Do You Guitar Players Play These Type Of Chords?

[seemunny]

Do any of you guitar players ever play chords where you strum the E,A,G,B strings (mute the D string), or either the A,D,B,E strings (mute the G string)?

Some chords may be easy or convenient to reach and/or form that way, but i'm not so sure how GOOD the voicings sound.

Do you play those kind of chords, and what are your thoughts on it?

[JayP5150]

A lot of chords have a muted string "in the middle," if you will.

It's all a matter of developing your technique to actually mute the string, rather than produce an audible "clunk."

A few are the major 7th shape here (movable--root note is the 6th string):
-x-
-5-
-6-
-6-
-x-
-5-

Or a minor 6th (at least, that's how I do mine):
-5-
-7-
-5-
-x-
-7-
-5-

That's just a couple, and everyone will have different inversions of the above, those are just two that I use a lot that have skipped strings in them.

Hope that's what you meant.

[gtrdave]

The voicings of those chord fragments sound fine as they're just inversions of chords that you'd play lower on the fretboard.
Most of the time in a full band context the guitarist does not need to play all six strings of a chord and would want to play alternate chord voices to what's available down in the first 3 frets so playing a chord on only 3 or 4 strings is better suited to the overall sound of the band.

Even in solo guitar, one need not play 6 string chords all of the time. It's very limiting to do so.

[Rown]

Those kind of chords are called,COWBOY CHORDS,AND BEATLE CHORDS.In a band setting,stick with the triads,and fills.So it will not sound muddy.

[JayP5150]

Those kind of chords are called,COWBOY CHORDS,AND BEATLE CHORDS.In a band setting,stick with the triads,and fills.So it will not sound muddy.

I've always thought of "cowboy chords" as regular ol' open chords. Maybe I was misinformed.

[Rown]

I've always thought of "cowboy chords" as regular ol' open chords. Maybe I was misinformed.

YOU ARE SO RIGHT

[seemunny]

Let me be more specific:

Just so we're all on the same page:

the skinniest string = 1st string
the fattest string = 6th string

I'm moreso speaking jazz, r&b, or gospel style chords.

I am familiar with chords that mute strings, called the drop 2 or something like that. For example:


6        x                   
x        5         
4  or   x   
3        3         
2        2       
x        1       

But the muted chord configurations that i'm referring to are these Two:

6           x
5           5
x           4
3    &     x
2           2
x           1

I find that there are many altered chords that can indeed be played with those configurations very comfortably, but i'm not quite sold on HOW GOOD those voicings sound.

And i just wondered are there many guitar players out there that even use those type of voicing configurations.

To me they sound like a big empty gap in the middle, where i can't hear the beauty of it. But who knows, maybe there are guys who are doing it, and maybe right now it's too subjective to me, and i can't quite hear it.

[JayP5150]

Well, usually, when writing out your chord charts in and up-and down like this, 6th string is on the bottom.

1
2
3
4
5
6

So, that minor 6th shape I posted has a

x
2
3
x
5
6

formula like you asked for (the high E string isn't really needed). (I have to admit, at first I was trying to play what you posted as chords, and I was all "hmm... impossible to fret, and why would these sound good anyhow?" lol)

Sometimes when you're playing things by yourself and they sound like the "middle's" missing it doesn't mean it won't fit into a band scenario quite well.

The best thing to do is to try to take up space that the other instruments aren't using, in order for your stuff to "pop" out.

One thing you tell in the first few minutes of jamming with someone is how often they actually get to play with others. If they're constantly hammering out full rhythms, and playing leads ALL THE TIME, odds are, they're bedroom guitar heroes.

All comes with mileage, though.

[seemunny]

One thing you tell in the first few minutes of jamming with someone is how often they actually get to play with others. If they're constantly hammering out full rhythms, and playing leads ALL THE TIME, odds are, they're bedroom guitar heroes.

All comes with mileage, though.

That's true to an extent. It depends on what settings they play in. If they're used to playing in a three piece jazz setting (drums, bass, guitar), then they'd have to play fuller chords. Same obviously with unaccompanied jazz guitar or duets, etc.

[gtrdave]

That's true to an extent. It depends on what settings they play in. If they're used to playing in a three piece jazz setting (drums, bass, guitar), then they'd have to play fuller chords. Same obviously with unaccompanied jazz guitar or duets, etc.

Not so true with the jazz combo players that I've known. They will typically play chord fragments, accenting the extensions of the chord and rarely ever play the root notes. The bassist covers the root and then some.
And any schooled jazz guitarist will understand the concept of comping; the practice of providing a rhythmic chord and counter-melody accompaniment to other musicians.
Not an easy thing to do and requires an immense understanding of chords and timing.

[seemunny]

Not so true with the jazz combo players that I've known. They will typically play chord fragments, accenting the extensions of the chord and rarely ever play the root notes. The bassist covers the root and then some.
And any schooled jazz guitarist will understand the concept of comping; the practice of providing a rhythmic chord and counter-melody accompaniment to other musicians.
Not an easy thing to do and requires an immense understanding of chords and timing.

That's understood, chord intstruments don't want to clash. It then becomes more necessary to use more fragmented chords. But common sense seems to say, when the guitar player is the only chord instrument, and the music calls for "lush", souful chords, then the guitar player won't be able to accomplish that as effectively with merely doublestops and triads "all the time".

Some keyboard players in gospel (probably many on this very site) will sometimes play 7 or 8 note chords (or more) to get a phatter sound. Some may call that excessive, but they don't care. Nobody's making rules for them, and it often sounds very good. So it depends on what "sound" you're after. There are no hard fast rules, only common sense.

Common sense tells you if you're playing some up tempo bebop tune, you're not gonna be playing a bunch of 5 string chords at that tempo. That's where the fragments would obviously show up. Or again, when you're playing with another chord instrument, you don't wanna clash.

But still, there is always room for "rootless" four & five note chords in music for guitar players. You're not just relegated to doublestops and triads if you want a richer, phatter, souful, and more lush sound, depending on your type of music and group configuration.

By the way, i never mentioned anything about "playing the root". That's what bass players are for (unless you're playing unaccompanied).

One thing you tell in the first few minutes of jamming with someone is how often they actually get to play with others. If they're constantly hammering out full rhythms....

And any schooled jazz guitarist will understand the concept of comping; the practice of providing a rhythmic chord.....

"Hammering out full rhythms & concept of comping?".....for those who don't understand that, they might be complete beginners or either not very rhythmic to begin with, repectively. That is NOT the most complexed thing in music if you got some soul & rhythm where that stuff is fairly natural and common sense to your ears & feel .

[JayP5150]

That's understood, chord intstruments don't want to clash. It then becomes more necessary to use more fragmented chords. But common sense seems to say, when the guitar player is the only chord instrument, and the music calls for "lush", souful chords, then the guitar player won't be able to accomplish that as effectively with merely doublestops and triads "all the time".

Have you ever heard any early Gov't Mule?

Anyhow, I was making a general statement, and what I meant is that you can tell by the way a person tries to accompany the other musicians. Not that they'll be pumping out full rhythms, specifically, but there's an element of both style and respect that is missing from someone who is not used to playing with others.

I think I was also thinking along the lines that there's no tension or dynamics with a more unexperienced player in a jam setting (I can tell a huge difference between the young me and the now me, for instance).

Even in a three piece setting, you have to be respectful of the bassist, and even the drummer, and try to leave them as much room as possible. I'd rather hear all three musicians getting to pound it out instead of one guy walking all over the others.

Go check out that Mule...

[gtrdave]

"Hammering out full rhythms & concept of comping?".....for those who don't understand that, they might be complete beginners or either not very rhythmic to begin with, repectively. That is NOT the most complexed thing in music if you got some soul & rhythm where that stuff is fairly natural and common sense to your ears & feel .

I don't recall anyone saying anything about comping being "the most complex thing".
Please don't introduce drama where there is none. 
All I said was that jazz comping was not "easy". You can have all of the soul and rhythm and common sense in the world but if you don't know the chords...   

[jlynnb1]

why does it seem to be the prevailing thought in gospel music that the more notes you play the more "soulful" or "lush" something is?? sometimes it just means muddy and messy. there is a LOT to be said for less is more in a band context.

[lilBB]

placement placement placement placement placement..........placement placement placement placement

even one note played in a good spot in a band context can make a bandmate go "ooo.."

[gtrdave]

Context is king.

Jesus is King of Kings.

Class dismissed. 

[Fenix]

why does it seem to be the prevailing thought in gospel music that the more notes you play the more "soulful" or "lush" something is?? sometimes it just means muddy and messy. there is a LOT to be said for less is more in a band context.

Yeah i noticed this too when i started out trying to learn gospel music. I am now used to it, but when i first started out, i had to get used to playing so-called "phat' chords with hard fingerings.

[jlynnb1]

Context is king.

Jesus is King of Kings.

Class dismissed. 

Amen and amen....

[Gibby]

Context is king.

Jesus is King of Kings.

Class dismissed. 

Yessir! Dave and his comments...

[seemunny]

Have you ever heard any early Gov't Mule?

Go check out that Mule...

No, i'm not familiar with Gov't Mule, but i understand that they're and offshoot of sorts of The Allman Brothers, or something like that. But i can check them out.

Anyhow, I was making a general statement......specifically, but there's an element of both style and respect that is missing from someone who is not used to playing with others.

I think I was also thinking along the lines that there's no tension or dynamics with a more unexperienced player in a jam setting (I can tell a huge difference between the young me and the now me, for instance).

Even in a three piece setting, you have to be respectful of the bassist, and even the drummer........I'd rather hear all three musicians getting to pound it out instead of one guy walking all over the others.

Fair enough, I can agree with "musician's etiquette", and SUCCESSFULLY "findin' that fonky joint" as it were. You can't be a musical knucklehead, and expect your group to sound good. I would say a more mature musician (young or old) will understand this, if he really wants to be a part of something that actually sounds in the pocket and cohesive.

Not so true with the jazz combo players that I've known. They will typically play chord fragments, accenting the extensions of the chord and rarely ever play the root notes. The bassist covers the root and then some.
And any schooled jazz guitarist will understand the concept of comping; the practice of providing a rhythmic chord and counter-melody accompaniment to other musicians. Not an easy thing to do and requires an immense understanding of chords and timing.

When i mentioned that (drums, bass, guitar)(guitar duet of sorts)(solo/unaccompanied guitar) would find a use for fuller chords other than "doublestops & triads", you SEEMED to basically imply: "no, in those settings you WON'T find a place for 4 or even 5 note rootless chords".

If a guitar player can't use what i call "lush, soulful" extended/altered chords, just like what many of the LGM gospel musicians are well aware of, then why even learn them? There IS room.

If your playing is dynamic, you will play (single notes, octaves, doublestops, triads, and four & five note chords as well). Being that i keep using the word "lush" is somewhat of a hint that i'm not referring to basic power chords. Thus when you say:

You can have all of the soul and rhythm and common sense in the world but if you don't know the chords...   

that's not an issue here.

Please don't introduce drama where there is none. 

I'm not introducing drama, i'm just trying to be clear. You almost seemed to be telling guitar players, "there's no need for you to learn a rootless 7,b5,b9 or 7,9,13,b5 because there's no context for you to ever use it". Maybe you weren't saying that, but it sounded like it.

My original question was that weird string configuration in using two adjacent strings-mute a string-two more adjacent strings" and does anyone ever use it? - i don't. But anyway, i don't want to confuse, misstate, or spin anything you were meaning to say, that's just the way i received it.

why does it seem to be the prevailing thought in gospel music that the more notes you play the more "soulful" or "lush" something is?? sometimes it just means muddy and messy. there is a LOT to be said for less is more in a band context.

Well Jlynn, i personally don't like "muddy", but the proof is in the pudding. Just take a listen to many of these gospel players, and let your ears be the judge. Either it will sound good, or not. I personally think there are a lot of fly gospel players who play with all kinda gospel/jazz/funk/blues/r&b soul, and many of them really move me with their skills and seem to know what they're doing.