-
I am getting a lot out of working through Conti's "Formula" book while learning some of his "Signature Chord Melodies". I can definitely see the formula at work.
Quick and maybe obvious question:
He says that you don't need to play a chord over every melody note or beat, but that he presents the material that way as a learning aid. However, his "Signature Chord" arrangements are built one chord per beat (an usually one per melody note). If I want to thin it out, what would people suggest:
1) Playing the chords he calls out in his arrangements for beats 1&4, for example, and skipping over the ones in between; or
2) Playing the progression as written, but playing those chords over two melody notes.
For example, in "Over the Rainbow" you have the melody F-F(octave)-E-C-D-E-F for which he calls out F6-Bb9-Am7-Eb13-Dm7-Eaug-Eb13add9 (for simplicity let's ignore rhythmic values of the notes). You can see the progression follows the formula exactly.
So, would it make more sense to play (unaccompanied melody notes as lower case):
F6-f-Am7-c-Dm7-e-Eb13add9 (skipping chords) or
F6-f-Bbm7b5-c-Am7add11-e-Ebm7add9 (same progression over two melody notes)?
In that example both follow the formula, even if the second one is a little harder to play. I don't know if it would always work both ways. Does anyone know what Conti suggests, or what is the general rule of thumb here?
Again I get the caveat that this is music and our ears are what counts, theory is just a guideline, systems are made to be broken, etc... I just want to know if there is a reasonable consensus on how to approach thinning some of these arrangements out so they are more musical.
Thanks!
-
03-16-2017 02:33 PM
-
I've found the folks at Pinnacle to be very responsive to questions about the material -- some people have called with a question, and have even gotten to talk to Conti himself. According to all of the accounts I've read, people who have had phone conversations with him have come away being even more of a fan than they were when the placed the call.
Originally Posted by rlrhett
In the Pro Chord Melody DVDs, Conti seems to suggest placing chords anywhere your technique will allow. In my case, that usually means chords go on the long notes (anything that gets one beat or more, depending on the tempo).
-
I'm thinking out loud here. I have to ask the question. Does the harmony follow the melody or the chords. I believe it follows the chords. Originally Posted by rlrhett
For example: You have three melody notes with the chords C - F - Bb over each melody note. If your drop out the F chord over the second melody note, you would break the harmony in fourths, but by placing the F chord over the third melody note the harmony in fourths continues. Continuing in fourths, the Bb would harmonize the next melody note you choose. This seems more difficult to explain than in practice.
Does this make sense? I would think if you took just dropped chords over melody notes and still follow Conti's harmonization, you would end up playing arbitrary chords over arbitrary notes.
Just my thoughts.
Mike
-
On ballads, I try to harmonize more notes of the melody to get more "color" into the tune.
But on up-tempo tunes often I simply cannot finger a chord for every melody note and stay in time. (Listen to KBurrell's "Groovin' High")
My advice is take a tune and play just the single melody notes. On which notes does your ear really want to hear more? What notes really make the melody effective musically/emotionally?
Focus on those notes. Harmonizing them will give the biggest musical/emotional punch. Good news is that often those are longer-held notes in the melody or at the end of a melodic phrase, which gives you time to finger one or more chords underneath.
NOTE: Just as not every melody note needs to be harmonized, not every chord needs to support a melody note. You can insert all kinds of 2-5s and other nifty motion/sequences into the space between phrases of a melody.
Final thought: Any melody is strong on its own. If you play it enough times, even the most non-musical person would begin to remember it and thus dig it (if not enjoy it.) So in some ways, it almost doesn't matter how much harmony is supporting it. But of course you want to sound hip, so between what your ears want and what your hands can accomplish lies
the answer. (...ooh so mystical.)
-
It's one of those things, like hitting every change in a tune. You practice until you can do it, and then...try to never do it
-
Well said! Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
It's one of those things, like hitting every change in a tune. You practice until you can do it, and then...try to never do it
Conti likes things lush. That's his taste. I'm comparatively Spartan: bass line, bit o' chank, the melody.
That's most of the time. Sometimes a bit o' the "lush life" hits the spot. It's good to be able to play tunes a few ways so you don't end up playing all your tunes the same way or with the same feel.
-
Once, in the early days of Jimmy Bruno's original site (JBGI), a student submitted a chord melody rendition of "Move." I thought it was pretty impressive, since I barely knew what a ii-V was back then, but Jimmy lit him up and told him it was dumb to try to play that tune in that way. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
It's one of those things, like hitting every change in a tune. You practice until you can do it, and then...try to never do it
-
Yeah, it definitely depends on the tune. Something with a slower harmonic rhythm, sounds great. But if the melody is busier, it can sound very clunky. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
Still, like I said, you learn to do it because you'll eventually get to a point where you can improvise a chord melody, because you know the possible permutations.Last edited by mr. beaumont; 03-17-2017 at 03:42 PM.
-
I once emailed the Conti Org with a query on a Ticket to Improv DVD. I live in the UK and that evening my phone rang and it was Robert who discussed it for thirty minutes. Now that's one class ,generous guy.!
-
Originally Posted by mispeltyoof
He definitely is! He called me once and we talked for over an hour. He does care about his students and their progress.
-
I honestly don't understand why there is so much discussion/questions about playing one chord for each melody note. Having taken lessons with him in the late 70's I have heard him play solo a number of times. He didn't play that way (chord every note) then and I don't imagine he plays that way now. He serves the song i.e. melody and his ears. His teaching method as others have pointed out is to provide options. You use those options or choices to determine what you as the player want to hear. Below is a youtube vid that is close to the way I remember him playing albeit on a six string ES-175 or a Guild AA and not the eight string in the video.
-
Thank you everyone for your thoughtful responses. It will certainly be helpful when tackling my own arrangements for chord melody. I admit I was thinking of a more focused question, though the responses have been great. Specifically I was wondering how to approach Conti's existing arrangements which he calls, "Signature Chord Melodies". They are written out one chord per melody note.
As Rob points out, Conti himself doesn't play one chord per note. So my question was more how does Conti play his own arrangements? I am learning so much looking at his arrangements and seeing the "Formula" applied. But the missing step for me on Conti's specific approach is what he does when he is actually out playing these arrangements and wants to thin it out some. I feel like if I could understand his approach to this it would complete the system in my eyes. That doesn't mean I expect to slavishly follow his system, but I do want to understand it fully to incorporate it where I can.
So when he is actually playing an arrangement, and he wants to mix it up, does he skip chords? Will doing so "break" the formula? If so, how does he reconcile his actual playing with his formula? If that doesn't break the system, how is that possible? That implies that any two links in the chain will follow the rule even if they didn't begin adjacent. Is that true?
In the alternative, does he do a complete reharmonization every time he plays? In Howard Morgen's book he talks about how he realized even Joe Pass worked out arrangements beforehand, and that the less worked arrangements were always noticeably weaker. If Conti decides that this performance requires a quieter approach does he start from zero? That seems unlikely. It seems more likely that he has a system for mixing it up that doesn't require him to start from scratch.
Honestly, my question was less how I might come up with my own arrangements. Of course, I want to make my own arrangements and am working at it using Conti's formula (and Joe Pass books, and the excellent book by forum member Alan Kingstone, and even Fux). But for now, I really want to dig into how Conti has dealt with his own arrangements.
FWIW I have emailed Conti on this question last night. If I get a response, I'll share it here.
-
I remember when I was first studying chord melody guitar with a real master of this style. He insisted in the beginning that every melody note be harmonized with a chord and it was a real pain. Then I would go and see him play and he never harmonized every note. The reason for harmonizing every note was to ensure the student really learned and understood the tune. The relationship of the melody to the harmony. It also creates many challenges (like what to do when the melody is the 4th scale degree on a Maj7 chord). Chord melody in my opinion is the best study of applied theory. And there are lots of rules in the beginning that can help develop knowledge and understanding, but may not always sound musical.
-
Thanks, Rob! Originally Posted by rob taft
-
Thanks Chris. Of all the amazing videos posted of players on this forum, yours always inspire me the most. If you got there in part by painfully playing a chord for every melody note, then that is all the encouragement I need to keep playing them as written. Originally Posted by Chris Whiteman
-
Conti does a great job of simplifying the complicated. Originally Posted by rlrhett
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
That's some great insight -- thanks, Chris! Originally Posted by Chris Whiteman
-
Thanks for such a nice compliment. Originally Posted by rlrhett
Yes harmonizing every note can be painful, but equally painful was the next assignment. That was to do a second version without using any of the voicings from the first. And then a third, etc. It really seemed impossible at first, like there weren't any other options, but there always are. And, after doing 3 of 4 versions, learning them well, you can mix a match your favorite parts and really have something nice. Also, at that point you have options, so a performance may be slightly different each time.
-
I worked through the formula a few years ago, after the first book, but never followed through on the final step of arranging a boatload of my own chord melody re-harmonizations. I don't think it's a step that can be skipped. Conti has broken it down into more of a logical process perhaps, but there's still a lot of work to be done, and it's mostly all an ear thing. I think you know what can be left outand what is essential once you really learn to hear them.
I tried the thing where you drop occasional chords, and it doesn't really work that way if you're somewhat of a novice to re- harmonization. Probably simple once you get things together, but I think you really have to do the work Chris is talking about before that kind of thing is going to make sense.
What I took away from going through Conti's material:
1. Conti did a TON of transcribing CM from Oscar Peterson et al, and he learned myriad ways of covering single tunes harmonically.
2. Conti then did a ton of slogging through, writing out his own arrangements in variations over single tunes, until he eventually developed the ear to be able to do all of it on the fly.
Honestly, I think that the formula is merely a METHOD for BEGINNING the slog.Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 03-18-2017 at 10:26 AM.
-
Harmonizing every note in the tune is a great way to learn voice leading, contrary motion, bass lines, and such. But then we have to back up and think about simply how it sounds. I find for example that sometimes the line sounds better simply harmonized in thirds, just two notes or double-stops. Or two note in contrary motion, like the opening line of "In the Wee Small Hours of the Morning." I also like to start "There Will Never be Another You" with a two note phrase for the opening measure.
So for me, I like the exercise of a chord on every melody note, then substitutions, still with a chord on every note, but then once I know the way the melody and harmony move, I pull back and think how best to present each line. Normally even then there will be several options, and since I don't really arrange, I tend to play the same tune differently each time. Admittedly, each time it's likely 75% the same, but it's the 25% of variation and improvisation that makes it fun.
-
As far as it pertains to me, Rob's comment here is all I need to know. He actually studied in person with Conti, and has heard him play in this style a number of times -- presumably while sitting in the same room with Conti, watching him do it. Originally Posted by rob taft
Not only that, but video clips and audio recordings of Conti's solo guitar work -- as well as accounts from people who caught him during his Marriott gig -- show that while he approaches a tune with the ability to harmonize every note, he uses the ability to make musical choices, based on what he wants to hear. Conti has said this himself, on more than one occasion.
As far as I'm concerned, that's the final word. As many people have remarked, Conti is very approachable and responsive -- if anyone wants to know what he thinks about how to play (especially when it comes to using his own materials), it should be simple enough to ask the man himself, rather than to rely on speculation and forum banter, no matter how well-intentioned it may be.
-
Agreed. Conti's excellent stuff was just what I needed to move on to my own style, taking what I needed to create my versions of the songs I loved. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
Sp
-
I just got off the phone with Conti! What a great guy. He spent nearly an hour answering my question and even helping me on another sticking point.
The bottom line is that he confirmed that it should work to just skip over any chord in his arrangements, play the melody note bare, in octaves, or over a bass run, and pick up again wherever I wanted. Anywhere I picked up, as long as the chord worked over the melody note, would be like starting a new harmonic phrase for the listener. It didn't matter what harmonic progression I had played a few beats or bars back. The key, and he says this a lot, is to use your ears and make sure the melody is clear to the listener.
He shared a story where he was listening to a friend play at a club. Someone he was with requested "Misty". The guitar player began with the familiar chord progression, but then placed these long fast lines in between the chords. After a little while, the lady who requested the tune leaned over to Conti and asked, "what song is that? I hope he doesn't forget to play 'Misty'".
So, rather than trying to re-harmonize on the fly an otherwise familiar arrangement the bottom line is that he thinks you simply skip over wherever you want and re-start when you would like the support of the chords. Again, a GIANT thank you to Conti.
-
He is a great guy. Originally Posted by rlrhett
-
Yeah. I think what you're describing works. Almost said something about it the other day. specific context in my opinion. Originally Posted by rlrhett
In terms of "dropping out" for parts, in the past people have talked about just dropping every other chord or playing one per bar etc. I think, at that point,you lose a lot of context,and you're kind of losing what the arrangement is doing.
Very cool that he took the time.Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 03-24-2017 at 06:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
mid-ranginess?
Today, 05:42 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos