#1
I think I've seen songs before where say like one guitarist will be playing one progression like G C D Am and another one will be playing something like else.

Can someone explain to me how people do this if they do?


EDIT:

Wow, I was way off. Because of the nature of the song (I Fought The Law) I was thinking it was two different chord progressions but it was a counter melody. I just remember that it was that song and checked.

Damn, I feel stupid. haha
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
Last edited by RockGuitar92 at Dec 12, 2009,
#2
Um. I have a couple ideas?

1. One is playing open chords. The other is playing power chords/barre chords.
2. One is playing a barre chord/ power chord on a different string from the other.
3. One is playing an inversion of the chord.


I just cant think of 2 different chords sounding good together unless they are playing chords that aren't just your basic major or minor chords. Correct me if I'm wrong.
#3
can you think of a song as an example? i guess if they like stacked chords so that they were sorta harmonizing, like one playing a G major triad and another playing a B minor triad, which combined would make a Gmaj7.


that way each would be playing part of the same chord, but if you looked at the individual parts it would look like two different chords


edit: i screwed up, I meant Bm

guitar 1 would be G B D

guitar 2 would be B D F♯

added together = G B D F♯ = Gmaj7
Last edited by The4thHorsemen at Dec 12, 2009,
#4
Quote by The4thHorsemen
can you think of a song as an example? i guess if they like stacked chords so that they were sorta harmonizing, like one playing a G major triad and another playing a B minor triad, which combined would make a Gmaj7.


that way each would be playing part of the same chord, but if you looked at the individual parts it would look like two different chords


edit: i screwed up, I meant Bm

guitar 1 would be G B D

guitar 2 would be B D F♯

added together = G B D F♯ = Gmaj7


Yeah, that is kind of what I was thinking.


I can't remember what song I saw it in. I know it was before I started learning theory when I saw it but I think they were two different progressions. Hmm...
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
Last edited by RockGuitar92 at Dec 13, 2009,
#5
Quote by The4thHorsemen
can you think of a song as an example? i guess if they like stacked chords so that they were sorta harmonizing, like one playing a G major triad and another playing a B minor triad, which combined would make a Gmaj7.


that way each would be playing part of the same chord, but if you looked at the individual parts it would look like two different chords


edit: i screwed up, I meant Bm

guitar 1 would be G B D

guitar 2 would be B D F♯

added together = G B D F♯ = Gmaj7


Why not just play a Gmaj7 then?
#6
Quote by Souls United
Why not just play a Gmaj7 then?

It would sound different.
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
#8
Quote by Souls United
Why not just play a Gmaj7 then?


That is what they're doing. One just omits the root while the other omits the seventh, but both notes are found elsewhere. It can just make playing it easier, and allow for more possibilities in terms of voicings.
#9
Here's an example showing how chords that extended beyond a typical triad progression can be played as different chords

So, a I ii iii IV in C for example could have one player going:

I (C) ii (Dm) iii (Em) and IV (F)

The other player would play:

iii (Em) IV (F) and V (G) and vi (Am)

The guitarists together, would overall be playing: Cmaj7 to Dm7 to Em7 to Fmaj7
#10
Quote by Sean0913
Here's an example showing how chords that extended beyond a typical triad progression can be played as different chords

So, a I ii iii IV in C for example could have one player going:

I (C) ii (Dm) iii (Em) and IV (F)

The other player would play:

iii (Em) IV (F) and V (G) and vi (Am)

The guitarists together, would overall be playing: Cmaj7 to Dm7 to Em7 to Fmaj7


Yeah and I am sure I've seen that stuff done for acoustic guitars and stuff. It's pretty cool.
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
#11
Quote by RockGuitar92
I can't remember what song I seen it in. I know it was before I started learning theory when I seen it but I think they were two different progressions. Hmm...



FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Quote by dubstar92
Sparks92 is made of win

Member #26 of the "Claudio Sanchez is god" Club.
PM stepco12345 to join!

__________________________________________________
Last edited by Sparks92 : Tomorrow at 13:37 AM.
#13
No, I just had a fail moment with grammar. Partly due with how the rednecks that live in my area talk rubbing off on me.
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
#14
I doubt whether you've 'seen it' in any rock song.

What I think you're talking about is called polychords. In late romantic music, composers began to have these massive orchestras where 8 or more instruments would be playing completely different things. This meant that you could have the lowest 3 or 4 instruments play a different chord (together) from the upper 3 or 4 instruments, and still make it sound good. Therefore, it was possible to have two different chord progressions going at once.

I guess in reality it would be some altered 13th chord, but it might have been easier to call it two chords playing at once.

Anyway, this isn't really possible in contemporary music. Contemporary music is pretty simple in comparison to romantic music.
        ,
        |\
[U]        | |                     [/U]
[U]        |/     .-.              [/U]
[U]       /|_     `-’       |      [/U]
[U]      //| \      |       |      [/U]
[U]     | \|_ |     |     .-|      [/U]
      *-|-*    (_)     `-’
        |
        L.
#15
Quote by demonofthenight

What I think you're talking about is called polychords. In late romantic music, composers began to have these massive orchestras where 8 or more instruments would be playing completely different things. This meant that you could have the lowest 3 or 4 instruments play a different chord (together) from the upper 3 or 4 instruments, and still make it sound good. Therefore, it was possible to have two different chord progressions going at once.


That was stuff like Cm/Em right?
#16
Quote by isaac_bandits
That was stuff like Cm/Em right?


Could be. Sometimes it gets more dissonant than that. Stravinskies firebird suit has a section of straight up D triad over Db triad
#18
Quote by Beakwithteeth
Actually if one guy played this
--x--
--x--
--x--
--5--
--2--
--3--


and the other played this
--14--
--12--
---x---
--12--
---x---
---x---

I have a feeling it would sound different than this:
--x--
--3--
--4--
--4--
--x--
--3--


Harmonically the notes will have the same function. But now your getting into whats called orchestration
#19
Quote by Beakwithteeth
Actually if one guy played this
--x--
--x--
--x--
--5--
--2--
--3--


and the other played this
--14--
--12--
---x---
--12--
---x---
---x---

I have a feeling it would sound different than this:
--x--
--3--
--4--
--4--
--x--
--3--


It would be the same overall harmony, only with a different voicing. The point of two guitarists playing two different chords at the same time is to have a better voicing of the chord that results when the two are added.
#20
Quote by demonofthenight
I doubt whether you've 'seen it' in any rock song.

What I think you're talking about is called polychords. In late romantic music, composers began to have these massive orchestras where 8 or more instruments would be playing completely different things. This meant that you could have the lowest 3 or 4 instruments play a different chord (together) from the upper 3 or 4 instruments, and still make it sound good. Therefore, it was possible to have two different chord progressions going at once.

I guess in reality it would be some altered 13th chord, but it might have been easier to call it two chords playing at once.

Anyway, this isn't really possible in contemporary music. Contemporary music is pretty simple in comparison to romantic music.


didnt stravinsky do it heaps as well? e.g. Petrushka, firebird etc.
#21
Quote by WishfulShredder
didnt stravinsky do it heaps as well? e.g. Petrushka, firebird etc.

Yep.

A long with Schoenberg and... someone else. Then again, is there a technique Schoenberg hasn't used? That guy is crazy smart.
        ,
        |\
[U]        | |                     [/U]
[U]        |/     .-.              [/U]
[U]       /|_     `-’       |      [/U]
[U]      //| \      |       |      [/U]
[U]     | \|_ |     |     .-|      [/U]
      *-|-*    (_)     `-’
        |
        L.