Been told about a certain book recommendation

[niffnoff]

This may of been brought up somewhere or another, but can anyone tell me a second opinion on Ted Greene's Chord Chemistry. I want to expand my horizons when it comes to chords and chord voicings instead of using traditional formats of chords. My friend recommended this to me and was just wondering what you guys think of it.

[StratoJazz]

It's a great book man along with alot of the resources that are on Ted's website. Ted Greene is a fantastic solo guitarist as well.

However, it is like the Advancing Guitarist, Thesaurus of scales, etc, in that it is a book that you can get lost in. Meaning, if you don't have a very clear goal of what you want to achieve you might not get alot out of it.

There are lots and lots of voicings, chords and other things in this book. More than you would ever need. Just remember this, it's better to have 2 or 3 stock voicings that you own than 500 abstract voicings you don't use.

[niffnoff]

yeah I understand, I've literally began using different voicings and have understanding of how they are constructed. I just want to get a feel now of doing something different understanding where I can find different chords on the scale without resorting to the typical chord voicings. The more different voicings I can find and enjoy, the better. I understand though that not all voicings may be suitable and that a standard voicing should be used.

[Trespass]

What's the end goal man?

Are you planning on using these voicings over standards?


Great book, but it's literally just a massive dump of voicings, some-a lot of which will not sound good without context (what comes before and after it//Voice leading).

Ted's other book is lesser known, smaller, and a bit more digestible. Give that a thought as well.
Both complement each other.

[niffnoff]

The end goal is to extend my chord vocabulary, especially since my first few years of being a guitarist used to be just nonsense of metal shredding, single note riffing, I understand the theory and some voicings will not sound good at all without some sort of leading to it prior.

I.e Cmaj7 followed by Ddim7 as an example of bad at least off the top of my head.

I just want to get a grasp of using different chords and know the fretboard alot better. It may even help my leads with arrpeggios as well.

[Trespass]

Cmaj7 followed by Ddmin7 totally makes sense!
Especially if going back into Cmaj7 (Ddmin7 is the 5th, 7th, b9 and 3rd of G7b9. It's like a rootless V-I, where the root motion is implied)

See the opening four bars to "It Could Happen To You". It's all stepwise movement by joining diminished chords, which implys the dominant into that chord.


It sounds like a basic theory book (on voice leading) and The Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levine is what you want, then go into the Ted Greene stuff armed with "why" he chooses the voicings and movement he chooses.

Because from what I remember, he basically doesn't offer any explanations in the book itself. It's just a massive dump of chord diagrams over chord progressions.

[niffnoff]

Originally Posted by Trespass

Cmaj7 followed by Ddmin7 totally makes sense!
Especially if going back into Cmaj7 (Ddmin7 is the 5th, 7th, b9 and 3rd of G7b9. It's like a rootless V-I, where the root motion is implied)

See the opening four bars to "It Could Happen To You". It's all stepwise movement by joining diminished chords, which implys the dominant into that chord.


It sounds like a basic theory book (on voice leading) and The Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levine is what you want, then go into the Ted Greene stuff armed with "why" he chooses the voicings and movement he chooses.

Because from what I remember, he basically doesn't offer any explanations in the book itself. It's just a massive dump of chord diagrams over chord progressions.

God dammit my random nonsensical attempt at a random progression makes sense. I RETIRE MAN! :| lol. I will look into it though man!

[SchecterWhore]

You know, the reason why we have music theory at all is because musicians were making music that sounded good to them, and then they started asking themselves what they were doing. That you would throw a couple of chords together and then find out that they form a pretty common relationship isn't all that surprising. After all, somebody before you did the exact same thing and decided to put a name to it. Leave behind the expectation of originality, and you'll be better off. Music is about expression, not who's the first to wank it in a new way.

That said, I'd forgo Chord Chemistry. I don't like the format of the book. Anything that's just pages and pages of tiny fretboards peppered with fingerings (although it's not nearly as bad as some other well-known publications), or ordered lists of intervallic formulæ is terrible learning material. Look for something that has some explanation, or even some history. Learn how to construct a chord on paper, know where the notes are on the fretboard, have a good grasp on the shape of individual intervals, and you have every chord shape and voicing you could ever think of without having to commit hundreds of tiny Ted Greene diagrams to memory.

[DropDizzle]

^ Bingo. Most of the book is "committing chord shapes to memory"

Meh. Big deal. I find it more useful to know what notes are in any given chord combined with knowing the notes of the fretboard, topped off with nomenclature makes a very tasty jazz dish. Wish i could suggest a better book, but i found very little help in Chord Chemistry.

[niffnoff]

@ SW I agree, on what you mean, I know vaguely where each note is on the fretboard not fluent,y but enough to know the intervals of each note. I guess what I wanna know more than anything is to just use these complex voicings and apply them to my own writing. Most of the progressions I use are very simple trying to get out of the typical bar chords and drop tuning shapes. I wanna use my 7 to it's optimal range.

On the fact of originality, I wasn't trying to get that kinda vibe more like adding vocabulary in a chord perspective, sometimes I'll make a shape and it'll sound pretty with the next. Then I'll write it on manuscript and analyse it just to see what I've done. Don't know if it's a bad thing but I just like seeing what I've done and what I've used in my writing.

[Ryan-ZenGtr-]

My take on what Schecter meant with "..Give up on originality.." is:

Some dudes in ancient Greece played your licks way before Christ was born... And gave them names!



Giving credit where it is due, SW expressed it more lucidly...

SchecterWhore said ...

"...Leave behind the expectation of originality..."

I had a heartbreaking experience with a guitarist friend one time.

He was showing me all his cool songs, with complex riffs and what not. I learned them after he'd played them once or twice and he was surprised.
"How did you know how my songs went?"
"Well, you're songs are good. They obey the rules of music theory and are completely predictable."

He wasn't best please, but for me, it was the highest compliment you can pay to a musician. He was quite upset that his complex material could be learned so quickly, but if you have a grasp on theory all music becomes a lot easier to dissect, analyse, absorb and, unfortunately, predict.

His songs sounded good because they conformed to scales, despite his natural approach to music and his interesting guitar style. Listeners enjoy music the most when they are guided carefully to expect each event in a song and be rewarded in their correct prediction. Work of that nature is the sign of a mature artist, in my experience.


The trouble is that when musicians know "nothing" about theory, they think it's all a mystery, A Pythagorian * oddessey into the unknown. As soon as they learn theory and are forced to accept the mundane truth that it is all well understood and categorised, only then can they start using their new tools.
The amount of time reaching that acceptance takes an individual is the trouble, if they accept it at all, as the disappointment can be tough.

Theories really simple, if it's not, they're teaching it wrong or you think it's more complicated than it really is. *<<< probably that one there at the end. *


Those fretboard diagram books are meant to go with your chord charts and you pencil in the voicings on your chart of "Stella by starlight" or "Green dolphin street" as you go along. Actually I might get into more jazz as a friend is a die hard Django Rienhardt devotee so he might inspire me. who knows?



^Ketamine music IMO. *Too out of it to be able to lol anymore... ask me later...* The only genre definitions that truly stand the test of time are which drugs you're supposed to take to enjoy the music in it's intended format.

*Pythagorian epistemology has some good google links. After a quick look I found this;

http://science.jrank.org/pages/9173/...tes-Plato.html

Enjoy! I always learn something from 7string.org!

[SchecterWhore]

Ryan, good anecdotes.

Originally Posted by niffnoff

@ SW I agree, on what you mean, I know vaguely where each note is on the fretboard not fluent,y but enough to know the intervals of each note. I guess what I wanna know more than anything is to just use these complex voicings and apply them to my own writing. Most of the progressions I use are very simple trying to get out of the typical bar chords and drop tuning shapes. I wanna use my 7 to it's optimal range.

Try voicing the chords you know in different ways. These are all F∆:

1 7 3 5:
e-
b-1
G-2
D-2
A-
E-1

1 3 5 7:
e-0
b-1
G-2
D-3
A-
E-

1 5 7 3:
e-
b-10
G-9
D-10
A-8
E-

1 3 7 5
e-8
b-
G-9
D-7
A-8
E-

1 5 7 3:
e-5
b-5
G-5
D-3
A-
E-

Do you see how each interval relates to the root of the chord? Do that with everything, and you'll be making your own voicings on the fly.

On the fact of originality, I wasn't trying to get that kinda vibe more like adding vocabulary in a chord perspective, sometimes I'll make a shape and it'll sound pretty with the next. Then I'll write it on manuscript and analyse it just to see what I've done. Don't know if it's a bad thing but I just like seeing what I've done and what I've used in my writing.

Your method is sound. Keep doing that. I would suggest that you look into voice leading. When going from one chord to the next, try to move each note as little as possible. That will get your chord movement to sound smooth.

[Trespass]

It's a dictionary of voicings and voice leading in the style of Ted Greene. Great reference to expand your grip vocabulary. If you know the theory, buy it. I personally don't have it (because I actually don't like most of his voicings) but it's a great reference.