Inversions of more complex chord voicing question

[bako]

I think good jazz guitarists would find every context for something simple like that triad shape.

Doesn't require being a good jazz guitarist.

Em11---- E B G A D F#

F13b9 --- F X Eb A D F#

F#m7#5 or Dadd9 --- F# X E A D F#

Gma13 --- G X E A D F#

Ab7b9/#11 --- Ab Eb A D F# X *** (cheating)

A13sus --- X A G A D F#

Bbma7+ --- X Bb X A D F#

B7#9 --- B D# A D F# X *** (cheating)

Cma13#11 --- X C E A D F#

D/C# --- X C# X A D F#

D ---- X X D A D F#

Ebma7#11/#9 ---- Eb G A D F# X *** (cheating)

[christianm77]

It may actually work to play only this shape: xxx232, and use it for everything by sliding it up and down the fingerboard. It's a major, a m7, a 13b9, lydian, it will be a (poor) sub for dom 7, maj6, whatever.

I'm (mostly) kidding here, but the point is that you certainly need to know how to use the simple voicings before you start going beyond them -- and some very simple shapes can serve many different functions.

That said, around here, the guitarists working a lot playing jazz are not doing just that, but, typically using all kinds of stretchy voicings (the commonality is that they hurt my hand to play) and making them sound great.

One world class player told me that he doesn't use drop 2 voicings at all, because they sound old fashioned. I think that videos of his gigs would prove that he uses them occasionally, but not as much as players of yesteryear.

He still knows them though :-) I use drop 2s when I want to sound old fashioned....

But sometimes I use them when playing a contemporary gig and I’m like ‘oh no I’m so uncool’

I have to say using interesting voicings of commonplace chords is a great way of sounding modern without making too many waves. Drop 2/4s for instance.

Anyway jazz is increasingly a form of music where people fixate on formal complexity.

To put this in context- I don't often hear guitarists doing standards gigs. Occasionally. Most of the live music I hear is original or original arrangements, or piano only, or r&b or something other than an old fashioned standards gig. Of course, maybe I should get out more. But it seems to me that the old idea of knowing several hundred standards and calling them at random on the bandstand with no charts isn't what is usually happening in the live music venues I encounter.

I know that there are going to be responses from players who are doing exactly that, and in my area. SF Bay Area. I hope they post the dates/venues so I can go hear them.

I’ve heard this about the West Coast. In London we have something of an old school bebop/swing backlash that proves pretty popular with young audiences. So there a few standards gigs around.

[John A.]

I am starting to practicing my inversions and I have got up to 7th chord 4 voice extensions. I was interested to know if inversions were commonly used for more complex chords such as 9ths, 11ths, 13ths etc?

Yes, all the time. First off, A 13th chord has 7 notes, which can't be played on a six string instrument by a person with 5 fingers; and even with voices left out, it's essentially impossible to play chords built entirely in thirds on a guitar because of the stretches involved. So there has to be some sort of editing and inversion for, all practical purposes once you get into chords with more than 4 voices. Physical challenges of playing large chords aside, if you're playing with a bass player, you typically leave out the root, which automatically puts you into inversion land. If you're comping behind a soloist, you often play only 2 or 3 notes to leave space for the soloist.

I ask as I wondered if these chords just became too ambiguous when inverted to have much functional l use? If I play a major 7th in a few inversions I can still tell it is a major 7. But a few inversions I have attempted with more complex chords tend to sound like a different chord than intended, either through the notes I have removed to simplify the playing of them or through the change in bass note leading the chord away (to my ears) from the tonal center I am aiming for.

I might not use the word "ambiguous". But yes, how you voice a chord changes the way it sounds. That change versus the "vanilla" voicing can be subtle or it can have the effect of making it seem like something else, depending on what else is going on with other voices/instruments in the moment. That's actually one of the main points of inverting chords. Jazz involves harmony created by multiple instruments in motion. It's not a bunch of static chords played one after the other. The whole point is to voice chords in ways that create and resolve tension, set up varying degrees of harmonic clarity and ambiguity, and have voices in varying degrees and kinds of motion.

I am interested to hear your thoughts on this. Do complex inversions get used more in free jazz for example and does it vary depending on the instrument played on, do certain inversions sound better or easier to translate on piano for example?

Cheers!

There tends to be a lot of dissonance in free jazz, so whatever facilitates that is what people use, I imagine. Piano vs guitar -- I think it comes down to what sorts of voicing and motion works on the instrument. E.g., close voiced chords are much easier to play on piano, than guitar. It's also much easier to do stuff like play long passages with contrary motion on piano. OTOH, quartal harmony is easier on guitar, and guitar has more articulation possibilities (slurs, bends, vibrato, etc.), so people tend to play what the instrument facilitates. I don't think there's much of "oh, don't play that voicing on your guitar; that's a better piano voicing" or vice versa.

John

[bako]

Anyway jazz is increasingly a form of music where people fixate on formal complexity.

Not smart enough to know at what level this statement is true or not but I believe that complexity requires
far more elements than just an expansive chord vocabulary.

The structure of our instrument imposes certain limitations.
Many harmonies by necessity and sometimes by choice are implied rather than fully stated.
A 4 note voicing with 9, 11 and 13 allows just 1 note to address the lower chordal structure.
A pianist is able to play very colorful obtuse notes in the right hand while fully stating function in the left.
We are generally more reliant on our rhythm section to supply additional content.
While at times perhaps a limitation, this has also served as an impetus for great creativity.

[Babaluma]

My thought is - learn what is good to play on the guitar. If a particular inversion sounds good and is good to play, learn it well. "well" means way horribly too much in music. There is no single sentence that would describe "well" good enough here.

Guitar is not a piano. Unlike piano, on guitar you should learn well all the stuff that sounds good and is comfy instead all inversions. You can check all inversions but not all of them are usable on the guitar. A few of those sound bad on any instrument also.

So, check out all of them but learn only the good-sounding comfy ones first.

Learn those in context of progressions of your tunes.

Excellent advice

[Babaluma]

It's always easier to discuss a specific song.

If I understand what you're driving at ... There's a chance that inversions containing the correct notes will sound just fine once the bass player shows up and you play the entire song. The bass note (and the song itself) will anchor the ear and make the chord sound more specific.

I don't know anything about free jazz, so I can't comment on that.

I don't know that I've ever heard a chord sound good on one instrument and bad on another, assuming it's playable at all on guitar. But, lots of stuff pianists to is really hard to do on guitar.

Some of the great players eventually gravitate to three note chords for a lot of their comping.

For a basic vocabulary, I like the approach that I heard attributed to Chuck Wayne. The way I was taught it, you start with xx3433 which is G7. Then you move each note up to the next one on the same string, in G7. So, the next one is xx5768. And then to the next one and the next one. That gives you 4 ways to play G7. Then you start altering notes. So, you lower the B to a Bb in each chord to get Gm7.

You keep doing that until you've got G7 G6 Gmaj7 Gmaj7#11,Gm7 Gm7b5, Gm7#5, Gminmaj7, G9, G7b9 and whatever addition chords you want.

Then you do that on the middle four strings and then the bottom four strings.

And, then you learn it in every key.

Could be a year of work, maybe more.

At that point, you've got a good command of basic chords. You'll be able to get any note on top of any chord, which helps with chord melody.

You may want to add some of the old style big band chords too with muted A and high E strings (another post).

And, if you have paid attention to the notes in each chord, you'll be in good shape to learn more.

After that, (or during it) it's about songs. You've got the basic vocabulary, so how are you going to make music with it? At that point, it's about listening, watching youtube videos where guys play great harmony and show you what they did, hanging around great players, figuring out chord melodies of your own etc.

Sorry I am being a bit dense but I don't quite get the formula for moving the notes with this approach? Why does the root on the 6 string (top string) move to the 4th on the 8th fret if it is a variation on G7?

I have it as 7th moves to root
3rd moves to 5th
5th moves to 7th
root moves to 4th (11th) ?????

The way I was taught it, you start with xx3433 which is G7. Then you move each note up to the next one on the same string, in G7. So, the next one is xx5768.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Sorry I am being a bit dense but I don't quite get the formula for moving the notes with this approach? Why does the root on the 6 string (top string) move to the 4th on the 8th fret if it is a variation on G7?

I have it as 7th moves to root
3rd moves to 5th
5th moves to 7th
root moves to 4th (11th) ?????

The way I was taught it, you start with xx3433 which is G7. Then you move each note up to the next one on the same string, in G7. So, the next one is xx5768.

No. I think it was just a typo. Should be XX5767. No 8...

[Babaluma]

No. I think it was just a typo. Should be XX5767. No 8...

OK cool thanks, looks like an excellent method, will try it out.

[rpjazzguitar]

OK cool thanks, looks like an excellent method, will try it out.

It was a typo. xx5767. xx G D F B.

I learned this many years ago from Carl Barry, who, I believe may have gotten it from Chuck Wayne.

[Babaluma]

Thanks for the treasure trove of advice guys, what an amazing forum!! I have loads of get on with just from some of these posts.

[Reg]

So... if you can't work with and make simple voicings sound great when comping through a tune.... what makes one think they can sound great using non standard voicings and sound great. Generally... it not just what your playing... it's how your playing or comping.

Comping is a skill, that requires more practice and understanding of music than blowing through changes or playing a melody.

I would guess... there are only a few guitarist on this forum that actually comp well. On;y a few that actually have an understanding of how they comp. What that even means ... I'm not saying anyone comps bad... just most don't understand what comping involves.

It's the same thing... you need basic references to start with, the tune, the setting, the instrumentation etc... There are different styles of comping.... basic requirements. The old school of using contrapuntal... counterpoint organizational guideline... where and how notes move...just doesn't really work, besides not allowing most of what creates comping in a jazz style.


Again there are no complex chords... the only reason they're complex is... you don't know and understand them, and don't have the technical skills to play and use them yet.

When your doing your own thing, playing original etc... The basic Reference is different, your doing your own thing... something different etc...

If your playing one, two chords etc... long grooves... then more complex... dissonance voicings can work. Other wise they're for effect.
As with most performance aspects of playing... there are the skills of having the technical aspects of being able to play changes and being aware of styles of playing... and then the actual performance skills of using them.

So complex is either...
1) the actual chord, the harmony, 2) the application of the chord.
-example using changes and voicings from Melodic Minor, there are two tritones and generally the chords constructed on each scale degree are interchanged more freely. But with organization, somewhat like using subs, extended subs and sub of subs.

The two basic applications are tritone subs and extended diatonic subs.
Tritone.... D7#11 and Ab7altered and the related diatonic subs of each. ( D7#11--- F#-7b5 nat.9 and B-7b9) etc...
And Extended Diatonic subs...chords a diatonic 3rd above and below are extended diatonic subs. Can also extend further. And Diatonic is being used with a different context.... not just with reference to Maj/min or the Tonic... Diatonic with a target... Micro application. (Key of the moment) and also with modal concepts..... extended Diatonic.

You can do the same applications with almost any chord.... CONTEXT needs to be applied, and understanding of.

So this is example of creating complex chords... the actual harmonic concepts and applications.

The other complex application is the actual voicing.... technically how you realize the chord on your instrument, we're dealing with Guitar, so voicings of chords on guitar. Complex is generally related to what intervals you use to realize the chord. Most hear complex as being somewhat dissonant.... Difficult to create when playing basic Root, 3rd and 5th. But when using fuller chords... triads can become dissonant or complex when the basic reference changes... when the triad has reference to a different tonic or Root note, basically it's not a harmonic triad... but the application or voicing is a triad with reference to a different tonal center... you can create complex sounds.
(Stravinsky's late Russian period). (A member...Jordan has great examples and applications of using this approach)

So there is the harmonic organization and the physical organization of notes, both can be complex.

Again comping techniques... like lead line applications, lowest note movement and choice of inner voices. How to understand what Chord Patterns are used to create movement and organization of SPACE... imply One chord.

Chord Patterns are jazz chord patterns of chord... which are used to create forward movement. Depending on tempos and your skill levels.... generally many jazz players play chord patterns when the chart may only have a few basic changes notated on chart. Just as you learn that basic chords have extensions, other notes that are used when playing a chord on your instrument.... eventually you learn that single chords also have standard Chord Patterns that are also used. These Chord Patterns are adjusted, Harmonically and melodically to expand the basic chord notated.

Understanding of Form and the shape of that form to create.... something. Not just play whatever you can or have pre worked out. A memorized performance.... it not really jazz comping.

I understand the newer directions and get it.... (they're not really new), but being able to cover the basics should be covered first.

Matt...

Gmaj7 example of voicings
Chord tone lead line... vanilla
X X 2 2 3 3
X X 5 7 7 7
X X 9 9 10 10
X X 12 12 12 14

Gmaj7 Extensions lead line... maybe pulling from D7, a V chord movement approach for extensions... lots of choices.
X X 4 5 5 5..... or X X 5 5 5 5
X X 7 9 8 8
X X 10 11 12 12
X X 14 14 15 15

Gmin7 chord tones
X X 3 3 3 3
X X 5 5 6 6
X X 8 10 10 10
X X 12 12 13 13

Gmin7 extensions

X X 3 3 3 5
X X 8 7 6 8
X X 8 10 10 10
X X 10 10 10 12

I usually combine a few different approaches for creating movement with voicings. ( Blue Notes) And the voicings generally also reflect Chord Patterns. That means that I generally don't just Play say... Gmin 7, I would make that Gmin7 a chord Pattern and then adjust the voicings to reflect that chord pattern. And almost always... the lead line is most important.

The context would also help imply what voicings. And eventually.... one should have their sound, what you like. I do and try and use as much as I can get away with.... I have a sound and feel that can be recognized... that is from my personal choices. Eventually most do. Still need to be able to cover other styles and feels.

Too much info...

[mr. beaumont]

Too much? I don't know...Good info though, Reg.

Maybe we should have a comping thread of the month! (maybe we have too many of those things going, but it's such a neglected topic...)

I don't claim to be a master, but to me the thing that separates the good from the "notsomuch" is a keen awareness of the fact that the top note in comping voicings becomes a countermelody...It has to be approached wisely and logically...a lot of times, I hear a guitar player comp, and they're just reaching for every voicing they can think of on the "chord of the moment."

The other thing, that was so big for me, is working with voicings that work as multiple things in different situations...

[matt.guitarteacher]

Matt...

Gmaj7 example of voicings
Chord tone lead line... vanilla
X X 2 2 3 3
X X 5 7 7 7
X X 9 9 10 10
X X 12 12 12 14

Gmaj7 Extensions lead line... maybe pulling from D7, a V chord movement approach for extensions... lots of choices.
X X 4 5 5 5..... or X X 5 5 5 5
X X 7 9 8 8
X X 10 11 12 12
X X 14 14 15 15

Gmin7 chord tones
X X 5 5 5 5
X X 5 5 6 6
X X 8 10 10 10
X X 11 11 12 12

Gmin7 extensions

X X 3 3 3 5
X X 8 7 6 8
X X 8 10 10 10
X X 10 10 10 12

Great post. Thanks so much.
Wondered about a couple of these, whether they're typos maybe?

Gmin7 chord tones
X X 5 5 5 5
X X 5 5 6 6
X X 8 10 10 10
X X 11 11 12 12

Are they supposed to be:

X X 3 3 3 ??
X X 5 5 6 6
X X 8 10 10 10
X X 12 12 13 13 ??

Maybe we should have a comping thread of the month! (maybe we have too many of those things going, but it's such a neglected topic...)

+1000. I whole-heartedly agree with you on this. Honestly, if we made it one of the tunes of the month, you're killing 2 birds with one stone anyway. I don't know about others, but I put a lot of energy into that one tune anyway. I have to. I'm very interested in the harmonic implications for soloing and comping. My personal opinion has always been that comping is an easier entry point into these kind of discussions on harmony anyway.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I usually combine a few different approaches for creating movement with voicings. ( Blue Notes) And the voicings generally also reflect Chord Patterns. That means that I generally don't just Play say... Gmin 7, I would make that Gmin7 a chord Pattern and then adjust the voicings to reflect that chord pattern. And almost always... the lead line is most important.

Very interested in blue note approaches as well. Do you mainly borrow from mel minor for blue note approaches?

[rpjazzguitar]

+1000. I whole-heartedly agree with you on this. Honestly, if we made it one of the tunes of the month, you're killing 2 birds with one stone anyway. I don't know about others, but I put a lot of energy into that one tune anyway. I have to. I'm very interested in the harmonic implications for soloing and comping. My personal opinion has always been that comping is an easier entry point into these kind of discussions on harmony anyway.[/QUOTE]

I think it's a great idea. I am unable to understand some of the posts, so I need to see the details, meaning exactly what is played in a particular song.

From what I am able to appreciate thus far, some of the posts are about what used to be called chord substitutions. These have been around forever. My first teacher, a swing band era musician, taught me some 4 chord sequences, 2 beats each, to be used over 8 beats of a single chord.

My experience is that learning about comping (or maybe anything else in music) is easiest in the context of a song. You hear the sound, you learn how to make it, and then, afterwards, you find some other tunes where it works.

[Reg]

Thanks Matt.... I'm always going too fast and need to check material.

Yea... I agree about adding a comping aspect or Part "B" to Tune of the Month. I'll put something up tonight with Take the A trane...

Yes Matt... I almost always use MM to frame Blue Notes... unless I'm on a pop, rock, country or bluegrass gig...

Not 100% but different chord pattern imply different harmonic references, even when just using on weak side of harmonic rhythm, (weak side of beat).

It's always interesting to watch players realize connections between harmonic and melodic playing applications. It's a simple ways to create solid basic references for soloing... having the relationships and their developments have organization.

They become one in the same etc...

[christianm77]

I think the OP as just curious as to how 9th chords are inverted.

[christianm77]

I think the OP was just curious as to how 9th chords are inverted.

Great comping can be done with a very stock set of voicings. Jim Hall clearly demonstrates this and I have played with a few players who just play stock voicings yet comp magnificently.

I would question the extent to which a jazz player should aim to master voicings and how much they should get a basic toolset and apply it to making music ASAP.

[mr. beaumont]

I think the OP as just curious as to how 9th chords are inverted.

But christian, we never just answer a question here.

Joking aside, this thread has become quite interesting, lots of good stuff.

Lawson, RE: that 7b5 voicing...yeah, I never liked that one either. Always fumbly to get to on the fly for me.

When I want the G on top of a G7b5, I'll play stuff like this... G B Db F

x x 3 x 2 3

or

x x x 4 2 3

or

x x x 6 6 3

or

x x 11 10 8 x or x x 10 11 10 8 x even...

[Reg]

Yea... Christian was right... OP just wanted inversions of rest of chords....

Which can just be mechanical transpositions of chord tones... you do need the starting reference.... what is your starting voicing of the chord.

Then the process can be simple mechanical applications of moving voicing up or down with organization.... chord tone inversion transpositions, moving 2, 3, 4, or more notes in some chord form... up or down. There are lots of chord forms... and lots of mechanical approaches to move those chord forms up or down, (inversions).

I agree with most of the posts about... this piano style of inversion application doesn't work that well on guitar.
And personally I don't really like the sound on piano either. The basic reason is different intervals, the space between notes.... are all different.
A possible analogy.... your stacking rocks or stones....
When you put the unstable or the small rocks on bottom ......and the stable or large rocks on top, the structure falls or breaks down very easily. It can be effected by almost anything.

The same basic concept is generally the same with Guitar Voicings, except the rocks are the notes and stability of the intervals are the stacking aspects. Meaning how constant the interval is... becomes the stability or weight of the interval. That stability.... is always in reference to the context. ( it changes)

Getting back to voicings.... anyway, the point is mechanical or constant structure type of moving chords with inversions, just doesn't work on guitar.... not all inversions are equal, comparable, some use the term... weight or gravity.

So that was why I was getting into the discussion of comping or using voicings and inversions... which teach one how to use those voicings and inversions on Guitar. And brings harmony into the discussion also.

Harmony becomes another physical force which effects how those voicings and inversions work in different musical contexts.

Anyway... with jazz styles of comping or using voicings and inversions, that is one of the reasons we use chord patterns... we still want to imply the chord that the melody or improvisation is interacting with. But much of the time the harmony, or chords are more complex as far as the actual chord and reference for the chord. So using chord patterns help imply... what the harmony is implying without playing thick or muddy unstable chords. And when you use a unstable or thicker chord... it's organized, it's played physically on weaker rhythmic attacks and generally doesn't need to physically sound as long. Your controlling how long the stack of rocks needs to stand for, and using other techniques to help support that stack of unstable rocks.

I believe it was Wolfin posted some information earlier about how one can approach developing collections of voicings and inversions that work... the well parts can get personal, but there many very physical aspects that should be worked into that practice and learning process.

Many times what one thinks sound great or what sounds lousy... changes with understandings.

[Jonah]

Every new chord you learn

I think you learn your instrument, voice leading, harmony... you don't learn chords...

[Babaluma]

Wow thanks so much for all this amazing info guys!

[Alter]

You can get a lot of mileage from the original 4 note voicings. Once you are comfortable following the 1357 inversions and voicings on different chords and progressions, practice the following

1257 (change the 3 to 2)
1347 (change the 5 to 4)
1245 (change both the 3 to 2, and the 5 to 4)

obviously the chord scale will determine if the 2 is a 2 or b2, if the 4 is 4 or #4 etc.. These voicings are pretty advanced if you analyze them, but are quite easy to get under your fingers since you alter one note at a time starting from the original 1357 inversions. They sound great and very modern too

For example if we look at what chords they give us, say on a Cmaj7,

1357 is C E G B = Cmaj7
1257 is C D G B = Cmaj7sus2, G/C, Gadd11
1347 is C E F B = Cmaj11, also a quartal voicing C F B E
1247 is C D F B = Bdim9, quartal with a third on top C F B D

and more if you keep analyzing in terms of modal, quartal or intervalic voicings.. Apply it to dom7, min7 and minb5 chords and many more chords appear. I actually came up with this simplification studying with Mick Goodrick. He had you practice all these on one chord and then do it on all the diatonic cycles, 2nds, 3rds, 4ths, 5ths, 6ths and 7ths. The theory was over my head at the time, but i found the simpler 1357 derived formulas much easier to follow on the fretboard.

One example: say you want to voice lead on a tune like all the things you are, using quartal harmony, on closed or open positions. Good luck with being able to follow what all the proper notes are on all these chords and find their inversions (Goodrick could do it and talk and explain at the same time ). Now if you just think of 1347 voicings instead, you re cooking in no time..!

[emanresu]

I only post until getting good enough to not have any free time left to post here. I've tried to get a good comp going, practicing with good recordings or my own inventions. Dry runs vs. actual support for a solo is so different. I could figure out neat new inversions but when it came to support, it just didn't matter anymore. I got a good feeling when anticipating&following the solo's rhythm, the notes themselves were cut to stupid simple so often. But yeah, this was just a comment about what worked for me only. Do your own damn things

[christianm77]

All this stuff is great if you find that you don’t have enough cluster headaches in your life.