 |
| |||||||
|
Welcome to the Jazz Guitar Forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
09-26-2010, 03:18 PM
| ||||
| ||||
 Robert Conti, but then a bit more fluid I've been playing guitar for about 30 years now and the last 10 years primarily acoustic (celtic) fingerstyle (basic Al Petteway and Tony McManus stuff). Since 1 year I submerged myself into jazz chord melody. I'm very attracted to the embellished 4 or 5 tone jazz chords. I learned a lot from the Robert Conti source books (Chord Melody Assembly Line and the Formula). I really like the harmonies Conti is using, but somehow I'm missing the fluency that attracts me to fingerstyle guitar in the first place. I tried to combine two approaches: Conti's harmony and the fluid fingerstyle a la Howard Morgen and Martin Taylor, but somehow it doesn't work the way I hoped it would and I'm kinda 'stuck'. Right now it seems I can't even play a simple arrangment a la Danny Boy. Any idea's how to move on from this point (Conti's formula)? Forget Conti's approach to chord melody and move over completely to Martin Taylor's Guitar Academy?     |
|
#2
09-26-2010, 07:15 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#3
09-27-2010, 07:52 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Tnx for your input Jazzyteach65. I found this text in a review of Martin Taylor's Method. It describes exactly what I found difficult to express myself: "The Martin Taylor Guitar Method doesn't involve page after page of chord forms. In fact, he acts allergic to them. There is a description of his view on chord construction and the CAGED Method. Overall, he seems to view playing more as a series of moving lines instead of a bunch of block chords." |
|
#4
09-27-2010, 09:05 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| There are so many approaches to CM, and they are all valid. The question I had to ask myself a couple of years ago was, am I content playing just arrangments (not jazz), or did I want to play from more of a jazz perspective, where I would not play the tune the same way twice? The latter takes more work of course, but I find is more rewarding. It is up to you, how much time you want to put into it, and what your goals are. Good luck |
|
#5
09-27-2010, 11:06 AM
| |||
| |||
 CM/Robert Conti. I am a great fan of this guy and for anyone wanting to learn chord melody/and improv.his way suits me.I cant see the sense of learning scales and modes for a load of years and still having then to learn how to apply them over progressions for another bunch of years and still wind-up unable to play a simple tune.His way gets you playing in no time at all. Play your axe!  |
|
#6
09-27-2010, 12:26 PM
| |||
| |||
| I've looked at both Conti and Taylor approaches and I don't see any incomplatibility. The fluidity in Conti's approach comes from simply looking at the chord movenments in term os three parts - bass, melody, and inner harmony. Them it is just a matter of parsing it out with right-hand technique. It may be necessay to drop some parts from each chord. Having said that, Martin Taylor has a very accessible approach that is focussed more on tunes and arrangement (not unlike Conti), which I like. His arrangements are based on 10ths and 7ths and he seems to view alterations in terms of moving inner lines that will generate passing chords (that really don't need to be analyzed or named). Conti includes all the passing chords in his one-chord-per-per melody note approach. These block chords can be broken apart into moving lines and a more fingerstyle approach as long as you understand the point of resolution in the progression. In fact most of his instructional material is packaged as small progressions to resolution points. I agree with Jazzuki...there is really nothing wrong with learning theory from tunes. It is an apprentice approach as apposed to an academic approach. Sometimes you don't have to know why, especially if the concept transferrs nicely to many tunes. |
|
#7
09-27-2010, 01:45 PM
| |||
| |||
| I understand what you say-but are you wanting to play or study academically?Me I want to play the theory will evolve.The point of all tunes of whatever type is resolution!After all progressions willl either be an intro-turnaround or an ending |
|
#8
09-27-2010, 02:02 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| I like Conti's idea to treat every songline as a seperate segment that is going somewhere and needs some kind of resolution. I can build on from that idea and play those segments more like moving lines and less with full chords on every melody note. Tnx guys for giving me new insights! So much music to play and so little time  |
|
#9
09-27-2010, 02:04 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
With respect to "reslolution points", It is my observation that with the chord-scale approach that is so prevalent these days, the idea that a progression is seeking some resolution point down stream is often overlooked or lost. Last edited by Jazzaluk : 09-27-2010 at 02:15 PM. |
|
#10
09-28-2010, 03:33 AM
| |||
| |||
| CM.Bob Conti One final comment.Re Contis block chords approach-you dont have to use them all-you can use single notes when you feel it is appropriate to the tune you are playing he is in fact giving you the building"blocks"so you can develope YOUR style -not his! Martin Taylor does this as do all . |
|
#11
09-29-2010, 09:44 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Conti has a great approach and is great to get you actually playing songs from beginning to end. Many of us love to analyze theory and scales but can't play a whole song by ourselves. The songs have a lot of chords and it's been reharmonized so it can be tricky to remember them and understand what is happening. I write the original chords above the melody to help see what is happening. One of the potential issues with removing some of Conti's chords is that the chord motion may not follow his rules (cycle of fourths, chromatic, etc) but more importantly the previous chord may not be feasible if you can't get the next melody note(s) while playing that chord. A question I asked myself was 'Can I play a chord melody from beginning to end by myself?' After years of enjoying studying, analysis and practicing I found the answer to usually be 'No'. So I decided to learn full chord melodies but it wasn't easy to find ones I could finish. Conti came close - you could remove some chords and work with those. I looked at a lot of arrangements and even Steve Herberman's inner lines, George Van Eps Triad motion, but it was preventing me from getting full songs under my belt. I've been taking the standard chord progressions and building my own simple chord melodies using a small number of common jazz chords. I feel this is a great basic framework to work with and expand from there. Last edited by wkriski : 09-29-2010 at 09:48 AM. |
|
#12
09-29-2010, 10:32 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#13
09-29-2010, 11:24 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Yeah I went back to basics using the original chords and melody, finding places to be able to play the next melody notes as well using simple jazz chords. From there we can add some of conti's ideas of reharmonization once we can play a basic arrangement. |
|
#14
09-29-2010, 05:27 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Learning only the "favourite, difficult or attractive parts" of a tune and faking through the rest can definitely be a disease for gutarists. I know I suffered that affliction for a long time. It not only kills the repertoire, it also undermines the ability to understand and create a decent and cohesive arrangement. |
|
#15
09-29-2010, 07:03 PM
| |||
| |||
| This is my first post here, having just subscribed. I have been reading these forums for a while, especially the chord melody forum, since that is my primary interest. I have been working with the Conti chord melody books for some time and wanted to comment on this subject. First, I want to say that I think the two Conti chord melody books together ("Assembly Line" and "The Formula") are an excellent way to get into playing this style. Though the books are relatively short, especially compared to some other books on the subject, I believe they are quite complete and represent a lot of work to be done over a long period of time. I don't mean that in a negative way, because it is actually enjoyable to be playing songs and getting better at it while doing so. I am not a "pro" jazz guitar player, and for me it is an enjoyable hobby. For me, the chord melody style is similar to playing cocktail style piano. There is a guy, Jim Haskins, who has quite a few CDs recorded of many standards and pop tunes, Broadway and movie tunes, etc. in a cocktail style. His approach is to be "unobtrusive", rather than showy, and I think his recordings represent a good model of how one can approach playing these tunes on guitar, specifically because of that. The idea that a guy (or gal) can do this on guitar just to relax and have some fun is really compelling, and I believe Conti's materials are a solid way to get to that point. For me, starting with "Assembly Line" is a good thing because you build up a solid vocabulary of chord forms that are then used in "The Formula" to show what can REALLY be done with them. What I did was to photocopy the back pages where all the various forms are given (the "Alternate Chord Voicings") and laminate them so that I drill through them every day as a warm-up. It is important to really get these into your hands so that you don't have to think about them as you conjure up your bass lines in "The Formula". I then photocopied and laminated the back page from "The Formula" that has the chart of 4ths, "gravity", and tritone subs and refer to that, since it is at the core of what "The Formula" teaches. After you have gone through the two books, these laminated pages are what you need moving forward as you work through tunes. Really, the fluidity that is being discussed here comes from being very familiar with the chord forms (second nature) and the various movements of bass line that Conti teaches in "The Formula". It is a question of "mental bandwidth". I remember learning to drive a stick shift. At first, I had to remember to let up on the gas while slowly pushing in the clutch and then shifting to another gear while then letting out the clutch while pressing on the gas. That is a lot of steps and a lot can go wrong in the process (i.e. dump the clutch - embarrassing to say the least). However, after a while (weeks, months, ...), if somebody asks what gear you are in, you probably don't know without looking because it is all a fluid motion based on how the engine sounds, rather than a conscious mental process. That pretty much sums up what it is to work with the Conti materials. It takes a lot of time and (as Conti says again and again and again and...) playing your instrument. It is when the mechanics of it no longer take up all your conscious thought that the fluidity starts to happen. There are no shortcuts, though I know that listening to Conti say "it's a walk in the park" might be interpreted as saying that this stuff is easy, he doesn't mean it that way. He is saying that the mechanics of what he teaches are easy enough to grasp, but getting musical with it takes a lot of practice, and he does say that on a number of occasions in the DVDs. Joe Pass talked about how every jazz guitar player "has his favorite grips". Conti is no different. He has his favorite grips, and he gives them to you in "Assembly Line". In "The Formula" he teaches you how to use them in an infinite variety of combinations, with the primary deciding factor being how it sounds to you. I have worked on and off over several years with these materials. Life interferes, especially with my wife's medical problems, so that it can often be weeks or even months between periods of working with my guitar. But I keep coming back to it and making progress. I have played fingerstyle guitar, and am working on applying that to what Conti teaches. It is from that effort that I am saying what I am saying here about the "mental bandwidth". Conti gives you the raw materials and leaves it to you to turn it into whatever styling you want. My approach has been to form a chord under every melody note, but only play part of (or none of, or all of) the chord in an effort to change up the overall texture. But by forming the whole chord, I am keeping track of where that bass line and harmony are. You can arpeggiate, play just the bass note and melody note, just the melody note, a couple of voices in a given chord, etc. It is all there right under your fingers, but until you no longer have to think about what chord to play and how to form it, much of your thought process is taken up by that. I have never been good at memorizing a "fixed" arrangement. As a kid, I was never good at memorizing a poem or speech assignment to recite back to the class. But I can work to understand a process and then use it, which is really what Conti teaches. Think of the Conti chord set as your vocabulary, which you are using to learn to speak a new language. That is really what this is. Instead of memorizing something and reciting it back, you are "speaking" something new every time you play the tune. I work from fakebooks so I don't even have to memorize the melody. Joe Pass said to "learn melodies", so maybe some day I will focus on that so that I no longer need a fakebook, but for now, I am still learning the language. One other thing I have found to be helpful when working through "The Formula"... Conti has a series of chord melody arrangement books. If you get one or more of these and then use them to analyze the bass line movements as you work out the tune for yourself from a fakebook, it really helps to bring home these concepts. I have since gone on to analyze the arrangements of Barry Galbraith (the two Mel Bay books), and Conti's ideas directly apply and help to make sense of what Galbraith is doing too. This really is great stuff! You then reach a point where you start to look at lots of chord melody arrangements, when you can find them written out by somebody else, and REALLY understand what is happening so you can apply it to your own playing. This is much better than memorizing what somebody else did without being able to take anything from the experience for your own playing. I hope this commentary is helpful. If somebody had said that to me when I first started working with the Conti materials, it would have really helped to set realistic expectations and given me a methodical approach to getting the most from them. I don't care how good the presentation is (and I personally like Conti's presentation best of all the materials I have owned and worked with over the years), it always helps to discuss approaches to internalizing the materials. In college, I found that being in a study group was far more effective than going it alone. Somebody always has a new persepctive on the materials. Regards, Tony |
|
#16
09-30-2010, 03:54 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Tnx for your reply tbeltrans. That's quite a first post and it's helpfull indeed! I found Conti's approach to harmony just great. He was the first person who was really able to teach me the main principles of harmonizing chords using the circle of 4ths, tritone substitutions and minor 3rds movements. Last week I've started with Howard Morgen's book, 'chord melody and beyond', and I'm already starting to see how to adapt Conti's style and approach to a more fingerstyle, or harplike (I've no better word for it) approach. I realise now that I was stuck too much in the 'a chord for every melody note style' which is just not my thing. I really like to keep it light and airy. |
|
#17
09-30-2010, 04:22 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Conti Yep I agree with Tony. Conti is very likable and no-nonsense and his arrangements can get you playing full songs pretty quickly. One criticism is that he doesn't include stock changes in the arrangements so it's harder to see what reharmonization he's done. But you see the same ideas over and over with regards to chord/bass movement. And most chords are fairly easy to play in comparison to say Ted Greene's arrangements. I'm taking the stock chord changes from real books, songtrellis.com, etc and creating even simpler arrangements. But I've also been looking at inner lines, van eps, and some great lessons by Steve Herberman who shows how you can hold a bass note and melody and create an inner line/more movement. I'm so excited that I've been able to use a very small number of chords and use them to create good chord melodies, so I can play songs by myself from beginning to end. I think keeping it simple at first is extremely powerful especially when teaching others and creating the excitement when they can play songs, without giving up and putting all the material back on the shelf. |
|
#18
09-30-2010, 05:02 PM
| |||
| |||
| I think the most likely reason (i.e. don't know this for certain...) that Conti does not supply the stock chords could be one or more of the following: 1. We can look it up in a fakebook (I am not trying to be facetious, but instead I think he knows we have the sheet music). That in mind, it is interesting to see when he transposes from the original sheet in the Real Books. 2. He says on his DVD for "The Formula" that once you start using his approach, you toss the original chords completely. He says you can start on whatever chord you want and then apply the various bassline movements to generate your own changes. Of course, rather than "anything goes", he says that it needs to sound good - and that takes lots of experimentation. So he does not consider the original chords to necessarily be important in his process. That said, he does use some of the original chords in his chord melody arrangements. He will sometimes start on the original chord, and other times, end a "musical phrase" (again, a concept described in "The Formula") on an original chord. What I will do is play through a tune using the original chords as per "Assembly Line", and then just touch up areas that don't feel/sound good to me with the original chords, using Conti's ideas. The result is much closer to the original than going "whole hog" with completely different chords. I am still learning the process and experimenting, so maybe in time I will get farther away from the original as my ear becomes more used to the sounds that approach often creates. Tony |
|
#19
09-30-2010, 05:16 PM
| |||
| |||
| Dutch Courage: Thanks for the response. I will have to look into that Morgen book sometime. The problem for me with a lot of these books is that they are too advanced and/or don't spend enough time in one area to really explain it. Conti is very thorough and focuses on one set of concepts through the whole book/DVD, making sure we "get it". Even with that, I find that I have to go back through the material from time to time. I am finding that as I get his concepts into my hands (huge difference between actually successfully doing and intellectually understanding what is being said), some of the other materials that seemed unfathomable start to become more accessible. A good example is that now I can apply Conti's bass line movements to Barry Galbraith's chord melody arrangements and understand them from Conti's perspective. That then makes them viable learning materials to further get ideas for handling chord melody situations such as moving away from strict block chording. By the way, it is interesting that Conti's teaching approach is a chord under every note, and then after you master that, you can go on to experimenting with ways to make it flow (as the OP talked about). David Sudnow (now deceased, unfortunately) had a piano method in which he taught you to voice a chord under each melody note on the piano. You moved from block chord to block chord and could hear the melody playing on top of that. The idea was to really get those chords in hand (literally...) and then after you learned 15 or 20 tunes this way, you then begin to experiment with stride in the left hand, arpeggiating, and stuff like that. I see Conti's approach to be very similar in that regard. It is a different, but very effective way of learning this style. Sudnow said that you needed to learn to crawl before you could walk. If you learned to walk, then if you "saw a kid hopping and skipping, well you could learn that too). The intent was that if you really get the basics well into your hands so you don't have to concentrate on that anymore, you can experiment with other means of presenting the tune - but if you try to take on too much, you get overwhelmed and lose your motivation altogether because it all becomes too difficult. Tony |
|
#20
10-01-2010, 08:55 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| I like the way you guys are approaching things. The crawl before you walk thing for me is using the original progression for the most part at first, together with simple jazz chords that I can finger without much problem, then expand with reharmonizations, inner lines, etc. But right now I'm builing up a library of simple chord melodies. I think an important point is that for most of us to create our own style we can't just play other people's chord melodies. I kept learning bits and pieces of other ones but would get stuck on certain chords, and usually never finish one. Now I am able to take ideas from other ones and simplify or replace chords if necessary. I find having the original chords helpful to actually understand the reharmonizations, even though I understand the root movements. I find every bar or 2 the original chord is there so sometimes he backcycles, not just completely from his first chosen chord. In other words the first chord of the measure, or a nearby chord is often the target from the original chord progression. I think that is because you want to have some semblance of the original changes or at least touch them at various points along the way. |
|
#21
10-01-2010, 02:01 PM
| |||
| |||
| Reading some of the earlier posts in this thread, I think there may possibly be some misunderstanding of Conti's teaching materials vs his chord melody arrangements. This post is not directed at anybody or anybody's particular comments, but just a general reading here. I really believe that Conti has something unique in these books we are discussing, and having gone through them, I want to make some of the points he makes in them very clear. In the "Assembly Line", you will learn a whole series of chord forms such that you can easily harmonize any melody note in any tune in any key. The idea is that you use these to create your own chord melody arrangements "on the fly" - hence, the title "Chord Melody Assembly Line". You are using the original chords as specified in the lead sheet, and using Conti's forms to "voice them". The idea is to teach you, in a very practical manner, how to play a whole tune in the chord melody style. There is nothing that prevents you from using your own chord forms if you wish. If you readily know where the notes are on the fretboard, and know how to "spell" chords, there is no reason that you would be prevented from coming up with your own chord forms. Bear in mind that Conti's forms are not unique (i.e. everybody uses them at one time or another), but he has collected those forms that lend themselves well to chord melody and they just sound good together. As I mentioned in another post, Joe Pass talked about every guitarist having his or her own favorite "grips". These hapened to be Conti's, so that is what he shows you. But the CONCEPTS he is teaching can be readily applied to whatever "grips" you want to use - it is the idea of putting a decent sounding voicing under the melody note and creating your own chord melody arrangements, rather than learning somebody else's. So, when you have worked through "Assembly Line", you ARE creating your own chord melodies - not playing somebody elses. I have not seen anything in Conti's books or videos that indicate he is the least bit interested in having you memorize his arrangements. He is teaching you to do it yourself. In "The Formula", he specifically talks about this. In "Assembly Line", he clearly states his interest in having you do your own arrangements. In "The Formula", Conti says that you CAN learn his arrangements from that arrangement series of books if you want to, but he would prefer you use these as a starting point for your own explorations. He provides a chord under every melody note to give you a sense of what can be done, but expects you to explore the tune and make it your own. He says that in the beginning of each of these books of arrangements and in "The Formula". Also note that in his arrangement books, he often provides more than one set of chords to harmonize the melody. Clearly, his intent is to give you options to play with, rather than specifying that there is only one way to play the tune. If you have gone through "The Formula", you will begin to see the bass line patterns in all of these arrangements, and how he uses the same concepts over and over to get an immense variety with each melody. To me, this all suggests that he does not want you to learn this by rote, but by exploring all that you can do with these ideas and create your own arrangements. "The Formula" is really all about substitutions. Conti says that, when you start reharmonizing a tune, you can ignore the original chords and find your own to make the tune sound the way YOU want to hear and play it. That IS substitution. He teaches you step by step HOW to do it in a very practical manner. But even with this guidance, it still takes a lot of time and effort to become proficient at it. It is, as David Sudnow would say, a "hardy" skill. But the learning process is fun because you are playing songs instead of exercises all along the way. Regarding theory, Conti does not dismiss it. He talks about this in both "Assembly Line" and "The Formula" on the respective DVDs. He says that as a prerequisite to "The Formula", you need to understand diatonic harmony (which is basic theory). He says that he believes that you should learn theory beyond the basic diatonic harmony in the context of playing the music, not as a separate activity that does not directly relate to being able to use it on the fretboard. So, to him, it is better to learn to play tunes first, and then study the theory in the context of what you are already doing because in the long run, that is the way it will make sense so you can really use that knowledge in real life situations. I have studied theory over the years and I can read music. I can tell you that there is a lot of "useless" theory (i.e. stuff that talking about will make us sound really knowledgeable, but doesn't help us play any better) and "useful" theory that we can really use to make our playing more interesting. If you play and then take what theory you need as you go, you will spend your time on "useful" theory. I think that is what Conti is getting at. Those who have already gone through these two book/DVD combinations already have heard all this. Those who have not, will now at least know that this is what he discusses and demonstrates in these book/DVDs. I do have to emphasize that Conti's materials are anything BUT learning tunes by rote. If you have any of his books of chord melody arrangements, read the opening comments. He is encouraging you to make these your own rather than just stiffly playing them exactly as he wrote them out. Any arrangements he provides in "Assembly Line" or "The Formula" are intended to demonstrate how to use what he is teaching, rather than to spoon feed you an arrangement to memorize. His intent is clearly to have you do your own - and never to have to play the song the same way twice. Tony |
|
#22
10-02-2010, 12:57 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Very interesting thread, one of which takes me back years ago when I was attempting to teach myself to play jazz piano. I burned a lot of midnite oil before finally getting voicings (shapes) of complex chords programmed into my hands. I'm coming new to jazz guitar, and in many respects it's like being back at square one again, but not exactly for in a theoretical sense I'm much further ahead of the game this time around. What remains to be seen is how much of what I already know in terms of voicings will be applicable on guitar. We'll see. I just discovered RC a week ago, having just acquired a guitar. And as fate would have it the Assembly Line and The Formula arrived yesterday and I've been digesting the DVD material mentally prior to picking up the guitar. I stumbled upon this site tonight while doing a google search for a jazz guitar style amplifier. It's reassuring to find oneself in the identical position, musically speaking, as so many others. I look forward to sharing thoughts and suggestions as I begin the task of learning how to create serious chord melody arrangements. Enjoy! |
|
#23
10-19-2010, 02:53 PM
| |||
| |||
| When point you CM guys might like is this" pay attention to the lyrics of the song /standard".Most were written for motion pictures or shows by great composers Gershwin Cole Porter et al.They are telling you a story and that sorts out when to use the block chords and melody lines.Listen to how great singers "Ella Fitzgerald"and pianists Oscar Petersen and Art Tatum give life to the melody. Even better listen to Joe Pass backing Ella- must be good as he did it for 10yrs! |
|
#24
10-25-2010, 06:36 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Yes, the Robert Conti books are great for learning Chord Melody style....after working through his Chord Assembly line and Formula books, I started tackling songs I wanted to play out of the Real Book..first ones were tough but easier as I worked out about 10 songs... His one chord per melody note was a little much for me so I just simplified them down to chords and some melody notes.. I learned this style playing fingerstyle and have now gone back to learn pick-style chord melody...its a different feel for me..joe pass vs barney kessel...I can see where you need more chords over the melody note to make it work..maybe thats why Conti has one chord per melody note? I think he plays more pick-style. Anybody else noticed this? |
|
#25
10-27-2010, 02:58 PM
| |||
| |||
| Pick or Fingers ? Pass-Kessel-Conti can do both!But as you know if playing at 220bpm plus they use a pick for quicker easier articulation hiding the pick between 1st/2nd finger when not required(Pass put it between his lips).Wes couldnt play at these speeds because he only used his thumb.Using the fingers will give you more freedom to build solo's using chords and single notes as you want to use them.This is what Conti gives you in all his books the building blocks for you to develop your own way of interpreting the tune you are working on in your style.You WILL develop your own style once you learn your own progressions that sound GOOD to YOU and you will use these a lot and reinvent them over and over again.Remember its not rocket science but a way of expressing YOURSELF through the love of the guitar and music. |
|
#26
12-20-2010, 06:47 AM
| |||
| |||
| I have 5 of Robert Conti's books and a few of his Chord Melody arrangement books. Need I say that he is a "Monster" guitarist and you can probably count on your finger the number of guitarist in any genre who can even come close to his knowledge and blazing speed. MHO. As I etched my way through his material I soon realized "I MUST BE NUTS TO THINK I CAN DO THIS!", but I love him!!!! |
|
#27
12-20-2010, 02:39 PM
| |||
| |||
| Is this the Tony Beltrans that wrote the "Chord Melody, An Organized Approach?" Dude, your volume changed everything about how I think about the guitar. Good, good stuff. |
|
#28
12-26-2010, 07:12 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Tony |
|
« An easy approach to play chord melodies and chord solos - EXCELLENT FOR BEGGINERS
|
Arrangement website »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
