It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Why? Because, unlike a piano, as a player you don't need to concern yourself unduly with whether a particular key has sharps and flats. Want to transpose a C major scale to a B? If you were going to write that down in notation, or play it on a piano, you would need to use the Circle of Fifths to know that B has five sharps. On a guitar? Just shift the whole thing down by one fret and throw the Co5ths in the bin. If you know the fingering for the major scale (without using any open strings) then you can move it anywhere you like, without giving one jot for what the note names actually are. Apart from the root note, of course. It's the *relationship* between the notes you are playing rather than the actual note names themselves that are important. In fact, because you can tune a guitar up and down with ease, the actual note names can be more of a hindrance than a help. I tune down to Eb, but I still call a C chord a C chord, and unless I'm playing with a piano or other fixed-tuning instrument, it works fine. And if I *am* playing with a fixed-tuning instrument, I just tell them I'm playing a B and let them worry about it!
@Viz gives an excellent summary of the theory, but I've already argued that you don't actually need to worry about "how many sharps are in this key signature" to play the guitar to a high level. As for finding 5ths? Doesn't this come naturally, from the most basic of chords, the power chord? The E, A, and D shape have a 5th built right into them as the next note up from the root - so doesn't every guitarist instinctively know where to find (if not the actual name of) the 5th of any key?
For me personally, the secrets of music theory can be unlocked by considering chord construction. Learn the basics - root, third, fifth, and understand the what makes major and what makes minor chords (changing the third, basically). Then consider sus2, sus4, major and minor 7th, add9, add11, and learn how they sound. Then diminished, and augmented, and... well, it never stops.
If you know a chord you know half the scale, and then experimenting with filling in the blanks to see what sounds good is my personal recipe for interesting playing, rather than sweating over whether you should be playing an F# or G in that A major scale. Knowing what sound you're going for, rather than what theory says you should do, is they key to interesting playing IMHO. On the guitar, at any rate. I'm not sure Mozart would thank you for changing his sheet music, but since most mainstream guitar playing is largely improvisatory, this sort of approach works, in my experience.
Again, to make it clear, I'm not criticising anything that has gone before, it's just that it's my opinion that, specifically for mainstream guitar playing, the Circle of Fifths is not worth spending time worrying about.
Nil Satis Nisi Optimum
I would agree though that piano players need it even more, to know sharps and flats to play the right black notes, but I'd also say that being familiar with the piano layout does also help guitarists by the way, as it's the perfect model of our western music system.
Just thinking as I write, I will concede there's a difference between understanding it and learning it off by heart; understanding it is probably a very useful first step; learning it is maybe not so much, initially at least.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Would that indicate that the key has changed? i.e the i and ii are now iv and v?
What is typical is a progression like this:
Dm7 / G7 / | Cmaj7 / / / | Cmin7 / F7 / | Bbmaj7 / / / |
This is a ii V I in C then a parallel modulation where the Cmaj7 becomes the ii of a II V I in Bb.
Studio: https://www.voltperoctave.com
Music: https://www.euclideancircuits.com
Me: https://www.jamesrichmond.com
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
http://www.clienthosting.co.uk/cof5thsToPrint.pdf
I have rebuilt the one at wikipedia so that it is accurate and able to place onto the clock face. The clock I bought was:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000G73YJ6
Available in several colours there. That clock is easy to disassemble and I have put the marker for the lug to cut out on the pdf. My wife is into crafts so we had the spray glue so it wasn't messy when sticking. I printed on something like 120gsm to 200gsm paper matt but you may prefer glossy. I used photoshop paths and fonts to re-create the image, I know photoshop quite well so I generated the minutes at every 6 degrees and the 5 minute markers at every 30 degrees I may have messed up on resolution or mode but some of the 5 minute blocks seem a little fuzzy, I should at some point redo that but can't see at a distance. You should print the pdf at best quality and at 100% and that should be perfect size for the clock above. Most parts are vectors so in theory I can scale as wiki uses SVG. But I have very little time these days.
Let me know if you need any further help.
Released by me under creative commons inherited from Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Just_plain_Bill
using the cycle of 5ths or 4ths [or bits of both] is one way to build such a bridge by passing through many keys in succession until you hit the target key..
in the sort of music I get involved with [particularly my orchestral / movie trailer / proggy stuff] this can be 'a way' to help find or contribute to a solution…
jazzers love this sit too cos they get involved with a lot of II-V-I and VI-II-V-I progressions [which is cycle of 5ths stuff]
will this make you a better player? nope ! !
playing, repertoire, practice, and experimenting with the stuff you've learned to play does that…
but it will help you think and may throw your creativity down a few paths that your intuition may not..
hmmm… is that right???
EDITED: in the case above, the C chord is a <sort of> 'pivot chord' because it <sort of> belongs to both keys..
a true pivot chord is one that belongs completely to 2 different keys.. like Em being III in C and VI in G.
I thought parallel modulation would be something like being in C maj, then switching to Cm
so there's a key change over the same tonic…
you've gone and got me doubting myself now.. I reckon I need to look this up when I get a mo..
looked it up in wiki
A parallel key modulation is a change of mode, but maintains the same tonal center. For example, one section of a composition may be in the key of E major and then modulate to E minor.
As someone who's never had a music lesson, let alone a guitar lesson, I really struggle with any kind of theory. I've looked at various Youtube vids about minor pentatonics etc. and just find myself feeling 'hemmed in'. Whilst I'm pretty hopeless at just turning up and jamming along, I can, given a little time, work out quite a reasonable solo which will fit in with the flavour of the piece.
Our keyboard player - who has a degree in music - called me 'a brilliant musician'. I'm not, but when I asked her to explain, she said it's because of the way I can interpret a song and make it work for our line-up - and then transpose the key as required using the stuff that @modellista talks about.
The fact is that music means a whole lot of different things to different folks. If you're enjoying it, you're doing it right.