allow me to add one tidbit to this discussion (though maybe we should move this stuff to a non-sticky)..

I am also a fan of alpine accordion music. Way back when, in my naive, pre-music theory existence, my naive self was naively surprised to find that this music is also played mostly in I IV V... so much so, that alpine button accordions are even hard-wired tuned in that way..

The right hand (treble) side of these kinds of instruments generally come in 'rows', where each row is tuned to a particular key. These rows are tuned a fourth apart. So a common 4-row button accordion setup might be G C F Bb (from the outside in). Of course since we all now know that a fourth in one direction is a fifth in the other, you could also think of these as tuned a fifth apart they're generally not referred to in that way.

In addition, these types of accordions play (mostly) different notes when pushing the bellows than when pulling them. In fact, in a given row when you push you'll generally get the notes for the root chord, but when you pull you'll get the notes for the V chord.

So what I'm basically saying is the whole keyboard of one of these instruments is a myriad of I IV V stuff.. The bass side is somewhat different.. suffice it to say it provides the basic contra-bass notes (ie similar to the alternating bass one gets in bluegrass guitar).

And believe it or not.. I use the tunings of these accordions to remember my 'circle of fifths'.. for example, I have a G C F Bb four-row.. and I can remember I IV and V for C and F by remembering my accordion's tuning ... if i ever forget, those note names are actually printed on a little sticker on the corner of my accordion.. courtesy of the manufacturer.. i'll try to post a pic..

Even though I 'realized' this a number of years ago, it still amazes me.. but I guess goes a little way toward showing how common these concepts are across cultures and music types.

Sounds like an autoharp layout.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian T

Here's some homework, an application ( I hope). To me, this is an important "what if:"

What if practically none of my partner's fiddle music books show chords. What if I'm eager to play along (guitar) behind her work. From that Western, standard, music notation, how can I spot the chords and the chord changes?
That is, if I see F# note , does that suggest a 'D' chord? if I see a C-note, does that suggest a 'C' chord?

For every question asked by a student in any university class. . . polls show that >50% of the class is interested in the answer.

---

spaz: I agree. The key signature suggests limitations on the variety of probable chords in an elementary fiddle piece or exercise. That certainly helps.

I picked a fiddle book at random. The only signatures I saw were G, D and A.
So, in in the key of D (##) for chords: tonic is D, subdom is G, dom7 is A7, then Bm, Em and F#7 round it out according to the theory page I use.

I can imagine that most pieces in D would kick off with a 'D' chord, then 'G', then likely 'A/A7' (using the I, IV, V idea). I can also imagine that each bar will be one chord, possibly two. Maybe more, but in beginner's music? While that very well might be the order of business, can I spot the chord changes from the scale positions of the notes in Standard Notation music on that page?

I'm almost afraid to answer this..

I'm not good enough to do this, but I do think its possible if the tune is straightforward enough. But I think it depends on the song, and maybe some other assumptions..

for example.. lets take twinkle, twinkle little star in the key of C. If you look at the melody notes you'll see something like..

c c g g a a g..
f f e e d d c..
g g f f e e d..
g g f f e e d..
c c g g a a g..
f f e e d d c..

If you knew that this song has 3 chords and they are I(C) IV(F) and V(G), there are a couple things that might jump out at you..
Given the chord's (assume triad for now) notes:
C (c e g)
F (f a c)
G (g b d)

you can see that there are some notes in the melody that only show up in certain chords. f and a only show up in F and d only shows up in G. Based on that fact, one might surmise that if I see an f or a in the melody I should be playing an F. If I see a d I should be playing a G. This of course doesnt work all the way around given the question of what you play when you see a g (C or G?), but in this tune it does work for those other notes.

A couple huge caveats here before everyone yells at me..
- twinkle twinkle little star is a simplistic song.
- a fiddle may not be playing melody (imagine its playing harmony to the melody )
- depends on how many notes are being played (eg for a banjo roll, I can 'see' the chord from just the tabbed notes, I could imagine that if one could read standard notation really well, something similar would happen there. But banjo rolls are often playing most if not all notes in a triad, something which may not apply to other isntruments)

hope that makes just a little sense..

If you are looking for some hard and fast rule about harmonizing a melody, forget it. A simple 1-5 fiddle tune can have so many substitutions and passing chords that you could play a new chord on every beat. In Western swing, they do sometimes (the sock rhythm that accompanies Western swing tunes hardly ever stays on the same chord more than a measure). Jazz players will tell you that theoretically the chord changes on every melody note, and indeed it CAN if yu wan tit to. The simplest 1-5 or 1-4-5 tunes can be played with a myriad of chords, or the most complex jazz tune can be broken down to 1-4-5 (or more commonly, 1-6-2-5). Substitutions are one reason...a Bm triad has two notes in common with a G Major triad...try substituting a Bm for any G chord in the key of G except at the end of a phrase. Same for an Am, two notes in common with a D7 or a C Maj triad...stick an Am in there for color instead of a C or D7 while the rest of the musicians keep playing the "correct" chords.

I think it is better to look at chord progressions as being their own world, not so much tied to any sequence of scale notes (melody)...The melody note does not even have to be a note in the accompanying chord. There are many "generic" chord progressions (i have a whole section cataloging them in my new backup book). Learn them. For example, There are dozens of songs with the "Rollin My Sweet Baby's Arms" progression. There is a catalog of fiddle tune progressions as well. Learn the most basic progressions, then when you hear a melody try inserting one of them...until a chord does not sound right, then try another common chord. ALWAYS expect the 1 chord and the 5 chord to be included. I can only think of one song that has no 5 chord, Waylon Jennings song "I Don't Think Hank Done it This A Way" which goes 1-4-1-4-1-4 ad nauseum. VERY boring. Some simple kiddie chants do not change chords at all. (Merrily We Roll Along" ....all 1 chord, but you COULD play a different chord every two beats if you want to jazz it up. The other way is to build the progression change by change. The VAST majority of songs start on the 1, a few on the 4 and a very VERY few on the 5. When trying to harmonize a melody, first try starting with the 1 chord, then when you sense a chord change, insert the 5 chord. If your ear tells you it's not a 5, try the 4...simple process of elimination. It should be obvious when the progression returns to the 1 chord, the "home base". If you hear a minor sound, try the 6m first because it is the most common minor chord. If it's not the 6m, try the 2m, the next most commonly used minor... then finally the 3m. This is "probability theory". I devote a chapter to it in my book "How to Play by Ear" It eliminates much of the guesswork in the trial and error method of figuring out a progression by ear. Also listen for fourths movement...if a song has more than three chords, the 6-2-5-1 progression is common (Salty Dog). Also, pay attention to the signals from seventh chords. if you hear a seventh chord the following chord is likely "up a fourth", (G7-C or D7-G). Look for transition chords...the 3 chord is almost always a quick (hardly ever more than a measure) transition between the 1 chord and the 4 chord. It is a stepping stone to the 4 chord. The verse of "Old Home Place" is an example. The F# Half Diminished Seventh chord serves the same function. Residing only a half step below the 1 chord, it serves as a stepping stone to the 1 chord. You may say "I never even heard of this chord, much less use it"...hey, the D7 has two notes in common with the F# Half Diminished Seventh... we use it all the time! The 57 chord is a substitution for the chord rooted on the seventh degree of the scale (F# Half Diminished Seventh in the key of G Major)
This is by necessity a drive-by explanation. Get my book "How to Play by Ear" if you want in-depth view with ear training examples on the CD and helpful charts and chord diagrams I can't present here.

If no one minds me jumping in on this one for my own understanding... when you say:

"If you knew that this song has 3 chords and they are I(C) IV(F) and V(G)"

How did you come to that conclusion? I see 6 chords? You wrote out the entire song to be:

c c g g a a g..
f f e e d d c..
g g f f e e d..
g g f f e e d..
c c g g a a g..
f f e e d d c..

I see the C F and G that you mentioned.... but theres also A D and E there as well. Doesnt that automatically take it out of the 3 chord format? If I were to write it out in Nashville: I'd say its I,V,VI,V,IV,III,II,I - but Im sure thats not right at all. I can see the I IV V format in the CFG, but also in the remaining notes - ADE as well? If we're going to stick with calling it a 3 chord progression, couldnt we just as easily call it VI,II,III or some other combination of the 6 degrees used in the song? Since there are no sharps or flats, its definitely in the key of C - which explains why we're calling F and G the IV and V respectively, but in terms of the progression, wouldnt you somehow try to include the VI, III and II that are in the song as well?
Im in the middle of digesting all the material you recommended, it looks extremely helpful! Ive never really looked into consonance and dissonance but I have heard generalized terms close to what youre talking about. Im gonna have to research both of those a bit further.
Somebody once gave me this whole long story about the major scale and how they were called "church tones" because they were considered to be "naturally pleasing to the ear" and any other chord structure (augmented/diminished) was considered to be the devils music... Im starting to see the science behind it based on those graphs which fundamentally makes a lot more sense to me than divine musical law? Do you s'pose understanding the correlation in these graphs will help me develop a basis for creating harmony in my music?

That stream of letters are the melody notes, not the chords. I wrote single notes (eg melody) lower case, chords upper case. Also try to digest Jack's response, he has a LOT of really useful suggestions in that one post there. I may have to check out that play by ear book of his..

I had an epiphany yesterday... not quite the full "click" Im hoping for but a few things came into focus as a result of researching all the stuff you mentioned. First of all... rhythm and melody= 2 different things?!? Sounds pretty stupid but that hadnt dawned on me before - that really helps tremendously. Especially understanding chord progressions.
I scrutinized the bejesus out of consonance and disonance - the graph is pretty tough to grasp at first but I think I got the idea. When they say "two sinusoidal tones", is that like playing 2 open G's on the banjo? Only thing I dont quite understand is the overtones - what are they and how does it split from 2 to 4? Im still working on the Blues Physics stuff... but I can tell you so far that its a good read!
Do you mind explaining the sharps and flats in the circle of 5ths? I understand how they got there and how to find how many there are in each key and which ones they are from using the circle, I just dont quite understand how to use that information practically in my playing.
I know the major scale forward and back, but I know them more as patterns on the fretboard rather than the actual notes. Im still working on the scales for banjo, but on a guitar lets say I start off in C position and play the Ionian mode of C major - if I were to shift that whole pattern up a fret, now Im in D major - 2 frets up from that would be Emaj and so forth. It doesnt matter how many sharps or flats are in the key - all I have to do is know where my root is and play the Ionian pattern right?
Is that cutting too many corners? Should I know all of the notes in the scale Im playing WHEN Im playing it? Isnt that a lot of stuff to memorize? Im starting to think thats one of my biggest problems. Trust me guys, Im not at all the type to say "thats too much work, Im not doing it", I just need to know what stuff I need to focus on. If I should know all the notes on a fretboard, or how many sharps and flats are in each key... it'll be tough but Im not above it! Do you have any advice?
It feels like theory is one of those subjects that is well hidden so the few people who have access to it can charge to teach it?!? It sounds absurd, and Im mostly kidding (although it wouldnt shock me if it were the case) I just cant figure out why I have such a hard time understanding this stuff? Ive always sucked at math and science... could that have anything to do with it?

Buy a friggin' book! That's what they are for! It would take an hour of (my) two finger typing to answer all your questions.

Get "The Natural Way to Music" - co-written by Bill Keith. It totally demystifies a lot of this stuff and explains a lot about the circle of fifths and how it applies to music (not banjo specific).

Go to:
beaconbanjo.com/cgi-bin/online...repro.php
Under Catalogs, click on "Other".

Indulge me. I use Pachelbel's Canon in D as a pointed, concrete example to speak to.
I can read the standard notation notes on those pages and then I can tell you what the chords, inversions and all, are for the piece. I have some experience using nothing but SN on the guitar neck.
However, I look over my partner's shoulder when she's practicing fiddle. No chords in beginner's fiddle music lesson books. . . . long strings of 1/8th notes. I can't decide from what's written on the page in standard notation where the chord changes must be.

I just don't think it's polite to strum along, fumbling for the first or second chord change while she's turned the page to another lesson. I want to be able to sit down with her SN charts and pencil in the chords at the appropriate points of change. I have thousands of tunes, with chords marked, so it doesn't appear to have been a theoretcial impossibility.

Jack: Name a book. Shouldn't take up too much time. I like book-learning.

First off, a sinusoidal tone is simply something that looks like a sine wave when graphed.


I think really the only reason it is used in discussions of this sort is because it is a pure representation of some frequency. If you play some note on a string instrument, it may sound like one note, but there are really a bunch of other things going on there (other strings resonating, wood resonating/reflecting/dampening etc). The concepts in question are about how frequencies relate so they just want to be more precise.

Im not sure I understand your question about sharps and flats. However, maybe something else about the circle of fifths wasnt made clear. Notice that neighboring positions differ in the number of flats or sharps by only 1. This means that the scale for a given position on the circle will differ from the scale of a neighboring position by only one note. Or maybe a better way of saying it is all the notes on those scales are the same except for one. This applies both right and left (though the notes that differ are different for each). So in the same way that a fourth and fifth tone have consonance with the root, the scales for those 3 positions will have almost all the same notes in them (ie are very similar). Another reason why they sound good together..

That was not well explained, so a quick example. I'll use the piano because its easiest to 'see' imho.

the C major scale uses all white notes on the piano: c d e f g a b c
the two positions right and left of C on the circle are F and G.

the F major scale uses all white notes on the piano except for b, instead it uses b flat: f g a bb c d e f
and the G major scale uses all the white notes on the piano except for f, instead it uses f#: g a b c d e f# g

This is in contrast to something across the circle such as maybe the scale of B which would differ from the scale of C by something like 5 notes.

In terms of using them while playing, I guess the point here would be that if you are playing a I, IV, V song thats in the key of C, you can still use almost all the notes from the C major scale while the F and G chords are playing, and they will still 'fit'. Thats probably not news to many people, but it is a side effect of the relationship of the scales represented by the circle of fifths. I dont know whether that answers your question..

Ok, there is one additional bit of magic that I cant resist adding here..

You may have heard of something called the pentatonic scale. It is simply a 5 note scales instead of the standard 7. As it turns out you can use the circle of fifths to remember the pentatonic scale by simply using the 5 notes in a clockwise position from your root. In other words, if you start at C and move right to encompass five notes you get: c g d a e
If you put those 'in order' you get: c d e g a

Now, note that the two things that are missing from that pentatonic scale as compared to C major above are the f and b. And remembering from above, those are exactly the two notes that aren't used in F and G (one from each of those). This means if you play in the pentatonic scale of the root in a I, IV, V song, you will always be using notes from the scale of the chord being played at the time (irrespective of which chord it is).

Oh, and i'll pretend not to notice that those two 'missing' notes (f and b) neighbor that group of 5 on the circle of fifths diagram, which means any consecutive 7 notes on that circle comprise a major scale!

ok, i'll shut up now..

quote:

---

Originally posted by Texasbanjo

Several people have asked if I would post my Begnning Banjo Theory lessons somewhere easy to access (so they wouldn't have to contact me off line).

Here's the entire booklet -- feel free to copy and use it as you wish.



Everyone cringes at the words "Music Theory", but this is mainly banjo related and very important to learning how to play.
VOL. 1, #1
BLUEGRASS MUSIC THEORY 101
What is a scale?
A scale is an ascending and descending, ordered collection of notes that spans an interval of an
octave. (Say that again in English) A scale is a group of notes spanning 7 notes and the
beginning note again an octave higher.
Example: G Scale: G, A, B, C, D, E, F#, G (octave)
All major scales are made up of 7 notes ranging from A to G. The D scale begins on D and goes
as follows: D, E, F#, G, A, B, C#, D.
What is an octave?
An octave encompasses all notes from a given note to its next repetition. (What did she just
say?) An octave is 8 notes starting on C and ending on C.
Example: C Scale: C D E F G A B C (octave)
A scale is made of up whole steps and half steps. In the G Major scale you have the following
steps: whole step, whole step , half step , whole step, whole step , whole step, half step.
(This is supposed to mean something to me?) Hang on, it will.
Example: Let's take the 3rd string on the banjo — open G.
Let's walk down that string and see what happens.
Open G
1st fret G#
2nd fret A
3rd fret A#
4th fret B
5th fret C
6th fret C#
7th fret D
8th fret D#
9th fret E
10th fret F
11th fret F#
12th fret G (octave)
-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
1--2--3--4--5--6--7--8--9--10--11-12--------
-------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------- Each Fret is a HALF STEP on your banjo. To make a G scale on the 3rd string, you fret as
follows: open, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 & 12. Try it on your banjo, it works. (notice that there are 2 frets
between each note EXCEPT B) and C and F# and G — this is why you need to know the whole
and half steps. There are NO sharps and flats between B and C and E and F.
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
0--2--4--5--7--8--11--12------------
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Why do you need to know this?
As you learn songs, you need to know what notes to play in what scale or key. If you are playing
a song in the key of G, you normally start out in G and then as the song progresses, you may go
to a D or a C. You need to know the G, D and C scales so you'll know which notes to play and
better yet, which notes NOT to play. When you start playing chromatic or melodic, this
information is invaluable.
Try this and see how it works for you:
Take the 1st string of your banjo, it's the D string.
Go down the string fretting each fret and see how it sounds.
You've got a D chromatic.
Now, fret open, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 & 12.
You've got a D scale.
0 -2--4--5--7--9--11--12------------
--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
Now, if you think this isn't going to help you play the banjo, think again. It's teaching you where
the notes are on your fretboard. Next time we'll go into how to play a scale using different open
notes and fretted strings -- and how to make hot licks out of those notes.
NOTE: There are several notes in common in the D and G scales — what are they?
Let me know what you think and if you want more of this!
Vol. 1, #2
BLUEGRASS MUSIC THEORY 101
Okay, gang, here's the 2nd installment of music theory. This one will show you a couple of hot
licks you can use in your picking. Enjoy.
Did you figure out what notes the G and D scales had in common?
Did you see which notes were different? Let's see if you figured as I do:
G Scale: G, A, B, C, D, E, F#, G
D Scale: D, E, F#, G, A, B, C#, D
Common notes: G, A, B, D, E
Different notes: C - C#,
So, the basic difference in these two scales is one note - a C or a C#. Play these two notes
together and you'll see that they sound awful.
Now, you're never going to play a scale like that on a banjo, right? So, why did I even bother?
You need to know your fretboard. This is a great way to learn it and will help you later on when
you're playing chromatic/melodic licks.
Let's see if we can make it simpler to play on the banjo. Let's take a G scale and make it
playable. (If you have tab paper, you can tab it out and it'll be a whole lot easier).
G Scale
3rd string, open
4th string, 7th fret
2nd string, open
3rd string, 5th fret
1st string, open
2ndstring, 5th fret
1st string, 4th fret
5th string, open
You have just played G, A, B, C, D, E, F# and G on the banjo. You can actually use this scale in
as a hot lick on some songs.
You will use the scale tones to form licks. Many licks can be formed from this basic scale. Let's
try a simple G lick:
3rd string, open
1st string, open
3rd string, 2nd fret, slide to 4th fret
1st string, open
5th string, open
2nd string, 5th fret
1st string, 4th fret
1st string, open
This is a 4 beat lick with the final G being the 1st note/beat of the next bar.
It is counted 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 1. Each note is an 8th note and counts as ½ beat.
Now, does everyone understand how to count in music? 4/4, 3/4, 2/4, 2/2 6/8 etc.? No, we'll get
to that later.
Another easy G lick that uses the scale
3rd string, open
4th string, 7th fret
2nd string, open
3rd string, 5th fret
1st string, open
2nd string, 5th fret
1st string, 4th fret
3rd string, open
It is counted as follows: 1, 2 and 3 and 4 and 1, next measure. In this lick the first note gets a full
beat, the rest get ½ beat.
Okay, students, here's another music theory lesson on the C and D scales and licks. Some really
neat licks in this one, try them, you'll like them!!
VOL. 1, #3
BLUEGRASS MUSIC THEORY 101
D SCALE AND LICKS
How did you do with the two G licks I wrote out? Ready for more?
Let's take a look at the D scale. You can do it chromatically using the 1st fret and going down:
D 1st open
D# 1st fret
E 2nd fret
F 3rd fret
F# 4th fret and so on.
D scale on 1st string: 1 open, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12
D scale using all 5 strings:
1st string, open
3rd string, 9th fret
2nd string, 7th fret
5th string, open
2nd string, 10th fret
1st string, 9th fret
5th string, 11th fret
1st string, 12th fret
Let's look at a couple of D licks. Again, these use the notes of the D scale.
(And we're just going to say 3 open or 2 fret 3 instead of 3rd string open, 2nd string fret 3
because it saves time and is easier to do). Again, if you have tab paper, you can tab it out.)
3 open, 2 fret 2, hammer 3, 5 open, 2 fret 3, 1 open, 5 open.
This is counted: 1, 2 and 3 and 4 and. The first 3 open gets a full beat and everything else gets
½ beat.
1 fret 7, 5 open, 1 fret 4, 2 fret 5, 1 open, 3 fret 5, 2 open, 4 fret 7.
This is counted 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and with each note getting ½ beat.
What I've done on these licks is give you a Scruggs type lick and a melodic lick.
Now, are you ready to tackle the C Scale?
C SCALE
Again, we'll look at our fretboard. You can start with the 2nd string, first fret and go chromatic C,
C#, D, D#, E, F, F#, G, G#, A, A#, B, C. (Note there are no #s between E and F and B and C —
this is a given)
Now the scale in C is: 2nd string, fret 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13.The easy way to play it on the banjo:
3 fret 5, 1 open, 2 fret 5, 1 fret 3, 5 open, 2 fret 10, 1 fret 9 and 5 fret 10 (yes, you can fret the 5th
string).
Two C licks:
2 fret 1, 1 fret 1, 5 open, 2 fret 1, 1 fret 2, 2 fret 1, 3 fret 2, 1 fret 2.
1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and
3 open, 1 open, 2 fret 5, 1 fret 3, 5 open, 2 fret 10, 1 fret 9.
1, 2 and 3 and 4 and.
Now do you begin to see why you need to know scales?
Okay, group, here's #5 of Vol. 1 and it starts with chords and how they are formed. I've also
included two graphics that show you the F and D positions on the banjo. I've always called them
#1 and #2 because it's easier to remember and not so confusing when you tell someone to make
the F position C chord -- do what? Anyway the #1 position C chord is much easier to remember.
Hope you enjoy. Let me know if you have any questions.
VOL. 1, #5
BLUEGRASSS MUSIC THEORY 101
CHORDS
We've gone through the G, C and D scales, told you what notes were in each and gave you
examples of scales and licks.
Now, let's see how those scales make chords and why.
A Chord is made up of 3 notes. These notes are the 1st, 3rd and 5th notes of the scale (ah,
there's that scale again). These notes harmonize or sound good when played as a group.
In the key of G you have the following chords: G, Am, Bm, C, D, Em F#dim and G (octave). This
is supposed to mean something to me? It will, trust me!
To make a G chord on the banjo, just strum open, that's a G chord. But I'm strumming 4 notes,
not 3! Yes, but you're strumming D, B, G and another D -- that's 3 notes with the D notes being
an octave apart.
You can also make a G closed chord (no open notes) as follows: 2nd string, 3rd fret (index
finger), 3rd string, 4th fret (middle finger), 4th string, 5th fret (ring finger) and 1st string 5th fret
(pinkie). (This is called the 1st or F position on a banjo and you can make many, many chords
using this position.) Again you have D, B, G, G.
A C chord is C, E, G -- which can be made several ways on the banjo. The first C Chord on the
banjo is as follows: 2nd string, 1st fret (index finger), 1st string 2nd fret (ring finger) and 4thstring
2nd fret (middle finger). This makes a complete C chord - C, E, G and C. (Note: the G (3rd string)
is picked open)
A D chord is D, F#, A and can also be made several ways on the banjo. The first D chord on the
banjo is made as follows: 3rd string, 2nd fret (index), 2nd string, 3rd fret (middle), 1st string 4thfret
(pinkie) and 4th string, 4th fret (ring). (This is called the 2nd or D position and also makes many
chords). You have notes A, D, F#, F#.
We'll get into the why of minor chords later if anyone is interested. Right now, just note that they
are made up of 3 notes -- the 1st, 3rd and 5th, just like a major chord, but the inversion is different
(no, you aren't supposed to understand that now, just take it at face value).
So, all the chords in the G scale are as follows:
G: G, B, D
Am: A, C, E
Bm: B, D, F#
C: C, E, G
D: D, F#, A
Em: E, G, B
F#dim: F#, A, C# (You'll probably never need to know this one -- it's seldom used in bluegrass,
it's just for information).
And back to G which starts it all over. NOTE:that the pitch of the fretted first string and forth strings will indicate the Major chord name.
This chord shape is a really useful one when used in backup. In many tunes the forth string is not
actually played so many players don't fret the forth string but it is best practice to learn the chord
on all four strings so that it can be played at all fret positions as a closed chord


Let's Pick!
Texas Banjo

---

Jack - youre advice so far has been really helpful, I dont have any intent to put you to the trouble of writing out an explanation if you dont have the time. I have a really lame day job which affords me all the time in the world to write out my questions in detail, I dont expect everyone else to be in the same position. If my problems could be resolved by reading a book, I would have overcome these obstacles long ago. I have countless theory books, literally thousands of dollars invested in literature alone. I have everything Mel Bay has ever written, the entire Grimoire series (which seems to have been the most helpful reading so far)... Ive even read the "Structural Functions of Harmony" by Schoenberg as well as a few of his other books.
I truly feel that all the research and private study Ive done in the past decade would be comparable to a Masters degree in terms of actual book work. What Ive found in most thoretical literature is that many musicians (with few exceptions) write lessons as a means of exposing their proficiency rather than teaching the topic.
In my hometown, theres a phenominal musician named Mike Campese - he is a tremendously talented guy who has only recently begun to publish some of his works. While I would expect his instruction to be incredibly helpful... everything Ive read from him so far uses terms and explanations that are not helpful at all to the beginning or uneducated musician. It seems as if its his way to show off his wisdom to the experts in the field to prove he's a worthy contender - which in this day and age Im sure is elemental in getting exposure as an accomplished musician - but is of no help to me whatsoever.
As far as other books on the subject - Im just a normal everyday guy, I dont hold a degree or professional certification, there are no other musicians in my family, most of my freinds are all hockey players and have a hard time holding a fork much less a stringed instrument... theres a lot of stuff written in these books that are extremely difficult to understand, especially for someone with no background or point of reference. Im not gonna get on a soapbox, but I think what Ive been able to understand of theory thus far is somewhat a testament to perserverance... but again, I think its just flat out being stubborn!
I have no grand dreams of becoming a famous or well known musician. I simply love music, theres nothing in the world I appreciate more. I just want to be good or even decent at it more than I want my next five minutes of air!

On a separate note - Spaz, I owe you my sincere gratitude. Ive made some serious leaps on account of everything youve said so far. Especially that last one... it seems to me that you have a pretty good grip on where Im at! Im gonna take this weekend and focus on applying all the things I learned this week. Im hoping to have some good news on Monday. Thanks again to both of you!

Im glad it helped.

quote:

---

... most of my freinds are all hockey players and have a hard time holding a fork much less a stringed instrument..

---

Choosing chords for a fiddle tune is almost random I think. The key is a good indicator but not that good. I still say Angeline the Bakegirl is in a mode (key) of A even tho you commonly play D with a G or Bm so folks with chordal instruments say it is in the key (major key) of D.

/* the main thrust of my argument is that if the 7 modes are truly different from each other, then they would necessarily use different chords */

A more prosaic (less argumentative) example is turning an old-time tune into a swing tune, adding 6th chords and maybe some exotic transitions to the same melody someone else plays with only major chords.
=================================
A first shot at chords for a fiddle tune in a major key would be to limit yourself to the 1,4,5 chords. Then break the stream of eighth notes into beat groups and select which chord encompasses the most notes of that particular group. (The 1,4,5 chords completely cover the notes of the major scale).

Another approach is to consider the chord progression as more of a bass line and simply provide structure (such as building to the dominant 7th) for the melody. This would probably be more along the lines of choosing the chord which goes best with the 1st note of the beat group.

But just as the 3 common major chords (1,4,5 or D,G,A) cover the major scale, so do their relative minor chords so they could all be replaced (or augmented) with Bm, Em and F#m chords. This would be a user choice kind of thing, trying to decide if the tune 'should' have a more minor sound behind it or not.

Similarly, if I want a different 'modal' sound (as opposed to the common minor), I would start with chords that are clockwise on the circle of fifths such as adding C and F (and Am and Dm) to a song in D (instead of adding the clockwise chords which seem a lot more common for modern music).

Those are a few approaches. If fiddlers expect a song to sound a certain way, then you'll have to ask them for a recording. There are some who think that is the _only_ way it should go, Record the song with three completely different backups, then listen to only one of them for a week and the others will sound wrong, (even the one the fiddler claimed was right).

What an amazing fundamental theory discussion. I enjoyed reading the different points of views and the expertise in this thread, though I doubt it's Banjo Theory 101.

To me scales and chord are very much an integrated system, they both rely on each other and effect each other.
If you're thinking in a melody, or 'scale' frame of mind, you need the chord theory to choose which notes to play along with the melody and to know which the 'strong' notes are.
If you're thinking in a harmony or 'chord' frame of mind, the scale theory can tell you what notes to pick in between the chord notes, the weaker notes.

Some other thoughts: though I enjoyed the ideas that babies prefer minor, major is more fundamental if you look at the harmonic series. The 5th harmonic is a major third. The first notes that occur in the harmonic series except for the octaves are the fifth and the major third. In a way this supports the point of view that chords are more fundamental than scales.

@Minstrelmike: The Salty Dog type circle of fifth progression make much more sense if you think of changing scales instead of the scale being a collection of all the chord notes. Starting with the VI chord it's all circle of fifth. This suggests mixolydian scales based on each of the dominant chords: G major E mixo A mixo D mixo G major. It starts with one sharp, goes to three sharps, than two sharps and back to one sharp. The chord progression suggests a scale progression to make sense of it. It surely doesn't make much sense if you just throw all the notes on one big pile. As a 'scale progression' it's a very useful way of thinking about it and a good starting point for improvisations.

To get this track back on the 101 track I'll try to explain some of the dominant chord stuff I was talking about.

The fifth (G --> D) is the most fundamental, harmonious and pleasing of all intervals, well except for the octave. This makes it less surprising that the relationship between the I and V chords is fundamental for western music and, yes indeed, for bluegrass banjo. The V chord is called the dominant chord and leads back to the I chord at the end of (almost?) every bluegrass song. There's a feeling of coming home, of tension being relieved when the V changes back to the I. Pay special attention to the third of the V chord leading us back to I (F# to G).

There's one special feature that distinguishes the V chord from the I and the IV, and that is it's flatted 7th. If you play both the 3rd and the flat 7th of the V chord (F# and C), they clash and create tension, that's longing to go 'back to do' even more than the regular V chord. If you go from a V7 to a I chord the clash of the 3rd and the 7th resolves chromatically: the 3rd goes up a halftone to the tonic and the 7th goes down a halftone to the 3rd of the I chord (F#->G and C->B)

|-(0)-(0)-|
|--5---4--|
|--4---5--|
|--------|

Joe said:

"To me scales and chord are very much an integrated system, they both rely on each other and effect each other."

I disagree. They do NOT rely on each other. Each can exist without the other.

Joe also said:

"If you're thinking in a melody, or 'scale' frame of mind, you need the chord theory to choose which notes to play along with the melody and to know which the 'strong' notes are."

No, you DON'T. Any child can concoct a melody without the faintest idea of chord theory.

"If you're thinking in a harmony or 'chord' frame of mind, the scale theory can tell you what notes to pick in between the chord notes, the weaker notes."

Joe implies the most fundamental melodies would contain only chord tones. I don't see why the chord tones should be thought of as any more important than any other note in a scale when creating melodies. The esthetic "value" of a melody is based solely on the way notes are combined and also involves the spacing of the notes, and aspects such as repetition, variation, and resolution, which has nothing at all to do with any inherent importance of chord tones.

"The 5th harmonic is a major third. The first notes that occur in the harmonic series except for the octaves are the fifth and the major third. In a way this supports the point of view that chords are more fundamental than scales".

OK I see this logic. Physically speaking (literally speaking... PHYSICS...ACOUSTICS). But MUSICALLY, ESTHETICALLY speaking, a chord all by itself just sits there. It needs to progress to another chord to be considered music. Even then its only a display of harmonics...it's not MUSIC. Practically speaking, Chords exist to to enhance melodies. They are not"music" in and of themselves. MELODIES are.For this reason, scales are more fundamental IMO.

It surely doesn't make much sense if you just throw all the notes on one big pile. As a 'scale progression' it's a very useful way of thinking about it and a good starting point for improvisations.

I'm not sure what Joe means by the term "scale progression". A "progression" in music is by definition a series of CHORDS. I have never heard the term "Scale progression".

Joe seems to suggest that the chords imply melodies, or it could be inferred from his comments that melodies come from chords...that chords exist first then the melody follows. I disagree. Melodies are selected from SCALES, not chords...Since chords also are generated by scales there is an association, but not a causal association. Melodies and chords exist "side by side", BOTH a product of the scale in my view.
Chords and melodies are like ice and steam: Both are derived from water...but ice is not directly derived from stem, nor steam directly from ice...EITHER must first be returned to water before manifesting. SCALES are like water. They are more fundamental than chords OR melodies IMO.

To get this track back on the 101 track I'll try to explain some of the dominant chord stuff I was talking about.

"101 stuff?" any novices here understand what he said? Raise your hand. This thread got away from "101" early on IMO.

example:

"There's one special feature that distinguishes the V chord from the I and the IV, and that is it's flatted 7th. If you play both the 3rd and the flat 7th of the V chord (F# and C), they clash and create tension, that's longing to go 'back to do' even more than the regular V chord. If you go from a V7 to a I chord the clash of the 3rd and the 7th resolves chromatically: the 3rd goes up a halftone to the tonic and the 7th goes down a halftone to the 3rd of the I chord (F#->G and C->B)"

Joe makes some good points. I don't discount everything he says, but I REALLY think he and some others here make too much of the so called "intimate" relationship between chords and scales. To me SCALES are clearly more "fundamental" to producing music than chords, because melodies are viable music, chords and chord progressions are not. You can't HUM a chord progression!

Jack

Jack,

There's no need to talk to me in the third person.
And I think there's no need to argue about scales vs chords. Yes, one can exist without the other, but in bluegrass they are interrelated. Why not open another thread for arguing about scales vs chords?

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield


I don't see why the chord tones should be thought of as any more important than any other note in a scale when creating melodies. The esthetic "value" of a melody is based solely on the way notes are combined and also involves the spacing of the notes, and aspects such as repetition, variation, and resolution, which has nothing at all to do with any inherent importance of chord tones.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield


I'm not sure what Joe means by the term "scale progression". A "progression" in music is by definition a series of CHORDS. I have never heard the term "Scale progression".

---

Joe:

I'm not just talking to you... if I were this would be done with private emails. I'm talking to the entire group. That's why I use third person.

The problem with explaining things in words alone is that erms are often used that are not first defined. Though your discussion certainly is BASICALLY Theory 101, the lack of charts, diagrams, chord stacks, or any other graphic in a discussion like this makes it Greek to many who have not had much or any theory and do not know what a "dominant" is for example, or even what the Roman numerals mean.

Yes, I agree that chord tones are used more than non-chord tones in melodies, but I don't think it is necessary for ANYBODY to "hear in their mind" or "visualize" a chord in order to create a melody. That's complicating things IMO, adding an unnecessary step to the process. ALL that is needed to create a melody is the palate of notes to draw from...the scale. CHORDS come next in my view...they enhance/harmonize the melody notes that have already been selected.

And NO, you CAN'T hum a chord progression with one other person. Two notes do not make a chord. It would take at least TWO people besides yourself to create even a triad, and three to create a "chord" which by formal definition consists of at least four notes. We all use the term "chord" when what we are actually describing is usually a "triad". If we are going to call this a "theory" discussion, we should use accepted, well defined terms as taught in "formal" music, IMO. Not loosely call something what it isn't or coin phrases and terms which have no basis in accepted music jargon and may just confuse some people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield

Joe:

The problem with explaining things in words alone is that erms are often used that are not first defined. Though your discussion certainly is BASICALLY Theory 101, the lack of charts, diagrams, chord stacks, or any other graphic in a discussion like this makes it Greek to many who have not had much or any theory and do not know what a "dominant" is for example, or even what the Roman numerals mean.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield


Yes, I agree that chord tones are used more than non-chord tones in melodies, but I don't think it is necessary for ANYBODY to "hear in their mind" or "visualize" a chord in order to create a melody. That's complicating things IMO, adding an unnecessary step to the process. ALL that is needed to create a melody is the palate of notes to draw from...the scale. CHORDS come next in my view...they enhance/harmonize the melody notes that have already been selected.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield


And NO, you CAN'T hum a chord progression with one other person. Two notes do not make a chord.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield


It would take at least TWO people besides yourself to create even a triad, and three to create a "chord" which by formal definition consists of at least four notes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackhatfield


If we are going to call this a "theory" discussion, we should use accepted, well defined terms as taught in "formal" music, IMO. Not loosely call something what it isn't or coin phrases and terms which have no basis in accepted music jargon and may just confuse some people.

---

Joe say: At least I've never heard of your 'formal definition' before. Can you give me a citation, or some source that supports it?

I have had NO formal musical training beyond high school band. You are undoubtedly more "schooled" than I am in music theory. I have NEVER called myself an expert (you called me one for some unknown reason). The theory I know that i did not figure out for myself by logic and observation or read in columns in music magazines and books on my own was mostly the result of asking questions of jazz musicians who I taught with at a music store where i taught for 17 years, notably Rusty Holloway, former bassist with Woody Herman and head of the bass program at University of Tennessee for the last 25 years. (Rusty proof read my theory book "How to Play by Ear"). Rusty taught me that a triad consists of a stack of three notes which are an interval of a major third or minor third apart, and "chords" are considered to exist when a fourth note is added, commonly the major or minor seventh degree of the scale is added to the top of the triad (if we are talking first inversion), making it a four note stack of major or minor third intervals. "Add" chords (like G add9) and are also four-note stacks, a note added to the triad for color. The various substitutions for seventh chords, ( the 13, 9th, etc) are also "chords" by this definition because they consist of four notes or more and contain the basic triad, though when chords consist of five notes or more the root or fifth can be omitted, or "understood". Other members of the ensembe will be usually be supplying the omitted note. Since Rusty IS an expert i have gone with this definition as the "formal" definition in my understanding, though as i stated before we all use the term "chord" loosely, and understand that most of the time in bluegrass when we say "chord" we really mean "triad". I think I made this clear, that IMO "informally" what we call a chord is any stack of three or more notes. I dont think ANYBODY other than rock musicians with their so-called "power chords"consisting of a root and a fifth(no third to define it as a major or minor chord) considers two notes to be a "chord" though. No common language dictionary will give a clear and precise definition of the word "chord", one must refer to a musical dictionary such as Groeler's. I coule not find Groliers MUC SCI dictionary online jut a grolier's common dictionary of the english language. I DID find baker's music dictionary, which I have never heard of before...and baker's music dctionary does indeed consider three notes a "chord":

1. Any tonal combination containing three or more different notes. The major triad (three-note chord) is colloquially described as a common chord, but this does not mean that other chords are uncommon. In CLASSICAL music theory, any chord containing more than three different notes was regarded as a DISSONANCE, requiring resolution into a CONSONANCE according to traditional academic rules. Discrimination against unrestricted use of dissonant chords has been abolished in the music of the 20th century. 2. A HARMONY of from three to seven tones, forming an ascending series of DIATONIC THIRDS.

Notice even this music dictionary says "colloquially described" suggesting a more "formal" or "strict' definition exists. I suspect Rusty's definition is more or less a jazz musician's point of view...somewhat more strict than a folk or popular musican's?

To get back to a previous point: The melody of Salty Dog (since that was used as an example earlier in this thread) does not in any way REQUIRE a 1-6-2-5-1 chord progression. The notes that are unique to the 6 and the 2 chord, (the Ab in the E chord and the C# in the A chord, in the key of G) are not even IN the melody of Salty Dog. This melody can be harmonized just as well with 1-4-5 or even a simple 1-5 progression. IMO the Morris brothers simply took a rather mundane melody and chose a more interesting chord progression than the common 1-5 or 1-4-5 to dress it up. They viewed the melody and the chord progression as two separate entities, related only by the fact they come from the same scale . A given melody can be harmonized many different ways, there is no ONE "correct" chord progression. This is why i suggested for those trying to make sense of composition, not to be so hung up on thinking the melody (which is the SCALE ordered into a pleasing arrangement) requires a specific chord progression. More to the point: although the scale dictates what chords are "legal" in that key, it does not dictate any particular ORDER or how many of the "legal" chords have to be used. MOST melodies, no matter how intricate, can be harmonized with 1-5 or 1-4-5.

Jack

Thank you Jack,

maybe you should be more careful in choosing your words and checking your facts before you post them here.
I liked music theory right from the start and picked up more and more as I went along. Right now I've got time enough to look around on the internet for information, to check and expand my knowledge before I post something stupid. I found this reference for example:

The Harvard Dictionary of Music on chords

"Three or more pitches sounded simultaneously or functioning as if sounded simultaneously; two pitches are normally referred to as an interval. The most basic chords in the system of tonic-dominant or triadic tonality are the major and minor triads and their inversions. (...)"

I can understand how a jazz musician might look at this from a different point of view, as they use extended chords all the time and often omit the root and fifth in their voicings. But from a 'formal' point of view triads are considered the basic chords of western tonality. And from a bluegrass point of view it doesn't make much sense to define chords as 'four pitches or more'.
Within the context of playing banjo in a bluegrass band and following the Harvard definition of chords I would even consider playing dyads (two notes simultaneously or double stops), as playing chords, or to be more precise, partial chords. For example, if you play B and F while the bass and guitar add the G and D notes, they make up a G7 chord, because all four pitches sound simultaneously, or "function as if". If the tenor, alto and soprano all sing a different pitch at the end of the song, what you get is a chord. If you add another pitch with you banjo you'll hear an extended chord.

I do not understand where you are heading with the Salty Dog example. Of course you could harmonize the melody differently or even change the melody a bit, like Cat Power did:
youtube.com/watch?v=-ipyCHEOylE
But that's not common practice, I guess. Folks like to play it the VI II V I way. And if you do, you can use the chord/scale knowledge to add harmony and embellishment to the bare melody. For example, you could use the leading note G# to lead to the A note in the third measure, or you could use A B C# to walk up to the D note in the fifth measure. If the banjo doesn't play that walk up, the bass or guitar may do it.

If you look at those scale runs that connect the chords, you'll find our three sharps are the leading notes:

E-->F#-->G#-->A
A-->B -->C#-->D
D-->E -->F#-->G

An earlier example shows how the sharps appear and disappear again. If you play only the 3rd and 7th of the VI7, II7 and V7 chords and the root and 3rd for the I chord you get this 'harmonic motion':

G-->G#--> G --> F#--> G
B-->D --> C# --> C --> B

On the third and fourth string:

----------------
----------------
4--7--6--5--4
5--6--5--4--5
----------------

Notice how G# appears in the E7 chord and goes back to G in the A7, and the same thing happens with C#-->C.

I hope this makes sense to some.

The point of the Salty Dog example is that, I think many believe that a given melody REQUIRES a certain chord progression. I just want to make the point it does not...the composer has freedom to choose many different chords and combinations of chords. Many expect hard and fast rules in composition...but The "rules" are fairly fluid in many areas. Especially in folk styles because the composers do not KNOW the "formal" rules of music, For example, the preponderance of using the major chord for the 2, 3 and 6 chord, when diatonically speaking the "correct" form is the minor triad, dominant seventh, or minor seventh chord. (Salty Dog SHOULD be G-E7-A7-D7-G if more "formal" rules were adhered to). Ironically, the same guy who taught me all these "strict" rules also said: If it sounds good, it IS good". That seems to be the only rule steadfast bluegrass composers follow! I wish I had more time to look for examples but I'm in the midst of preparing for my banjo camp next week and directing/coaching a middle school tennis league in addition to running my business single-handedly and renovating a rental house (with a broken foot, which slows everything down). When I do take time to post it is usually very hurried and its very late, I'm not too sharp mentally. It's amazing to me how difficult it is to find a concise and clear definition of such a common term, and how many unclear, incomplete or ambiguous definitions i do find. MOST of the seven definitions in the Baker's dictionary I found last night used the term being defined as part of the definition! I have no affinity for Baker's BTW, I had never heard of it before last night...it's merely the first one that came up on a Google search on the words "music dictionary" that even offered a definition of the word "chord".

Jack