Chord Inversions

**JimmyK** · 06-05-2016, 10:44 PM

Can you suggest the best way to study chord inversions with the Root on the 6th string? For example, is it best to memorize the positions of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd chord inversion based on the grids (picture of the chord) or should you memorize as follows: Gmaj7-1st inversion= 7X577X (3rd (B) starts on the 6 string 7th Fret), 5th string mute, 4th string is the Root etc., or knowing the R, 3, 5, 7 on the fretboard just find the inversions. Then moving to the 2nd inversion of Gmaj7 with the D on the 6th string 10 Fret etc., do it all over again.

I hope this makes sense since I'm not using the "Musician Lexicon", but if I was familiar with that this question probably wouldn't be in my mind. Thanks for your suggestions.

Regards,

Jimmy

**Cunamara** · 06-05-2016, 11:29 PM

Both. Learn the grips for the chords, but also learn the functions of the notes in the chords.

**Jonah** · 06-06-2016, 05:05 AM

Gmaj7-1st inversion= 3XR57X

i did not get this... should it be 7x577x ?

I think playing guitar you should always be on 'grids' of course... it makes many things easier...

but to be competent musician you should also see the grids musically... that is about learning fretboard.

it's important to develope both...

My idea that it is good to learn inversions in context...

1) play inversions in scales - kind of Wes style - with diminshed chords between inversion
2) play ii-v-i in the same position in the same voicing with refernce to i

Like

A-7 5 -x-5-5-5-x (a-g-c-e)
D7 5 -x-4-5-3-x
Gmaj7 3 -x-4-4-3-x

A-7 8-x-7-9-8-x
D7 8-x-7-7-7 -x
Gma7 7-x-5-7-7-x

etc

Another note: in jazz we have so many options how to treat chords in the contexts... so inversions can be often treated just as another chord with different root...

I personally heard thing more functionally at the beginning and treated inversions more or less in a classical way... but today my hearing became much more modal and i often treat them as new chords...

I say it only to note that if you learn inversions as inversions (by the same root) you're already in certain harmonic context.... and it's ok... try also to treat them as chord by the bass

finally I noticed that for me it's just important what I have in the bass (or could be if baszs note is omitted) and what is before and after this chord (context)...
but I know of course original harmonic realtions and all.

**christianm77** · 06-06-2016, 09:13 AM

I've just been going through the drop 2s & 3s, tightening them up. Probably get onto the other drops soon.

Not the only way to practice chords, but it's a pretty classic way to do it.

**Jonah** · 06-06-2016, 09:50 AM

Probably get onto the other drops soon.

I like Drop 2 4
Sounds like choral broad voicing on piano... very well balanced.. and sounds very cool in strumming...

I like mixing different voicings all the way... to feel more relaxed... as when I play piano I change it very naturally fluidly without thinking of 'what voicing it is' - on guitar it's a bit more schematic... depends on 'grip'

**A. Kingstone** · 06-06-2016, 10:00 AM

Drop 2 / 4 are great!

Drop 2 / 3 are tough with a pick because of where the gap is.

In Canada a case of beer is called a 'two four'. I refuse to use Drop Two Four for this reason.

**dasein** · 06-06-2016, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by christianm77

I've just been going through the drop 2s & 3s, tightening them up. Probably get onto the other drops soon.

Not the only way to practice chords, but it's a pretty classic way to do it.

You should definitely add Drop 2 and 4 at the very least. That way you can voice any four note chord with any bass/melody note combination that you want.

**christianm77** · 06-06-2016, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by dasein

You should definitely add Drop 2 and 4 at the very least. That way you can voice any four note chord with any bass/melody note combination that you want.

Probably at some point. At the moment I am focussing on Drop 2 block harmonisations somewhat inspired by Pasquale :-)

There's knowing your drop 2's and there's KNOWING YOUR DROP 2's.

**Nate Miller** · 06-06-2016, 03:13 PM

you realize I have no freakin idea what you are talking about when you say Drop 2, right?

..but I learned Jack Petersen's system, so I'm sure its just different terminology

the fact is that when you have a 7th chord in close position, you have to move the inner voice(s) up an octave to get a chord voicing that we can play on guitar, so I'm pretty sure that's just different terminology for the same thing I learned from Jack

**Jonah** · 06-06-2016, 04:36 PM

you realize I have no freakin idea what you are talking about when you say Drop 2, right?

I played Drop 2 and Drop 3 voicings since I was a kid... but these Drop-names I knew only on this forum...

**Jonah** · 06-06-2016, 04:37 PM

Lately I like playing very close 'dont drop' vocing... like x7543x for E-7 for example...

**Jonah** · 06-06-2016, 04:39 PM

Probably at some point. At the moment I am focussing on Drop 2 block harmonisations somewhat inspired by Pasquale :-)

There's knowing your drop 2's and there's KNOWING YOUR DROP 2's.

if you mean Pasquale Grasso? I am not sure but he sounds (and looks))) much like he plays by Barry Harris method... I am now trying to get more into it...

**christianm77** · 06-06-2016, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Jonah

if you mean Pasquale Grasso? I am not sure but he sounds (and looks))) much like he plays by Barry Harris method... I am now trying to get more into it...

I would describe PG as almost Barry on guitar.

In any case, he can certainly drop 2 block harmonise with the best of them.

**PMB** · 06-06-2016, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by Nate Miller

you realize I have no freakin idea what you are talking about when you say Drop 2, right?

..but I learned Jack Petersen's system, so I'm sure its just different terminology

the fact is that when you have a 7th chord in close position, you have to move the inner voice(s) up an octave to get a chord voicing that we can play on guitar, so I'm pretty sure that's just different terminology for the same thing I learned from Jack

Jack Petersen called it "Raised 2" (raising the second lowest note of a close position chord an octave) and it's a more direct way of visualising the process on the fretboard. If you apply the "Drop 2" concept (dropping the second highest note of a close position chord an octave) to the same close position 7th chord, it will give you an inversion of the "Raised 2" voicing. That might seem confusing but "raised 2" assumes thinking of the chord from the lowest note whereas "drop 2" is an arranging technique for harmonising the upper melodic voice. So basically, one is "ground up" while the other is "top down".

**JonR** · 06-07-2016, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Jonah

I played Drop 2 and Drop 3 voicings since I was a kid... but these Drop-names I knew only on this forum...

A lot of common guitar chord shapes are drop 2 voicings, simply because there is usually no easy way to get a complete close-voiced 7th chord.

x-x-0-2-1-2 = D7, 2nd inversion, drop 2
x-x-5-5-5-6 = C7, root position drop 2
x-x-5-5-5-5 = Am7, 1st inversion, drop 2
5-x-5-5-5-x = Am7, 3rd inversion, drop 3

As you're saying, there's really no need to know these terms. They're just "ways of playing" various kinds of 7th chords. However, for chord melody playing, it may be worth noting that drop 2 helps a melody stand out, while drop 3 can separate a bass line usefully from upper voices.

**Jonah** · 06-07-2016, 08:57 AM

A lot of common guitar chord shapes are drop 2 voicings, simply because there is usually no easy way to get a complete close-voiced 7th chord.

x-x-0-2-1-2 = D7, 2nd inversion, drop 2
x-x-5-5-5-6 = C7, root position drop 2
x-x-5-5-5-5 = Am7, 1st inversion, drop 2
5-x-5-5-5-x = Am7, 3rd inversion, drop 3

As you're saying, there's really no need to know these terms. They're just "ways of playing" various kinds of 7th chords. However, for chord melody playing, it may be worth noting that drop 2 helps a melody stand out, while drop 3 can separate a bass line usefully from upper voices.

Sure...
I just meant common patterns... when I was kid I played calssical guitar and occasionally I got a book on jazz comping ... those days there was nothing about it around at all. So theere was scale harmonized in these voicings in first chapters - I learnt them because I liked how they sounded... but they never called them "Drop..."

I like the term with 'drop' - it explains well the nature of it and useful

Actually... it's quite special way to look at it...
from point of view of 'dropping a sound octave lower' from close voicing

f#-g)- b - d
We drop g octave lower and get
g-f#-b-d

and I remember loooked at it more from traditional classical point of view where you have 'broad, close, mixed voicings'
and you think in terms of
'omitting the note'

G (bass) -f#-g-b-d
We omit g in the middle and get
G (bass) -f#-b-d

In classical voicings bass is separite and can be at any interval from other voices
It's like there's 5th voice there that we drop out. it give a bit different perspective

**Nate Miller** · 06-07-2016, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by PMB

Jack Petersen called it "Raised 2" (raising the second lowest note of a close position chord an octave) and it's a more direct way of visualising the process on the fretboard. If you apply the "Drop 2" concept (dropping the second highest note of a close position chord an octave) to the same close position 7th chord, it will give you an inversion of the "Raised 2" voicing. That might seem confusing but "raised 2" assumes thinking of the chord from the lowest note whereas "drop 2" is an arranging technique for harmonising the upper melodic voice. So basically, one is "ground up" while the other is "top down".

I probably wouldn't have recognized the "raised 2" terminology either. But yea, that's how Jack did it. And then you take everything and cross it over and transfer octaves and you get all the voicings

it just rolls right off the tongue like there's nothing to it

now if somebody could just tell me WTF that CAGED stuff is all about, I'd be in business

**MarkRhodes** · 06-07-2016, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Jonah

Lately I like playing very close 'dont drop' vocing... like x7543x for E-7 for example...

I like that one too, though closer to the nut (-say D-7: x5321x) that grip becomes uncomfortable for me.

**mr. beaumont** · 06-07-2016, 10:46 AM

Some Johnny Smith chords right there.

**Jonah** · 06-07-2016, 11:05 AM

I like that one too, though closer to the nut (-say D-7: x5321x) that grip becomes uncomfortable for me.

I was not much in strect chords... but now I find it fun .

sometimes I also like playing ii-v like .. for example

x8654x (F-7)
6x653x (Bb9) - also sounds nice if you insert Ab/Bb before it (6x654x)

and then there are many options to resolve smoothely to Eb (I like Imaj chord with 5th in the bass)
6x554x (Eb6/Bb)
6x574x (Ebmaj7/Bb) -one of my favourites
x6533x (Ebmaj7)
x65363 (Ebadd9)

**PMB** · 06-07-2016, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by Nate Miller

I probably wouldn't have recognized the "raised 2" terminology either. But yea, that's how Jack did it. And then you take everything and cross it over and transfer octaves and you get all the voicings

it just rolls right off the tongue like there's nothing to it

now if somebody could just tell me WTF that CAGED stuff is all about, I'd be in business

Jack Petersen's book, Chords Galore is an excellent, straight forward method for deriving voicings on the guitar.

OK, Nate you're probably kidding about CAGED but it's based around visualising and connecting regions of the fretboard via open chord shapes:

Chord Inversions-five-major-scales-jpg

**MarkRhodes** · 06-07-2016, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by PMB

Jack Petersen's book, Chords Galore is an excellent, straight forward method for deriving voicings on the guitar.

About that book. I think it may be what I'm looking for. My summer project is to organize my guitar / music material and to get rid of duplicate charts / graphs and books that repeat material covered in other books I want to keep. I would like one chord book and this might be it.

**christianm77** · 06-08-2016, 06:59 AM

Has anyone seen the Ben Monder stuff on close position chords (in his video lesson?) it gets very silly.

**Jonah** · 06-08-2016, 07:17 AM

What I try to remember is that when you begin to explore chords on guitar it may be fun sometimes..
so that you may end up being great 'guitar chordist' instead of musician...

**PMB** · 06-08-2016, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by MarkRhodes

About that book. I think it may be what I'm looking for. My summer project is to organize my guitar / music material and to get rid of duplicate charts / graphs and books that repeat material covered in other books I want to. keep. I would like one chord book and this might be it.

It's just over 50 pages so by no means comprehensive. I'm pretty certain that you would have played all the shapes in that book, Mark. What is does offer is an alternate method for constructing chords so probably it's worth checking out for that reason alone. The most inspiring books/DVDs can sometimes be the ones that suggest different insights rather than more information.