Guitars and harmonic tempo

[jazzpazz]

Hey. Im curious as to why guitar have so much higher harmonic tempo in general than for instance piano. 2 chords per bar is the standard on lead sheets. We pianists also are told to avoid lead sheets with more than 2 chords per bar, as it's seen as unserious. And it's mostly lead sheets that's written by someone who don't understand jazz. Unless the song has a particular fast harmonic tempo, which some few do.

But when I see guitar transcriptions I often notice that there are 3 or more chords per bar. I wonder why that is? Ive seen such much of it that it can't be bad arranging.

My main theory is that guitars don't have sustain pedals like piano have. Therefore the chords not ringing out throughout the bar. Making it kinda boring or dry just playing the melody, making one want to add more chords in there to get more harmonic fundaments?

[jameslovestal]

Hey. Im curious as to why guitar have so much higher harmonic tempo in general than for instance piano. 2 chords per bar is the standard on lead sheets. We pianists also are told to avoid lead sheets with more than 2 chords per bar, as it's seen as unserious. And it's mostly lead sheets that's written by someone who don't understand jazz. Unless the song has a particular fast harmonic tempo, which some few do.

But when I see guitar transcriptions I often notice that there are 3 or more chords per bar. I wonder why that is? Ive seen such much of it that it can't be bad arranging.

My main theory is that guitars don't have sustain pedals like piano have. Therefore the chords not ringing out throughout the bar. Making it kinda boring or dry just playing the melody, making one want to add more chords in there to get more harmonic fundaments?

Can you post an example of one song with what you're calling a guitar lead sheet and then, the same song, and a piano lead sheet?

[pamosmusic]

Hey. Im curious as to why guitar have so much higher harmonic tempo in general than for instance piano. 2 chords per bar is the standard on lead sheets. We pianists also are told to avoid lead sheets with more than 2 chords per bar, as it's seen as unserious. And it's mostly lead sheets that's written by someone who don't understand jazz. Unless the song has a particular fast harmonic tempo, which some few do.

But when I see guitar transcriptions I often notice that there are 3 or more chords per bar. I wonder why that is? Ive seen such much of it that it can't be bad arranging.

My main theory is that guitars don't have sustain pedals like piano have. Therefore the chords not ringing out throughout the bar. Making it kinda boring or dry just playing the melody, making one want to add more chords in there to get more harmonic fundaments?

Could you link to an example transcription?

My inclination is that this is what I was talking about in the last thread. Side-slipping, upper-structures, passing chords, things like that. The way guitarists tend to think about it (for the reasons you mentioned above), I wouldn’t really call those things “different chords” but an over eager transcriber might write chord symbols above everything, even though it would be more helpful just to see the prevailing chord for the measure or whatever.

Hard to say without seeing what you’re talking about though.

[ragman1]

Charts like this are not just for guitar. Displaying more than two chords to the bar is not 'unserious' when the chart is trying to replicate the original recording.

[Jimmy Smith]

Bruh wtf are you talking about?

It could be that you're comparing apples to oranges. Transcriptions usually have more chords to describe the music in more detail compared to a lead sheet. I'm sure there are piano transcriptions with hella chords too. So you could be comparing guitar transcriptions to not necessarily piano lead sheets and incorrectly assuming guitar music is more complex. And wtf are you talking about with 'piano is unserious if there are too many fundaments'?

[pamosmusic]

Charts like this are not just for guitar. Displaying more than two chords to the bar is not 'unserious' when the chart is trying to replicate the original recording.

Yeah I mostly agree with this

… unserious seems harsh.

A lot of the times I’m abbreviating those chords when I solo over a tune and sometimes you get ones that are a little much, like maybe m.7 on that lead sheet.

Others though are part of the melody … like the third measure of the bridge. That’s an important part of the tune, right? Even if you might generalize the chords when you improvise.

Not something you see on every tune, but plenty of tunes like that.

[rpjazzguitar]

If we're talking about transcriptions of guitar, for certain things, you may be seeing minor variations in grip (like lifting a finger revealing a barred note(s), or moving the pinkie when the other fingers are holding a chord). Sometimes those small changes in grip can make big changes in chord name, especially if the bass note is moving.

In big band charts you sometimes see a quick sequence of chords. It may be that you're seeing the voicing the band, including the horns, is playing and the guitar part is actually simpler -- in effect, you're being told what not to conflict with. Or, it may be that's it's playable by somebody with sufficient chops, or it could be an arranger who doesn't know what's actually playable on guitar.

Or, it could be a quick sequence of chords on guitar that a monster-chops individual played and a mere mortal has to simplify.

[Alter]

Different instruments. The piano has so much sound, with all the keys, notes ringing, overtones etc, that you can just hit a chord and listen to it decay for days while notes balance or even new ones come out. Even the best archtop or classical guitars can't even begin to approach that - unless you use effects, but that's not so common in jazz.

However, compared to piano it is the guitar that is the minimalistic instrument. Chords usually have three or four notes maximum, sometimes two, you only have six strings and one hand, no sustain pedal, and very limited dynamics and presence. So it is situations that call for minimalism and the musical freedom it gives soloists that would choose to use a guitar rather than a piano for comping. Plus quieter dynamics overall. And the color of the instrument of course. Even if you have to play more stuff, you end up taking less space, so most guitarists tend to become good at working with that minimalism, cause that's what is going to make guitar music work..

[Christian Miller]

But when I see guitar transcriptions I often notice that there are 3 or more chords per bar. I wonder why that is? Ive seen such much of it that it can't be bad arranging.

probably because transcription are giving chord symbols for ALL the chords the guitarist plays including subs and passing chords. The same would be true for piano. Perhaps more so as pianists tend to be more complex harmonists than guitarists esp in solo and trio stuff.

Guitar and piano use the same lead sheets

My main theory is that guitars don't have sustain pedals like piano have. Therefore the chords not ringing out throughout the bar. Making it kinda boring or dry just playing the melody, making one want to add more chords in there to get more harmonic fundaments?

So there’s something in here that I think needs context

For standards it’s often a good idea to keep the chords simple, you don’t want to cramp the compers style and it’s clearer for soloing. An experienced jazz player does not need to be told to add notes to a dominant or put in a II V etc. in fact you may have to tell them not to sometimes!

OTOH sometimes the chart is arranged in which case voicings become much more specific (yes that IS a C9 etc) and the charts get a lot more complicated. Some of the more modern tunes such as pop-fusion charts and contemporary jazz compositions (of which there are many in all the Real Books) have a tighter and less improvisational style of chart with many more hits and details etc.

the same is true of arranged standards. Sometimes someone will have put together a very specific arrangement of a tune and you are expected to play what’s on the chart accurately. You’ll usually find simpler ‘blowing changes’ are also provided.

Some of the Real book lead sheets are in a slightly awkward middle ground, like that body and soul chart. My taste would be for less chords in that one.

[ragman1]

The OP is having a lot of trouble adjusting to the guitar away from his piano experience.

It's something he's going to have to get over.

[Bop Head]

There are some cases where the composition requires the harmonic rhythm to be faster than two chords per rhythm. 'Round Midnight is one example. Another one is that | IIIm7 / bIIIm7 bVI7 | spot in the A section of If You Could See Me Now ("Perhaps then you'd realize" is the first time it occurs), where the melody outlines that change.

But then both those tunes are ballads.

[pamosmusic]

There are some cases where the composition requires the harmonic rhythm to be faster than two chords per rhythm. 'Round Midnight is one example. Another one is that | IIIm7 / bIIIm7 bVI7 | spot in the A section of If You Could See Me Now ("Perhaps then you'd realize" is the first time it occurs), where the melody outlines that change.

But then both those tunes are ballads.

Another ballad but that’s what I was saying about Body and Soul. A handful of spots in that lead sheet are busy, but there’s also that iii-vi-ii-V to the D major in the third bar of the bridge that always feels composed into the melody.

Let’s Cool One is another … Monk does that a lot actually. Quick harmonic rhythm for effect.

[Christian Miller]

Another ballad but that’s what I was saying about Body and Soul. A handful of spots in that lead sheet are busy, but there’s also that iii-vi-ii-V to the D major in the third bar of the bridge that always feels composed into the melody.

This is how I hear the changes on Coleman Hawkins’ defining version btw. Always interesting to compare

Let’s Cool One is another … Monk does that a lot actually. Quick harmonic rhythm for effect.

Monks music so detailed and composed.

[pamosmusic]

This is how I hear the changes on Coleman Hawkins’ defining version btw. Always interesting to compare

Oh man!

Maybe interesting point … he doesn’t ever quite get around to a straightforward statement of the melody on that recording though, right?

Or maybe on the way out. Been a while.

[pingu]

i find there’s a lot value in
reducing a tune’s harmony to
a basic bare bones level
(in your own head)

the amount of reduction you can
achieve is dependant on the actual
tune of course ….

its like what is the cake
then ….
do i want to decorate the cake ?
how shall i decorate the cake ?

i don’t wanna put yellow icing
on there if someone else is putting
pink baubles on there ….

but i might put a white candle on

this all unplanned and happening in the moment ….

[Christian Miller]

I found an old vocal version from Ruth Etting.

might that be Eddie Lang on guitar? I can hear some Eddie style bass run embellishments

As far as crappy ears can tell The bridge sounds the same as the chart I posted including the major IV chord (G) but omits the Ebo7 in the second half.

A section on the other hand sounds more like the Real book lol (excepting that Bb7 chord in bar 1, which I’ve never liked.) Assuming I transcribed the Hawkins right (can be hard to hear the bass on those old records.)

Also, I like the verse.

[Christian Miller]

i find there’s a lot value in
reducing a tune’s harmony to
a basic bare bones level
(in your own head)

the amount of reduction you can
achieve is dependant on the actual
tune of course ….

its like what is the cake
then ….
do i want to decorate the cake ?
how shall i decorate the cake ?

i don’t wanna put yellow icing
on there if someone else is putting
pink baubles on there ….

but i might put a white candle on

this all unplanned and happening in the moment ….

is this the long lost extra verse of MacArthur Park?

[pingu]

1291167[/URL]]is this the long lost extra verse of MacArthur Park?

close ,
but that was green icing

(I mean ….who even uses green icing these days ?)

[SandChannel]

close ,
but that was green icing

(I mean ….who even uses green icing these days ?)

... around Christmas time - everyone.

[Christian Miller]

I am reliably informed it is NOT a metaphor

[mr. beaumont]

Is our OP looking at big band charts for "guitar" perhaps? You know, the one where they write out the harmony of the horn section and then scribble "guitar" at the top of the sheet?

[RLetson]

As a non-reading not-really-jazz player, I hesitate to add a comment. But--

I think of myself as part of the rhythm section, which means that I will sometimes simplify even a fairly sparse Real Book chart--certainly when it comes to chord extensions, unless I'm comping in the absence of a keyboardist, when the fancy bits provide guidance. On the other hand, when I'm, say, attempting a chord-melody version of a tune or figuring out an arrangement for my own singing, I'll get out my Frank Mantooth books for guidance and inspiration. I don't believe I'm the only guitarist who thinks of those charts, with their extended chords, as "pianistic" in their harmonic detail. But (and here's what justifies my disclaimer above) those charts are generally beyond my technical ability to execute as-written, and often beyond my practical needs as an accompanist. Though they are wonderfully informative--probably moreso were I a keyboardist.

[pingu]

1291203[/URL]]Is our OP looking at big band charts for "guitar" perhaps? You know, the one where they write out the harmony of the horn section and then scribble "guitar" at the top of the sheet?

Ha ha , yeah been there ….
and ran away screaming

[Jimmy blue note]

The OP is having a lot of trouble adjusting to the guitar away from his piano experience.

It's something he's going to have to get over.

I think he's still trying to deal with serious pianist envy.

[pauln]

Hey. Im curious as to why guitar have so much higher harmonic tempo in general than for instance piano. 2 chords per bar is the standard on lead sheets. We pianists also are told to avoid lead sheets with more than 2 chords per bar, as it's seen as unserious. And it's mostly lead sheets that's written by someone who don't understand jazz. Unless the song has a particular fast harmonic tempo, which some few do.

But when I see guitar transcriptions I often notice that there are 3 or more chords per bar. I wonder why that is? Ive seen such much of it that it can't be bad arranging.

My main theory is that guitars don't have sustain pedals like piano have. Therefore the chords not ringing out throughout the bar. Making it kinda boring or dry just playing the melody, making one want to add more chords in there to get more harmonic fundaments?

My theory is that the sound of "more chords in there" played on the guitar very often just sounds better than on the piano, less muddy, better integration into the overall sound.

First thing might be to distinguish between the song (how it goes) and playing the song (how you want it to go). Sometimes the actual song is pretty simple with slow regular chord changes and you may want to play some segments with additional chord melody, passing chords, chord patterns, quick changes, etc. Inversely, a song may have those elements already but you may wish to clear those out and play it with just regular chord changes.

Here's an example to play with (to discover which chords are minimally necessary and which chords or sections may be omitted) of a jazz turnaround comprising 12 chords plus a lead-in chord from the end of the previous measure. The first five chords after the lead-in chord take a unit of your pace, with the subsequent seven chords taking twice that pace.

If you look at the changes, this is really a double turnaround played fast (designed to be played fast), but once you get it you may omit chords or segments of chords.

V chord (lead in chord)
(x) (15) (16) (15) (18) (x)

(now unit pace)

I chord
(x) (14) (14) (14) (15) (x)

VI chord
(x) (12) (13) (12) (15) (x)

ii chord
(x) (11) (11) (11) (12) (x)

V chord
(x) (9) (10) (9) (12) (x)

I chord
(x) (8) (9) (9) (8) (x)

(now 2x unit pace to the end)

VI chord
(x) (7) (6) (7) (8) (x)

bIII chord
(6) (x) (6) (5) (5) (x)

ii chord
(5) (x) (5) (5) (5) (x)

bVI chord
(x) (6) (5) (6) (6) (x)

V chord
(x) (5) (4) (5) (6) (x)

bii chord
(4) (x) (4) (3) (3) (x)

I chord
(x) (2) (3) (2) (3) (x)