Here's a little course I go through with my students. As the name suggests, it tells you how chord progressions work. You'll get info on all the following topics...
Key structure
The importance of tonality
Modes
Pitch Axis
Steering a chord progression in the direction you want it to go
Static chords
Secondary dominant chords
II V I sequences
Tonality shifts
The Blues
Harmonic Minor keys
And a lot more too...
It's in PDF format with mp3 examples of all the chord sequences mentioned. You'll need winrar to download it & if you don't already have it, you can get it from here:
http://download.cnet.com/WinRAR-32-bit/3000-2250_4-10007677.html (http://download.cnet.com/WinRAR-32-bit/3000-2250_4-10007677.html)
And here's the link to the free course:
http://geetarjohnny.fileburst.com/chord-progressions.rar (http://geetarjohnny.fileburst.com/chord-progressions.rar)
Enjoy :)
Nice one Johnny, but to be perfectly honest, this kinda stuff scares the originality out of me...I'd rather not know. I would find myself contributing to the generic. And the world really doesn't need that.
henwrench
i haven't a clue what i'm doing and probably need guidance, but am far too lazy to take any, my fave chord progression is adhd.
Quote from: henwrench on May 10, 2014, 05:44:01 PMNice one Johnny, but to be perfectly honest, this kinda stuff scares the originality out of me...I'd rather not know. I would find myself contributing to the generic. And the world really doesn't need that.
henwrench
I see what you're saying, but contrary to what you may think, knowing what you're doing and
then some is an
excellent way to, believe it or not, increase originality and takes things to entirely different levels. It can help you properly express what you're feeling in the best way possible; even better than how you've expressed yourself prior. The goal is not to think of it as work contributing to science, but as work contributing to you. I see what you're saying about the generic, though. All too often do these so-called famous "professional" musicians produce the same boring chord progressions over and over again to really just produce a source of income, rather than a unique and original means of expression, but there's a flip side: you can use this knowledge to steer
away from such dull tendencies and produce something that only you can produce, once you have found a way to fuse your theory knowledge with your deep, inner self ;) Only my take on it.
I hear what pharaoh is saying, and it's valid, but I am with henwrench on this one.
but being self taught with a good ear, suits me fine. while I realize knowing theory and being able to read music is helpful, I like being raw and uncontained or guide lined. different strokes for different folks, I suppose!
Quote from: phantasm777 on May 10, 2014, 10:50:46 PMI hear what pharaoh is saying, and it's valid, but I am with henwrench on this one.
but being self taught with a good ear, suits me fine. while I realize knowing theory and being able to read music is helpful, I like being raw and uncontained or guide lined. different strokes for different folks, I suppose!
Fair enough... if that's what works for you, mate. From my perspective, I just don't follow the logic which states "more knowledge & understanding = less creativity". That (to me anyway) seems counter-intuitive. The myth which is often spouted is that "theory = rules" and "rules = restrictions" ... therefore don't learn the theory and you'll have no restrictions.
This is not a true reflection of the situation, though. There are no "rules" in composition: there are, however, ways of combining notes, chords and rhythms into something which expresses the emotion or feeling you have inside and want to convey via the music you're writing. Having a knowledge of which chords to put into which order, and what notes to play over the top of it all (or underneath it as a bass-line or riff) in order to express the feeling you want is liberating. You don't have to rely on chance or luck to come up with something that says what you want to say – you can go straight to it.
I often find, when talking to people who claim no musical "book learning" that they usually have a pretty good working knowledge of what they're doing, and the theory behind it, but simply lack the jargon & terminology which describes it all. The point being that many people know (and regularly use) more theory than they realise.
Also, we all have our favourite riffs, chord progressions and familiar ruts we fall into from time to time. Having some kind of mental map of where these well-trodden paths are enables you to avoid them and go somewhere new & unfamiliar... and original.
As I mentioned, there are no "rules"... if something sounds odd & dissonant it doesn't mean it's "wrong" it just means it sounds odd & dissonant, which may just be the feel you want for that particular moment in your music. Knowing how to get it straight away, without having to try endless combinations of notes in search of the ones you need, is just one of the benefits of knowing the theory of music & composition.
There are countless examples of generic, boring music written by people who both know, and don't know the theory behind what they're writing. Does anyone think it was The Spice Girls immense knowledge of music theory which made their songs so bland, generic & soul-less, for example? Or put it another way... does having a decent knowledge of grammar, punctuation & spelling mean you can't write a gripping & original novel? See what I mean? :)
thanks johnny, I was lacking something to read just now, and I'm always looking for some good material, like yours really seems to be at the first glance ! I cant resist giving my 2 cents to the discussion, I think (like you) that technique is serving creativity and cannot be against it (I've heard talking about it in terms of 'paradox of structure')... ciao, grazie!
I hear what you are saying and for the most part agree. however using spicegirls as an example is not very good, I doubt they even write, compose and arrange their own music.
I remember once a bandmate of mine, went to college for all the book learning and theory etc. and damn good at it. he said when he would get these other college guys together, doing sheet music they were great, but in improvisations they went nowhere. he said his musically uneducated friends could improvise far better. I am not saying they all cannot improvise, I just found it odd! perhaps just a weird co-incidence in this instance.
I for one would never say it gives less creativity, whether it is a musically educated musician or a bare bones ear - feel musician, the creativity is solely upon that one individual and not either group of musicians.
I rely on feeling and being in the moment, aside of having a million musical ideas in my head since I was very young. yes there are similar guidelines, if it sounds out of tune, not on time, sloppy etc. these are among the things all musicians have to watch out for.
in summing it up, whatever works for you, or me, or whomever, is fair enough. I personally do not have anything against musically educated people, never saw a point in that. if anything, some look down upon me for not being musically educated!
A couple generalities:
The more you know the better able you are to realize that sound in your head.
Learning the name of whatever it is you are already doing allows you to communicate better with other musicians.
All perspectives are valid. Just don't hold to a perspective out of fear or misconception. That being said, I learned a bit of theory some 20+ years ago and have let it go to waste without following up. I'm severely limited because of laziness. Ah well, heeding my own advice sounds like too much work.
I really don't think it matters if you're full of knowledge or just wing it. Originality is a state of mind, not a result of training or lack thereof.
I myself seek knowledge and admire those who really know their trade, but music is magic!! .. and if a song touches me it doesn't necessarily mean that the performer have a PhD in music theory. Most likekly (s)he has not.
I do prefer Zappa to Beefheart tho' ::)
But I also prefer Slade to Donald Fagen.
Here's a favourite without any formal training, not that it seems that way :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOYX264kYxc
I don't think it matters a jot how you make music, the fact that you are making it as an expression of yourself is the thing that matters.
I can read music and I can improvise - I fact I used to sing (briefly) with a big band and at my audition I improvised a few bars of a song. They were really shocked (in a good way) as they were all music readers and not many of them could (improvise).
Having said that, I am personally fascinated by the theory of music and would like to thank Johnny for sharing his knowledge. You seem very knowledgeable and kind for sharing (freely) and patient.
I appreciate it :D
Matters to who? The most important thing is to be creative, to make music. The rest are tools you choose to use or not. So let's make some music.
There shouldn't be any rules - to any art form. It's all about imagination and expression, and any kind of execution is valid. If the results are pleasing - to you and others - it doesn't matter how you got there. e.g. Steely Dan and the Ramones are equally valid - for totally different reasons.
I'm torn about whether greater technical knowledge helps. On one hand, I know that every new chord I learned (and continue to learn) on guitar opens up several new songs. And on the other, I have to step back now to keep my chord progressions simple and not over-complicate things. All my best songs are very, very simple when you strip them down. The problem seems to be that the more you know, the more you're tempted to throw all that skill and technique into everything you do, losing some of the raw, unpolished magic in the process.
I'm saying that as a rhythm guitar player though. If I was a lead guitarist, I'd definitely want to learn more scales and technique to allow me to have a whole load of chops in my locker.
Nobody's right and nobody's wrong here. It shouldn't even be an argument!
my earlier comment might appear a bit flippant so apologies for that.
i can't play any instrument properly, i can probably name about 3 or 4 chords, 5 at a pinch. this is down to one thing, my inherent laziness. that said when ever i learn something new it adds another colour to my palette.
it probably shows in my work, but i try not to think about what i am doing, i just do it. if that makes sense.
my times in norway with the MET guys was an eyeopener. they spoke a foreign language to me (not just norwegian) there where exchanges like what chord is that and they would mention letters and numbers beyond my ken. i felt inadequate and out of my depth and filled with trepidation and awe at their musical abilities and knowledge.
however, whenever we get together something magic happens.
i grew up on prog rock, admiring fabulous musicians from afar, then punk rock hit me like a sledgehammer and one of it's basic tenet's was, anybody can do this.
i wish i had the time and patience to learn properly,but when i do have time i plug in whatever i have at hand, hit record and see what happens.
i think it also stems back to having piano lessons as a kid. i lasted three lessons. i was rattling tunes out on the piano and my tutor made me play scales and stuff. i just wanted to do tunes.
even if someone hands me an instrument i've never played before, the 1st thing i'll do with it, is try get a tune out of it before even trying to find out how to play proper chords on it. i just want instant gratification. but like they say the day you stop learning is the day they put you in a box.
Quote from: oldrottenhead on May 16, 2014, 06:20:14 AMmy earlier comment might appear a bit flippant so apologies for that.
i can't play any instrument properly, i can probably name about 3 or 4 chords, 5 at a pinch. this is down to one thing, my inherent laziness. that said when ever i learn something new it adds another colour to my palette.
it probably shows in my work, but i try not to think about what i am doing, i just do it. if that makes sense.
my times in norway with the MET guys was an eyeopener. they spoke a foreign language to me (not just norwegian) there where exchanges like what chord is that and they would mention letters and numbers beyond my ken. i felt inadequate and out of my depth and filled with trepidation and awe at their musical abilities and knowledge.
however, whenever we get together something magic happens.
i grew up on prog rock, admiring fabulous musicians from afar, then punk rock hit me like a sledgehammer and one of it's basic tenet's was, anybody can do this.
i wish i had the time and patience to learn properly,but when i do have time i plug in whatever i have at hand, hit record and see what happens.
i think it also stems back to having piano lessons as a kid. i lasted three lessons. i was rattling tunes out on the piano and my tutor made me play scales and stuff. i just wanted to do tunes.
even if someone hands me an instrument i've never played before, the 1st thing i'll do with it, is try get a tune out of it before even trying to find out how to play proper chords on it. i just want instant gratification. but like they say the day you stop learning is the day they put you in a box.
Right on oldrottenhead.
I am a bit surprised ... the musician you quote as unlearned are such craftmans! They exactly seem to know what a progression is and what a secondary dominant is, even if you'll never catch em talking about LOL!
did anyone ever get the answer to this question?
Just read back all the posts
Some great posts I have to say.
Me -I am still a busker -cant read music -find it a big deal to follow tabs even-
but I'm still open to learn something new -
Like someone at the music club will be doing a song -and suddenly throw in a chord
your ears prick up -what was that??????
Show me that chord 8) 8) 8) 8)
-----------
I always found gig wise a good bass player can teach you a lot -
listening to their runs in a song you find yourself following his run progressions
plus it keeps you on your toes,
However there is nothing wrong with the 3 chord trick as they call it-
C-F-G or even G7 can be the basis of a great song-
Always has been and always will be.
Just keep on making music!!!!
I'm bunping this since I was searching for info on a specific chord progression but couldn't find it. Tons of great info here but sorry to say, most is way over my head.... IE: what does the "^" symbol represent in a Roman Numeral representation? Maybe up an octave?
Anyway I'm like others here that if it sounds good, use it. However, since I find I keep "discovering" the same progressions just in different keys, thought I'd find out what the heck I'm doing for a change.
One version that keeps coming up but in different keys is: Bm, D, A, E. Which could be written: i, III, VII, IV ?
Question is, what's the root chord? Or Key using these chords?
Maybe it shouldn't start with the Bm but the D instead? Then it would be: vi, I, V, II ?
Or start on A for: ii, IV, I, V ?
Or E for: v, VII, IV, I
This stuff's all Greek to me (pun intended) but feel I need to understand at least the basics. ???
Thanks all!
Ken
It's early in the morning so I can't play it to check but I think it's in the key of A
So A would be I, D would be IV and E would be V (the classic I, IV, V combo with a minor 2nd Bm ii)
Your version would as you say be A for: ii, IV, I, V
If the key is in a minor 1st (ie Bm) I believe the 4th and the 5th would typically also be minor, ie - so the E would be Em
Unlikely to be in E with a minor 5th (Bm)
I'd have to play it on the piano to be sure - although the most interesting songs are the ones that don't play by the rules :D
Thanks for that Hilary. When it's played on piano, depending on the inversions, I noticed that the Bm changes to D with only one note change of B>A. Almost an intro to: I, V, II (D, A, E). That's if the D is root? Here's a quick sample:
The Bm is an inversion of the D with a 6 - Dmaj6?
I wish I could play like you do.
I got a book How to write songs on Guitar by Ricky Rooksby which is very good and analyses the structure of some popular songs when I first decided to have a go at writing songs - nowadays I do it all be ear.
I know nothing about guitars but 8va is usually up an octave and the sign you mention is usually marcato (I'm on my phone) which means to play it more forcefully than the rest!
A D F# - 2nd inversion of D
The sign is reverse polarity so where it would typically be a minor chord it's a major and vice versa.
I'm fairly sure that if it was in D the E would be an Em but I'm rusty to say the least!
Bm D A E - Bm tonic
i III VII IV^
Bm D A E - D tonic
vi I V II^
Bm D A E - A tonic
ii IV I V
Bm D A E - E tonic
v^ VII^ IV I
A is the only one that makes sense typically
It does seem odd to start on a ii though if in A so maybe it's in Bm with a reverse polarity on the 4th ::)
Quote from: hardlock on December 26, 2020, 12:40:29 AMOne version that keeps coming up but in different keys is: Bm, D, A, E. Which could be written: i, III, VII, IV ?
Question is, what's the root chord? Or Key using these chords?
Or start on A for: ii, IV, I, V ?
The first thing I look at are the major chords to see if it fits the I IV V pattern of any major key. Your chord progression fits nicely into the key of A (I=A, IV=D, V-E)
If a progression is in minor then then a typical progression would have the minor chord sound more final or full even if it's not the final chord of the progression.
The relative minor of A is F#minor which doesn't appear. And after playing through on the guitar I'd agree with Hillary. Your key seems to be A.
All that being said, my little cheat method (identifying the major chords) works in a lot of rock music, but it isn't foolproof. People use Major III chords and other borrowed chords all the time. I think it makes more interesting music, but it also tests my limited theory skills.
Thanks much for the theory lessons Hilory & TC! Guess I now need to do some serious homework. :-[
My takeaway is I need to understand "tonic" (thought it was something you add to a drink), "relative minor" (a young cousin?), and "reverse polarity" (putting my batteries in backward)...... ::)
> I see what you're saying, but contrary to what you may think, knowing what you're doing and then some is an excellent way to, believe it or not, increase originality and takes things to entirely different levels.
I am with both fellers above, if you take my meaning, I'm quotin' a joke from one of my favorite Coen Brothers films, O Brother Where Art Thou.
Let me talk about both sides and how it feels inside my skull.
First, I'm a piano student at the young age of 50, I am about grade 1 level, but I am intent on mastering theory and composition from a classical point of view. Eventually.
Meanwhile, I am also a noodler and a free form song idea maker, and I do what I do with the level of theory knowledge I have, and I have a great time.
Both those things are great. But let's then, balance them.
What I find that I do when I don't know enough theory, is repeat myself, I get into loops. Theory can be a way to BREAK OUT of loops.
Let's say I wrote a tonne of songs that use the I, IV, and V chord. What you don't know what that is? Yes you do, if you've ever noticed all the songs that can be played with just G and C and D. That's the I and IV and V chord of G major. G is I, C is IV, and D is V. You might even (without knowing theory) know that if you do G, C, D7 G, it sounds more pleasant when returning to G. That's also theory. Not knowing theory is fine, but you're soaking in it anyways.
So then, suppose you asked yourself, could this song, which is very long become more interesting if I modulate into a different key for the bridge and fourth verse? What if I could substitute different chords in my song and keep the same melody? That's all theory.
Then suppose you ask yourself, is this boring, is this interesting, is this clever, is this a rip-off? The more theory you know, the more you'll be able to answer those questions, not with someone else's sets of judgements, but with your own judgement. You'll be able to say, I think that there aren't enough interesting rhythmic ideas in here, and I know ways to spice these ones up because, hey, I know theory. Playing salsa is awesome, but also, knowing how Salsa music is constructed and the musicalideas upon which it is based, and being about to talk about those ideas is part of perhaps learning something about salsa and applying it to something that isn't salsa.
Should we stop making stuff until we learn more theory? Nope. I'm a programmer in my day job. I always have MORE fun programming the MORE I know about it. But I also don't stop doing the part I love (making things) until I know things. The knowing things is a gradual drip drip drip.
Should we learn more theory if it could make the stuff we make more fun for us to make, and make us happier with our own output, and possibly, even help other people to enjoy our music more?
I think sure.
What I don't get is the fear of knowing more, spending say 30 minutes, every year, or 30 minutes every week, learning more. Music theory isn't rules. It's explanations of things. Knowing how electricity works doesn't make you less creative or happy when working with electrical systems, so why would knowing about music theory make you a worse or less happy songwriter?
Only knowing four chords, or only knowing four ways to string together chords (less knowledge) is always going to mean more generic. To take the argument that knowing more makes us less creative to its farthest end, let's say we should only know how to play one note on one string on our guitar. Now for sure we will be original?
Maybe learning is hard and we don't want to do it. But I don't get the idea that it could make you less good at something or less of what YOU want to be. You have the choices all open to you. You could know how to make Prog Rock or Chamber Music and not make it.
Lol I wanted to say something but warren said it so well I just dont !
I only can add, being a long time fan of music theory, that really that stuff can be learned easily basing on what you need and what you like, and finding out someone that don't overcomplicate it. when I stopped calling it 'music theory' myself I made a biiig step forward, for example. Now I call it just magic tricks ;-)
Hey max, I agree, it reminds me of the first time I heard about "circle of 5ths". Seemed just like magic!
I've been looking at doing some more interesting stuff on the piano (don't hold your breath) and ii IV I is a common jazz chord progression apparently.
Quote from: Oldrottenhead on May 10, 2014, 05:51:03 PMi haven't a clue what i'm doing and probably need guidance, but am far too lazy to take any, my fave chord progression is adhd.
"my fave chord progression is adhd."
that is so dang funny....
Quote from: T.C. Elliott on May 12, 2014, 09:08:33 PMA couple generalities:
The more you know the better able you are to realize that sound in your head.
Learning the name of whatever it is you are already doing allows you to communicate better with other musicians.
All perspectives are valid. Just don't hold to a perspective out of fear or misconception. That being said, I learned a bit of theory some 20+ years ago and have let it go to waste without following up. I'm severely limited because of laziness. Ah well, heeding my own advice sounds like too much work.
*************
er mate.... I have heard your music and it is anything but limited.... I have listened to thousands of songs and hundreds of musicians and bands..... and honestly some of your work is as good as any....period....no bull....
I remember years ago Sting saying that he figured out the general public prefers simple music....as in da goo goo ga or what ever that stuff was....over say classical.... I am kind of believer that any music that you can get people to listen to multiple times, they will eventually like it..... that is why radio plays the same songs over and over again...we like what we know.... and new music not so much unless you have a reason to like someone... I would say this though....if you want to know who the really great musicians are....go watch the ones the musicans watch....
but I tend to love all kinds of music.... and I listen to the stuff on SC that I never would otherwise because of my sense of belonging to the community.... and I think that is how a lot of bands or musicians get heard.... is because of affiliation with community....
I see both sides of this.... learning more can't hurt.... being able to communicate with other musicians is important if you are going to be in bands and stuff... but I know folks who are absolutely brilliant technical musicians...that know in depth theory and play their instruments very well but won't ever write anything.... the level of discipline that it takes to practice scales, and pieces of music, and growing in ability is also the level of discipline that it takes to write good music.... and lyrics...and not everyone can use the energy it takes for both....but I believe imagination and creativity can be developed just like playing skills can...
It's a great topic. Both sides of the argument have some sense behind them. If pushed to side with one or the other I would say acquiring more theory/knowledge would be more beneficial to a musician than just winging it, but there is some logic to the argument that if you are armed with a decent ear and a curiosity to make sounds from your instrument, you may not fall into patterns burned into your subconscious by structured theory lessons.
I have no clue what I am doing theory wise. I learned basic chord shapes from a book years ago like most others I guess. I used to practice basic pentatonic shapes many years ago from books and that's about it. Now I just fart around, put a few chords down and then if I want something to sound a little different somehow, a lot of times I try to imagine or hear a new chord in my head I want to go to and then try and locate it string by string (painful I suppose). Hard to disagree that with a bit more theory I would get to where I want a lot faster, but then again maybe I choose sounds I wouldn't if I had lots of theory drummed into me. And hey, I enjoy it like this... it's fun.
I am not very good with things that seem like a foreign language... eh which explains why I am not very good at learning languages! And music written on a page in any form is not something that seems natural to me, my brain does anything in it's power to repel it. I am a fairly anxious person anyway and this type of thing seems to overload me.
There would be so many examples of musical geniuses on both sides. Hard to argue Jimi Hendrix wasn't a genius, but then again hard to argue against Steve Vai who studied music. End of the day we are all making music and pretty great music too. How we get there is not all that important.
To throw another angle at this, how about Autism and ADHD and all that. If your brain is wired different, perhaps learning formally won't even fit your head.
Not everybody CAN do the classical/formal methods.
But ANYBODY can make a cool noise on an instrument.
Quote from: WarpCanada on January 03, 2021, 11:42:17 PMTo throw another angle at this, how about Autism and ADHD and all that. If your brain is wired different, perhaps learning formally won't even fit your head.
I started writing a comment to that effect that last week but thought it was too personal / revealing.
It definitely is a real issue.
I have a weird kind of autism called PDA (pathological demand avoidance). It means I will not follow any instructions, rules or authority. I have to figure everything out myself and be in total control of it. It's like an anxiety caused by the (perceived) expectation of others and not being in control. It makes me a nightmare to deal with in certain situations.
So I'm pretty incapable of being 'taught' and even accepting things like scales and theory.
I always want my chords to be different to what's expected. Some extra, jarring little addition that spices things up. Which means I'm deliberately NOT trying to follow conventional chord theory or wisdom.
Interesting topic. I've been playing around with guitars, basses and other stuff since I was 11 (53 years ago!!!). But I could never be bothered to learn any music theory. I was put off it at age 11 because I had some classical guitar lessons, which I hated. In 1968 in the UK there was no-one to teach you electric guitar, just some very simple and basic chord and scale books. I learned some chord shapes and picked up some basic ideas from listening to records and off I went. Like Mike I guess......
Also, although I started off in my first band aged 14 playing covers, I was never much interested in learning other people's songs, I always wanted to do my own stuff. I was inspired by other people's music but I did not want to spend the time learning how to play songs note for note. So I never bothered with any theory. It wasn't an issue in the 1970s and 1980s because the type of bands I played in (punk/post-punk/goth-y stuff) sneered at long solos and I got shouted at if I tried to do anything too clever (it's true!).
When I retired I though I would sit down and learn some theory and scales, because now I have the time and there are so many fantastic resources available for free online. But I find I still can't be arsed, it just bores me. Which is odd, because I have a very obsessive personality. However, I have found some theory resources very helpful. Jake Lizzio of Signals Music Studio in particular I find helpful and inspirational. He has some great ideas for improving song structure and I've started to explore some modes thanks to his videos. But I just dip in and out of them, I don't obsess over them. Seems to work for me.
I really admire people who are technically accomplished musicians but I realise that's not for me. We are all different and as long as we are enjoying what we are doing, who cares. I do realise that sometimes my lack of technique and ability can be a constraint, but that does encourage me to find ways to get round those constraints. I tend to use effects and production techniques to do this. Maybe that makes me lazy, or maybe a sonic innovator. Or maybe both....?
To finish, I will say that being on this site has really opened my mind to different types of music and different ways of approaching music. I was quite narrow-minded before coming on here but SC has helped me enjoy and appreciate different styles of music more than I ever have in the past.
and to pile onto Nigels idea I would go so far to say that if everyone followed convention we never would have even had rock and roll...here is something I was thinking about today..l.. I have small hands and fingers... .... I have had to learn to get around that.... many of your really best lead guitarist are tall and thin, have long fingers and reach... I gave up trying to copy others because I can't... I have had to learn to get around some things that would be simple for others.... like for example when you play a bar chord and use the pinky two frets up for rhythem....that is almost impossible for me... I can get to it a few places on the board... but there are some ways around it..
having said all that I do know where I am at on the fret board and an idea of what key I am in..... this can be somewhat important when playing with others...
and I would add that if I had known how to read music, as a bass player I could work alot more...because I had friends who are very connected in the local music scenes and there are lots of black tie jobs and lounges that like more jazzy, softer stuff and sometimes their bassist can't be there and they need a fill in.l... so I think the absolute best scenario is to work at both...
I don't much like being told what to do either but I used to love playing scales and arpeggios on the piano as a teenager. Try doing a chromatic scale starting on middle C using both hands in the opposite directions - it's a total mind-f*ck.
I think you should just do what you are interested in and enjoy doing - life's a box of chocolates as they say.
Quote from: StephenM on January 04, 2021, 04:58:22 PMI have small hands and fingers... .... I have had to learn to get around that.... many of your really best lead guitarist are tall and thin, have long fingers and reach...
This made me smile. Day 1 at University (back in 1975) I put a notice up in our student hall saying "Guitarist wants to form band". At that time I played guitar (rhythm with a bit of lead) and was experimenting with bass. The first guy who replied was an amazing guitarist. He had played the cello and had really long fingers and a very well developed reach. He could play everything by Hendrix note for note, also everything Queen had done up to that time note for note. He was amazing. I decided at that point to focus on bass.
I can sympathise. My fingers seem too short to reach a lot of barre chords and power chords on the lowest frets (and I've been trying a lot of that recently), and certainly can't do that wraparound thumb thing that Hendrix does. And I don't want small frets or a thin neck because it would interfere with my open chord hybrid picking.
I guess some of us are just more suited to lead guitar by nature.
Quote from: Ferryman on January 05, 2021, 01:21:33 PMQuote from: StephenM on January 04, 2021, 04:58:22 PMI have small hands and fingers... .... I have had to learn to get around that.... many of your really best lead guitarist are tall and thin, have long fingers and reach...
This made me smile. Day 1 at University (back in 1975) I put a notice up in our student hall saying "Guitarist wants to form band". At that time I played guitar (rhythm with a bit of lead) and was experimenting with bass. The first guy who replied was an amazing guitarist. He had played the cello and had really long fingers and a very well developed reach. He could play everything by Hendrix note for note, also everything Queen had done up to that time note for note. He was amazing. I decided at that point to focus on bass.