#16
|
|||
|
|||
Dual,
A quick FYI. The relative major of F#m is A major - 3 sharps |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Obvious answer is use the notes you started with: F# minor scale. However, just using the whole scale at random may not work too well (aimless noodling), and there are a few strategies for giving it shape. Simplest and most traditional in blues/rock is to use F# minor pent throughout. There may be clashing issues on the E chord, but the pent is such a strong sound you may get away with it . (A is the note to be careful with on the E chord.) A more complicated method (but potentially more interesting and musical) is to follow the chords: working from the chord shapes or arpeggios. You can do that with no theory or scale knowledge, just from the chord shapes you know. Eg, when on the F#m chord, start and end with any note in the shape, using any note from the Bm and E shapes in passing. If the chord changes are quite quick, you may want to end a phrase on the next chord, which means the last phrase note needs to be in that chord shape. IOW, mainly it's about "target notes": long notes, accented notes, phrase-ending notes - all should usually be in the chord at that moment. Starting notes can often be anything. With a bit of note/theory/scale knowledge, you can obviously develop this all over the neck: In the simplest view, there are 3 chord tones (triad notes) and 4 passing notes ("diatonic" notes from the scale of the key): Code:
CHORD CHORD TONES PASSING NOTES 1 3 5 2 4 6 7 F#m F# A C# G# B D E Bm B D F# C# E G# A E E G# B F# A C# D Code:
CHORD PENT CHARACTER NOTES 1 3 4 5 7 2 6 F#m F# A B C# E G# D (b6) Bm B D E F# A C# G# . 1 2 3 5 6 4 7 E(maj) E F# G# B C# A D But that 3-level distinction reflects how the notes will sound. The pentatonics (minor on minor chords, major on major) will sound "inside", the other two notes a little more "outside", or expressive. It's only a beginning strategy. It will sound fine - no "wrong notes"! - but could be a little bland. If you think it sounds too "safe" - not funky, bluesy or jazzy enough - that's where chromatics come in. The most common one would be the blues b5 - adding C natural to the basic F# minor pent. Standard blues style means staying with the key pent (F# minor) all the way, but in this case (in a minor key), the b6 (D) is good on the Bm chord and the E(7), and the G# makes a good "sweet" 9th on the F#m, as well as being a chord tone on E.
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen. Last edited by JonPR; 04-30-2013 at 03:09 AM. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Outstanding post Jon.
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Generally, following the simple rules sounds "normal"; but deviating from them doesn't sound "wrong" necessarily, it just sounds "more interesting". And if it sounds good in some way, that just means other rules are being followed (not broken)... The way I like to look at available chords in any key is in 2 stages - the 2nd of which is where things get interesting! (and complicated...) 1. DIATONIC This means any chord harmonised from the 7-note scale of the key. For a major and its "relative minor", that's the same 7 chords, we just number them differently: C major = C(I) Dm(ii) Em(iii) F(IV) G(V) Am(vi) Bdim(vii) A minor = Am(i) Bdim(ii) C(III) Dm(iv) Em(v) F(VI) G(VII) However, that set of chords is most likely to make C sound like "home", unless we really make Am much more prominent. To assist in making Am sound like home, we tend to use an E major chord (or E7) as V in A minor, giving a G# "leading tone" to resolve more strongly to A. This is where the idea of "harmonic minor" comes from, and makes minor keys more complicated entities than majors. However, you can just think of the E chord as being "borrowed from A major", to toughen up the A minor key a little. The concept of "borrowed chords" is a very useful one, and borrowed chords (from closely-related keys) are very common. They tend to fall under category 2: 2. CHROMATIC These include any chord using any note from outside that 7-note set - and they are very common. (ie they break no rules, they just follow other rules .) Rule 2a is SECONDARY DOMINANTS. Every key has its "primary dominant", which is the V chord, leading back to I. But all the other chords (except the dim chord) can have their own V chords, to make chord sequences lead to them more strongly. Secondary dominants in key of C: C7 = V/IV = "dominant of the IV chord", ie, leads to F. D7 = V/V (leads to G) E7 = V/vi (leads to Am) A7 = V/ii (leads to Dm) B7 = V/iii (leads to Em) Secondary dominants in key of A minor: G7 = V/III (leads to C*) A7 = V/iv (leads to Dm) B7 = V/V (leads to E) C7 = V/VI (leads to F) * this would normally indicate a change of key (modulation) to C major. This is a subtle distinction, because secondary dominants don't mean a change of key. When A7 is used in C major to go to Dm, the key isn't changing to D minor - unless you spend some time on Dm, maybe alternating with A7. So you can imagine there can be grey areas, where it might sound as if the key is changing to Dm, but not for long. This is sometimes called "tonicisation" of the Dm, if it returns to key of C (usually via G) before long. Secondary dominants have a "brightening" effect, injecting forward energy into a chord sequence, making changes seem more urgent. Compare the following: C - Am - Dm - G C - Am - D7 - G Remember the D7 is not "better" than Dm. It just depends on whether you want that effect. As mentioned, it's not breaking any rules; it's just an additional rule or formula you can apply when you want it. (That might sound like the key has changed to G major, but you can bring it straight back to C by using G7 .) Rule 2b is MODAL INTERCHANGE, or MODE MIXTURE. This is normally seen (in a major key) as "borrowing from the parallel minor", because that's the source of all the most common borrowed chords in a major key. A "parallel" mode or key is one with the same keynote. Eg, in key of C major, it means you can borrow any chord from the key of C minor. Most commonly, that means the following chords: Eb (bIII) Fm (iv) Ab (bVI) Bb (bVII) In contrast to the "brightening" effect of secondary dominants, these chords contribute some of the "darkness" of the minor key - which is a very popular effect in rock. In rock music, we tend to think the diatonic major key is "too happy", "too simple"; we want a bit of grit, a bit of heaviness, or mystery. At the same time, we don't usually want the complete minor key, because that can sound weak. The combination of a sturdy major tonic (plus IV and V) with those other 3 major chords from the parallel minor (bIII, bVI, bVII) is the ideal recipe. Add the minor iv for a little sophisticated mystery.... Compare the following: C - Am - F - G C - Am - Fm - G Also try C-F-Fm-C and C-Fm-C. You can also borrow chords from a parallel major key or mode, to brighten up a minor key. As mentioned, we do this normally anyway, with E in key of A minor, but we could also borrow D or Bm from A major (or D7 from A dorian). Both the above rules (2a and 2b) can be developed further. 2a can involve substitutes, secondary leading tone chords (dim7s), etc. 2b can involve chords borrowed from other modes, such as bII (Db) from C phrygian, or Bm from C lydian. But most of the above are pretty common in rock music, and examples of all can be found in the Beatles' songs (which they themselves learned from the vast array of earlier pop and jazz tunes they covered in their early career). Generically, modal interchange is more characteristic of rock music, and secondary dominants (etc) are more common in jazz.
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen. Last edited by JonPR; 04-30-2013 at 04:09 AM. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Jon, that’s more than I can handle, I’m sure you know that. I’m not complaining though, but now will need a free weekend to try to decipher the strategies you describe.
Regarding F#m and its major cousin, I got it. The sixth note in the A major key is F# and that is the relative minor I was looking for. Thank you everybody, Dual Trace |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
No worries. I did try to summarise it, believe it or not - I see that as pretty much all you need to know (about available chord choices), so take your time; some folks would make a book out of that post and sell it to you...
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Book indeed. I think I'll print this out and add it to my binder. I've got two books on this stuff and neither sum it up so well. Awesome thread!
__________________
"You don't have to be great to start, but you have to start to be great." -Zig Ziglar Acoustics 2013 Guild F30 Standard 2012 Yamaha LL16 2007 Seagull S12 1991 Yairi DY 50 Electrics Epiphone Les Paul Standard Fender Am. Standard Telecaster Gibson ES-335 Gibson Firebird |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
In creating music, especially for beginners, one should listen more and think less.
Advanced players will find their own way and some will enjoy theoretical explanations more than others -- but I generally don't like to over explain the mechanics to a beginner who is yet unable to hear what sounds harmonious and what doesn't (not to mention musicians who deliberately aim for dissonance and other atypical progressions). There is no written explanation that could ever compensate for that. To the OP, most if not all chord progressions have already been written. My recommendation is to study existing pieces in the genres that you're interested in, develop your ear, and take it from there to develop your own style and compositions. Last edited by JoeCharter; 05-01-2013 at 09:49 AM. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I was summarising what I've learned in over 45 years of learning to play songs. I never thought about organising it all in written form until I started teaching (around 15 years ago), and the above "simplification" has only come together in the last few years. I knew it all before, it was just all intuitive, picked up from the songs themselves. The problem with putting theory first is that you then find songs you think are "breaking the rules". Start with the songs, and you easily accept that anything they do is "correct": it sounds good, so it's right. That's it. Maybe if you're in a hurry to develop improvising, songwriting or arranging skills, a little theory can help. But I wouldn't advise anyone to be in that much of a hurry... Curiosity is another matter. Curiosity is good, and doesn't have to mean you ignore the songs and the sounds in favour of theory. I've only ever treated theory as an interesting side topic in its own right - not as a way of making me a better player, composer or improviser. I know it's a tired old cliche, but the Beatles got to be good by learning to play countless songs in all styles, for years before they became famous. They never read any books on theory, or went to music college. They just copied what they heard. The only theoretical terms they knew were the ones most beginners know: chord names, essentially, and little else. Their "genius" wasn't any extraordinary inner talent, just a shared obsession with popular music in all its forms - and it never occurred to them (as most of their contemporaries seemed to believe) that songwriting was something to be left to professionals. Cram enough of other people's songs into your brain, and your own original ideas will soon come pouring out.
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen. Last edited by JonPR; 05-01-2013 at 12:00 PM. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Jon, I agree with you and your posts are always incredibly good.
When I see questions coming from beginners, I try to think about how I viewed music when I first started and what helped me to understand what I was doing. When I was learning keyboards as a toddler, my favourite way of learning progressions was always through the music that I enjoyed listening to. Understanding it came much later in life so I guess my opinion is biased (just like any opinion...). There are so many soft rules that covering every scenario becomes quite tedious and confusing. A good friend of mine and probably one of the best musicians I heard is a music scholar who started guitar in his teenage years and it's interesting how he is so good at things that I never cared to analyze. I guess studying music while you're a literate person (as opposed to an illiterate kid) has a huge impact on your perception of the matter. Last edited by JoeCharter; 05-01-2013 at 01:41 PM. |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
True...but only if one can absorb all of it. Basically, ear training to a point where one can recognize at least standard chord changes that they will stick. I believe, it is an important part in anyone's musically development.
__________________
There are still so many beautiful things to be said in C major... Sergei Prokofiev |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Hi DT...
Well you are putting it together well. The only reason I asked is chords fall together more sensibly on keys...(visually and tactile-wise) You described chord structures in minor keys well. Happy further explorations... |