#1
This is a new song I just finished in the past couple days, and it doesn't really have a genre, I guess, if I was going for a genre...it's like...instrumental rock, whatever Vai or Satriani would play, I mean, it's not shred but, I think even for a GP tab, this song has some feel.


P.S. Sorry about the lame rhythm progression, but it seems to work in this song, so I kept it.
Attachments:
One for the heavens.gp4
One for the heavens.mid
Poop.


Yes, poop.
#5
It'd be Canon, and yes, the progression is similar, as I stated, it's a lame progression, but it works, and a lot of artists have used that progression besides Pachabel.
Poop.


Yes, poop.
Last edited by MattAnderson111 at Nov 12, 2009,
#6
Then it's generic, and you should come up with better ideas *Evil*.

But srsly.
#7
Not the progression itself is the problem.
The problem is that it does sound like Pachelbel's Canon.
The same chord progressions doesn't necessarily sound the same.
Example: The Cranberries - Zombie and Bruce Springsteen - Radio Nowhere (Em C G D). Okay, there are some slight differences in 2 of the chords but that's not the point.
Also, as you can see the example is a I VI III VII progression in a minor scale. I used this progression also, in Am (Am F C G). Iggy Pop - Passenger uses the same. They do not sound familiar, neither with each other nor with the other 2 examples.

So the point is: you can use generic chord progressions if you can make them sound different from other songs that use the same. And don't worry, you can't make a whole new progression as every single one was already invented by somebody.
#8
It sounds cool, but the chord progression is really predictable, because, as said above, it's the same as Pachabel's Canon in Dm. Still, it's relaxing to listen to.

C4C? Both of the ones in my sig need it, so I'd be happy with either one of them.