Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

C7?

21 Posts
9 Users
0 Likes
6,577 Views
Misanthrope
(@misanthrope)
Noble Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 2261
 

Thanks NoteBoat - I knew you'd have one up your sleeve that I hadn't spotted yet. :D
Don't forget ChordsAndScales.co.uk!:wink: This is the whole reason it gives you a fretboard layout of the notes rather than a selection of common shapes - to find a fingering that works for you... C7 example

ChordsAndScales.co.uk - Guitar Chord/Scale Finder/Viewer


   
ReplyQuote
dsparling
(@dsparling)
Reputable Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 289
 

There are a few three-note movable chord shapes a la Freddie Green (Count Basie), each with only the root, third, and seventh. I originally learned these from the guitar instrutor at a Stan Kenton jazz camp many years ago, but they're also in the Berklee books, and I'm sure other jazz methods...here are the C7 chords:

8x89xx

or

3x23xx (which is a variation of the one I show earlier)

These shapes are nice as you can move between major seventh, dominant seventh, and sixth chords (major and minor) fairly easily, and work great when playing the old big band style rhythm guitar style (mostly quarter notes).

3x24xx - Cmaj7 (G E B)
3x23xx - C7 (G E Bb)
3x22xx - C6 (G E A)

or

8x99xx - Cmaj7 (C B E)
8x89xx - C7 (C Bb E)
8x79xx - C6 (C A E)

For the minors, just lower the third a half step.

http://www.dougsparling.com/
http://www.300monks.com/store/products.php?cat=59
http://www.myspace.com/dougsparling
https://www.guitarnoise.com/author/dougsparling/


   
ReplyQuote
Fretsource
(@fretsource)
Prominent Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 973
 

These shapes are nice as you can move between major seventh, dominant seventh, and sixth chords (major and minor) fairly easily, and work great when playing the old big band style rhythm guitar style (mostly quarter notes).

3x24xx - Cmaj7 (G E B)
3x23xx - C7 (G E Bb)
3x22xx - C6 (G E A)

Well that's opened a can of worms, Doug
Just as we had got Chris used to the idea that, in practice, most chords don't need a 5th, you've let slip that they don't actually need a root either. :lol:

I know jazzers do this all the time. I can think of two reasons why this is justified, but if there are any more, I'd love to hear them.

1. In a band setting, the missing root is supplied by another instrument, e.g. bass or keyboards, which gives the guitarist many more fingering options.

2. In seventh chords, the third and seventh form the interval of a tritone (dim5/ aug 4) between them, which gives seventh chords their characteristic sound and 'drive'. The root's function is less noticeable in this context, so the chord still 'works' without it.

I supposed it could be argued that technically, without a root, it's not really a seventh chord but a diminished triad, but as I'm still recovering from the SUS 4 debate, I won't go down that road. :lol:


   
ReplyQuote
kingpatzer
(@kingpatzer)
Noble Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 2171
 

Yeah, when you start talking about how us jazzers tweak chords to suit whatever the heck it is we do, it's a whole new can of worms!

And to tell the truth, we start doing the same thing everyone else does -- we think in terms of shapes and not theory while we're playing.

I'll play an A, C and F# and think "Am7" when it's probably more correct to think of it as an F#° (as NoteBoat pointed out yesterday).

And then we do the whole "reharminzation" thing where we just ignore what ever chords are on the chart (or take them as a 'suggestion') and play what we want :)

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST


   
ReplyQuote
dsparling
(@dsparling)
Reputable Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 289
 

Well that's opened a can of worms, Doug
Just as we had got Chris used to the idea that, in practice, most chords don't need a 5th, you've let slip that they don't actually need a root either. :lol:

[snip]

I supposed it could be argued that technically, without a root, it's not really a seventh chord but a diminished triad, but as I'm still recovering from the SUS 4 debate, I won't go down that road. :lol:

All I can say is...LOL :) I didn't even think about that...

Let's see, my original example did have a root:

3x231x

and you could play those "rootless" chords like this:

x323xx

I'm not sure a guitarist's role is to supply every single note in a chord, but the third and seventh are the two important notes of a seventh chord, the root can be implied or played by another instrument. A lot of it is context...in a non-jazz context - if I'm playing in a power trio and the bass player is laying down a big massive bottom E, I can play a G# (3rd) and a D (7th), and that's all it takes to have the band as a whole playing an E7th chord (with or without the fifth :). The guitar doesn't have to play it all, often it's best not too.

That's about as far down the road I'm going to go :)

http://www.dougsparling.com/
http://www.300monks.com/store/products.php?cat=59
http://www.myspace.com/dougsparling
https://www.guitarnoise.com/author/dougsparling/


   
ReplyQuote
Chris C
(@chris-c)
Famed Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 3454
Topic starter  

Early morning here in West Australia now... and ..yawn..... one last look at the C7 thread... and..

Geez! Who let the worms out..... :shock:

Thanks for all the addition information everybody. :D

I'm starting to get used to the idea of looking at different shapes and voicings and the reasons for making the choice.

When I first started plodding through the books I kept hitting small brick walls that seemed out of proportion to where I'd reached in the book. I'd be going along quite nicely and then something would appear that seemed like a sudden large jump in difficulty.

So it was very useful to realise that it wasn't always necessary to play the full chord shape they'd shown you a few pages earlier. Some changes were far easier done using a slightly different shape or just leaving out some of the repeated notes.

Sometimes the sound did seem to lose something, sometimes it actually seemed better, but mostly it wasn't all that important either way, depending on the context. :)

At the moment I'm working on a small piece (that the book just refers to as a "progression") and the last two bars have a chord change on each beat.

It goes | E, E7, A, Em | E, C7, B7, E |

I simply can't make the changes in the last bar as fast as the guy on the CD yet. So it's been fun to work on in from several different angles - slowly building up my speed uisng the standard shaps that I know, also trying some different shapes, but also 'thinning down' the chords a bit and just sounding the essential notes.

Mostly, dropping a note or two seems to make very little real difference in that case, as the overall feel is just a final 'chunk, chunk,chunk, chunk' thing and doesn't seem to need to be especially delicate or subtle. At least that's not the way the example is played.

But it's been very instructive, and enjoyable, trying to get the ear to pick what the difference is, why it matters (if it does) and how any difference could be used to make a subtle flavour change....

Cheers,

Chris

What a fascinating thing music is... :D


   
ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 2