Re: Analyzing this Progression

On Feb 28, 5:45 am, i...@xxxxxxxxx (paramucho) wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:56:13 -0800 (PST), LJS <ljsche...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



Assuming you're referring to "Taxman", the Beatles probably didn't
call it anything in particular. It was played on one guitar,
Harrison's (IIRC Lennon was on tambourine), and the voicing probably
omitted the 5th. It's easily played.

I meant nothing about the ease of playing. The recording sounds to me
to be two guitars. One with a slightly subdued rhythm sound and the
other with a very piercing pumped up midrange and treble.

I'm in transit between my summer and winter quarters and don't have my
audio system set up so I can't check it out.

I find it
hard to concentrate on the details of who is doing what the way the
cut I have is recorded. I can say, however, that this seems to be one
of the early projects by the Beatles that became the foundation for
their education and their shaping the future of pop music for the next
decade or so.

How can you say that?

Sorry. I don't like it either, but the EQ of the mix hurts my ears and
makes it difficult for me to concentrate on the music that is behind
it. If you are referring to the part about their approach to music,
well that is the way I see it and will endeavor to go through some
pieces to document that as time permits. But I see their career as a
search for music and a search for making everything that they did a
bit better than the last session and I see a constant stream of
education in their music. If you were born from mid 70s on and surely
from the 80s on I can see how this may not make sense to you, but they
introduced so many different concepts to the pop world and in effect,
IMHO, (and quite a few others btw) that they have been the most
influential music educators in modern times.


I hear the tune as a combination of the simple folk style that seems
to be characteristic of a lot of British music as taught in primary
school. Then I hear the introduction of the Blue note concept as one
of the featured components of this tune. I believe that I hear the F
Blue 3rd in the melody with a tradition b3 -> 1 melodic line in the
vocals that sometimes coincides with the guitar part that has both
notes at the same time.

The chord has been discussed in rec.music.beatles and Dominic Pedlar
discusses it in his book THE SONGWRITING SECRETS OF THE BEATLES (a
publisher's title ever there was one). He also chases up the so-called
"Gretty Chord" which comes from a theme I popularised a few years back
quoting McCartney who recalled being shown a chord by the owner (named
"Gretty") of a local music shop. McCartney says he used in in
"Michelle" although it's hard to hear that on the recorded version
(which may be because Lennon play the rhythm part). The other earlier
instance of the "Gretty" chord is in Harrison's solo to "Till There
Was You", which I recently cited in another thread. The other earlier
use of the sonority was on "The Word" where it was spread across two
instruments. In short, by the time "Taxman" came around the band were
familiar with the chord. I don't see any need to follow your idea of
notating this chord in terms of "add b10". It's redundant.

That all sounds fine and dandy as well. I don't see how that and what
I observed cancels each other out. If they were shown that chord, that
would explain where they got the inspiration and sound from, not why
they chose to use it in that particular tune at that particular. Being
a group effort in most all of what they finally arrived at (though
there were certainly some that were more influential than others)
would tend to make it impossible for anyone, including the members of
the group, to know exactly which dynamics actually were the real
factors for the inspiration of how and why they used it.


I don't know how much blues they were taught in school,

None of the Beatles studied music at school. What they learned of the
blues was from listening and learning from other bands etc. Most of
their pre-Beatlemania heroes were bluesmen.

I beg to differ. They may not have had formal education in music, but
every British kid that went to grammar school seems to have had an
extremely broad based music education that was inherent in the British
system of education. Just listen to their voices. They did not learn
to sing that way by being taught in an American School that used the
Annie approach for music education. British education may have some
problems, but their teaching of the students to find their voice and
to learn music through rote learning and singing of good melodies
provide a truly great basis for learning and appreciating music. I
have learned to look forward to elementary British students in my
overseas classes and they never have disappointed me with their pure
and truthful interest eagerness to learn music.

And then as they leared the blues from their preferred Bluesmen, they
applied this to the music that they had learned in primary school. I
don't see how this can be contradicted. Unless I am mistaken at their
having attended primary. It is amazing what the proper foundation and
an inquisitive mind can do. And then when you have a group of egos
that are not intent on self destruction, at least for a few decades,
well, the Beatles had all the tools necessary to do exactly what they
did.





but this would certainly be a good way for them to use
their knowledge of the modal tone of the harmony and incorporate the
Blue note into a very well constructed tune that was made unique by
this particular combination of influences.
Even though it is still a
bit off topic, I don't see how the use of notation such as #9 or b10
is helpful where a simple tab diagram or a simple note of (add blues
note) would suffice.

The Beatles wouldn't have used any notation. Harrison described E7b9
as "E7 with an F on top", which is the manner in which you'd like to
describe the b10, but I'm not sure you'd want to describe a minor 9th
as such.

Read it again. I did not say that they did. I said that it wold be
useless to the understanding of their music to use such notation. I
think I used the term Blue Note specifically NOT the #9 or b10. That
was my original objection.


As I've pointed out, many times, quality pop/rock scores will provide
a tab equivalent of all chords. It's a non-issue -- a solution without
a problem :-)

True enough. And I think I have stated the very same thing, but
usually there is not the literal score of the music and most learn and
use the transcriptions that rely on tab and symbolic notation. I just
don't think that the use of such #9 b10 notation is the best way to
notate it. Either write out the notes or writes out the tab
equivalent. None of these three methods provide any inherent analysis,
merely a description that can be used by those that understand them to
learn the tune. Personally, I wold prefer to have the score written
out but that is my own preference. This wold be the most universal way
that is available for every instrumentalist to understand. The
extended chord symbols and tab notation would be effective for those
that do not understand how to read music and would be necessary for
them to learn the music that way in order to start analyzing it. It
serves the purpose for those that need it. But if you are discussing
standards, well learning tab without playing the guitar is sort of a
waste of time. (there are programs that can translate it), and there
is so many different meanings to the extended chord symbols that they
are meaningless (as the length of the discussion even BEFORE I jumped
in proves) without much talk simply to explain the notation that a
simple writing of the notes that are sounded is the best and thus that
most STANDARD way to start an analysis.

Therefore, when teachers try to force the other methods onto students
I get a bit bent. I don't know any MS or HS student that has any kind
of interest in guitar that can't sit down and figure out from tab
notation a song that they like and found on the web. But since it is
so simple to learn the more standard method early and be done with it,
I am upset when students are not made aware of the tools that can help
them the most. Its almost as if the teacher sees extra years of income
if they can have the students waste time on the additional steps. I
only want them to have a choice.

Of course, there is also the notion that the sound is the important
thing. I believe that the proper instruction can make conventional
notation the easiest way to do this as well, but there are other
learning styles that need to go through these other steps. All of the
students that I have had an opportunity to work with that was truly
interested had no problem learning conventional stave notation on
their instrument. The same is true for the theory students. They have
no problem with UC/LC notation. It is the easiest way to us the
numerals and it is the least confusing. A few weeks of their learning
how to use this gets us onto the real analysis so much quicker than
the students that won't expend the little effort to learn the more
efficient way. The ones that continue to use the 'crutches' never
really learn to walk. There are many successful students that learn
how to work around their learning disabilities and do excellent work,
but the fact that a lot of them can is no excuse for a teacher to lead
the 'normal' student into the realm of adding useless steps to the
learning process. This is the problem that should not need a solution.
It is only a problem if the student is TAUGHT in a manner that forces
him to waste his brainpower on useless ways of speaking the language
of music.

So yes, it is a solution without a problem. At least not an apparent
problem, but if you believe that the purpose of teaching music is to
provide the student with opportunity to allow him/her to reach higher
levels than simply to recreate what others have done, then there is a
problem, and proper teaching of the tools that will open these doors
for the student IS the solution to a real problem.

LJS




<snip>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Strange Case of the Roman Numerals
    ... and that use texts by American publishers authored by respected ... the harmonic meaning of chords ... asserting a qualitative relationship between the VII7 chord in major ... but I would prefer that students first attend to the matter ...
    (rec.music.theory)
  • Re: Sarah Palin- creationist VP candidate?
    ... that makes learning real mathematics impossible. ... colleges to keep and graduate students. ... reasoning. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: question about teaching and learning guitar (Master Musicians)
    ... It proves that there are a number of hack guitar ... > That would be why this person is a master. ... >> learning to write it down. ... I've got students that could already play the guitar when they started, ...
    (alt.guitar.beginner)
  • Re: Teachers and students -Method criticisms
    ... I understand that there needs to be "consolidation/reinforcement" learning ... I begin students by spending the first 3 weeks only on the ... Now that I am playing pieces that are ... Shearer books, which start out on the open B, G and D strings using P ...
    (rec.music.classical.guitar)
  • jjFOX Role of the Lecturer...
    ... The Role a lecturer within a Further Education College ... The successful teacher is passionate ... about teaching and learning, and understands that the role is far wider ... team and ensuring that students on this course are successful. ...
    (uk.education.teachers)