Anybody use the Goodchord Voice Leading Books?

[JohnoL]

New constructs in modern harmony and form

Is this the thread?

It's within there. There's a lot of it laid out in post #41

Do you have any favorite methods for playing a "drone" base note under the triads or some kind of backing tracks to "audition" the triads?

I hope I haven't killed an 18 page thread. Long live the cycle thread!

[JohnoL]

I believe this book is mentioned in Book 3.

The Shaping Forces in Music.

I got it back in the early seventies and thought it was a good read even though I didn't do anything with the examples.
My book survived being chewed up by a Great Dane puppy.

https://smile.amazon.com/Shaping-For...s%2C187&sr=8-1

[Jimmy blue note]

Toch Essential reading along with Piston, Persichetti and Shoenberg's Orchestration. All Old School fundamentals that steeped the thoughts and principles of the movers and shakers before there was YouTube.

[Jimmy blue note]

Do you have any favorite methods for playing a "drone" base note under the triads or some kind of backing tracks to "audition" the triads?

There are Sruti apps you can get for your phone. That's a great way to really learn "hearing" in a harmonic context because there's a visceral impact of playing against a drone or pedal.

[Mick Wright]

Stephen Harrison's 'The Happy Child': Changing the Heart of Education' (also mentioned in Vol. 3's reading list) is a great read as well.

[christianm77]

Toch Essential reading along with Piston, Persichetti and Shoenberg's Orchestration. All Old School fundamentals that steeped the thoughts and principles of the movers and shakers before there was YouTube.

Report from the partimento rabbit hole....

Boo! Germanic music theory... haha. It’s all about Italy (and Paris) these days...

In seriousness, it might not be a stretch to say YouTube may actually facilitate a revival of really old methods for the teaching of classical harmony, composition, and popularise classical improvisation in the next couple of years. A lot of movers and shakers in the scholarship are pretty active online. And they can improvise fugues (although not so much on guitar.. yet.)

Check out Nikhil Hogan’s channel for the latest scholarship on what we are learning about how the classical masters actually learned.... apparently this all relates to Boulanger, Debussy and so on too, what was taught at the Paris Conservatoire.

Anyway, I’m getting a lot of anti functional harmony stuff from these guys so at the moment chord inversions are a lie lol, it’s all counterpoint baby, none of that Roman Numeral stuff.

(seriously it’s an interesting perspective; the way for example a 6 4 chord is not considered an inverted triad but a type of double suspension. The way 6 3 chords resolve up 6 #4 2 chords descend, there’s a lot of this in Metheny for instance.)

But at some point I usually come up for air and start making links between things.

This is the type of thing I’ve been working on.
it’s fun!

this guy is mega

Anyway, what I’m taking away from this and a common thread of vague relevance to the OP is that patterns and intervallic voice leading combinations have always been of the utmost importance to the practical harmonist; far more so than any explanative theory. I think Goodrick’s material is a case in point.

I would expect there to be a lot of common material, but haven’t sat down and worked on it, yet. Also figured bass for jazz? Maybe.

Also I may have missed a post somewhere, but any news on when the new edition might be coming out?

[dasein]

Report from the partimento rabbit hole....

Boo! Germanic music theory... haha. It’s all about Italy (and Paris) these days...

In seriousness, it might not be a stretch to say YouTube may actually facilitate a revival of really old methods for the teaching of classical harmony, composition, and popularise classical improvisation in the next couple of years. A lot of movers and shakers in the scholarship are pretty active online. And they can improvise fugues (although not so much on guitar.. yet.)

Check out Nikhil Hogan’s channel for the latest scholarship on what we are learning about how the classical masters actually learned.... apparently this all relates to Boulanger, Debussy and so on too, what was taught at the Paris Conservatoire.

Anyway, I’m getting a lot of anti functional harmony stuff from these guys so at the moment chord inversions are a lie lol, it’s all counterpoint baby, none of that Roman Numeral stuff.

(seriously it’s an interesting perspective; the way for example a 6 4 chord is not considered an inverted triad but a type of double suspension. The way 6 3 chords resolve up 6 #4 2 chords descend, there’s a lot of this in Metheny for instance.)

But at some point I usually come up for air and start making links between things.

This is the type of thing I’ve been working on.
it’s fun!

this guy is mega

Anyway, what I’m taking away from this and a common thread of vague relevance to the OP is that patterns and intervallic voice leading combinations have always been of the utmost importance to the practical harmonist; far more so than any explanative theory. I think Goodrick’s material is a case in point.

I would expect there to be a lot of common material, but haven’t sat down and worked on it, yet. Also figured bass for jazz? Maybe.

Also I may have missed a post somewhere, but any news on when the new edition might be coming out?

Christian, if you're interested in the teachings of Nadia Boulanger, there's a book that I have that may interest you: "A Practical Musician's Guide to Tonal Harmony" by Easley Blackwood. I first heard about this in WA Mathieu's "Harmonic Experience" where he recommends it in one of the appendixes.

From the introduction:

"[This book's] principal background springs from studies at the French National Conservatory from 1954-1957 with Nadia Boulanger. In her class Accompagnement au Piano, harmony was based on Theodore Dubois' classic Traite d'Harmonie, and supplemented by a hand-written volume of 135 figured basses composed by Paul Vidal. This latter collection was edited and corrected by myself under Mlle. Boulanger's supervision. At that time, I became aware that her approach to Dubois and Vidal went substantially beyond what was current in courses in the United States, both as regards extent and thoroughness. Unfortunately Mlle. Boulanger was never able to find the time to write up the subject; the present volume is an effort to present some of her insights, supplemented by my own discoveries, through the medium of formal figured bass study."

Blackwood was an interesting figure -- he was one of many American composers from his generation to go study with Boulanger (along with Copland, Piston, Glass, and others), and taught at the University of Chicago for many years. He wrote a number of treatises on microtonality back when that was a very niche field. He pops up in, of all places, George Lewis' book "A Power Stronger Than Itself" as someone who taught a lot of the early AACM guys composition and musician skills.

I was very interested in finding his book when I read about it in "Harmonic Experience" -- the only issue is that I couldn't find it anywhere! No booksellers, nowhere online, no libraries, nothing. But at the time I was living in Chicago, and I thought, "could I just get in touch with the author?" So I found his email through the university website, and sure enough, he replied back to me and invited me over to his apartment to acquire a copy.

I came in, and spent probably an hour talking over different things, with him demonstrating various things at the miniature grand he had there. I asked him what it was like to study under Mlle. Boulanger. He chuckled and said, "Well... she got away with a lot of things you couldn't get away with now!"

[christianm77]

Oh that’s a great tip. I’ll try to track that down somehow. Thanks!

I think it speaks of Boulanger’s pedagogical approach that she never wrote a book.

[christianm77]

Christian, if you're interested in the teachings of Nadia Boulanger, there's a book that I have that may interest you: "A Practical Musician's Guide to Tonal Harmony" by Easley Blackwood. I first heard about this in WA Mathieu's "Harmonic Experience" where he recommends it in one of the appendixes.

From the introduction:

"[This book's] principal background springs from studies at the French National Conservatory from 1954-1957 with Nadia Boulanger. In her class Accompagnement au Piano, harmony was based on Theodore Dubois' classic Traite d'Harmonie, and supplemented by a hand-written volume of 135 figured basses composed by Paul Vidal. This latter collection was edited and corrected by myself under Mlle. Boulanger's supervision. At that time, I became aware that her approach to Dubois and Vidal went substantially beyond what was current in courses in the United States, both as regards extent and thoroughness. Unfortunately Mlle. Boulanger was never able to find the time to write up the subject; the present volume is an effort to present some of her insights, supplemented by my own discoveries, through the medium of formal figured bass study."

Blackwood was an interesting figure -- he was one of many American composers from his generation to go study with Boulanger (along with Copland, Piston, Glass, and others), and taught at the University of Chicago for many years. He wrote a number of treatises on microtonality back when that was a very niche field. He pops up in, of all places, George Lewis' book "A Power Stronger Than Itself" as someone who taught a lot of the early AACM guys composition and musician skills.

I was very interested in finding his book when I read about it in "Harmonic Experience" -- the only issue is that I couldn't find it anywhere! No booksellers, nowhere online, no libraries, nothing. But at the time I was living in Chicago, and I thought, "could I just get in touch with the author?" So I found his email through the university website, and sure enough, he replied back to me and invited me over to his apartment to acquire a copy.

I came in, and spent probably an hour talking over different things, with him demonstrating various things at the miniature grand he had there. I asked him what it was like to study under Mlle. Boulanger. He chuckled and said, "Well... she got away with a lot of things you couldn't get away with now!"

from my initial impression it will be a lot easier to get the original Dubois text, albeit in French (or Italian) though it may not matter too much.

I have to say from your description it sounds very much like a collection of Partimenti. I might see if the Partimento nutters on Facebook, sorry I mean the incredibly knowledgable academics and musicians, might have anything to say about this or Blackwood’s book.

[jlp]

Christian, if you're interested in the teachings of Nadia Boulanger, there's a book that I have that may interest you: "A Practical Musician's Guide to Tonal Harmony" by Easley Blackwood. I first heard about this in WA Mathieu's "Harmonic Experience" where he recommends it in one of the appendixes.

Could you say a few words about the contents of Blackwood's book? How much is examples and how much is instruction? Any modern applications?

[MattKent]

In response to the comment of the Almanacs being unavailable, I am in fact making a PDF version available as shareware; PM me, I send you access to a copy, you print it up yourself and voluntarily contribute to our project if you want.
Only if you're serious.

Hello I have just joined the group. Common to a lot of people I first learned harmonised triads through the major scale then the seventh chords, followed by root, 7th, 3rd shell voicings a la Django, then drop 2 and drop 3 voicings. Not that long ago I saw a connection with the Barry Harris Maj6-Dim7 chord/scales and some of the Wes style block chord forms. I started to throw myself into that direction and have the Maj6-Dim7 and the Min6-Dim7 drop 2 voicings down fairly well on most string groups. I was planning to embark on investigating the other two 8 note scales Barry Harris advocates plus a few more non diminished paired 8 note scales as sources. However having somehow found a link to this forum I am reconsidering my study choices as the Barry Harris train of thought is flip flopping between the various inversions of a major6, minor6, dom7 or dom7b5 and a dim7 chord. This does sound very jazzy but I have a feeling that the real good stuff is found in all those continually moving lines supposedly contained in the almanacs. As these books are now long out of print and not available elsewhere, I do not have access to these three volumes and would be extremely interested in obtaining PDF copies if I am deemed a suitable candidate.

Best Regard, MattKent

[christianm77]

I think Barry can be a lot more contrapuntal.

at some point I think we all want to get away from grips and into counterpoint whatever system of mental organisation or scales etc we might be using...

[Jimmy blue note]

I think Barry can be a lot more contrapuntal.

...Right out of the box and in a traditional way that might be true. Mick's concept gives you a way of looking at harmony where you can have total freedom to move bass lines and total knowledge of where each voice lies where ever you go. The Almanacs give you the constant possibility of voice control, in 3 parts or 4 parts, or in dyads or in lines executed single line. It DOESN'T give you applied lines. It DOES give you the vision that a pianist has, to see the totality of chordal possibility at a moment's grasp. Within that is counterpoint to a degree unimagined in the traditional root/inversion perspective.

[Fra88]

Hi everybody, could someone explain to me the concept behind TRIAD OVER BASS NOTE 1 AND 2?

Thanks

[Jimmy blue note]

Hi everybody, could someone explain to me the concept behind TRIAD OVER BASS NOTE 1 AND 2?

Thanks

The term triad over bass note is merely a name for a way that the initial 4 notes of a scale can be arranged within an octave so it includes a triadic grouping and either a 2(TBN4) or a 4(TBN 2).
Within a one octave scale, there are just so many groups of 4 notes that fit. Each one has a distinctive sound and personality, that's why a major 7 is different from a major 6.
In the Almanacs, all possible permutations are given and then voice led according to that initial origin chord. Once it begins to be voice led, it's no longer a triad over a bass note, so the name is deceiving. He gave them names people could relate to but it may have perhaps been better written as:
TBN 2= 1 7 9 11
TBN 2= 1 5 7 9 or maybe a 9th chord without a 3rd or something else.
What it means is each distinct 4 note chordal grouping is distinct in this nomenclature and has a sound unique to itself. If you get to know the chord as a distinct "type" of chord, not matter what the name or ostensible function of the original chord, you will unlock a system of sounds that can be used within a functional context with most unexpected textures.

These TBN chords were easy ones for Mick to work with in Volume 1 because they kept the triadic structure intact. He could name them easily by their triad orientation. Once you get to volume 2, the note combinations are not so easy to see that way, yet they are consistent systems each one, and that's why they hold sounds nobody else uses in their chordal lexicon: They come from a different system not constrained by the necessity for a tertiary way of thinking.
When you hear Holdsworth, or Monder, there's a lot of stuff that defies triadic harmony. Once you don't think of everything in tertiary terms, things open up.

Does this make sense?

[christianm77]

...Right out of the box and in a traditional way that might be true. Mick's concept gives you a way of looking at harmony where you can have total freedom to move bass lines and total knowledge of where each voice lies where ever you go. The Almanacs give you the constant possibility of voice control, in 3 parts or 4 parts, or in dyads or in lines executed single line. It DOESN'T give you applied lines. It DOES give you the vision that a pianist has, to see the totality of chordal possibility at a moment's grasp. Within that is counterpoint to a degree unimagined in the traditional root/inversion perspective.

Probably wasn’t very clear that I was responding directly to MattKent in the sense I think Barry can be more contrapuntal than he seems to think; a lot of the basic stuff you learn when getting into Barry is inversions of drop 2’s and so on through the scale.

In fact you have freedom to use the 8 note scales in whatever you want. (including any number of voices, single notes, whatever.) I wouldn’t say I’ve scratched the surface with theme

Any of the baroque stuff I’m looking at for example in theory at least could be done through 8 note scales. (Or the Chord Scale system for that matter.)

BH demonstrates several exercises including contrary motion, suspensions and so on. It’s not just block chords, good though that is to know.

Anyway I’m not here to talk about Barry on your Mick Goodrick thread (I’m going to bore everyone about figured bass instead, obviously).

I think it’s all good to know, and FWIW the more I get used to doing challenging fretboard harmony stuff, the easier found it easier to do new exercises and different approaches. The more you know the more you know... in the end as I see the goal is flexibility in every sense.

[christianm77]

Although does anyone else find it annoying that we spend all this time on fretboard harmony and yet still the instinct is to play x3523x when you see a Cmaj7 chord?

(or maybe it’s just me)

[Jimmy blue note]

Although does anyone else find it annoying that we spend all this time on fretboard harmony and yet still the instinct is to play x3523x when you see a Cmaj7 chord?

(or maybe it’s just me)

It took a while but now when I think of a CMaj7 chord, there are "chordal lines" that I'll gravitate towards. One single chord just seems like a harmonic anchor. Y'know the way one uses the sus to create movement in a single chord? Voice leading convergence gives a player a vocabulary of 4 part movement with the equivalent ease of a sus resolution.
Just a matter of programming the hardware.

[christianm77]

Aha, I just crunched the BH scale through some basic MG cycles and .... basically a lot of them end up being standard scales and inversions. maybe that’s what MattKent meant?

Doesn’t really lend itself to that type of harmonic operation, or rather it’s what Barry I’m sure would say would be a feature rather than a bug. Might be more interesting if there are borrowed notes in the voicing.

[christianm77]

It took a while but now when I think of a CMaj7 chord, there are "chordal lines" that I'll gravitate towards. One single chord just seems like a harmonic anchor. Y'know the way one uses the sus to create movement in a single chord? Voice leading convergence gives a player a vocabulary of 4 part movement with the equivalent ease of a sus resolution.
Just a matter of programming the hardware.

I took another look at the almanac for the first time in ages, something that struck me - how important is knowing whether it’s an Em, C, G/C or Bo/C to the whole enterprise? It’s tempting to view the material purely intervallically.

[MattKent]

Hello to christianm77 and Jimmy blue note,

First of all greetings from the North of England. I'm happy to be in the group.

Maybe I shouldn't have implied that the Barry Harris method should be abandoned in favour of a yet to be investigated path of study for myself. I have learned a lot with BH already; such as way more fluidity with moving between voicings and inversions, the idea of off and on type of voicings that can be linked to strong and weaker beats of the bar. Stringing them together to get movement that wasn't in my playing before. I can now see the whole guitar neck on all sets of four consecutive stings as available for these Drop 2 chords. I have only just scratched the surface of his teachings, using only the Major6/Dim7 and Minor6/Dim7 pairs so far. Lots more to learn such as intuitively knowing how to substitute these few voicings into implying the chord you require as he does. Also haven't touched on his Monk moves and borrowing notes from nearby diminished chords or even started on the Dom7/Dim7 chord pairs and 7b5/Dim7 chord pairs. Need to investigate Drop 3 further and start on Drop 2&4 and Drop 2&3 voicings. Like I said loads to learn. However my inquisitive nature made me stand back a bit and question what seemed like Barry's obsession with the Diminished form. I have investigated a few other 8 note bebop type scales and found other chord pairs that do not include the Dim7. They work very well and to my ears I prefer a few of them. They require a bit more effort though as 8 voicings are needed for each sting set as against the 5 for Barry's. But while I spent time in that direction I could have learned more of his teachings.

Nothing is of any use until it has been practiced to the point of "I don't have to think about it any more, I know it" So what you work on will eventually come out in your playing. I genuinely want to start learning to develop the Almanac cycles so that the level of control they offer will one day be something I know.

Regards,

MattKent

[jlp]

I have investigated a few other 8 note bebop type scales and found other chord pairs that do not include the Dim7. They work very well and to my ears I prefer a few of them.

If you are interested in exploring other 8-note scales - bebop (i.e. passing tone) or not - Dave Creamer's book on Octatonic Scales (all 43 of them) is pretty mind-blowing. A very different approach from the Almanacs, but complementary to them.

[christianm77]

Hello to christianm77 and Jimmy blue note,

First of all greetings from the North of England. I'm happy to be in the group.

Maybe I shouldn't have implied that the Barry Harris method should be abandoned in favour of a yet to be investigated path of study for myself. I have learned a lot with BH already; such as way more fluidity with moving between voicings and inversions, the idea of off and on type of voicings that can be linked to strong and weaker beats of the bar. Stringing them together to get movement that wasn't in my playing before. I can now see the whole guitar neck on all sets of four consecutive stings as available for these Drop 2 chords. I have only just scratched the surface of his teachings, using only the Major6/Dim7 and Minor6/Dim7 pairs so far. Lots more to learn such as intuitively knowing how to substitute these few voicings into implying the chord you require as he does. Also haven't touched on his Monk moves and borrowing notes from nearby diminished chords or even started on the Dom7/Dim7 chord pairs and 7b5/Dim7 chord pairs. Need to investigate Drop 3 further and start on Drop 2&4 and Drop 2&3 voicings. Like I said loads to learn. However my inquisitive nature made me stand back a bit and question what seemed like Barry's obsession with the Diminished form. I have investigated a few other 8 note bebop type scales and found other chord pairs that do not include the Dim7. They work very well and to my ears I prefer a few of them. They require a bit more effort though as 8 voicings are needed for each sting set as against the 5 for Barry's. But while I spent time in that direction I could have learned more of his teachings.

Nothing is of any use until it has been practiced to the point of "I don't have to think about it any more, I know it" So what you work on will eventually come out in your playing. I genuinely want to start learning to develop the Almanac cycles so that the level of control they offer will one day be something I know.

Regards,

MattKent

I know what you mean about the dim7 thing. Everything can sound a bit old fashioned.... but you aren't limited to using them. The main problem there for me I think is less the dim7 itself as using it in strict parallel motion, which is a feature of those basic drop 2 scales - breaking up that movement via borrowings or 'suspensions' can help a lot. To be honest I'm not a fan of too much parallel motion with any chord or intervallic structure, it just so happens dim7 is super recognisable as the 'silent movie chord' so it's particularly wearing after a while. The Almanac for its part seems to be all about getting away from parallel motion.

I'm not wanting to necessarily advocate for Barry's chordal approach (I'm not even that good at it). I just wanted to point out there's a deep world to explore there if you want. Barry can actually be pretty 'modern' too; there's applications that aren't in the basic material that surprised me in class (because they reminded me so much of what Jordan Klemons talks about for example) there's a lot of sounds you won't find in seven note chord scales. Like many, I suspect, I got into him because the default chord scales/seventh chord approach I was using sounded pretty terrible for the music I was playing at that time, but there's more to it than that. (Now I've got a good grasp on that idiom, I actually slip some of a lot of colouristic CST/Berkleeoid type stuff in there.)

This might be all a bit meta; but I'm going to stick my neck out and say for the longest time my relationship with fretboard harmony was shaped by quite negative emotions; fear, guilt and worry

Fear, because of the amount of information one can find in a book like the Almanac or Vic Juris's harmony book, or the amount of work that can be summed up in two and half sheets of paper (Ben Monder's legendary handout), guilt for not spending more time doing it, and worry that I would never be a 'good jazz guitarist' unless I learned all of the stuff. None of these are, I hope it's obvious, good reasons for learning anything.

So I think this manifests itself in certain mindsets. First of all, as any systemised harmonic approach is what the kids call a time sink; it can take years, even decades to get good at this stuff (at least for me.) So a natural fear is - am I doing the right thing, or wasting years of my life? On the other hand it takes a LOT of emotional investment. So people get drawn into certain methods and can end up advocating passionately for them at the expense of other approaches; especially in the case of a charismatic and opinionated teacher* (and who doesn't love a charismatic and opinionated teacher, no names haha.)

What helps is on one side it gets easier to learn new stuff, and on the other hand, there's obviously repeated material - triads and seventh chords are the same 'grips' whatever Durante or Bach - or Barry Harris - might call them. It's also perfectly OK for stuff to contradict, not everything has to be a neat intellectual system to be useful for the musician. In fact I strongly believe complimentary and even contradictory ways of looking at the same material I think can assist learning; I feel it's my path as an educator to understand different ways of doing things, even if I haven't mastered them all.

Anyway I think another thing is that what the Almanac, Figured Bass and Barry Harris have in common is that we are going scales --> chords & counterpoint. The thing is, this is a lot easier on keyboard instruments; so it's interesting that we spend so much time learning to try and understand the neck of the guitar (which is essentially chromatic) in terms of a keyboard. How important is this? I honestly don't know.

OTOH the guitar is very much a 'grips' and' shapes' instrument. We are perhaps conditioned into thinking this is something we must transcend, that it is disreputable way of playing? However, Peter Bernstein showed me how great harmony can made by embracing the guitar's natural tendency towards chromaticism, an ear for melody and counterpoint and twenty or thirty basic chord grips we all know. So; there's that. But the underlying principle is the same - understand how to balance the movements of the voices. The principle is just as true for Bernstein, Bach or Mick Goodrick.

The drop 2 block chord thing with Barry Harris is 'grips' and of course not at all unique to him.

So, I'm not sure if any of this helps really, but I do think this is probably true of any long term project in music. It's always a bit of a leap of faith. I'd say it's best to follow your instincts and ears.

Lastly of course, it's not always about the material itself, but rather the process. One thing I remember being impressed by was that a primary aspect of Warne Marsh's teaching was flexibility - so if a scale pattern was correctly executed once, he would never ask the student to play it again. This is different from the kind of stereotyped practice so many of us feel (because of fear, guilt and worry) that we must undertake. I suspect Mick might agree?

It's a really interesting mindset, and I think is really relevant here. You aren't necessarily looking to ingrain grips and patterns, but to actually stop things from getting ingrained; to be able to hear and execute harmonic ideas freely...

*this has obviously never been the case for me. Oh nonononono.

[MattKent]

If you are interested in exploring other 8-note scales - bebop (i.e. passing tone) or not - Dave Creamer's book on Octatonic Scales (all 43 of them) is pretty mind-blowing. A very different approach from the Almanacs, but complementary to them.

Hello jip,

Thank you for the great tip. Checked it out and is available as Ebook. I have heard of Dave Creamer but was not aware of any of his published works. This sounds like an amazing resource as I have tried to investigate this area unguided on my own too. I have discovered 8-note scales for each of the modes of the major scale and their associated secondary dominants, the melodic minor scale too though haven't looked at all its modes yet. All of these split nicely into chord pairs and only a few include a Dim7 (so those should be looked at as special cases not the whole subject). Thanks again as it would be fascinating to find out what a superior music educator makes of this and its musical applications.

Regard,

MattKent

[bako]

I keep coming back to the basic cycles from slightly different angles.
Here's todays edition:

Major cycle 2

Drop 2 / Drop 3 / Drop 2 / Drop 3 combination

C G B E X X ..... C X B E G ..... X G C E B X ..... X G X E B C

C F A D X X ..... C X A D F X ..... X F C D A X ..... X F X D A C

B E G D X X ..... B X G D E X ..... X E B D G X ..... X E X D G B

A E F C X X ..... A X F C E X ..... X E A C F X ..... X E X C F A

G D F B X X ..... G X F B D X ..... X D G B F X ..... X D X B F G

etc.

change octave as needed