Jump to content

Talk:Chord progression: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
=====IS PROGRESSION A TECHNIQUE?======

Mein freind und I enter a discusion he say technique is not progression i say the contrary wich is right???


--->ALSO
--->ALSO
A certain chord can be present in several different scales
A certain chord can be present in several different scales

Revision as of 16:17, 12 January 2006

IS PROGRESSION A TECHNIQUE?=

Mein freind und I enter a discusion he say technique is not progression i say the contrary wich is right???


--->ALSO A certain chord can be present in several different scales

example

      C E G bB  appears in the scales of   
               CDEFGA Bb ( C mixolydian )
               FGA Bb CDE ( F major ) 
               GA Bb CDE F#  ( G minor )    
               C Eb E F F# G Bb ( C blue scale ) 
                                       etc .... 

Therefore A chord is common to several tonalities

What you listed are scales. They consist of tones, not chords! And of course a certain tone can be present in several different scales, after all there are only 12 tones.

---> Especially modern jazz artists use these "characteristics " of chords by using chords progressions to create a constantly ongoing modulation ....

Theorists/ teachers (of this particular mode of playing ) include

            Nathan Davis 
            Hal Singer 

> Performers of these styles even fabricated so called " synthetic " scales

on several ( simple three chord ) progressions ( and a different one on "bridges" in anatole -pieces / ballad and tin -pan -alley material )

Sonny Rollins is an outstanding " player " of these linear approaches to motivistic and rapid scale- changing modes of improvisation


see short discussion at Talk:Harmonic progression



--- In the table, there under major IV, one of the progressions starts with a VI, I think this is a mistake, all the others start with the same as the title of the row but I don't feel as if I know enough to change it!


Under "Rewrite Rules," the link to "well-formed" doesn't go anywhere useful. I'm not sure what exactly it should link to. Maybe something should be added to the disambiguation page? Foxmulder 18:10, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Same goes for "cyclic." Also changed the VI to a IV; I assume that was a typo. Foxmulder 18:40, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


The rewrite rules are quite unclear in the examples.