chord changes,counterpoint,chord tones,lead sheets,big title name

[jazzy anime enthusiast]

hey bros,i have a pretty simple question

so eventually studying harmony leads us to the conclusion that harmony is really just counterpoint,that harmony is single notes being used in unison.According to Hal Galper (pianist teacher at berklee and pianist for cannonball adderly,chet baker,and his own trio) He said that chords in stacks are shortcuts to harmony that it is not really harmony,harmony is literally counterpoint. The rule to counterpoint is each line needs to have a strong melody independently

while keeping this in mind,how the hell do we come up with things such as chord progressions to a song,or chord progressions to lead sheet if really these "chords" are just melodies being played in unison?

are chord symbols on a lead sheet just a snapshot of the desired harmony by the composer at a given point of time at the music? and what if someone can't read music? how does one come up with said progressions?

[Hep To The Jive]

You mean if the composer can't read music?

[TH]

and what if someone can't read music? how does one come up with said progressions?

If you're a singer, that's why you have sidemen.

David

[Thumpalumpacus]

Counterpoint, harmony, and voice-leading are woven together.

[Jonah]

hey bros,i have a pretty simple question

so eventually studying harmony leads us to the conclusion that harmony is really just counterpoint,that harmony is single notes being used in unison.According to Hal Galper (pianist teacher at berklee and pianist for cannonball adderly,chet baker,and his own trio) He said that chords in stacks are shortcuts to harmony that it is not really harmony,harmony is literally counterpoint. The rule to counterpoint is each line needs to have a strong melody independently

while keeping this in mind,how the hell do we come up with things such as chord progressions to a song,or chord progressions to lead sheet if really these "chords" are just melodies being played in unison?

are chord symbols on a lead sheet just a snapshot of the desired harmony by the composer at a given point of time at the music? and what if someone can't read music? how does one come up with said progressions?

Harmony in music is vast notion. And there are lost of of ways to think of harmony.... it can be modal, functional. rythmic, even sonoric... Harmony - as we can see from the name - is how music is regulaterd, it is a general system of internal realtions within musical langiage.
It's very fundumental subject taht can be even treated abstractly to certain degree...

Counterpoint is just one of the ways how harmony (usually it concerns functional or modal harmony) can be represented in real music.

In some contexts... chords become to a certain degree intergral units/entity.

Say... Cm7 in functional harmony is a single harmonic sound that has its function as it it... and it can be represented in almost limitless quantity of harmonic contexts, voicings and textures... and counterpoint is one of the options.

As per reading lead sheets... well you should understand the style.. the musical language of the piece.... then you will be able to read it correctly.

[JonR]

hey bros,i have a pretty simple question

so eventually studying harmony leads us to the conclusion that harmony is really just counterpoint,that harmony is single notes being used in unison.According to Hal Galper (pianist teacher at berklee and pianist for cannonball adderly,chet baker,and his own trio) He said that chords in stacks are shortcuts to harmony that it is not really harmony,harmony is literally counterpoint. The rule to counterpoint is each line needs to have a strong melody independently

while keeping this in mind,how the hell do we come up with things such as chord progressions to a song,or chord progressions to lead sheet if really these "chords" are just melodies being played in unison?

Easy. Just keep your chords close together. On piano or guitar, keep them in the same position. That way you'll find that some notes stay the same, while others move up or down by scale step (definitely if you're playing 7ths). On guitar, eg, you can treat each string as a melodic "voice", so as long as your chords are not jumping up and down the neck all the time each string should have a singable (enough) melodic line.

In fact, you can think of chords as a set of harmonic modules that help you cheat with counterpoint. Instead of worrying about each individual voice and its multiple intervals with all the others, here's a bunch of pre-prepared harmonic units you can just clip together and it works! (Naturally you're going to break a few of the old rules, such as parallel octaves and 5ths, but those strictures are outmoded anyway. We're not writing Bach chorales these days. Unless maybe we're at college....)
Of course, it's still a good idea to experiment with different inversions, to improve the voice-leading.

are chord symbols on a lead sheet just a snapshot of the desired harmony by the composer at a given point of time at the music?

Yes, more or less. Sometimes the harmony desired by an arranger, who might have reharmonised the composer's melody. You're allowed to do that.

and what if someone can't read music? how does one come up with said progressions?

Play guitar or piano? Use your ear?

[jazzy anime enthusiast]

thanks for the responses guys!!! heres another question

okay so i get the whole concepts of what you guys have been bringing up and elaborating on,but what still bugs me is the word "changes"

if harmony is just counterpoint,then like i said how does one come up with "changes"

better yet how do you hear changes? in a piece lets say "arabesque 1" by claude debussy

[Jonah]

Well.. I will try to go through once again - though to be true you did not seem to read previous answers carefully

if harmony is just counterpoint,

It is not just a couterpoint. As I tried to show couterpoint is one of the ways to represent harmonies.
The harmony is the concept, and the counterpoint is texture,i.e. how you realize the concept.

The referens you give to Hal Garper might concern certain context (at least I could suggest what he meant) and you just try to expand it to harmony in general.

in a piece lets say "arabesque 1" by claude debussy

This is not the best sample imho...

Try to hear ''changes'' in some Mozart pieces for example....

''Changes'' means chord progression... a chain of chords... to which that we or composer imply some relations... The harmonic concept explains this relations.

So it depends on harmonic concept...


If you take traditional functional tonality where chords have functions... you hear the changes in realtion to functions... that's how Bach and Mozart heard it and how we should hear it listening to his music.

But the difference is that Bach still thoought mostly in polyphic texture - i.d. everything should be represented through counterpoints... the 'melodic lines' as you called them intervene and co-work intensively waving and weaving the harmony... we can both hear harmonic concept and hear melodic voices working...

And Mozart alread shifted to homophinic texture. - i.e. the rules of counterpont are still strict but in general texture of music it becomes much less important and hidden...
the -as you called them - 'melodic lines' rythmical coincide much more and become more and more solid together and finally break into
' Harmony = bass - chord - melody' and the counterpoint goes a but on the backgroud - though it is still there...

And if you strum The Beatles song on the guitar - there will be no couterpoint at all... just functions represesented by
chords in any voicing

If you take Debussy - he is already much in different concept... he might still use functional tonality but at the same he uses lots of other harmonic means where voicing might have no importance at all



What Hal Garper talks about is probably... the concept quite typical for many bop or post-bop teachers on harmony... the idea is to represent harmony as voices ever-moving as smooth and close as possible...
This is vaguely connected with classical idea of voicing.
Since the jazz changes can be very dense (many chords per beat) at certain point this movement of voicings become so intesive that it pushes out general harmonic concept... you begin to think rather just in voicings moving right now than in functions

At this point one could say 'the harmony is just counterpoint'... hear 'counterpoint' represents the idea of 'movement' - so important for jazz harmonic concepts...


But if you go for modal sparse comping style for example - you could find the chods played with no countepoint connection at all... they are played not as set of 'melodies' but as 'integral sound'... call it a 'colour' if you want - though this word might me misleading a bit


So when you see 'shortcust' of harmony in lead sheets - as I said before - you should learn know the style and concept of the piece to interprete it correctly...

[pingu]

if really these "chords" are just melodies being played in unison?

don't get 'unison' thing .... in 'harmony' maybe or 'thirds' or 'fourths' or 'fifths'maybe ?

not unison though

[TH]

don't get 'unison' thing .... in 'harmony' maybe or 'thirds' or 'fourths' or 'fifths'maybe ?

not unison though

Unison on the time axis, not the pitch axis.

David

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

AKA "at the same time"

[Thumpalumpacus]

Counterpoint is, in one sense, harmony split up into two or more instrument-voices.

[TH]

better yet how do you hear changes? in a piece lets say "arabesque 1" by claude debussy

Debussey is a great discussion and that piece is a great example of why Debussey is interesting.
Until CD, it can be argued that all harmony was voice led, that the idea of vertical as harmonic blocks unto themselves (chords) always had a horizontal component to them. It was CD who originated chordal harmony as most jazzers see it, as changes not necessarily voice led.
But the arabesque in question is, in fact, quite beautifully voice led and it does have a distinct linear continuity to it. So in that way, it's maybe not phrased quite like a jazz horn player or pianist would play, in a number of differences. I'd say the arabesque is closer to Bach than it is bebop.

Now some of the preludes, would be another story.
Take prelude #7 from book 1, you've got harmony that is presented in textural blocks and the juxtaposition is not horizontal by voice but vertical for effect.

This is the genesis of the harmonic model we jazzers usually think of in grabbing for a chord.

You will find voice led harmony in jazz guitar, but it's not common. It's usually something you might encounter in Mick Goodrick's students. It's not the norm.

Hope this gives you food for thought.
David

[Jonah]

You will find voice led harmony in jazz guitar, but it's not common. It's usually something you might encounter in Mick Goodrick's students. It's not the norm.

I think 'occasional' voice-leading is quite common... no?

I call it occasional because it's something that comes up on the spot - when you just lead to next chord smoothest.. not quite by the rules and all...

[TH]

I think 'occasional' voice-leading is quite common... no?

I call it occasional because it's something that comes up on the spot - when you just lead to next chord smoothest.. not quite by the rules and all...

It is used, for sure. It's always a delight to hear someone who can move their inner voices, no doubt about that. It comes from a certain care spent to developing that kind of awareness. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that voice leading was the exclusive realm of any one teacher or school of playing. It also seems to be more prevalent in guitarists who double on piano. I remember years ago going to a teacher and as the lesson began he said "What would you like to work on this week?" and I took out a recording of Ed Bikert and I told him I wanted to do what he was doing inside the chords in a passage. Well what I was hearing was voice leading in tight harmony. He didn't help me get there, it wasn't in his vocabulary to do so.

I hear nice ideas in outer voices, and individual voices, but three or four voice linear harmony, not so much. It's likely a result from thinking of one predominant chord family thought of with root in the bass as the norm. If you learn a piece and you're using a lot of drop 2 root in the bass a lot, you'll get a certain sound. It's not so common to find the root of a chord being moved into T or A (Soprano, Alto, Tenor, Bass) and that's a sound of its own.

Now if you get some classical guitar under your belt, you'll see a whole different world. The compositional process is different, it allows more time to write and learn to play. You can get a Bach fugue that can be played on guitar. And in doing so, if you're aware of what's happening then some of that can start to show up. Bach chorales.
A few years ago I asked Ben Monder what he was working on. He said Bach Chorales. He'd sight read them like daily training and you can see it in his real time playing.

Learning to control internal lines individually, taking care to think in a horizontal way is much easier to visualize and execute on a piano. I always recommend some time on a piano as a learning tool at the very least.
Too, for those who study or take part in some kind of literate composition, this kind of stuff is more accessible. With so many ways to visualize the flow of music when the guitar is in your hands, being able to "see" lines moving can be tricky. When you can take the time to create and observe linear causality, correct and assimilate with the help of a staff and pencil, possibilities open up that translate to real time improvisation. One overlooked benefit of learning to read music on the staff; not TAB so much.

Honestly, it's just not a priority for a lot of people. Heh, the guitar's quite a handful just to get from one end of a piece to another. Too, once you become enamoured of a particular methodology, that becomes your safe haven and it's just too much work to go outside that zone. Jimmy Bruno's teaching is very effective and serves many people well, but you won't find much voice leading in his playing nor is it often a priority with his students. It's not that sound.

Pick your sound, find it inside you, and if it's strong enough, you can find the way to realize it.

David

[targuit]

As someone who was trained in classical guitar as a youth and played (mostly past tense) works like Bach's Partitas, Lute Suites, and other works including the Chaconne, I would suggest that one absorbs Bach's counterpoint approach even one does not formally study it. In essence I agree with David's remarks.

I agree as well with the comment regarding playing a keyboard instrument, which facilitates playing inversions. In addition simply the fact of playing in classical fingerstyle with the right hand helps articulate individual voices such as the bass line and 'inner voices' which are so important.

I can't really speak in depth about Debussy or Ravel whom I enjoy as a composers. Apart from The Girl with Flaxen Hair, the only other piece of these Impressionist era composers I regularly play is Pavane Pour Une Enfante Defunte. But to me they are an extension of counterpoint in the direction of more 'chordal harmony.'

With the indulgence of the forum posters I am posting a link to a lovely guitar performance of The Girl with Flaxen Hair as an example of the chordal quality I referenced earlier in terms of harmony.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Threads like this are exactly why I love this forum. I'm learning a hell of a lot. Thanks!

[christianm77]

Chord progressions are just shorthand. I've been thinking about melodies through changes a lot over the past 10 years, and one thing I use a lot is this type of thinking. Take a common progression:

Cmaj7 A7 | Dm7 G7 --> I see and hear the melodic line C-C#-D-D.

We can use this for a one note comp if you like, a nice counter-melody against the melody of a rhythm tune say (unless the tune itself has this formula in it)

Cmaj7 A7b9 | Dm7 G7b9 --> we have a second melody line which can move contrary to the first C-Bb-A-Ab. (Watch out for the melody - it doesn't always work.)

So:

C C# D D
C Bb A Ab

The second is also the principle melodic line of a closely related progression:

C C7 F Fm

With a the 3rd of the key (E) in the top voice, you can get this sort of thing

Cmaj7 C/Bb Dm9/A G13/Ab

And so on

(Barry Harris, BTW, shows how this kind of thing can be applied to scales and the scales developed into melodic lines, but I got a long way just working on this stuff. BH also has a way of dealing with harmony in a voice based way.)

And so on. I'm trying to comp more by using 1 or 2 of these melodic lines, my ear and so on, less chord grips. I also try and listen out for where the other musicians are leaving gaps, and play answering phrases. Another thing to explore is imitative counterpoint.

Often you find little cliches in chromatic thirds and so on in standards. Once you have mastered these you can subvert them a bit.

[jordanklemons]

hey bros,i have a pretty simple question

The simpler the question, the better... and the less assumptions we should let ourselves carry... and the more time we should spend thinking about and practicing the topic.

so eventually studying harmony leads us to the conclusion that harmony is really just counterpoint

Are you sure that's not just an assumption you've picked up based on something you've read or heard someone else say? Not to say it's a bad way to approach music philosophically. But music is a vast muthah. She's got a lot of sides. And she's changed and evolved drastically and will continue to. Generally, when I hear musicians state "truths" about music, I tend to assume they're really talking more about themselves, their process, beliefs, and feelings (and sometimes limitations) then they are about music.

We can study Bach and see how it's all separate voices... if we freeze frame each moment of that movement... we get a chord, and we can analyze and study that chord progression. But we could also compose a piece of baroque counterpoint by starting with a chord progression of basic triads and inversions, come up with a theme we like, and apply that theme to compose an individual melody for each voice... thus connecting the "frozen" shapes into a living and moving and breathing composition. Neither is right or wrong... it all depends on what we want.

while keeping this in mind,how the hell do we come up with things such as chord progressions to a song,or chord progressions to lead sheet if really these "chords" are just melodies being played in unison?

There are so many ways to answer this question I wouldn't even know where to begin having never heard you play and with no idea what your big picture goals are for what you want from your music. But the biggest recommendations I have across the board...
1) Learn as much as you can about harmony and specifically how it relates to melody.
2) Practice implementing those things onto the fretboard a lot.
3) Learn lots of tunes.
4) Compose compose compose.
5) Have fun and stay curious and passionate.

are chord symbols on a lead sheet just a snapshot of the desired harmony by the composer at a given point of time at the music?

I don't see this question as having ONE answer. The most common use is the "real book" use. Which works great for smaller groups and groups with super talented guys that know how to listen and interpret on the fly.

When I write for my larger ensemble, I get WAY more specific. Then my priority can shift to how to get guitar, bass, drums, and piano, plus a 5 piece horn section to sound like a singular entity. And often times, it's how I view the harmony and how I express it with my chord names that helps create that unity. My piano player knows I will almost never just write a G7alt. Because I usually need something way more specific to get the tight sound I'm hearing in my head. So more often then not, I will write out the chord name that best explains exactly what's happening in the melody or exactly how I'm voicing out the chords under that melody in the horn section. Either way, the idea there for me is to get as specific as possible so the piano player can help breathe harmonic life into the tune and create a tight, cohesive sound with the rest of the band so it doesn't just sound like someone playing a melody, and then someone else just comping however and whenever they want. Plenty of groups can do that sound amazingly well. I just like the idea of taking a 9-piece group and making it sound like a singularity. Chord symbols are one of the ways I do that.

[jordanklemons]

Thought it might be worth sharing this little clip here in this thread... as I feel like it's fitting. I'm working on wrapping up and releasing a recording project with a medium-large ensemble... hence all that talk of specificity in my previous post. I just got the first round of masters back and have been posting short clips of the tunes on the forum and on Facebook.

I just posted a new clip today in the showcase and figured I'd put it here too.

It's picking up from the end of the drum solo and carries through into the first part of the shout chorus. It's basically a new melody being presented over the harmonic form of the original melody. I essentially composed out what could have been a guitar solo over the changes to the first two A sections, then arranged that out for the full group.

I chose to separate the band into 3 voices or mini/sub-groups... the rhythm section, the woodwinds (with guitar doubling)... and the brass. Then I took the "guitar solo" I wrote and put it into the woodwinds/guitar. Almost entirely in unison. I then broke that melody down and took certain parts away to give to the brass and also wrote new material based on the motif to give to them as well...again mostly in unison with each other. The rhythm section (piano/bass) were essentially playing off the original rhythm section motif from the beginning of the tune to keep the groove going, but with some alterations to better accompany the new melodies. The piano's left hand and bass are again, basically in unison. But the way the 3 voices play off each other creates counterpoint.

THEN, I had rhythmic beats in mind (based on the momentum of the melody) where I wanted to have big, colorful, nasty, surprising, band hits....

So while everything is in unison, every now and then all the horns and the guitar split off into huge 5 and 6 note chord voicings which the piano doubles and the bass lines up with the root and the drums accent. These could effectively be thought of as "chord shapes", just not on my fretboard. And very random ones at that. But without an understanding of shapes, and a big harmonic vocabulary and ability to pick a chord and just voice it out with clarity and power without worrying about where each voice is coming from or going to (because they're all in unison before and after) that could be a tough arranging technique to pull off. But this same technique could be used while playing guitar. When comping, we could play a short single note run that lands on a strong sounding shape. I hear great compers do that stuff a ton.

So effectively, I developed 3-part counterpoint by starting with the chord progression first, and composing the melodies within it (not the only way to do this... but also not illegal), then I used the arrangers version of just throwing in random chord shapes... only I did it intentionally and at specific moments to highlight the melody. Voice leading, counterpoint, shapes... all can be used together... none are necessarily better than others... they just each bring something different to the table.

Sorry for the long post. I just didn't know how to more concisely explain how many different "comping" techniques were at play in this tiny little clip. That's really all they are. They're just being used in an arranging and compositional setting. But it's all the same stuff. Just depends on what sounds you want to create, and what you want to use to help you create those sounds.

Hope you guys dig the video now that THAT'S all over.
The clip's short and the piece is uppity. See if you can spot the "chord shapes" in there.

[eh6794]

I like to play, for example Eb x6574x, then move each note down or up, while using a completely different scale on the separate strings.

Ex. 5th string descends with a major scale, 4th string MM, 3rd string nat minor and 2nd/1st string maj 6th dim. (to play the melody).

It doesn't always sound great, but it makes you think of each string independently, and you can come up with really cool sounding chords.