I've just started to really delve into the genre, though I've been interested for a long long time.
I thought this piece would be an easy one to start with:
I found the Guitar Pro tab and it seems to be very accurate. From what I've read, GJ is about arpeggios which I know pretty well. However, the melody of this piece doesn't seem to support that approach. Sure, maybe 2 notes of a six-note measure are chord tones, but it doesn't seem like studying arpeggios has helped me understand what is happening here. My knowledge of music theory is decent and I'm stumped. I expected there to be a few chromatics thrown in but that I'd still "get" what chord shape/arpeggio I'd be working over. I'm really not having any issues playing this (chords or melody) but I feel like I should be learning more from it than rote memorization of finger movements.
Thoughts? Suggestion?
Comments
(string-fret)
6-7
5-7
4-5
5-6
similar to:
5-2
4-2
3-0
2-2
In this case double approaches.
They can be in or out of the arpeggio or scale.
Double chromatic or anything else.
The distance of the approach is only limited by your finger reach or imagination.
Its another method for sequencing musical information.
It can be tonal as in this case or not.
A large segment of the musical theory world refers to these cells as approach notes.
Just trying to get us on the same page with the greater world of music theory.
That Enclosures video that stuart posted is really helpful because he seems to have a system which can be practiced. One semitone below and one tone above each chord tone. I guess a good place to start is with simple triads, regardless of what the progression calls for. For example, if a C7 is being played, I can apply the enclosure method described in the video for the simple C triad. Is that a solid way to approach it?
Also, with enclosures, is it a good rule of thumb to emphasize the chord tones on the downbeat as I would expect?
The norms for use and placement are complicated by the fact that these can be seen as decorations of chord tones or tensions aka scale tones and that there may be brief areas of modal interchange in which the root stays the same but the scale type changes.
So now you know that this music isn't separate from normative romantic period compositional practice.
At Mannes we studied harmony and counterpoint. A bit of grounding in both is helpful when approaching the study of music.
Meanwhile none of it matters if you can hear the note patterns and replicate them on your instrument.
It all really boils down to listening and singing.
If you find a passage that is confusing it may indicate that you don't actually hear it. Which is to say that you could not remember the passage clearly enough to sing it. You can not divorce music study from ear training.
When in doubt sing the passage with the source material till you can sing the passage without the recording . Then and only then find it on your instrument and deal with the physical aspects of producing the passage on your instrument. scared: