# Technique, Theory, Playing Tips and Tricks > Theory, Technique, Tips and Tricks >  Music Theory- Chord Progressions Etc.

## Bob Scrutchfield

I've been doing a lot of reading about music theory concerning chord progressions and such. 

The hows and whys of how some mandolin players and really any musician can improvise by musically straying out there from basic major/minor chords and then coming back so gracefully and pleasing has just recently peaked my interest. I have never taken any music lessons and I mostly play by ear and learn songs by listening to CDs etc. 
I decided to try to find out and ran across this chart and some other info on the website listed below. This fellow really explains theory in a good way even though it isn't specifically for the mandolin. I can't come close to putting into practice what is on this chart but it sort of opened my eyes _just a little bit_ and I thought I'd share it.
 :Smile:  




Copyright 2004 Steve Mugglin
Permission is given to make not-for-profit copies
of this material.

Link to his website;
Music Theory for Songwriters

----------


## Rob Gerety

This is s joke - right?

----------


## pickloser

> This is s joke - right?


What!  You mean it doesn't make perfect sense to you?  I'm going to photocopy it and keep it in my tonegard.   :Chicken: 

Bob, if you could maybe explain it a little, please, it might be more generally useful.  I'm reading thru Music Theory for Modern Mandolin.  I haven't gotten to this part yet.   :Confused:

----------


## Bruce Clausen

As the site name says, it's a help for songwriters looking for logical chord progressions in a major key.  Probably won't be much help to players wanting to improvise over complex chord progressions, as it gives no information about what foreign notes or scales are involved in non-diatonic chords like III7, Vm7, etc.  These need to be related to temporary key areas; classical theory uses expressions like V7/vi, "five-seven of six", i.e. dominant seventh in the key of the relative minor (=III7 on the chart).  But a neat chart for exploring chord progression possibilities.

BC

----------


## Markus

-Bruce posted while I was writing, but I'm going to leave this any ... edit-

If you follow the link below the chart, it runs through the system.




> Music Theory for Songwriters


Look at the *simple chart* on the website, this chart above is the absolute most silly complex one could take it [in my opinion] sort of like the mandolin chord chart 8.5x11 I have that has about 100 chords listed on it. Useful in it's place, but not exactly the user-friendly entrance one would use.

It's an interesting idea, the `simple chart' I fooled around with last night, it's just a method of constructing nice-sounding chord progressions. I only read enough to understand that chart and the rules - this is just a different presentation of the same `how to link chords into nice sounding progressions', for some people this might work better than another method.

It does note that this is just `predictable' sounding progressions, not the only ones you should consider or use - but when you want to make something sound natural to the listener's ear ... here's a some sequences that work and that you just might regularly run into in songs.

----------


## Bruce Clausen

I think that's it exactly, Markus.  Interesting that I said "logical" chord progressions, and you said "predictable". I guess they mean the same thing.  Of course great songs can and will go much farther afield.  For one thing, almost none of the Beatles tunes could have been written by following the arrows on the chart.

----------


## Cabbagehead

Thanks for the post and link Bob!  I love this sorta stuff!  :Mandosmiley:

----------


## Bob Scrutchfield

At the time I was reading this stuff I was half asleep and somehow it seemed logical. Besides, I think the_ chart itself_ is rather cool and artisic looking in a Picasso sort of way.
 :Grin:

----------


## Bob Scrutchfield

Here's a much simpler Chart for the key of C which just shows suggestions on how to "get back" to C (using the arrows) from related chord progressions.

----------


## tree

Two words: chord scale.

It's a concept that can seriously enrich your musical life.  :Coffee:

----------


## Rob Gerety

Hmmm.  Chord scale yes.  But that first chart is a mind blower.

----------


## Ted Eschliman

Makes perfect sense to me. Thanks for posting, Bob. I'm stealing it.

Here's a condensed Jazz version from the JazzMando website:

----------


## Markus

> Two words: chord scale.
> 
> It's a concept that can seriously enrich your musical life.


How about some sort of further reference or explanation?

You do realize that if someone plugs in `chord scale' into a search engine - just about every single thread on this board has one or both words.

So a two word answer is quite honestly useless to anyone who isn't already familiar with what you're trying to pass along.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if you tell me there's a better way to understand it I'd appreciate being pointed the right direction instead of just told there's a better way [but I'm not sharing, and good luck with that search term.]

I'm not completely unfamiliar with the idea, but like many my understanding of music theory is incomplete ... and how this exactly matches with the chart I'm uncertain on. Something like the simple chart is like what I've run into many times before - but that complex chart, well, that's something else.

I assume I'm not alone on this board with having an imperfect or incomplete understanding of music theory ... while I appreciate guidance, a little more info would help greatly.

----------


## Brent Hutto

Markus,

Actually, using this qualified Google search string...




> "chord scale" site:mandolincafe.com/forum


...returns a fairly good proportion of useful discussion around the topic that he was suggesting.

----------


## Perry

Check out the Chord Wheel.

A similar concept but with a rotating wheel to dial in the key. The book also contains some thoughtful suggestions for usage.

----------


## Londy

I have always used the Circle of Fifths to help me out... I also like Perry's post of the Chord Wheel. That little tool is prolly worth the money to add to your gig bag.

----------


## Markus

Brent, thank you. 

The thing is, I often come here on my mobile [advanced search a pain] and guess I find myself unsatisfied with a `search through pages of results, spend an hour, and maybe you will figure out what I'm trying to point you at'.

I did find some useful threads, then again I just wasted half an hour looking and don't feel particularly enlightened. I guess when someone tells me `thats simple' I'd really love to know where I can learn for myself or what they found highly instructive so that the rest of us can catch up. I've got the standard changes down [like in the Simple chart] ... but that one on top goes far far beyond most that I see discussed.

I've been suffering from `online resource syndrome' recently ... I know a lot about music theory, but discussions and partial websites have me seeing nothing but trees when it's the forest I'm really looking for.

Thanks for pointing me in a useful direction, Brent. I do appreciate it. At very least, I found this thread: http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...-Improvisation

----------


## tree

The chord scale concept is something I was introduced to a couple of years ago and it really has broadened my musical horizon, although I'm probably not qualified to explain it.  I'll try anyway.  :Grin: 

If you are in the key of C major (like the "simple" chart), the notes of the C major scale are C, D, E, F, G, A and B.  C is 1, D is 2, etc.

The C major triad is C, E, and G.  If you move each note (1 - 3 - 5) to the next note of the C major scale, you get D, F and A, which is D minor.  D minor is the 2nd triad of the C major chord scale.  

If you flesh that out for the whole C major scale, you get C major, D minor, E minor, F major, G major, A minor, B half diminished.

So, since this works the same way in every key, the 2, 3 and 6 are always minor.  The 7 is half-diminished.  1, 4 and 5 are major.

I've found this tremendously helpful when trying to learn songs by ear, particularly if they have more than just 1, 4 and 5 chords.  And this is just the beginning point of many more really cool connections . . .

----------


## Bertram Henze

Somehow this reminds me of the triangular random walk model for tying a tie - this is no joke, I actually use the Lo Ri Lo Ci Ro Li Co T knot aka St. Andrews knot myself.

Those chord charts, however... I just spilt my tea trying to imagine somebody playing ITM accompaniment with such a chart sheet on the table, soaked in Guinness (the sheet: yes, the table: probably, the player: hopefully)  :Laughing:

----------


## Markus

tree, explain away. 
And now that you explain, I realize I know what you speak of just don't have the terminology right.

Someone told me years ago `a chord progression is just a collection of notes from a scale'. I thought he was a bit loopy, but sometime last summer it clicked. I'm still confused by terminology in terms of music theory, but I've come to realize I know quite a lot just don't have all the dots collected.

----------


## Brent Hutto

Markus,

I also enjoyed having my consciousness altered by this thread brought up by that search I mentioned...

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...l-organization

----------


## Markus

> Somehow this reminds me of the triangular random walk model for tying a tie


It's more like musical hopscotch. 

Pick a key for the I chord, toss a pebble into one of the distant chord spots. Strum the I, then jump to your pebble. Follow the arrows back to the I chord. Vary rhythm, timing, you can always step back to the last chord you were at.

You're not guaranteed to like the results, but it probably won't sound incredibly wrong. 

If you've always had a hankering to use the IIIm7b5 chord, this is quite helpful figuring out how you can work that one in. I know I laid in bed as a young child, doing nothing but dreaming of using IIIm7b5 chords all day - is that unusual?

Of course, as the site itself mentions - having only `predictable or reasonable sounding' progressions is not the way to build a great tune, as it offers little novelty or true `surprise' for the listener.

I'm no giant advocate for this chart, but after reading what it's meant to do ... it printed it out and tossed into my songwriting chord progressions folder. When I feel like I'm doing nothing but stringing the same old progressions together, this chart will aid my creativity [probably more due to fear of having to use it than actually using it, lol].

----------


## Markus

> I also enjoyed having my consciousness altered by this thread brought up by that search I mentioned...


I tell ya, that search turned up some great threads. Not sure it exactly relates to this chart, but I found a few I missed the first time through or need to re-read as I understand more now.

Quite a few theory things are like that I find, the first time I read it I get a little out of it - but months later I re-read it and finally have all the pieces in place to grasp the bigger picture.

And I'm realizing that a year later, another read gives even more revelations.

----------


## Brent Hutto

I have that same experience during mandolin lessons (or guitar lessons in the past). Sometimes the teacher makes a comment that goes into my head like a throwaway that doesn't mean much. Yeah, whatever. Then weeks or months later I "discover" something and, thinking back, realize my great new insight is exactly what my teacher said way back when. A lot of things are obvious when you're ready to learn them and totally meaningless when you're not.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> A lot of things are obvious when you're ready to learn them and totally meaningless when you're not.


Yep, it's easier to understand the answer if receiving it after asking the question than the other way round. When you do a jigsaw, you begin with a thousand answers without knowing what to do with them.

----------


## Rob Gerety

Well, now I'm feeling really dumb.  I thought I new a couple of things. Guess I have my work cut out.

----------


## Brent Hutto

The music theory books I've seen refer to the "chord scale" as the "harmonized major scale" or "harmonized minor scale".

----------


## Bob Scrutchfield

Having posted that mind bending Chart, I must admit that I'm not qualified to explain most of it. 
 :Confused:   :Coffee: 
I know if you go to the link for the website Music Theory for Song Writers he goes through the process of explaining the theory from start to finish.
I do understand the simpler Chart like the one for the key of C that I posted. 
I'm still mulling over the information on that website and maybe I'll get _something_ out of it that I can use later on.

Although that big Chart is ridiculously complicated, I mainly posted it for the Cafe's music theory Gurus, Jazz mando players, and anyone else who could glean something out of it that might be useful to them.
 :Mandosmiley:

----------


## farmerjones

i think that Debussy quote covers it. 
I take it as being "well listened" trumps being "well read."  
I feel almost guilty for knowing what theory i know. 
But i learned it backwards. Descriptive instead of prescriptive.
i.e. "What's going on in the tune City of New Orleans?"
Or, "what's the deal with that turn around?"
I know Ted's Jazzmando.com is the fountain by all that have testified. One of these days im gonna have to put away my Charlie Parker, and Big Bill Broonzy records and read into it. Peace

----------


## tree

> i
> I feel almost guilty for knowing what theory i know. 
> But i learned it backwards. Descriptive instead of prescriptive.
> i.e. "What's going on in the tune City of New Orleans?"
> Or, "what's the deal with that turn around?"


I think I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure "backwards" is the right term (although I don't have a better one).  I get that the "traditional" way is to be exposed to music theory from the beginning, and the "backwards" way is to have a question or item of interest and try to find out more about it.  Actually, "backwards" seems to me to be a very good way to learn something so that it really sticks.  It's definitely the main way I go about it.  But everybody's wheels turn a little different.

I learned about the chord scale when I asked my teacher how to get that "walking down the scale" sound with chords, something I was hearing it in some of Bryan Sutton's and Ricky Skaggs's rhythm playing.  Best example I can think of off the top of my head is the intro to the Osborn's version of Midnight Flyer.  I wanted to know how to do that, and if there was a way to transpose it to other keys.  

It turns out that that particular concept is a fundamental building block to helping you understand SO MUCH about how music fits together and how to improvise over it.  But my teacher is brilliant, he only covers manageable bits of it at a time, and somehow it seemed like the bits he covered were questions I already had, so I kept getting information that I was interested in, that continued to build on the basic chord scale concept.

I definitely don't feel guilty for knowing the little bit of theory that I do . . . it has tremendously enriched my musical life.  Sure, you do have to work at it a little bit, but anything worth having is worth working for (I know now  :Redface:  ).  I just wish it happened 40 years ago when I was starting out!

----------


## JonZ

> I have that same experience during mandolin lessons (or guitar lessons in the past). Sometimes the teacher makes a comment that goes into my head like a throwaway that doesn't mean much. Yeah, whatever. Then weeks or months later I "discover" something and, thinking back, realize my great new insight is exactly what my teacher said way back when. A lot of things are obvious when you're ready to learn them and totally meaningless when you're not.


I find a similar phenomenon with things I tell my children. If I tell them something about how to play violin, or shoot a basketball, it is taken with a grain of salt, only being acknowledged as significant when confirmed by the violin teacher or coach.

----------


## 250sc

I've always heard of what you're refering to as chord/scale as the "harmonized major scale" and have to say I've gotten more milage out of knowing this than any other piece of theory I've picked up in more than 50 years of playing music.

I have no problem with the chart. Use as much or as little of it as you need.

----------


## Jim MacDaniel

I like this Clark - thanks for clarifying....




> The chord scale concept is something I was introduced to a couple of years ago and it really has broadened my musical horizon, although I'm probably not qualified to explain it.  I'll try anyway. 
> 
> If you are in the key of C major (like the "simple" chart), the notes of the C major scale are C, D, E, F, G, A and B.  C is 1, D is 2, etc.
> 
> The C major triad is C, E, and G.  If you move each note (1 - 3 - 5) to the next note of the C major scale, you get D, F and A, which is D minor.  D minor is the 2nd triad of the C major chord scale.  
> 
> If you flesh that out for the whole C major scale, you get C major, D minor, E minor, F major, G major, A minor, B half diminished.
> 
> So, since this works the same way in every key, the 2, 3 and 6 are always minor.  The 7 is half-diminished.  1, 4 and 5 are major.
> ...

----------


## "Umm, fish?"

Well, I for one will stand up and say: I _like_ m7b5 chords.  :Smile:

----------

