The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 43 of 43
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    But my point before was that I doubt very much if Depeche Mode thought 'I think we'll use the III of Ab minor there'. I think they found a chord that felt good and a sound that had been used before in pop music. That's all really, nothing deep :-)
    Maybe... but I do not care what they really thought. Maybe they thought about scrumbled eggs... who cares.

    I usually use word 'think' in that context like B'ach thought', 'Wes thought'.. but I do not mean it letterally... I never cared what they could think as casual persons....
    it's more in artisitc sense.. I put it in my terms and words.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Maybe... but I do not care what they really thought. Maybe they thought about scrumbled eggs... who cares.
    This reminds me of something a PHD Music Theory candidate told me about what a presenter at a theory conference
    for which he was in attendance said:

    paraphrase: "Once the composers ink dries on the page, the composition is now mine to dissect as I please".

    For me, I find learning about a composers/improvisors thought process fascinating but hard to come by information.
    I am also equally interested in how I myself as well as others interpret the same material.
    It takes a village to raise a thinking musician.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    You see... we make choices.. and even if unconciuosly that means that we feel some realations.

    To say 'we like it' is just a statement that we feel these relations. And it's ok.

    Theory is the way to explain these relations in conventional terms.
    Well, it depends what you mean by "explain".

    Theory will offer descriptions, but "explanation" depends on what level of information you find satisfying.

    Some may well feel that "common 3rds" (or "relative" and "parallel" keys, "chromatic mediants" or whatever) is sufficient. "Oh yeah, I see. Thanks!"

    Others might well say "but why do common 3rds (or the rest) sound good?"

    IOW, the question "why" is kind of endless. Theory stops at first base. And then just says (in essence). "that's just how it is. Deal with it!"

    The only real answer to the question why does "x" sound good is that we like it. And the main reason we like it is it's familiar, we've heard it before. Maybe not as much as things we've heard too many times before (because they're boring cliches). But not something we've never heard before, because that would just not make sense. It would sound wrong, and not in a good way.
    Of course, it's possible to put familiar sounds together in unfamiliar ways - which sound good - but very rarely totally new (unheard of) ways. Of course, if we can't remember where we heard them before, I guess that counts as "new" and "original".

    There would be additional stories about how things get to be common - where it all started. Obviously once they are common practice, then it's self-perpetuating, because we all want to make sounds that other people like. (If we don't, then no one hears them, so they don't count.) But theory is not really interested in any of this (culture, psychology, history, acoustics). I mean, many theorists are, but music theory as a discipline doesn't require reference to any of that.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    One of the most interesting and striking chord sequences I've heard is Tom Waites' Invitation To The Blues. Great stuff. It's the Bbm that does it.

    Dm - Bbm - F - Bo
    Gm7 - A7sus/A7 - Dm/A7 - Dm


  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JonR
    Well, it depends what you mean by "explain".

    Theory will offer descriptions, but "explanation" depends on what level of information you find satisfying.

    Some may well feel that "common 3rds" (or "relative" and "parallel" keys, "chromatic mediants" or whatever) is sufficient. "Oh yeah, I see. Thanks!"

    Others might well say "but why do common 3rds (or the rest) sound good?"

    IOW, the question "why" is kind of endless. Theory stops at first base. And then just says (in essence). "that's just how it is. Deal with it!"

    The only real answer to the question why does "x" sound good is that we like it. And the main reason we like it is it's familiar, we've heard it before. Maybe not as much as things we've heard too many times before (because they're boring cliches). But not something we've never heard before, because that would just not make sense. It would sound wrong, and not in a good way.
    Of course, it's possible to put familiar sounds together in unfamiliar ways - which sound good - but very rarely totally new (unheard of) ways. Of course, if we can't remember where we heard them before, I guess that counts as "new" and "original".

    There would be additional stories about how things get to be common - where it all started. Obviously once they are common practice, then it's self-perpetuating, because we all want to make sounds that other people like. (If we don't, then no one hears them, so they don't count.) But theory is not really interested in any of this (culture, psychology, history, acoustics). I mean, many theorists are, but music theory as a discipline doesn't require reference to any of that.
    I believe that direct personal perception always goes first...

    so as I said 'I like it' is statement of some acknoledgement...

    Theory is conventional tool... conventional is a key word here... conventional cannot be real, true etc. It is always a compromise.

    Music theory is not static too.. I mean as approach... medievial music theories, renaissance, baroque and modern are very different approaches to subjet ... I mean namely method, way of thinking and approach... (not the subject itself)

    IOW, the question "why" is kind of endless. Theory stops at first base. And then just says (in essence). "that's just how it is. Deal with it!"
    Not really.. theoretic tools are very flexible and complex and they can be expanded as far as you need.

    And the main reason we like it is it's familiar, we've heard it before
    Familiar yes.. but it does not necessarily mean 'we'ver heard it before'

    Perception works on the level of relations and integrity... it's faster that instinct.


    But not something we've never heard before, because that would just not make sense.
    You refer to experience... it's already a physolsopucal system. I am not sure I can thoroughly accept it.


    Basically it's culture that works... and culture is not just history and society.

    Theory will offer descriptions, but "explanation" depends on what level of information you find satisfying.
    Description and explanations are different things. Why do you mix it? Theory both explains and describes. And perception of both descritpion and explanations depends on perceiveing person (on cultural commonality and many otehr factors)
    Last edited by Jonah; 01-07-2018 at 04:16 PM.

  7. #31
    Thanks guys for all the input I learnt a lot!!

    That B chord sounds amazing and gives all the identity to this song in my opinion.

    I believe he started with the melody F-Ab-C-B...I believe that's the main voice leading, in my opinion.

    One of members of DM was classically trained Alan Wilder - Wikipedia

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by bossa
    One of members of DM was classically trained Alan Wilder - Wikipedia

    The above wiki states this:
    For "Enjoy the Silence" from the album Violator, Wilder is credited with taking Martin Gore's melancholy ballad-esque demo and re-envisioning the song as a percolating, melodic dance track.[4] The resulting single went on to become one of the most commercially successful songs in Depeche Mode's history.
    Which is nice

  9. #33
    Bmajor Chord on Cminor Key-capture-jpg
    Attached Images Attached Images Bmajor Chord on Cminor Key-capture-jpg 

  10. #34
    That's a picture of Synfire software, and out of the box it gives a B major chord to use on a Cminor key progression, pretty cool.

    I didn't understand very well the vert and hor scales, can someone help me with that?

    Thanks.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    It's useful to know and be able hear the interrelationships between keys and
    discover interesting chord progressions.

    Here's a simple game that can at times produce some useful material.
    I generated a chart of derivations of Cm according to the following rules:
    Each note can move up or down by either a half step or whole step.
    I am not suggesting everything on the list is useable in any given context,
    just that they are within the parameters as described above.
    I did this using a permutation calculator and then by eliminating the chords
    not fulfilling the criteria. Hopefully not too many omissions/mistakes.

    In reality, this is something I do on the fly by ear. I think of this as a kind of chordal mutation.
    Never knew there were this many variables. Would only get worse for 4 note structures.

    Then there are the variations of the 2nd chord.

    One other game variable is to mutate chord #1 into chord #2 etc.

    The moral of the story is that you don't have wait till you fully understand something to explore possibilities.
    Keep what you find useful, discard the rest.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by bako; 01-08-2018 at 09:48 PM.

  12. #36
    Cool ideas Bako, thanks!!

    I couldn't figure it out the scales the software gave and the logic behind it.

    Could someone help me understand it?

    a) Vertical: B lydial b7
    b) Horizontal: Db melodic major

    c) Relation: Db Major

    d) Function: DG ( I believe this is german, anyone know what it means, it might be related to #VII)

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Hi there, I've noticed that in either a major or minor key you can pretty much always replace the I IV and V get a nice exotic yet distinctly pop sound by replacing one of those structural triads with a triad of the same colour a minor third higher.

    You are in Cm, the four chord is Fminor, it's relative Major is Ab, B is a minor third up from that. You get pretty much the same colour and effect by using Ab minor too, which is a minor third up from the IV.

    I like to focus on the simplest explanation if it is useful. I think this is just a very simple substitution for the IV.


    I think that's the point of theory really, to give you things to try and see if you like them. And if you find you do then use them. The simplest explanation is usually the most useful. Increasingly I like to think that there are only really three chords in any key.

    Take any tune you like with simple three chord harmony and try this over the IV. Mostly it will sound nice.
    It will also mostly sound nice to apply the same principle to the I and the V as well. It may not be effective everywhere but in general you will find somewhere that you like it in a tune.

    ANY TUNE.

    And in short order you will find yourself having a neat trick to spice up simple melodies with interesting progressions that won't sound like Tin Pan Alley clichés. It's one of the main ways that pop and rock composers avoid sounding like jazz whilst avoiding folksiness.

    D.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    One of the most interesting and striking chord sequences I've heard is Tom Waites' Invitation To The Blues. Great stuff. It's the Bbm that does it.

    Dm - Bbm - F - Bo
    Gm7 - A7sus/A7 - Dm/A7 - Dm

    I just read the thread properly and noticed that this does just as I described. IVm replaced with a chord up a minor third.


    D.

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Pop artists have a bank of devices that allow them to elaborate harmony without invoking the sound of Jazz Standards.

    One of the most interesting is this. Take any major or minor key tune and harmonise it with I IV and V triads only, ensure that you never change chord if you don't have to, go for the most vanilla sounds.

    Next try substituting, one at a time, a chord up a minor third of the same colour.

    Say you are in Cm, so you have Cm,Fm and G(or Gm depending on taste and melody) to play with. You also have Eb and Ab as substitutes for the I and the IV.

    Looking at the IV you can have Fminor or Ab or Abm or B all fulfilling the function of a IV chord.

    In the Depeche Mode song and also the Tom Waits that is all that is happening.

    You experiment by trying this substitution out on ANY TUNE that can be elegantly harmonised with three triads. There will generally be somewhere that you will find you like the sound of it.

    D.
    Last edited by Freel; 02-01-2018 at 10:32 AM.

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Next try substituting, one at a time, a chord up a minor third of the same colour.
    chord of the same colour... what does it mean?


    Looking at the IV you can have Fminor or Ab or Abm or B all fulfilling the function of a IV chord.
    you see function in functional tonality ... it's not just a number... it's sundominant. It's some specific tensions and releases which make it different from dominant and tonic... you can't just put anything instead using some abstact principle ... it may sound all right.. but it won't function as subdominant..

    I can't see how B triad can function as subdominant for Fm... the fact it's minor3rd apart from minor 3rd apart does not change anything...

    Ab for Fm yes... because they are relative chords.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Hi sorry if I wasn't clear. Major goes to Major, Minor to Minor.

    I think it's a lot more fun to actually use this over tunes like I said than get tied in knots about the whys and wherefores.

    I think if you spend some time doing that you'll have fun. I don't really anticipate that either of us will have any fun debating nomenclature.

    The way to have fun with this idea is to sing an eight bar phrase from a song you like that has only three chords and just 'plug in' the options one at a time and see how you like them. So if the tune's 'vanilla' harmonisation has two instances of the four chord try it over each in turn and ask yourself if you like the sound of it.

    It's a practical method for enjoying not debating.

    If you don't want to do that or am not sure what I mean I could do it for you if you pick a three chord tonal tune. But as I said you will get a lot more enjoyment trying it out for yourself, I assumed you wanted to harness this effect for yourself, if you just want to debate then I won't have much to offer at this point.

    It functions that way because when you do it it sounds interesting and nice.

    I like heuristics a lot more than long explanations.

    D.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    It functions that way because when you do it it sounds interesting and nice.
    It works.. no problem...
    but it does not function as subdominant)))

    I don't really anticipate that either of us will have any fun debating nomenclature.
    You see.. it's one of the same story .. all the time... those who do not get that there is practical meaning behind nomenclature try to neglect it and say it's impractical...

    For the term 'subdominanat' has meaning connected with music and its language... it's a living thing for me...
    and that's why I argue when somebody just drops it in as if it's something meaningless..
    and even more he tries to tell me that I am doing meaningless..


    I like heuristics a lot more than long explanations.
    Take a look at Talmud... me favourite book probably... every next comment has another comment in it)))

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Don't really see your problem Jonah. I did learn how to write four part harmony at my conservatoire. It was not for me a very emotional experience but I am a methodical man and I did get perfect marks for my last harmony exam. The only thing that it left me with really was an abiding dislike of hearing myself play with egregiously poor voice leading.

    I have learned however that for me, with a rather pedestrian ear, the easiest way to find the sounds I want is through emotional connection with the music. That means building up a bank of heuristics based on how harmonic devices feel in different contest. And as this bank grows I get a little more likely to pull out the sounds I want where I want.

    So for me this means singing tunes and playing guitar and plugging in different chords and usually fairly systematically. I don't worry terribly much about how the things I find jive with classical harmony. I come from a Science background so if I think I see something that works then I immediately test my hypothesis by changing the tune and seeing if the effect is repeatable over a few other tunes. And since singing and playing is a really visceral experience and it is great FUN to hold a tune over the unexpected twists of evolving harmony then I am likely to subconsciously attach a label to the sound and be able to reach for it in the future, spontaneously.

    Funny thing is the last time this came up was with a harmony teacher about fifteen years ago. He was talking one way, neapolitan sixths and what not, and I was more interested in the heuristic that I had been reading about in the, now sadly out of print, 'Harmony with Lego Bricks' by Conrad Cork. Conrad talks about Bartok substitutions, basically the somewhat interchangeability of chords at not only the tritone but also the minor third. He insisted that the theory was unsound went to the piano to show why and hummed and hawed and did nothing worth listening to which could last more than two beats. I showed him how my idea worked and I think it was fairly nice. We ended with a mutual disinterest in each others view of things.

    It was then that I thought about the classical insistence that the ionian mode was central to music. It isn't really, it is super convenient for Sonato Form and it's Tin Pan Alley lovechild because of the emphasis on movement through the cycle of fourths. But there are just screeds of musics both older and newer that do not have a chromatic universe revolving round an ionian Earth with the sun a minor player. Here in Scotland for example we have bitonal music based on six note scales (usually the addition of a minor I and a major on the flattened supertonic) and I consistently see it mislabelled as dorian despite the absence of a sixth in the melody and the fact that a sixth violates the style fairly brutally, even when Tony Rice does it.

    To get my ear to instruct my fingers I need to keep things real simple, I don't worry too much about voice leading because the guitar will be there and it is pretty much a six row abacus for working that stuff out. And I need emotional connection to make my memory work so for me Singing, Stumming and plugging in different options works real nice.

    And I use the term subdominant because if I am singing the tune it is readily supported in three chord harmony and the chord at that point is a subdominant then it is natural for see a predictably workable substitute chord in relation to the chord it is substituting for. As much as possible I try and think of three harmonic regions which define the architecture of a song in time and this means I need only think of the tune whilst trying to dredge up the harmony in a new key without getting all tied in nots or having to stop playing all the time.


    I am sorry that I do not have much knowledge of the Talmud Jonah but that need't stop us having a Whale of a time.


    D.