-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
The specific problem in this thread is not ‘theory’ but people looking for an explanation of something which is simply a notational convention. We call a minor 6th chord a minor 6th chord because that is what we call it. Everyone knows what it is and it’s all fine.
It’s like how we don’t need a reason why multiplication goes before addition in maths, that’s just how everyone agrees to do it and that’s how we write equations etc so that they can be understood by others.
often these conventions can be a bit quirky or illogical even in STEM subjects. But everyone uses them.
-
01-24-2022 11:31 AM
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
From the practical point of view, I like David Berkman's approach. He's got 10 pages of 'all the jazz theory you'll ever need' summary. One can read and move on.
After that all one needs is someone to show them some examples of how they apply to analyzing tunes and lines. Then off you go.
-
01-24-2022, 11:43 AM #104Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by Tal_175
DB
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Sorry for any snark, I just don’t get why anyone wouldn’t say ‘that what it’s called, cool’ and move on.
People seem to think music theory is like physics or something, but the joke is even physicists would be perfectly happy with that type of argument with regards to notation, so long as it’s what people use (which it is) and it’s reasonably clear (which it is).
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Chord naming always seems to be a "trip up" point for beginners. Maybe we should make chord formulas a sticky...
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
Obviously I find a lot of nerdy shit interesting, particularly the music theory history thing (when did chord scale theory start off and what form did it have? That type of thing.)
I actually think the forum is sometimes quite good for stuff like this, but they are all academic points really and very niche.
I think I’m well aware that knowing this stuff doesn’t make me a better player per se.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
I feel like people would take to it better if it was a YouTube video of a guy in a cowboy hat who played a telecaster and calls you "pal" and "champ" and all that.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
-
It’s like this. Someone created a theory forum in here. Wasn’t me. It’s there and it’s free so I thought I might as well use it. I asked a simple question and summarized the many useful answers (for which I thank y’all) somewhere on page 2 or so. After that, it’s bring out the popcorn and enjoy the show. Everyone’s viewpoints about theory in general or theory nerds posting bad clips, or the value of playing by ear… it’s entertaining and so forth but who’s trying to convince who of what here?
Now I’m settling in for part II.
-
Originally Posted by Oscar67
-
Originally Posted by Lobomov
Christian actually posted a good video a while ago that summarized the approach for the dominant scale (let me find it). Check out the PDF especially.
-
I think a distinction has to be made between theory as analytical knowledge and theory as how you organize your instrument.
Harmony comes from scales. So in order to play a very harmonically rich style in a chord specific way, it seems like scales are useful abstractions to internalize on the instrument as a reference (not just for running up and down). Scales are also useful for expanding comping voicings. Lines, chords, counter lines etc. can all be viewed in a unified way on the instrument with scales.
But I'm under the impression that there are other fretboard organization references that people are alluding to. One that doesn't involve seeing lines, chords, extensions within a scalar reference on the instrument.
I'd love it if people discuss these alternative approaches as I'm sincerely curious about them.
-
Sure, a monkey mashing at keyboards will eventually write a real sentence too.
It’s a scale, it takes an hour to learn it’s not a big deal and I cannot understand why your life’s goal is attacking them on this forum.
-
Originally Posted by Lobomov
This view applies well to most standards. So to me it's crazy not to take advantage of it.
-
Originally Posted by Oscar67
-
01-24-2022, 02:59 PM #119Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by grahambop
DB
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
-
01-24-2022, 03:14 PM #121Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by Tal_175
DB
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by Lobomov
-
Historically speaking, 1 3 5 b7 has been in active rotation for a long while as an essential chord to delineate a key center and also to steer elsewhere. 1 3 5 7 has played a far lesser role.
Despite 1 3 5 7 being the I chord in a major scale, 1 3 5 b7 earned the title of 7th chord while 1 3 5 7 is presented as ma7 to describe how it is different from 1 3 5 b7.
1 b3 5 6 similarly was granted a similar priority over 1 b3 5 b6 and deemed the best to represent m6.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
HeadRush?
Today, 11:54 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos