A couple of interesting websites for theory...

[TBman]

http://www.bellandcomusic.com/building-chords.html

https://www.bluesguitarinstitute.com...onize-a-scale/

[rick-slo]

Reasonable level of theory info. IMO theory sites often go way overboard into details that are useless to most people. For playing I like a list of common
chord progressions, the I-ii-iii-IV-V-vi-vii(dim) and i-II(dim)-III-iv-v-VI-VII bit and CAGED (not really theory). For communication a bit more.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Reasonable level of theory info. IMO theory sites often go way overboard into details that are useless to most people. For playing I like a list of common
chord progressions, the I-ii-iii-IV-V-vi-vii(dim) and i-II(dim)-III-iv-v-VI-VII bit and CAGED (not really theory). For communication a bit more.

Those two pages are pretty good without going nuts over it. The table with formulas for building chords is a handy thing to have around especially for other tunings.

[agfsteve]

Originally Posted by TBman

http://www.bellandcomusic.com/building-chords.html

https://www.bluesguitarinstitute.com...onize-a-scale/

Thanks for posting this.

A couple of things that I noticed in the first link (Bell & Co. Music):

1) This seems to be a contradiction:

If we were to include the 8th note of the scale it is referred to as the Octave (upper octave) or Super Tonic.

If we think of the Tonic as the tonal center of a scale
Supertonic and Subtonic are each one whole step above and below the Tonic

Either I'm reading that wrong, or there is a difference between "Super Tonic" and "Supertonic".

2) It keeps referring to "Major Scales" (plural), but isn't there only one major scale? I think it should say something like "Major Scale in the key of", e.g. "Major Scale in the key of C". Maybe I'm being too pedantic (or wrong!)

[Gordon Currie]

1. Supertonic = the second. I have no idea where they got the idea that Supertonic = octave.

2. A major scale has a major third. There are more than one.

[agfsteve]

It's frustrating, the way some musical terms seem to be interchanged. I think the definition for "Major Scale" should be limited to explaining the formula of the "Whole, whole, half, whole, whole, whole, half" step thing. Then the definition for "Key" should be the application of the major scale starting at a specific note (tonic).

What's wrong with that?!!

Here are some more words that I also enjoyed bolding.

[Gordon Currie]

Agfsteve, sorry, I may have inadvertently misled you.

The Major Scale is a diatonic (7 note) scale that is foundational to Western music theory.

A scale (regardless of number of notes) can be major if it has a major third interval. For example the Lydian and Mixolydian modes are scales with major thirds, but they differ in order of interval from each other and from The Major Scale (also known as the Ionian mode).

Western music theory is fantastically detailed and rich in describing, well, Western music, but it is not the only game in town. And it's rigidity can sometimes result in odd descriptions such as key signatures that don't seem to match the song they are applied to - e.g. if you were playing a song in A minor Dorian (with a raised 6th (F#) instead of a minor 6th (F), the key signature would be G (!) due to having one sharp. Many people would just ignore that and say the song is in A minor Dorian (or just A Dorian since that is implicitly understood to be minor).

[TBman]

Originally Posted by agfsteve

Thanks for posting this.

A couple of things that I noticed in the first link (Bell & Co. Music):

1) This seems to be a contradiction:


Either I'm reading that wrong, or there is a difference between "Super Tonic" and "Supertonic".

2) It keeps referring to "Major Scales" (plural), but isn't there only one major scale? I think it should say something like "Major Scale in the key of", e.g. "Major Scale in the key of C". Maybe I'm being too pedantic (or wrong!)

Originally Posted by Gordon Currie

1. Supertonic = the second. I have no idea where they got the idea that Supertonic = octave.

2. A major scale has a major third. There are more than one.

Originally Posted by agfsteve

It's frustrating, the way some musical terms seem to be interchanged. I think the definition for "Major Scale" should be limited to explaining the formula of the "Whole, whole, half, whole, whole, whole, half" step thing. Then the definition for "Key" should be the application of the major scale starting at a specific note (tonic).

What's wrong with that?!!

Here are some more words that I also enjoyed bolding.

Originally Posted by Gordon Currie

Agfsteve, sorry, I may have inadvertently misled you.

The Major Scale is a diatonic (7 note) scale that is foundational to Western music theory.

A scale (regardless of number of notes) can be major if it has a major third interval. For example the Lydian and Mixolydian modes are scales with major thirds, but they differ in order of interval from each other and from The Major Scale (also known as the Ionian mode).

Western music theory is fantastically detailed and rich in describing, well, Western music, but it is not the only game in town. And it's rigidity can sometimes result in odd descriptions such as key signatures that don't seem to match the song they are applied to - e.g. if you were playing a song in A minor Dorian (with a raised 6th (F#) instead of a minor 6th (F), the key signature would be G (!) due to having one sharp. Many people would just ignore that and say the song is in A minor Dorian (or just A Dorian since that is implicitly understood to be minor).

My idea of theory and practical usage at this point is pretty much limited to the pages I posted. I am however getting the idea that writing good melody may involve more than I IV V, etc. I don't understand the significance of "dorian" or "Ionian" or any of the other scales or their practical application to writing original melodies - i.e. what helps your imagination in creating melodies that are "hum-able" and even as important, the filler notes in between that are the mesh that holds it all together without sounding clunky, predictable and corny.

[jseth]

Really confusing presentation... and I actually know what they were talking about! God knows what a beginner would think... probably walk away, saying "well, I guess I just can't do that...".

Far too much extraneous information, not enough meat and potatoes... you will NEVER need to know what a "supertonic" is, not in the realms of music in which I stride... jazz, blues, rock, country, folk, etc.... it is simply not germane to the subject...

Most people, when they say they want to know theory, DON'T really want to know everything about music theory... they want to know more about whatever their particular slant on music may be taking them. There are very simple, effective ways to get your "boots on the ground" about music theory and harmony without learning "the Secrets of the Ancient Masters" (kidding...).

Well, if that's for you? Good luck... hope you get what you want from it.

[JonPR]

Here's my critique of those:

Originally Posted by TBman

http://www.bellandcomusic.com/building-chords.html

1. In the list of major scales, some of the greyed out ones should simply be omitted (because they have double sharps and are never used), while a couple should be bold like the rest (Db and Gb). The Db major scale (5 flats) is a lot more common than its enharmonic equivalent, C# (7 sharps) - he is quite wrong there to assert the opposite - while Gb is more common in jazz than F#, although in theory (6 flats or 6 sharps) there is nothing to choose between them. (One thing that makes Gb better is its relative minor, Ebm, is easier to handle than D# minor, because D# melodic minor would contain B# and Cx, while Eb melodic minor has C and D. )

In short, there are 15 major scales: C major, 7 sharp ones and 7 flat ones.
Six of them form enharmonic pairs - sound the same, written differently (so take your pick):
Db (5 flats) = C# (7 sharps)
Gb (6 flats) = F# (6 sharps)
Cb (7 flats) = B (5 sharps)
Normally, of course (except in rare circumstances) we'd choose Db and B, not C# or Cb.

He calls the octave of the tonic, the "upper tonic" (not the "super tonic") which I think is OK. (Maybe that was changed after reading your criticism?)

2. The "diminished 5th" chord type (major 3rd, diminished 5th) should be omitted. There is no common scale which produces such a chord, and when we find one it's better regarded as an altered chord of some kind.
E.g., it's acceptable in his list of 7th chords - although "7b5" should be listed as a symbol before the jazz shorthand "7-5".

3. The chord symbols in general in that list are somewhat chaotic - some common ones missed, some included which are ambiguous or almost never used.
He's included a couple of 9th chords in his list of 7ths.
He's not mentioned add9 chords (very common) at all.
The 11th chord he lists is never used in practice. The "11" chord symbol stands for a 9sus4. Meanwhile, min11 chords can and do exist, which he's left out.

4. His method for building chords is dumb, IMO. It works, but it promotes no kind of understanding about where these chords come from.
E.g., "Fdim7" would come from the Gb harmonic minor scale - a scale which doesn't really exist, but would contain all the relevant notes, with no alteration: F Ab Cb Ebb.
If we were to spell the chord F Ab B D, then it's actually Bdim7, which comes from C harmonic minor.
Once you understand the derivation from vii of harmonic minor, dim7 chords make a lot more sense in the context in which you usually find them.
(Not all dim7 chords are vii chords, but most are.)

Originally Posted by TBman

https://www.bluesguitarinstitute.com...onize-a-scale/

Nothing wrong with this one at all! (as far as it goes...)

The best site I've found for music theory (for getting questions answered anyway) is https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/wiki/index - that's a link to their FAQ.
For music theory lessons, the best is https://www.musictheory.net/lessons
The downside to both those - for readers of this site! - is they are not specifically guitar-friendly. (That's because music theory is the same for all instruments.)

If the dry, academic approach is off-putting, try this: http://tobyrush.com/theorypages/