Robert Conti´s chords voicings for chord-melody style

[eduardosanz]

Hy, I would like to know if the chord voicings Robert Conti uses in his Assembly Line, and then The Formula, are drop 2 or drop 3 voicings, or if they are (I mean, most of them) closed voicings or what kind of chords. I ask because I´ve read that the voicnings he uses are big dificult chords...

Also, does he promote or teaches any voice leading with his chord melody approach, or his style is more of jumping up and down the fretboard without any walking bass lines.

Thanks!

[matt.guitarteacher]

They aren't really any ONE type of chord voicing. Just standard, go-to, jazz grips. I'd say that he mostly tries to have the root in the bass. In fact, his method of re-harmonization, laid out in "the formula", is based around root movement.

There aren't really any voicings that you WOULDN'T want to know, anyway. Certainly not wasting your time to learn them. Personally, the assembly line was probably the best "book money" I'd ever spent. But that's where I was at the time. Good basic material.

[mr. beaumont]

Drop 2 and 3 aren't magical like some folks will lead you to beleive--they're PLAYABLE!

If you knew your drop 2 and 3 inversions for maj7, m7, dom7, and m7b5 on string sets 1-4, 5-2 and 6432 (those are the drop 3) you'd have everything you need to start arranging these things for yourself.

[MarkRhodes]

They aren't really any ONE type of chord voicing. Just standard, go-to, jazz grips. .

I found them useful too. It's basic knowledge---like how to do long division: it doesn't matter which book you learn it from; what matters is that you can solve long division problems (or in this case put the melody note on top of various chord voicings.)

[goldenwave77]

I admired chord melody playing for years, but was always intimidated by learning it. The problem was that you drowned in too much information.

The great virtue of Conti's approach is that there is no ambiguity. Here are 15 or 16 voicings for the 5th string...15 or 16 for the 6th string, for each of the chord types: major, minor, dominant, augmented and diminished. He supplies the diagrams, and you learn them by playing thru pithy little examples from jazz songs. (The first song is "Oh Susannah" which you get sick of, but it does the job of keeping life simple.) (He supplies additional voicings in the back of the book, but strongly urges you NOT to worry about them until you get the basic grips down.) So you learn every possible melody note for each chord type.

If you understand, CAGED chord forms, this will help you. The chord forms are primarily root forms, but some inversions are thrown in. (When you realize this, you'll notice that I Maj 6= vi- min 7.)

His examples show you a chord for each melody note, because this is the most complete treatment. Obviously, you can do more sparse treatments. (As you learn the basic grips, you'll realize you know a bunch of other possibilities...but stick with the program.) When you get done, you'll be able to play flip thru a real book and play rudimentary chord melody.

You'll also learn a tremendous amount about harmony...voice movements...how to begin creating voice movements, etc. As you start learning the basic CAGED forms by playing, you'll also start seeing the connections on the fretboard. I think learning some chord melody is the single biggest thing that has helped my playing, overall. You are supplying CONTEXT for musical ideas, and as Joe Pass has said, learning songs is a great way to learn concepts, that will also enhance your soloing.

Of all the guitar books I have, I think this book (Chord Melody Assembly Line) has been the most worthwhile. I'm going to tackle the Barry Galbraith comping books, but I don't think I would have been able to do this without the basics, which Conti has given me.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Drop 2 and 3 aren't magical like some folks will lead you to beleive--they're PLAYABLE!

If you knew your drop 2 and 3 inversions for maj7, m7, dom7, and m7b5 on string sets 1-4, 5-2 and 6432 (those are the drop 3) you'd have everything you need to start arranging these things for yourself.

Drop 2's are cool. There's no getting around the fact that you have to know how to construct chords and work out these different things eventually. But it's also true that most of us learn some basic chord forms from a teacher or old pro to get started, whether it's chord melody or just comping at the beginning. There's a point at which it's not productive to reinvent the wheel.

A lot of us get to chord melody at a later point, where maybe we SHOULD have our OWN stuff together and be able to work things out, but I don't see that it's detrimental to look at favorite grips of Joe Pass or Robert Conti. There is a lot of material to be worked out over multiple chord types, just to get STARTED, with chord melody , and I think that this method is pretty helpful.

Honestly, drop-2 7th chords are just pretty dry for CM, especially at the beginning, when you're not doing much in between, subs etc. You really have to get into 9ths and other extensions to get any color. But once you get into a lot of 9ths, it's a lot harder to hear the root movements, as a beginner. They just sound like other seventh chords.

I just wonder if anyone who's concerned about the "dumbing down" caused by this approach, as a starting point, has even looked at it. It reminds me of the advice I see people sometimes give rank beginners here, generally, for comping: "Start out by learning every inversion of every drop2/drop 3 chord, for all chord types, and all the extensions. Then, start in on all possible altered chords. Then, you're ready to start learning tunes." (Not saying that's where you're coming from).

I certainly don't think THAT'S necessary to start working on comping over basic tunes as a beginner, and I would imagine most involved in this conversation would generally agree. I just wonder what the distinction is between that mentality and what I would view as a similar one which arises every time this book is mentioned.

I honestly don't understand how it's any more detrimental to someone's musical growth than than Mickey Baker, William Leavitt, or any other chord book.

[eduardosanz]

I
If you understand, CAGED chord forms, this will help you. The chord forms are primarily root forms, but some inversions are thrown in. (When you realize this, you'll notice that I Maj 6= vi- min 7.)

Is this another CAGED system book?

On the other hand, I keep reading that Conti teaches insisting in playing real tunes.... but are they real tunes like cheesy Oh Susannah or Danny Boy? I thought they would be "standards"...

[matt.guitarteacher]

Is this another CAGED system book?

On the other hand, I keep reading that Conti teaches insisting in playing real tunes.... but are they real tunes like cheesy Oh Susannah or Danny Boy? I thought they would be "standards"...

no. Not a "CAGED system" book, in that sense, but CAGED is just a description of the way chords lay out on the fretboard. So, in that sense, ANY book on chords is going to be helped buy a basic knowledge of caged, like he said.

The book uses phrases from actual jazz standards throughout. Susanna is the exception.

[lawson-stone]

I'd agree-Conti's book absolutely isn't a CAGED oriented presentation, though he does show how the standard shapes he teaches repeat in a consistent pattern up and down the neck. But he doesn't use the CAGED idea.

Really, I learned this stuff the hard way starting out with Mel Bay's old Melody Chord system. Now I'm glad I did that, but Conti's book would have got me playing real music a lot faster.

[NSJ]

I have no idea about the value of this course, but it's pretty much common practice no matter where you go. It doesn't appear that he's creating anything new, Which of course doesn't mean that it's bad.

When I start taking lessons, the first thing I learned were sixth string and fifth string root seventh chords. I soon learned that this was the 1573 (drop 2) and 1735 (drop 3) voicing.

Ballpark: between the three drop 2 string sets and the two drop 3 string sets, you should have at least 20 different ways to voice each chord and its inversions, from the nut to the 12th fret.

The best practice is to find these chords in that order -- from the nut to the 12th fret. Start with the first string set, move to the adjacent string sets. Ideally, you should learn them as sixth chords first (, i.e., 1563 or 1635, major and minor, then move onto the seventh chords and all the various permutations ).

There is no getting around the fact that this is very time-consuming initially, repetitive, and will take a long time to internalize. This doesn't mean that one should not work on tunes.

[goldenwave77]

Re: Conti and CAGED

Let me clarify my earlier comment. Conti never uses the term CAGED. BUT, there are a limited number of ways chords (and scale forms) can be formed on the guitar fingerboard...so...in this sense, NO teacher of chord forms (or scale forms, or fingerings) is "discovering" anything new...just as Columbus didn't "discover America"--- it was already there.

So...he gives you in his first set of chords, 18 chords...with half of the melody notes on the 2nd (b) string, and half of them on the 1st string (high e). The roots reside mostly on the 5th and 6th strings, with a couple of them being 4th string roots.

Now, if you can already play these...quickly... with more or less instant recall...you probably aren't learning anything new, from Conti. But if you can't, then having him "Assemble" and put them together in one place, i.e. "Assembly Line" style, will benefit you immensely.

After this 1st group, there is a 2nd group of major chords, then two sets of minor chord groupings, then a set of dominant chord groupings, and diminished, augmented, and minor 7, flat 5 groupings. Plus in the back there are additional chord grips.

So, these are all laid out, and they are practically idiot proof, though they do take some time to "get them under your fingers" along with pithy musical examples, that demonstrate their use...along with his observations. And he is right, play through the examples---don't memorize....context and "bottoms up" learning is the key here...pick up a real book, and start to work thru/reinforce what you're learning, and you'll enter the world of chord melody.

Plus, there is an accompanying video. Really, its the best $39 I ever spent on instructional materials. I'd still be floundering around trying to do this on my own...for others, it may be superfluous or unnecessary.

[lawson-stone]

Re: Conti and CAGED

Let me clarify my earlier comment. Conti never uses the term CAGED. BUT, there are a limited number of ways chords (and scale forms) can be formed on the guitar fingerboard...so...in this sense, NO teacher of chord forms (or scale forms, or fingerings) is "discovering" anything new...just as Columbus didn't "discover America"--- it was already there.

So...he gives you in his first set of chords, 18 chords...with half of the melody notes on the 2nd (b) string, and half of them on the 1st string (high e). The roots reside mostly on the 5th and 6th strings, with a couple of them being 4th string roots.

Now, if you can already play these...quickly... with more or less instant recall...you probably aren't learning anything new, from Conti. But if you can't, then having him "Assemble" and put them together in one place, i.e. "Assembly Line" style, will benefit you immensely.

After this 1st group, there is a 2nd group of major chords, then two sets of minor chord groupings, then a set of dominant chord groupings, and diminished, augmented, and minor 7, flat 5 groupings. Plus in the back there are additional chord grips.

So, these are all laid out, and they are practically idiot proof, though they do take some time to "get them under your fingers" along with pithy musical examples, that demonstrate their use...along with his observations. And he is right, play through the examples---don't memorize....context and "bottoms up" learning is the key here...pick up a real book, and start to work thru/reinforce what you're learning, and you'll enter the world of chord melody.

Plus, there is an accompanying video. Really, its the best $39 I ever spent on instructional materials. I'd still be floundering around trying to do this on my own...for others, it may be superfluous or unnecessary.

FWIW I have been doing chord-melody playing for decades and still went through his "Assembly Line" course very recently and picked up a lot of things I didn't know, or hadn't been using. It was well worth the $39 even to cap-off some basic stuff that I had let slide.

I plan to do his "Formula" course too, for the same reason.

[targuit]

I had the pleasure of meeting Robert Conti back in the mid-Eighties playing in a fancy restaurant on Mother's Day. He was playing solo and he was quite mesmerizing. I could hardly tear myself away from the bar section in which he was playing to return to my Mother's table in the main restaurant section. He was playing ballads and was fabulous. I have seen several of his videos on YTube, and his method of instruction is likely effective, though I find the videos a bit tedious in terms of his personal style of presentation. That is just a personal response based on the fact that he talks in that "put your index finger here on the fifth fret third string...." style in lieu of speaking in terms of actual note names or intervals, though I understand completely why he does that for a broader audience who may not be formally schooled. This is just a person 'gripe', though that word is too strong. I like his folksy approach and would LOVE to have the opportunity to play and learn with him one on one. Not likely unfortunately.

I would like to cautiously interject my thoughts about voicings in this discussion. In anticipation of recording more YT videos and with the notion that many players here want to see chord melody style solo guitar instrumentals, I was revising my Sibelius transcription of Body and Soul in the key of Bb, as I like that key for vocals and with Sibelius I can transpose with a click or two to Eb or any other key. I had notated the two staffs as upper melody with chord designations above and guitar accompaniment below as block chords in the measure as a form of slightly elaborated shorthand for clarity and simplicity plus lyrics in between the staves. But with an eye towards a solo guitar arrangement I revised the transcription accompaniment by "filling in" the voicings as in a classical arrangement.

Now although B&S is essentially a torchy blues song, the chords and voicings can be sophisticated. I was attentive to bringing down the melody line into that guitar staff as the top notes of the voicings. And of course, the bass line is based on root movement and fifths but does entail the chord inversions. My point is this. I think it is more productive to think of inversions as inherent to the voicing aspect rather than approaching the concrete application as "choosing" a specific chord inversion, the product of specifically studying all the chord permutations. I think you get there most effectively by using you ears to discriminate the specific voicings. It is just easier than approaching the issue like a wiring diagram.

Again this is not intended to provoke any notions about talking down; rather I sincerely believe that thinking in terms of bass and root movement coupled with the melody line help define one's arrangement. Then, filling in the harmony and walking aspects of the bass line becomes more defined in terms of where you play these notes and the fundamental intervals of the specific chord in question including extensions and colors.

The final aspect which brings in the aspect of improvisation is the issue of where you articulate the voicings in terms of the fret board. I find myself revising my resistance to creating more 'classical' style arrangements, not to play them identically each time (boring) but to create a good 'roadmap' for improvising. And there is where you can improvise more effectively because you have a clear idea of the principles of voicing.

I hope I have explicated my point without being tedious or condescending in any way. True, I just feel that approaching chords and voicings as diagrams and visually is much more complex than thinking in terms of intervals. To put it simply - if I can establish the root of the chord, I can count 1,3,5,7, 9, etc. Made easy, of course, if you know the fret board, but it is much easier than memorizing permutations of chords, when in the specific song and voice movement your choices will be limited for the better depending on where the melody and bass suggest.

[mjirish]

This is a very interesting and thoughtful thread. I have stated this before, but it bears repeating: The beauty of Conti's chord melody materials is that ALL of the important "need-to-know" information and execution is contained in his books. A variety of useful and beautiful chord voicings, excellent voice-leading, creative chord substitutions and reharmonizations and well chosen standard repertoire. Another VERY practical aspect of these materials are that they provide a guitarist with the means to be a "solo" performer, and not have to rely on a pianist, bass player, or drummer to get a gig. It's beautiful! Simple, easy to understand, beautiful to play - what more could you ask for. It is ALL there!

[Dio666]

To answer the original question; I only find one chord a bit difficult to finger and the rest are all quite easy for jazz chords. I finished this book a few weeks ago and have been working my way through the Real Vocal Book and have not yet needed that chord. (It's for a passing tone that's not diatonic to the key you're playing in). Keep in mind that Robert Conti has large short fingers as he jokes about in one of his videos.

There is a bit of jumping around the fretboard with this method but it doesn't sound bad, and you can look up the alternative voicings in the back of the book if something sounds too jarring. And keep in mind that this is only Phase 1. After you've spent some time working out a bunch of standards with this method then you move on to the second book, "The Formula!". Here you'll learn some common chord movements and substitutions which will help with the voice leading.

I agree with others that this is a great bang-for-your-buck book. You'll be amazed at what you can do after only a couple weeks. And being able to open the real book and quickly make a nice sounding chord melody is just plain fun.

You can check out his free Amazing Grace chord melody and see what you think, (just Google it). It uses the same grips you'll find in The Assembly Line and The Formula and it's the kind of arrangement you would come up with on your own after going through both of the books. Then you can decide for yourself instead of listening to us hacks.

[eduardosanz]

To answer the original question; I only find one chord a bit difficult to finger and the rest are all quite easy for jazz chords. I finished this book a few weeks ago and have been working my way through the Real Vocal Book and have not yet needed that chord. (It's for a passing tone that's not diatonic to the key you're playing in). Keep in mind that Robert Conti has large short fingers as he jokes about in one of his videos.

There is a bit of jumping around the fretboard with this method but it doesn't sound bad, and you can look up the alternative voicings in the back of the book if something sounds too jarring. And keep in mind that this is only Phase 1. After you've spent some time working out a bunch of standards with this method then you move on to the second book, "The Formula!". Here you'll learn some common chord movements and substitutions which will help with the voice leading.

I agree with others that this is a great bang-for-your-buck book. You'll be amazed at what you can do after only a couple weeks. And being able to open the real book and quickly make a nice sounding chord melody is just plain fun.

You can check out his free Amazing Grace chord melody and see what you think, (just Google it). It uses the same grips you'll find in The Assembly Line and The Formula and it's the kind of arrangement you would come up with on your own after going through both of the books. Then you can decide for yourself instead of listening to us hacks.

Thanks a lot for your precise answer to my questions.

One of my main concerns regarding to this style of music (call it chord melody, call it arranging for solo guitar with no other instruments) is voice leading.

In several videos I see in YT from Conti himself or some of his students, I don´t perceive (which is not to say it isn´t there) a lot of voice leading (as in smooth transition from chord to chord with minimal movement), but instead quite a lot of jumping along the fretboard. However, some of you defend that Conti actually gets into voice leading in The Formula, explaning bass lines that give a sense of linear flow to the music istead of that jumps. Is it the case?

I prefer when the music is flowing linear and smoothly rather than hearing like a series of independent chords being plucked.

Any thoughts?

And lastly, could you please tell me how many diferent chord voicings Conti employs in his Assembly Line (I mean the basic ones, not the voicings that he refers at the back of the book)? 20? 30? 50? more? My memoy is not very good (maybe I am definetely asking too much... being able to play some basic chord melody without learning hundreds of chord vocings...)

[Al Br.]

I purchased R.C.'s Assembly line book recently and have started into it. Playing the chord groupings is taking a little getting used to but it is coming along faster than I thought it might at first glance and I understand the concept he presents.
A question I have is, in a given chord grouping what determines the chords chosen? In the C major group the first chord is a C6. Why not C11, C6/9 or C7b9, all of which have the note C as the high note of the chord? What is the guideline for choosing what chord to play on a given scale note?

Looking ahead in the book Mr. Conti does offer additional chord selections but again, in a chord melody what guides which chord pattern is to be used?

And how does anyone remember all the variations and names? I know if I put the book down for a week I'll have forgotten a good bit of the chord name/configurations. Moving from rock and blues has greatly elevated my admiration and awe of the players who have this stuff down.

[eduardosanz]

I purchased R.C.'s Assembly line book recently and have started into it. Playing the chord groupings is taking a little getting used to but it is coming along faster than I thought it might at first glance and I understand the concept he presents.
A question I have is, in a given chord grouping what determines the chords chosen? In the C major group the first chord is a C6. Why not C11, C6/9 or C7b9, all of which have the note C as the high note of the chord? What is the guideline for choosing what chord to play on a given scale note?

Looking ahead in the book Mr. Conti does offer additional chord selections but again, in a chord melody what guides which chord pattern is to be used?

And how does anyone remember all the variations and names? I know if I put the book down for a week I'll have forgotten a good bit of the chord name/configurations. Moving from rock and blues has greatly elevated my admiration and awe of the players who have this stuff down.

Haven´t read the book, I guess, as I have read somewhere in this forum, the voicings chosen are a mere decision of Conti´s favourite grids, without further technical reason.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Thanks a lot for your precise answer to my questions.

One of my main concerns regarding to this style of music (call it chord melody, call it arranging for solo guitar with no other instruments) is voice leading.

In several videos I see in YT from Conti himself or some of his students, I don´t perceive (which is not to say it isn´t there) a lot of voice leading (as in smooth transition from chord to chord with minimal movement), but instead quite a lot of jumping along the fretboard. However, some of you defend that Conti actually gets into voice leading in The Formula, explaning bass lines that give a sense of linear flow to the music istead of that jumps. Is it the case?

I prefer when the music is flowing linear and smoothly rather than hearing like a series of independent chords being plucked.

Any thoughts?

Voice leading is its own thing , but I don't think it's something to get so worked up over if you don't really understand it in the first place. There isn't "good" voice leading in "bad" voice leading per se, but more like degrees of it. I mean, do you have ideal voice leading in four voices, three...., two...., one? How many of them are by halfstep, and how many by whole step? Which voices are the most important to have leading from chord to the next? I very often see people fretting over voice leading who don't know the answers to these basic questions. The answers are mostly in the ears and experience, or else you're talking about classical part writing for actual "voices". To that end, it's probably helpful to just learn some chord progressions from someone who already plays.

What you'll find when you do that, wherever you get them...., from lessons here or in other sources ....., is what NSJ was talking about: chords with roots on the fifth string resolving to those with roots on the six string and vice versa. they basically end up being alternating drop twos and threes. Beyond the fact that these make very practical sense for beginning guitar players who know the roots on those two strings, they also have very natural voice leading in the two most important voices: the third and seventh, of each chord respectively.. Conti's method is largely based on these root position type of chords.

It's good to know all of this, but you don't HAVE to know all of this to start playing. Frankly, most of these considerations aren't going to make a lot of sense until you know a good many chords anyway. Maybe you already do. I don't know.

But honestly, from hearing you talk about this, it sounds like you're in grave danger of "paralysis by analysis". Theory is largely for analyzing that which you already know how to play.

Another huge misconception regarding voice leading and chords is that chords which are far apart on the neck don't have a good voice leading. This simply isn't true. The guitar fretboard isn't the piano, and it's just different.

A lot of the large movements Conti uses stem from the fact that he's keeping it simple, with the melody on the first or second string, and also the fact that he favors large chords like that. The way I play now..... I don't like full chords on everything, jumping around the neck , or separate chords for wack each melody note,.....but all of these things were extremely helpful in the beginning, when I used this book .

Limits are helpful in the beginning of anything. You don't need to know EVERYTHING to get started. But for Pete's sake, get started. Buy Conti's book today , and start with Matt Warnock's Method at the same time. Look at both of them , decide what you like, and leave out the rest. There are worse things in life than having a book on the shelf which you later decided not to use, or something printed off the Internet that you no longer use.

It's not a big deal, but just get started. There are plenty of people who play better than me who know LESS theory, and plenty who know MORE theory than me and play worse than I do. At some point you just have to do it at the risk of "wasting time" with inefficiencies. In the long run, that's more efficient than overanalyzing.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I purchased R.C.'s Assembly line book recently and have started into it. Playing the chord groupings is taking a little getting used to but it is coming along faster than I thought it might at first glance and I understand the concept he presents.
A question I have is, in a given chord grouping what determines the chords chosen? In the C major group the first chord is a C6. Why not C11, C6/9 or C7b9, all of which have the note C as the high note of the chord? What is the guideline for choosing what chord to play on a given scale note?

Looking ahead in the book Mr. Conti does offer additional chord selections but again, in a chord melody what guides which chord pattern is to be used?

And how does anyone remember all the variations and names? I know if I put the book down for a week I'll have forgotten a good bit of the chord name/configurations. Moving from rock and blues has greatly elevated my admiration and awe of the players who have this stuff down.

One set is a major type chords and the other is dominant. 6/9 chords don't have a dominant seventh in them . Major six and major seven chords are also "major type" chords. It's common practice to substitute dominant type chords for other dominant type chords. The same is true for major type and minor type . I'm pretty sure he talks about it somewhere in that book, but it's mostly a pre-requisite for studying this kind of thing.

At a basic level , C major type chords assume that C is the I of the major scale (or IV).

C dominant assumes 5th degree of major etc. at least on basic level, with a flat seven ( dominant) . There are other subs as well, But that's the start of it. Pretty sure he has basic theory discussion on this at the front of the book or something.

[lawson-stone]

I purchased R.C.'s Assembly line book recently and have started into it. Playing the chord groupings is taking a little getting used to but it is coming along faster than I thought it might at first glance and I understand the concept he presents.
A question I have is, in a given chord grouping what determines the chords chosen? In the C major group the first chord is a C6. Why not C11, C6/9 or C7b9, all of which have the note C as the high note of the chord? What is the guideline for choosing what chord to play on a given scale note?

Looking ahead in the book Mr. Conti does offer additional chord selections but again, in a chord melody what guides which chord pattern is to be used?

And how does anyone remember all the variations and names? I know if I put the book down for a week I'll have forgotten a good bit of the chord name/configurations. Moving from rock and blues has greatly elevated my admiration and awe of the players who have this stuff down.

Well in the first group it wouldn't be a C11 or C7b9 because those are dominant family chords. The sequence starting with C6 is a major family chord group. As for C6/9, sure, later you can add that if you want. This is a starting collection of workable, usable chords. It doesn't give all the options, just common ones that are universally known and employed.

So in a piece of music, the chord name will be either a major, minor, dominant, or diminished family chord. For the beginning exercises, you match the chord family with the type of chord, and match the fingering for the top note.

It's mechanical to be sure, but all things starting out are a little mechanical. As you advance, you learn other chord types, other voicings or grips, etc.

[targuit]

If you are working with a Real Fake Book with a lead sheet, the chords are written in above the melody notated as "C7b5" for example. As I suggested in a post above, the best way to learn chords and extensions is to learn chord construction. Focus on learning intervals over the root of the chord first. Get that down cold. If you can count to 13 from 1, you will be fine. And of course, you need to learn basic major and minor diatonic scales to master the fret board. You need to learn what note is being played on any string at any fret cold. This is simpler than you might think and with regular practice of scales as warm ups, you will learn. But you need to understand the notes and the intervals in chord construction. That is part of the basic preparation.

Then take apart the songs. And importantly, learn to use your ears over trying to memorize the permutations of chords or chord diagrams! If you understand chord construction and the basics of harmony, you will make your own arrangements. Then learn to play them fluidly. Record your playing. Reality can be a beach. But you crawl before you walk and walk before you run.

[eduardosanz]

It's good to know all of this, but you don't HAVE to know all of this to start playing. Frankly, most of these considerations aren't going to make a lot of sense until you know a good many chords anyway. Maybe you already do. I don't know.

But honestly, from hearing you talk about this, it sounds like you're in grave danger of "paralysis by analysis". Theory is largely for analyzing that which you already know how to play.

Another huge misconception regarding voice leading and chords is that chords which are far apart on the neck don't have a good voice leading. This simply isn't true. The guitar fretboard isn't the piano, and it's just different.

...

Limits are helpful in the beginning of anything. You don't need to know EVERYTHING to get started. But for Pete's sake, get started. Buy Conti's book today , and start with Matt Warnock's Method at the same time. Look at both of them , decide what you like, and leave out the rest. There are worse things in life than having a book on the shelf which you later decided not to use, or something printed off the Internet that you no longer use.

It's not a big deal, but just get started. There are plenty of people who play better than me who know LESS theory, and plenty who know MORE theory than me and play worse than I do. At some point you just have to do it at the risk of "wasting time" with inefficiencies. In the long run, that's more efficient than overanalyzing.

You have nailed it perfectly (I mean for me).

I think I am too worried about learning theory (which I have done quite a bit I feel), but I can´t play at all...
I have just ordered Conti´s Assembly Line and I will try to be focused on it and only on it. It really seems to be the approach I need ... less theory analysis and more time on the fretboard.

Thanks a lot for your insight and input!

[lawson-stone]

I agree with Matt. The best approach really is to find a way to start playing, and then refine it as you learn more. What's funny is that I started out infatuated with the very closely-voiced chords and movement of Johnny Smith's playing. But I began to realize that, for me, that would always mean I'd have to play memorized, pre-arranged pieces, at least for a very long time (this was 25 years ago). But with the kinds of hip-pocket chords and melodic connections Conti teaches, you can get started and you have tools that allow you to be spontaneous and even to improvise. I became more of a fan of Joe Pass's style, which doesn't always feature prominent close-voiced chords and orchestral-type movements among all the voices. He goes for "grips" and trusts the geometry of the fingerboard to supply some basic voice leading, which it does (that's why it was designed as it is, partly). Then over time, you learn some close-voiced, tightly-moving chordal lines that you can deploy pretty much like a "lick" in your playing, and as you work on refining your particular blend of full chords, close voice leading, single-line playing, and 2-3 note passing intervals, you develop your own specific style. We won't all be George Van Epps or Johnny Smith. You listen to Jimmy Raney, for example, playing chordally (something he isn't usually given enough credit for!) and you'll hear all this in a very distinctive mix that is his. Kessell is another who mixes big open voicings, closely bound moving lines, single notes, and so forth in his own distinctive way. then there is Joe Pass... who took all this to a completely different level.

you get the idea. It's easier to learn to play something, learn to do something with melody and chords, and then refine it. I don't play "Misty" today anything like I played it 25 years ago.

[mr. beaumont]

Exactly...

And that's why I always advocate doing them on your own as soon as possible. People want their first little arrangement to be perfect. That's not how it works. I listened back to an old recording I did the other--from about 10-12 years ago--"Misty," actually...I harmonized every freaking note...sounded stiff and horrible.

Over time, you develop into who you are, I suppose...