A special thank you to everyone who has supported me on Patreon over the years: bit.ly/3WPvNqY. 15% off annual membership and I'll continue to grow the membership benefits without changing the pricing. Your generous support is a big help and very much appreciated, even if it's a small donation. Thank you and let's keep learning! ❤
I've picked up tons of YT videos on guitar playing, music theory, etc. Five minutes in, I am impressed by the no-nonsence style (No yadda-yadda 3 minute introduction, no "stay to the end for a surprise" etc). Talking tempo is great (but I'm over 60 and grew up with media where you could actually take in what is said and showed). No over-enthusiastic, half screaming voice - just calm and controlled so that viewer concentration can be on actual content. BRAVO!
I wish more musicians would take advantage of their harmonic freedom, but so many are unaware that they could enhance their music with such beautiful colors, and varied moods. I hope that your video will help them to realize the incredible expressive potential that reharmonizations make possible. Well done !
@@fretjamguitar To my ear, the grand master of reharmonization was piano maestro Bill Evans. I recommend his work to anyone interested in harmony. His impressionistic sounds are simultaneously beautiful, mysterious, and paradoxical, like life itself . . .
@@rigelloar7474 Absolutely love Bill Evans. Never fails to move me. It's other-worldly. His brother Harry also did some beautiful performances (some are still on RU-vid) and you can hear the similarity in the unique way they both approached harmony. Great recommendation!
Are you as lazy as me? I’m too busy with my practicing execution instead of pencil and paper practicing. I stumbled across the 1/2 page “Chapter” in Ted Greene’s book called “ Chord Chemistry” about 30 years ago. It’s titled “Fundamental Harmony “. It’s 1/2 page long in a book with at least 75 pages of small chord diagrams showing countless ways to play most chords you’d never imagine existed or might use until… A year ago a YT video of him improvising by himself played the most “Virtuoso” (Joe Pass album) style playing I’ve noticed. Ted plays 40-60 minutes on a Tele(?) instead of the extremely modded Gibson on the cover of his first book. If you enjoy beautiful guitar you owe it to yourself to watch it. You haven’t seen anything close to his playing.!!!!! I don’t have time to link it here.
3 minutes in, and, as a music teacher, I can definitely tell you've put your heart into it. Lovely work. Gonna follow along and see how you present the harder stuff. So far, it's very concise yet effective. Good luck in the future!
As a self taught music theorist (in theory!) the way you explain how I’ve been visualizing this idea really helps me solidify my natural understanding of if it in my head and I can’t thank you enough my friend
Man I love this video!. Straight to the point, without losing time in explaining some basic concept like other videos, it is just right for a guy that already have some basic music theory knowledge. Bravo!
Thanks so much.. this condenses a lot into a great reference for things I don't know well, and explains them so much more succinctly than any other way I've heard
Cool! Phenomenal technique for not only modulation, but for the development of new parts and movements for Classical Comp ... not to mention its value as an exercise (an Etude) for learning the inter-relatedness of chords and identifying forks in the road, if you will.
Interestingly, I was just toying with "A Time for Us" on Guitar about an hour ago. I'm pretty sure Google activates my phone's mic whenever I start making noise.
We have to stop trying to fit everything neatly in a box, the IIIm chord does not have tonic function because the tonic doesn't sit above the leading tone very well (though can if the voice leading is good, a la Moonlight Sonata first movement where over a Em/B chord we have a C melody note right on top and it's beautiful). IIIm also does not have dominant function. It has a leading tone, but it's the tritone relation of the 7 with the 4 that really supplies that, and the 4 doesn't work well over IIIm. It can be very useful in preceding the V chord. Depending on ones style V can substitute for iim, if you were Barry Harris for example where when they see a ii V progression they treat it as simply a V chord. Anyway the IIIm chord is kind of two things but really it's own thing. Diatonic reharm really works best when looking at the melody note and it's function, and finding the chords that support it, and doesn't rely on knowing what the original changes were. I say that because if you don't know the original changes let's say we had an original of C maj, but were unknowingly looking at a reharm that uses Am. And now we go to reharm in trying to make it F, then someone sees that and says oh, Dm should work. That and transcriptions usually get melody's correct, but can have faults in harmony, which means reharmonization can become problematic, but all can be avoided by working off of melodic notes.
I think you're already several steps ahead of what this lesson intended to be a mere introduction to. I agree, Em is not necessarily a functional substitute for G resolving to C (or V-I) - I think I made a point in the video of dominant to tonic vs dominant in other situations. But with the progression C / G / Am / F, for example... Em can be a nice and simple diversion from G and still support the melody in a functional way. So there is at least a reliable opening there that can be replicated in diatonic situations. Most people watching this video, if they are looking for a back to basics process, won't yet be thinking in terms of working off of melodic notes. That is further down the line and I hope we'll come to that. When working purely off the melodic notes, things really open up (as you know). We're no longer in diatonic territory (I refer to the opening example). But I don't think that is something to try and break down in part 1 (of at least 5) in terms of the subject of reharmonization. On the final point, about reharmonizing the already reharmonized (e.g. C becomes Am, then Am becomes F, then F becomes Dm etc.) while it could work, that is not the convoluted process I suggested. When you're starting out with reharmonization, it's one chord at a time and it's easier to compartmentalize that way. Then we can maybe start to think about the shared notes of another possible substitution. It is a process and it does seem needlessly restrictive at first to those who may be more versed in it. But I want to make it a gradual process that at least offers some opening of options while not prematurely overwhelming anyone with "you could do this, and this, and this etc." Really appreciate your comment and honestly, it does help me to reassess how to approach relatively complex topics such as this one!
You know RU-vid is reading my mind when I was thinking about this earlier, and I was given a reharmonization video. Thanks for sharing this! I didn't know what this was called. Any possibility of non-diatonic reharmonization in the future?
Absolutely. I use polls on Patreon to ultimately determine the next video but I definitely want to venture into non-diatonic substitution beyond parallel chord quality. I'll probably learn a lot myself along the way.
Excellent lesson. Thank you. You explain things well and I understand what you’re doing - but I have a question. At <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="577">9:37</a> you substitute an FM7 for Dm7, although the first note of the melody is a D - the 6th of F and rather discordant. As a result, we hear the C D E F notes all played on top of one another for the entire first and relatively long beat of the phrase. A certain amount of discord is not only virtually inevitable but also a desirable part of harmonization. That said, it seems that a composer or arranger should use discord like a strong spice in the stew of a composition - sprinkled both judiciously and sparingly throughout a piece. I’d appreciate fretjam’s thoughts. Or from anyone with a good foundation in theory…
I myself almost never think or explain it in a way of "substitutions". Instead I always keep track of my scale: how many changes did I make and where do they go (up or down), both when I apply then AND when I cancel them. And so to your question: in general, the less things you move, the less "contrasted" or even "jarring" it may sound. Say you move from A natural minor to A dorian. This "unlocks" the F# note and locks the F note. You can now use some extra chords (like D), and the general feel of the tune moves slightly upwards (cause you moved one note a semitone up). If you keep track this way (instead of just replacing chords blindly from a roaster of options), you can build surprisingly complex moves with a "safety net" built in even as a beginner. And iterate on them as well.
I don’t understand the section talking about how the fourth degree of the scale has trouble with fitting into certain cords of the scale. In the previous explanation/example, you talked about the best substitutions for accord are the ones that are two above and two below the cord that you’re starting on. if you start an in line, and you are playing an F major chord in the C major, in my mind, a minor should be choice that you can make to substitute with sense. It is two notes higher than the F. I guess I’m imagining the F being in the base of the a minor chord making it an F major seven chord, or even if it was at the top, it would be in a minor six cord. Am I making sense? That’s the only thing that really was confusing me. Whycan I not apply the rule of two above and two and below to this situation?
I hope I'm understanding your question correctly. The section you mention was purely about the melodic (singular) 4th tone in the major scale, and how it interacts with the seven diatonic chords of the same key. I think the easiest way to internalise this is to land on and emphasise the melodic note F when changing to the chords C, Em and Am. The general point was that chord substitution should ultimately involve ear training, identifying when a resting melodic tone might not fit comfortably over the substitute chord. The tonic scale's 4th degree tone, and its three "awkward" chords (I, iii, vi) in the same diatonic key is just a fundamental example of this.
@@fretjamguitar Ah I understand, now I notice you ve used capital and small letters to indicate the chords. Thanks so much for the effort and uploading this lesson, I appreciate!
Thanks, i love it. But there is a major issue..<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="814">13:34</a> calling this "avoid" note is what completly ruin my creative process through the years, i have learn that dissonance is bad while i have been searching though the years dissonance, for example the <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="840">14:00</a> example is absolutly beatiful, is a perfect example of a melancolic melody that can be used to express not reachign to a goal, a not love one, when do you not want to express much yet, or if you take out the Third, you can play on not resolving, perfect for example on annoying, or protest lyric, or even disconfort. Exampleas are: Nine inch nails , the frail and so on. Or something like Doom theme, etc.This kind of reharmonizationprocess is not good when you want to do music like Queen of Stonedge, Spinetta, NIN, Moviecore, doom metal, etc. even though i learn a lot to identify what dont work, thanks a lot!
Thank you for the thoughtful comment. Sorry if the "avoid/passing note" thing came across as too dogmatic. I don't intend to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't play. It was more about a broader "in most diatonic situations" flag, i.e. if the melody happens to fall on that tone when (re)harmonizing, in most situations (and to most ears), as a prolonged or emphasized tone landing on a chord change, it tends to create a more awkward dissonance. I agree though that there are certain situations where it could create something more appropriate for the sound you're going for (e.g. if the chord is drawn out or we're playing through a more atmospheric harmony and we want to disturb it a little). As I said in the video, your ears should always be the final judge of what works and what doesn't. I would like to explore dissonance as a topic in a future lesson (thanks for the reminder!) because I am open minded about it and I think we all ultimately should be. With genres such as those you mentioned, the use of dissonance is certainly freer. So we're thinking about context and, in this lesson at least, as it was approached in terms of diatonic comfort, I mostly wanted to flag up this idea of really listening to how resting melodic tones can determine the substitutions we make, while balancing it with something we can improvise with in most situations. I think finding that balance between accessibility and opening up new options is a challenge when teaching this stuff. But we will surely unravel more!
