PLEASE REGISTER TO POST. Also, be sure to visit the main website www.tedgreene.com

**************************************************************************************
Buy NOW on Amazon
My Life with The Chord Chemist
A Memoir of Ted Greene, Apotheosis of Solo Guitar
Available at amazon.com

*Check it out!!!

VISIT OUR NEW SUPPORT PORTAL
Your contributions keep the site healthy and growing


More information HERE

Official Ted Greene Archives Blog

Ted Greene Archives on YouTube

Join Ted on FACEBOOK

NEW! Follow on TWITTER

..:: The Ted Greene Forums ::..
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #1 
I'd like some help understanding some of the stuff on Ted's "Embellishment and Substitution" page in the "Harmony & Theory" section.
http://www.tedgreene.com/images/lessons/harmony/Embellishment_and_Substitution_1974-07-09.pdf
Item #9 on page 2 is about
"Elisions (modern vs. traditional) like C7 – G – C13 – G – Eb7 – G – Eb9 – G, etc."
Can anyone provide a more detailed explanation on this?

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #2 
Paul, that embellishment sheet transcription was quite an undertaking. There's enough condensed material there to fill out Chord Chemistry vol 2 through 10 had he written them. 
 
As for elision: in musical terms it usually means the skipping of a typical "step" or "stage". for example in a ii V I progression where there's maybe only time for two chords so the ii goes directly to I, thus skipping the V. But the ear still accepts it because it's such a standard progression. Plus ii goes to I quite naturally anyway. In Ted's examples the easiest one to see is the Eb7 going to G.   bVI7 (Eb7) will usually go to V before going back to I (G), but going directly to I  would be considered an elision. As for the C7 going back to G, the elided chord is maybe less obvious as to what he was thinking. Possibly a i° (#iv°)  or a V7 and maybe possibly a iv. The traditional/.modern aspect is shown through using a "traditional" chord like C7 or a more "modern" C13.Anyway that's my take on it.
 
Bravo for all that transcribing. I've been smashing my head up against these concepts since you posted them. 
 
p.s. the ? for #6 in the "Some Tune Treatments" section is: Stretto
 
and Tom J. could be Jobim. or Tom Jones

__________________
Dmolished = Egads
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #3 
Kontiki,
Thanks for the clarity about elisions.  I never learned about that in my theory lessons....I guess it shows my lack of classical training.  Your explanation makes total sense.
I'll collect a list of any typos that are brought to my attention and then fix the page a little later down the road.
Thanks!

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #4 
Ok let's start at the beginning: for #1 I read after "#11 types" :
  "+ types"  (which to me means Augmented triad types. Then "sus+2 types"  (the + here meaning add; not sharp). my reasoning for that is that after that he mentions putting 9th or 4th in the bass, which would correspond to sus+2 (9sus) types. 


__________________
Dmolished = Egads
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #5 
Ok, I see I missed the "+types" and had a typo on the "sus+2 types".  I've corrected these for the next version that I'll upload later. Thanks!

__________________
--Paul
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #6 
Mike,
Any more typos?

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #7 
well.. just to split hairs, let's continue

for #2 the transcription reads: "All combinations of above are possible or 6th chords again"  In Ted's original it reads  "6th Class again"  

Like I said this is splitting hairs, but "6th chords" could be confusing, as a person might be thinking of that chord quality instead of the 6th section (class). I know i was momentarily thrown.

and I think the "or the 6th class again" would maybe be even clearer if it were written right under the C. In Ted's original, there's an arrow pointing to the C, which makes his meaning clear (one could substitute the 6th class for C).

Now, as an aside...I'm thinking that he could have, and maybe forgot to mention that Class 3 (specifically Em) could be played again instead of the C. So class 6, or class 3, or C could be played at the end of the cycle. What do you guys think? After all it's quite common to have iii follow V7.

__________________
Dmolished = Egads
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #8 
Thanks, Mike.
I added an arrow (like Ted has) to point to the "All combination of above are possible or 6th class again" comment.
You may be correct in your comment about the class 3, but that is better for a separate discussion, rather that being dealt with with the editing or transcription of Ted's original page.

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #9 
let's continue:
#3 has as a transcription: 
"Example: given Cmaj7 - Am7 - Fmaj7 - G7  ->  Cmaj7 - Bm7b5 - Am7 - G7"  

but Ted's original continues beyond the G7. It reads:

"Example: given Cmaj7 - Am7 - Fmaj7 - G7  ->  Cmaj7 - Bm7b5 - Am7 - G7 - Fmaj7 - Em7 - Dm7 - G7"

__________________
Dmolished = Egads
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #10 
OK.  Done.

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #11 
#5 in the original has a "figured bass" 2 under the F7. This means that it should be in 3rd inversion (the 7th in the bass).  This is typically notated in "figured bass" as either 4/2 (4 over the 2 without the slash) or just the 2.  Ted used quite a bit of figured bass notation in this sheet. I think he tried to avoid it in later sheets.
__________________
Dmolished = Egads
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #12 
Got it. 
I purposely left off the 2 because I thought it would create more confusion.  But I've now added it in subscript.
Next?

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #13 
I guess in #6 your wrote the G5/3 on purpose.  Though i think it's confusing since the rest of the sheet has figured bass in traditional notation. Ted wrote G6/4 which is readily understandable to people who read figured bass. the 5/3 here threw me off. And it's not certain that people will necessarily understand 5/3 to mean that the 5th is in the bass.
__________________
Dmolished = Egads
PaulV

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,652
Reply with quote  #14 
Thanks, Mike.
The G5/3 is just a typo.  I'll fix.
Next......

__________________
--Paul
kontiki

Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #15 
#11  though not a typo per se, the D6 – E6 – Am – G6 – A6 – Dm  can be confusing. for example the D6 can be understood as a root position D6 chord when Ted meant for it to be a D triad in first inversion (D 6). I'm not sure how you can type it so that the 6 is smaller and perhaps slightly lower so that it's clear that it's a figured bass (inversion) notation.

and still in #11, there is a Ted Typo (or omission): there's a "B6/5". the problem is that the "6/5" clearly tells us that there's a 7th in the chord. Probably a B dominant 7 since it goes to Em.  same thing for the C# half diminished 2

__________________
Dmolished = Egads
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

YOUR SUPPORT MAKES A DIFFERENCE :: DONATE