Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    I've been studying jazz guitar for the last year or so and recently discovered "George Van Eps Method for Guitar". He begins with 6 forms of a harmonized major scale in C. When he gets to the 6th step in the scale I was expecting an A minor triad, but instead he wants us to play an F major triad in 2nd inversion (see circled triad in attached screenshot).

    That doesn't seem right to me. Why wouldn't we play an A minor here instead?

    Thanks!

    Question Regarding Van Eps 6 Forms-eps-method-minor-jpg

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    There's a thread on this somewhere. Somebody explained it well but I can't remember what they said. Anyway, it sounds good. Maybe it would be called an augmented minor? F being the raised 5th.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack E Blue
    There's a thread on this somewhere. Somebody explained it well but I can't remember what they said. Anyway, it sounds good. Maybe it would be called an augmented minor? F being the raised 5th.
    Thank you! I found it here:
    George Van Eps Guitar Method

    I thought I'd searched all "eps" posts but apparently not.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    to me I think its a print error..note in form 2..the fingering is a bar with just the first finger..that would imply the notes on the fifth fret C E A BUT the notation is using the F note..
    which is wrong


    also just follow the scale steps each chord is harmonized from the C major scale in all three forms the notes progress scale step wise except for the sixth chord in the scale which which is written C F A but should be voiced C E A

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Maroonblazer
    I've been studying jazz guitar for the last year or so and recently discovered "George Van Eps Method for Guitar". He begins with 6 forms of a harmonized major scale in C. When he gets to the 6th step in the scale I was expecting an A minor triad, but instead he wants us to play an F major triad in 2nd inversion (see circled triad in attached screenshot).

    That doesn't seem right to me. Why wouldn't we play an A minor here instead?

    Thanks!

    Question Regarding Van Eps 6 Forms-eps-method-minor-jpg
    Because it's too neutral, in harmony the VI is never inverted except if it has a dominant form.
    He wants to underline the major key.

    Quote Originally Posted by wolflen
    to me I think its a print error..note in form 2..the fingering is a bar with just the first finger..that would imply the notes on the fifth fret C E A BUT the notation is using the F note..
    which is wrong


    also just follow the scale steps each chord is harmonized from the C major scale in all three forms the notes progress scale step wise except for the sixth chord in the scale which which is written C F A but should be voiced C E A
    I write it in tabs in order to help you.

    x
    10
    10
    10
    x
    x

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lionelsax
    Because it's too neutral, in harmony the VI is never inverted except if it has a dominant form.
    He wants to underline the major key.



    I write it in tabs in order to help you.

    x
    10
    10
    10
    x
    x


    thank you for the imput...and in reviewing the preface to the notation..indeed the string sets do match the notation..so this harmonization is not strictly diatonic..and there are two F chords in this arrangement,..As for the vi chord (Aminor) never being inverted..we may disagree on this point.

    I interpret this harmonization as I ii iii IV (first inversion) V IV (second inversion) V I the diminished chord functions as a V (7b9) dominant
    Last edited by wolflen; 12-21-2020 at 03:15 AM.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wolflen
    thank you for the imput...and in reviewing the preface to the notation..indeed the string sets do match the notation..so this harmonization is not strictly diatonic..and there are two F chords in this arrangement,..As for the vi chord (Aminor) never being inverted..we may disagree on this point.
    The first inversion sounds like the the relative major (C major) but a bit odd, the second inversion announces a dominant.

    A-/E E A-

    but we are in A minor not in C Major

    For minor keys, it's the same.

    F is the VI

    The first inversion in this context sounds like an odd relative major (C Major)

    With the second inversion

    F/C C F

    Everybody has the right to believe in whatever he or she wants.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    It's not a printing error, and GVE discusses it in a recorded interview with Ted Greene, where he gives a really unsatisfactory explanation that players at the time didn't know fancy chords - or something along those line. I never thought of Am as fancy...

    However, it seems to me he was creating a 251 sequence, Dm7 (rootless) / G7 / C with those highest three chords, a sequence which is far more useful and practical. Looked at that way, the book becomes more interesting. BTW, here's my GVE page with many videos from this book: GVEps – ArchtopGuitar.net

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
    However, it seems to me he was creating a 251 sequence, Dm7 (rootless) / G7 / C with those highest three chords, a sequence which is far more useful and practical.
    I just skimmed through all these van eps threads which are linked within this one and I think you must have said this about 20 times Rob!

    I got the PDF of this book some time back from djangobooks, but must admit I haven’t done much with it, probably should have a go.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Haha. Sorry.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
    Haha. Sorry.
    no worries, I just meant you must have got tired of answering the same question over and over. Dear old George has a lot to answer for!

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    I'm still curious as to whether that chord could be called an augmented minor. What say you theory mavens. Is there such a thing?

  14. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
    ...BTW, here's my GVE page with many videos from this book: GVEps – ArchtopGuitar.net
    I discovered your site a few months ago when I discovered GVE. Huge thanks to you for that work, it's super-helpful.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack E Blue
    I'm still curious as to whether that chord could be called an augmented minor. What say you theory mavens. Is there such a thing?
    Theoretically, an aug 5th should show an e#, not an f. Ergo, it is not an augmented minor. So you can climb down from that tree

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    no worries, I just meant you must have got tired of answering the same question over and over. Dear old George has a lot to answer for!
    And I might be wrong, but I am practical... ii7 / V / I works for me.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    damn...you said it again.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Been a while since I looked at these but I remember thinking they were the way they were to ensure strong traditional chord progressions. (Rather like the old rules of the octave for continuo playing.)

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    I can't think of any reason that those working on this harmonized scale couldn't change that to Am if they wanted to. That's what I do.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Been a while since I looked at these but I remember thinking they were the way they were to ensure strong traditional chord progressions. (Rather like the old rules of the octave for continuo playing.)
    Hey ! I learnt the piano with that thing, it comes from Jean-Philippe Rameau.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
    Theoretically, an aug 5th should show an e#, not an f. Ergo, it is not an augmented minor. So you can climb down from that tree
    Thank you. I got down safely.