Mr Goodchord . . .

[shniggens]

. . . Whady'all think?

 

I briefly browsed through the Mr. Goodchord article last night in the latest issue of Keyboard mag, and I had a hard time deciphering it.

 

It appears to be some kind of visual representation of chords and chord movement. A sort of way to voice chords through osmosis. I dunno, seems strange.

 

Is it just another way to fry a turkey? Is it a revolutionary new way to understand difficult chord extentions? Should it be practiced or ignored?

[Phil B]

http://www.musicplayer.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=008266#000000

[shniggens]

And how do you feel about it now, Phil, after you have worked with it a few months?

[Phil B]

Good question - I actually have both books now, so that should tell you a little something.

 

I have not put them to use, though, like I thought I would. To be fair, this might have a lot more to do with the fact that I've been working insane hours and haven't played much of anything let along the Goodchord books. But, I definitely expect to use them more.

 

My observations, now that I've had the books for a while, are:

 

1- I got nothing really out of the Keyboard mag articles. I got a lot out of the books.

 

2- The books contain information overload in the sense that for each of the three scales covered (major, melodic minor and harmonic minor in the first book), every single 3 and 4 note diatonic chord voicing is covered. I never really just play everything in there front cover to back cover. I don't think that's the point. The point is to begin to see the "patterns" and the "DNA" elements that make up voicings and voice leading, and how in progressions the 3rd moves to the 7th and the root moves to the 5th, etc., for a certain progression.

 

I think using the book as a guide to make up your own exercises such as those shown in the keyboard articles is very helpful. But, it's NOT a book of "etudes" or fingering techniques or scales. It really is a "do-it-yourself" type book.

 

Even though I haven't gotten around to it much recently, I see the two books sitting there every day as I leave my apartment and I really WANT to sit down with them. Writing this has also made me want to do that.

 

In the end, I don't think the Mr. Goodchord books are good as the "one and only" practice book for anyone. I think it's more of a "gravy" book, or at least an "analytical" book.

 

It's sort of like a law school exam. You are given an enormous pool of convoluted facts and you must figure out on your own what is relevant and what isn't and then apply those facts to "general rules." The difference here, I guess, is that you never studied these "general rules" before, while in law school you studied them throughout the semester.

 

Like I think I said in my other posts. It's tough to actually flat out recommend because it's expensive and is really "do-it-yourself." I say, if you're intriguied, get it.

[shniggens]

Right on, thanks for the reply.

 

It IS intriquing because it is such an unusual approach. I'm curious, however, if the approach is valid and actually has a lasting effect, or if it is just a novelty book to make a few bucks.

[Phil B]

In my limited use, I have already found that I am "thinking in voice leading" a lot more. I don't think the goal of the book is that you necessarily use the actual notes in it, but more that you figure out some overarching themes and patterns in smooth voice leading. You also learn lots of new voicings in addition like the TBN I (that a triad over a bass note with the base note and the bottom note of the triad a diatonic fifth apart -- e.g., C, Bb, G, D in spread voicing is a Gm triad over a C -- this could be in the key of F, Dm, etc.). In the book, this voicing would be run through diatonic 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7ths patterns. It would show up in each key that the voicing could exist in. I don't know if that's helpful or makes it worse. Sorry...