Cmaj9
C C# D
A B B
F F E
D G C
How would this progression be explain?
Of course it's a simple 2-5-1 with a tension, but the voice leading is "wrong", from a traditional point of view, and also from Mark's Levine point of view.
Using the traditional theory idea of "7th always resolve downwards" doesn't work in jazz. Considering other root progressions (in 3rds for example) make this rule impossible, since in jazz pretty much EVERY chord is 7th.
How should we treat dissonant? obviously jazz is much more dissonant, but should the tensions and 7th be played arbitrary?
In traditional theory dissonant must be prepared.
Can we just say that Cmaj7 is not dissonant? and if so, why is it possible?
I mean, what is the difference that make it possible to say maj7 is a consonant in popular music?
quite incoherent. I hope you understand!
-
10-30-2011 12:39 PM
-
Where in Mark Levines book is that stated?
Originally Posted by hed_b94
I don't think I've used the voicings you indicated much, but I'm not sure why they should be wrong.
-
Some common tone motions for Dm7 G7 CMa
D D D
E E E
F F F# // F F E
G G G
Ab Ab G // Ab Ab A (Dm9b5)
A A A
Bb Bb A // Bb Bb B (Dm7#5)
B B B
C C C (G7sus)
C# C# C // C# C# D (DmMa7)
The G7 can harmonize every note but F#
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Write out as many versions of 4 part chords as you can within Dm7 G7 CMa.
Focus on if it sounds good and if it fulfills the II V I progression in some way. Don't worry about rules.
Life will look different after that.
-
First of all, 3rds and 7ths always resolve downwards, but for one kind of progressions only. The A progression, ascending in fourth. (II-V-I for example). Since in traditionnal jazz music, these progressions are about 80% of the music, the general harmony tends to go downwards (if you write voicings with care of voice leading, for a standard, you will quickly see you have to go up once in a while, because resolutions bring you down and down, halfstep by halfstep
)
Concerning your remark about Levine, you have to explain a bit more why it wouldn't be good.
Your questions at the end goes in too many directions. I don't know what you mean.
Cheers
FBLast edited by Fast Bebop; 10-30-2011 at 07:19 PM.
-
Traditional voice leading in jazz is for traditional musicians trying to understand jazz in their comfort zone... it doesn't work... somewhat like trying to explain color with black and white. Generally... what you consider acceptable and traditional voice leading or contrapuntal practice is avoided... I'm BSing somewhat... That is unless that's what you want to sound like... extremely straight... more like the pop style of jazz from old musicals, shows and movies. There's nothing wrong with many of the old tunes, but jazz players don't play them as pop or show tunes... melodically, harmonically or rhythmically.
Your concept of how voices move in simple II Vs... is one of many choices... the difference is instead of rules governing the concept of theory and harmony in tunes... the concept and application govern the rules... If you begin to understand that concept... you'll have a chance at actually beginning to understand jazz. If you want to go through an actual tune with examples... I'll gladly help... if your looking for a one answer or method of governing principles... somewhat like performing from memory or having a safety net... Jazz might not be your thing...
But if you do want to play jazz.... and you need structure to help justify or help guide your choices... You need to think of your traditional music education as music 101... and begin to move on... you have a ways to go... Reg
-
One of the things I always wonder about is the harmony of more modern composers. (Debussy, Ravel , Stravinsky etc, or even Shoenebrg and his students) Originally Posted by Reg
Their harmony also creates 'trouble' if tried to be analyzed with the traditional theory. So, is it the same thing?
I'm not looking for one solution to use all the time, I'm looking to understand how to create as many as possible options that will still sound GOOD.
So sure, I'll move on. What is next?
I'd be happy to see an example, on a simple tune like bluesette, which have many 2-5's.
You said the concepts govern the rules, so what are the concepts?
Just like I want to know a scale so I'll have a pool of notes, I want to know harmony well, so I can have a pool of different concepts to use. Could you speak more about that? If it's not a drag, I'd be happy to see 1 chorus of chords, of bluesette. Hopefully from that 1 I could learn new things to make many more.
Bako-
Oh, you rebel.
Rules obviously are not universal laws. They should be treated as directions, and of course many times you don't follow them, but I think you should understand WHY it works against the rules, or what justified breaking the rules.Last edited by hed_b94; 10-31-2011 at 04:37 AM.
-
It would be related, because many (if not most) jazz musicians studied classical harmony, so would at least know of those composers. Originally Posted by hed_b94
The "same thing" in the sense that harmonic practice has moved on snce the CPE, and other kinds of sounds are acceptable. Jazz certainly has "common practices" of its own. (Which help to define it as "jazz" of course.)
Good question, and I can't really give you chapter and verse. Originally Posted by hed_b94
IMO, a good rule of thumb is first to accept that jazz does indeed regard maj7s as consonant (on minor as well as major chords), and will even add 9ths, 6ths or #11s to them (well not #11s on minors, although AFAIK perfect 11s are OK on tonic minors).
And if they can be regarded as technically dissonant by definition, then we accept that jazz regards them as "stable dissonances", if that's not a contradiction in terms! Blues will often end on a tonic with a flattened 7th (dom7-type), and regard that as perfectly normal. Maybe they (we) just like the air of ambiguity those chords create - as if the classical habit of the final plain major triad is too cheesy and obvious. (Life doesn't have neat endings like that.)
Anyway, we start from those assumptions about tonic maj7s. Jazz voice-leading is then about creating half-step moves between chords (the other chords will all have b7s, of course, with the exception of IV). In the standard ii-V-I, we have the classical 4-3 and 7-8. But jazz likes to invent other half-step moves - and anything goes as long as it ends on one of the chord tones or consonant extensions of the tonic. So lines can rise as well as fall (although falls are still more common).
So, in your example, we insert that C# to make a line up from C to D, instead of the more conventional (and therefore less interesting) C-B-C move. We could just as well go from A on Dm7 to Ab on the G7 (b9) to G on the C. Or from A to B via A# on the G7 (#9). Or D-D#-E.
All these (and probably more) are acceptable.
You'll notice that the alterations are all on the V7 chord. It's much more unusual to alter ii or IV chords as much, because their function is more fragile. We can turn a major key ii chord (min7) into a m7b5 (or the IV into a minor iv), but that's about as far as it goes - unless we turn it into a secondary dominant, in which case we have all the freedom of dom7 alteration that we have on the V chord.
The plethora of chromatic alterations on the V7 chord results in (or is a result of) the practice of tritone substitution. This is related to the classical concept of the augmented 6th chord, but is more liberally applied. Eg, in key of C, we might lead to the G7 chord by way of Ab7 - and regard that as a tritone sub of D7 (V/V); this is very similar to the classical German 6th. But jazz uses tritone subs anywhere, not just to resolve to V.
So we can use Db7 in place of G7 in between Dm7 and Cmaj7. The Db7 will have a #11 (G), it shares the 3rd and 7th (enharmonically respelled) and its other chord tones represent various alterations on the original G7. (IOW the Db7#11 can have a major 9th (Eb) or major 13th (Bb) too.) In a sense they are the same chord (only the bass note is different). The point always being that extra chord tones on the Db7 are put there to make chromatic transitions between the Dm7 and Cmaj7 (or C6, C69, whatever).
I haven't studied jazz harmony in depth, but it seems to me this basic concept (alteration to get more chromatic voice-leading) explains all the functional harmony games jazz gets up to - at least to my satisfaction (but then I never studied classical harmony much either).
Modal jazz harmony is another story altogether...
-
Cool list! Originally Posted by bako
If feeling spicy, you could resolve to G#/Ab on the Cmaj7(#5) as well.
A A Ab
G G G#
G Ab Ab
A Ab Ab
-
A very simple question... does a interval resolve without the actual traditional physical voice leading movement. Does octave transposition work... does deceptive resolution... does implied movement or resolution... what about organized time displacement of voice leading and resolutions... with longer displacements... What happens when one misses or is unaware of of how the voice leading or resolution was implied... did it happen... I'm simply trying to help us realize... that voice leading is just a security blanket to make us feel were in control of playing jazz with traditional harmonic movement and resolutions. If your looking for voice leading to help you understand jazz harmony... good luck. It's somewhat like calling blue notes color... or Modal interchange borrowing chords...
Hey Hedb94... Sure would be very happy to... what's very cool is the new tune for the Practical Standards Group is going to be Bluesette... Ill make a playing example of analysis with examples of different harmonic approaches... and how those different concepts create the guidelines, (rules), for how one could play Bluesette . Reg
-
Of course it does. I spent 2 years doing harmonizations, one per week. First, just find the "good" chords (at appreciation of the teacher), the most natural way to make sound the melody. Then make voicings, with "academic" voice leading. Man, I've spent hundreds of hours doing that. And clearly, I have a much better comprehension of how voices work together, and a deeper knowledge of harmony. That's one thing. The most important is still to play, experiment, and "find our own way", but seriously, you are sometimes patronizing. It's ok, and important to learn things the classic way. Or tell me at least how you did it. Knowing tradition allows you to get out of it whenever you want. I'm no traditionnalist, but it's insulting for the jazz tradition. Originally Posted by Reg
No offenses at all, but you seem so reluctant to traditionnal thinking. I appreciate that, but sometimes it's annoying :-)
Cheers,
FB
-
The concept of voice leading is designed for several purposes employing several (many) different methods depending on the goal. some things it helps with.
Voicing full chords in motion with a specific number if monophonic instruments, with the aim of keeping each instrument within it's range, avoiding the crossing of voices, creating individual parts that each sound "good" on their own, creating close or spread out voicings, etc....
depending on how many voices you have at once certain notes will take a higher priority for each chord, even with 3 voices, there are always several options for each chord.
in Jazz voice leading, the root of the chord is assumed by the bass player and usually left out unless needed (or wanted) in the upper voices. This is the reason I suspect you think your example is "wrong" my Levine's standards. in your case the roots are on bottom and moving by 4th. Keep in mind that when you play them that way on the guitar you are playing the role of both the guitar/piano player AND the bass player.
A few things I like to keep in mind other than the above mentioned considerations....
The interval of a minor 9th is VERY dissonant and can kill a voicing, it is usually to be avoided. certain chord types sound VERY different when inverted. minor 2nds in the top 2 voices is to be used with caution, intervals greater than a 6th between any 2 voices can be tricky.
remember, adding or removing one string from a guitar voicing is like adding one more horn in the sax section, or another singer in the choir.
-
Hey I would appreciate if some would shed some light on this for me please.
Could someone explain how i should apply voice leading in a jazz standard say like 'blue in green' using drop chords. Do i make my way down the fretboard using the closet inversion of the next chord in the sequence? Just general guidelines would be great! Thanks
-
Assuming you mean "closest" inversion, and not some hidden gay chord shapes Originally Posted by Edwhite
- yes!
That's my general guideline.
I don't worry personally about drop voicings - I guess I use them (all guitarists do), but I just think about how to include the notes I want, and then how to link the chords as closely as possible.
Here's what I might do for Blue In Green - keeping the melody, but mostly using rootless voicings:
Obviously without the melody there'd be a lot more freedom to maintain close voice moves and shared tones.Code:Bbmaj7#11 A7#9 Dm9 Db7 Cm7 F13b9 Bbmaj7 A7alt Dm6 E7alt Am9 Dm7 -12----10-|---------|---------|----10----|------------5-|8-----5-|3------|8----4-|7---5-|13--9------ -10-------|13----11-|10-----8-|6---7-----|5---------6---|6-------|5----6-|6------|5-----|-------- -10-------|12-------|10-------|8---8-----|7---7-6-7-----|6-------|4------|7------|5-----|10----- -12-------|11-------|10---9---|8---7-----|7-------------|5-------|3------|6------|5-----|10---- ----------|---------|---------|----------|8-------------|--------|-------|7------|------|12--- ----------|---------|---------|----------|--------------|--------|-------|-------|------|------
-
The #9 on the Ealt is nice too : X76788 I like to play the Am maj9 : xx6557 Originally Posted by JonR
Assuming you mean "closest" inversion, and not some hidden gay chord shapes - yes!
That's my general guideline.
I don't worry personally about drop voicings - I guess I use them (all guitarists do), but I just think about how to include the notes I want, and then how to link the chords as closely as possible.
Here's what I might do for Blue In Green - keeping the melody, but mostly using rootless voicings:
Obviously without the melody there'd be a lot more freedom to maintain close voice moves and shared tones.
-
D-7 > G7 > CM7. So the root = b7th > 11th > R. I'd like to propose a thread devoted to voice leading. I'm learning the fretboard by looking at note collections in many ways. I've gotten really good at playing fully extended arps in all keys within one position. Thanks again, bako. Can we talk about voice leading, using changes from blues, easy standards, e.g., "Autumn Leaves" and slowly working up to more complex material? I think it would be cool to see how some of you guys think about this great topic. I think of voice leading as "note-tracking." In the most elementary example at top, the "C" is tracked through the ii V I. I think focusing on one note helps keep things clear and less overwhelming at the beginning. Thoughts?...
Last edited by whatswisdom; 04-30-2012 at 10:44 AM.
-
II V I voicings around the idea of one common tone.
X-X-A-E-F-C-----X-X-Ab-D-F-C-----X-X-G-D-E-C
X-X-D-F-A-C#-----X-X-D-F-B-C#-----X-X-C-E-A-D
X-X-E-F-C-D-----X-X-E-F-B-D-----X-X-E-G-A-D
X-X-C-F-G-E-----X-X-B-F-A-E-----X-X-C-D-B-E
X-X-F-C-D-E-----X-X-F-B-D-E-----X-C-G-A-E-X
X-D-X-C-F-E-----X-D-X-B-F-E-----X-C-X-B-F-E (upper voice on B string "F" in bold)
X-X-A-C-F-G-----X-X-A-B-F-G-----X-X-G-D-E-G
X-X-F-C-D-Ab-----X-X-F-B-Eb-Ab-----X-C-X-B-E-G#
X-X-F-C-E-A-----X-X-F-B-Eb-A-----X-C-X-B-E-A
X-D-X-C-F-Bb-----X-X-F-B-E-A#-----X-X-F#-C-E-B
X-X-F-C-E-B-----X-X-F-B-E-B-----X-E-X-D-G-B
-
Voicings that are too stretchy can be played broken up in various ways.
Based on a 4 string (DGBE) model
D + GBE
DG + BE
DGB + E
DB + GE
DE + GB
DG + GB + BE
D + G + B + E
etc.
Some shapes will become playable in time. Others, maybe never.....
For function measure the notes in relation to the D, G and C roots
-----Dm7----------------G7----------------CMa7-----
X-X-9-b3-b7-1-----X-X-13-b7-3-5-----X-X-3-5-6-9
X-X-E-F--C--D-----X-X-E---F--B-D-----X-X-E-G-A-D
-
I ran through your chart again and converted note to function. Correct me if I misspelled. I did it fairly quickly. (A good exercise for me and will be interesting to play through again with this perspective.) Originally Posted by bako
-
All looks good. One omission.
-------------------------------3-------------------------
X-X-R-b3-5-7-----X-X-5-b7-B-#11-----X-X-R-3-6-9
-
Thanks, bako. In my next step with this example, I want to spell each voicing to create a lead sheet, e.g., D-9 > G7#11 > C6/9. Some help needed--especially with the rootless voicings... Originally Posted by bako
-
my contribution:
-
Jeff asked on youtube, but I thought it would make more sense to answer here
Thanks for asking, I hadn't really thought about it. It really depends, but I am definitely not thinking about basic grabs and then just adding on that high note. Originally Posted by FatJeff
Sometimes I might just be using a simple drop 2 shape with a note or two switched. It's very easy to use drop 2 shapes to harmonize any melody note. For example, on a m7 you could use the m7 structure to harmonize the chord tones, and to harmonize a 9 you could raise the root or drop the 3, to harmonize the 11 you could raise the 3 or drop the 5, and to harmonize a 13/b13 you could raise the 13 or flat the 7. Same basic idea with all chord types.
However, for me that is often not enough to create a sound that seems personal to me, so I might make further adjustments (swapping things, maybe even inverting things further) until I find something I like. I might start with a basic drop 2 structure that accommodates the high note but then alter it more. In the video I take time between chords because I'm trying to find something good - it would be faster if I just did the most obvious chord, but it wouldn't be voicings that are as interesting.
I got a lot from just doing a bit of this book:Amazon.com: Mel Bays Complete Book of Harmony Theory and Voicing (9781562229948): Bret Willmott: Books
He has another book that I should get too. The first book is where I got the idea of simply using drop 2 structures but adjusting notes both to accommodate melody notes and also to just create a more interesting voicing.
Here is an example...normal m9 voicing might be b3 b7 9 5. Swap the 9 for an 11 and that is already a more interesting structure, to me. (Maybe a little more "sensitive" but I like that.) Then invert that as you would anything else. Funny thing is that when you change drop 2 structures enough then invert them sometimes you actually get things that are more like closed voicings. Go figure.
If not a drop 2 centered approach I might just look around for something that I like. It's really as simple as experimentation, which is what I think is so great about the exercise. Not every voicing is a winner, but there can be new ones every time. Some of the voicings I played in this video I probably never played before.
Funny, your question has me a little stumped, I think I do use a variety of approaches. I try to be sensitive to:
-the intervals within the voicing (closer intervals in guitar chords are less common so there can be some less-tapped territory in there if I'm willing to stretch.) Fifths can be cool in the right places...fourths can be a little played out, I don't usually use quartal voicings.
-even if the restriction is only to keep one note the same, obviously I pay attention to the movement of all voices, trying to keep them under a fourth most of the time and utilizing common tones if possible and doesn't interfere with another goal of the chord
-finding a balance between something that still sounds like the harmony to me but maybe is also "intriguing"Last edited by JakeAcci; 05-02-2012 at 03:37 PM.
-
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm just starting to enter this territory after spending my first couple of years playing jazz strictly in drop-2 land. I'm starting to get into chordal substitutions, I'm working out all my drop-3s now in all inversions on both string sets, and I've been spending time with quartal chords as well. This seems like an almost endless study!
-
It's beyond endless, listen to Ben Monder! Or Kurt...or Brad Mehldau, Robert Glasper, or for a different angle, Wes...Joe Pass..etc. Even those that may use more conventional voicings still often do very creative and interesting things with voice leading. Originally Posted by FatJeff
I've gotten a lot of mileage from the techniques I described earlier...swapping notes and substituting chords is a very accessible way to expand what you can already do with drop 2 voicings.
Other things to explore are: which "closed" voicings of 7th chords are possible? Some aren't and some are. For the ones that aren't, what notes can be changed to make it possible to play but still maintain some closer intervals? For the ones that can, it's fun to experiment with swapping as I said before...turn 3s into 9s, turn 7s into 9s, turn 9s into 11s, etc, go crazy. Johnny Smith is a great resource for smooth voice leading with closed voicings on guitar.
Once I made an excel chart (I could send) that has a sort of "automatic inversion" function. You type in four notes in the original order/voicing, and then it can automatically invert it, saving a little time. Really interesting to do this with "random" structures or clusters.
Other things - drop 2 and drop 4 voicings are beautiful, especially in root position, like 1 5 3 7...then could be 1 5 9 7 which is an interesting structure for a few reasons.
There's also endless study just within the idea of two or three note voicings as well.
-
My comping is best described as "haphazard", so I was sitting down, working on it. Now, this is hardly a revelation, but no one pointed this out to me, or if they did, I was daydreaming:
Circle of 5ths: two notes are held, the other two go down a second.
For example, Dm7 => G7 (xx3535 => xx3433)
A => G
D => D
C => B
F => F
And G7 => CMaj7 (xx3433 => xx2413)
G => G
D => C
B => B
F => E
When you look at this as four voice lines running through successive chords, the holding and dropping alternate:
FMaj7 => Bm7b5 => Em7 => Am7 => Dm7 => G7 => CMaj7
xx7968 => xx7767 => xx5757 => xx5555 => xx3535 => xx3433 => xx2413
C => B => B => A => A => G => G
F => F => E => E => D => D => C
E => D => D => C => C => B => B
A => A => G => G => F => F => E
I know this on some level, but I'm trying to have it "light up" on the fretboard for me.Last edited by BigDaddyLoveHandles; 05-18-2013 at 11:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
Ibanez archtop with 0.010 Thomastik strings and...
Today, 05:27 AM in The Builder's Bench