The first part of the video explains the structure of the Major scale which we need to know before we tackle TETRACHORDS. If you already know your Major scale structure skip to 8:20 to see how tetrachords form the circle of fifths and circle of fourths.
I knew about tetrachords, and I knew about the circle of fifths and fourths. So I've seen this all before. But never was it explained so logically. Masterful.
Thanks for sticking with it! Some folks want bubblegum content but I like to dissect it so you can see how seemingly disconnected topics connect. I appreciate your comment Lawrence. Means a ton!
Very nice lesson! But one small bone to pick, BOTH the cycle of 4ths and 5ths live on the fretboard. Going from a low string to the next higher one is a 4th, but in reverse it's a 5th. Except for that pesky B string tuning. These kinds of lessons of yours is what I should have been introduced to as a new student of the guitar many years ago. I'd be so much better now.
You are correct…I’ve battled with saying the circle of 5th lives on the fretboard. It does. BUT practically it’s easier to just use the circle of 4ths. In my early teaching days I would have agreed. I haven’t found that much benefit thinking in 5ths. The natural way to see movement is from thicker strings to thinner strings. I get it but adding 5ths as a navigation tool hasn’t been effective as sticking to 4ths. It’s all about efficiency for me. I guessed someone might bring it up!
@@rickysguitar Fair enough. But let's say you stand the neck up vertical. Then, it's just a matter of looking to the left of a note to see its 5th, and to the right to see its 4th, just like the fretboard is on a circle. ;-)
I have another lesson coming soon that really hammers home why 4ths is a better system for guitar. Saying that I'm not a 4ths purist (like Tom Quayle et al). I love that nasty Major 3rd tuning between the G and B string. Personally I don't use the circle of 5ths for guitar theory/visualisation. I don't think there's much value in it. I use it for composition which is when it becomes a valuable tool. Especially with string arrangements as those instruments are tuned in 5ths. Stick around for that lesson! I think you'll dig it!
Wow! A very clear explanation of what would take hours to learn in a classroom and far longer to figure out on your own. Great explanation, Ricky!! Thank you!!
This is epic! I’m not where I should be theory wise, but thanks to a good teacher I’ll get there. Question. I feel the need to understand why you picked Cmajor as a guide to begin. Why not pick another major scale. Everything flowed from it, so am I even right to ask if things would be different should you have picked another? I know you said in the video C major has all the notes from C thru to C (as octave) without sharps and flats - but why is this the crux point, as it were, for the rest of the video? I don’t have the knowledge to know if my question even makes sense for those who understand more. I have to piece together info. And this happens with almost everything with nuance in life. Very frustrating. But very glad to see good teachers who can do well in this regard.
This explanation is incredibly easy to digest as somebody learning theory ahead of their first instrument (ukulele in my case) being obtained. I've been gobbling up theory everywhere I can find it and I found this to be a standout as exceptional. Thanks for your contribution to my fret board education.
Could you do a lesson explaining why everthing in the natural scale is based around C, with no sharps or flats? Why wasn't it created around A, for example? Couldn't the half-steps been arranged differently? With C right next to D
That's more of a history thing than a theory thing... it has to do with notation starting with voices then moving to other instruments. (Trust me, I had the same question! 😄)
Note names are just an agreement. You give a sound with a certain frequency a name so people can make music together and know what you are talking about when you toss around with note and chord names. Today most people agree that the a' should be 440 Hz. 200 years ago it was a tone with 409 Hz. About a semi tone lower than today. For the late baroque guys it was still the a'. Please note that our western scale starting with the c is quite new when it comes to the "most important" scale. When musicians started to describe music with music theory the natural minor scale was considered more as the "most important scale". It was simply another time with different taste of music. Thats why our minor scale starts with an A. It was logic for the people at this time to start their most important scale with the first letter of the alphabet. Now when you take the A minor scale and start it from the C you get our major C scale we all know. And regarding C right next to D, well, there are scales where you start a scale with a half step. Read about modes and you will understand (but you would start with C, Db in western mode scales). And there are many other scales "non western style" that have a different whole - half step distribution to it. There are scales with 8 notes or 12 or as many as you like. Some devide an octave into 24 steps. Music theory with all this whole step half step, scales and modes stuff is only there to describe what we like to hear and what "works" for our music. Music is not a product of music theory. Usually its the other way around.
The first part of the video explains the structure of the Major scale which we need to know before we tackle TETRACHORDS. If you already know your Major scale structure skip to 8:20 to see how tetrachords form the circle of fifths and circle of fourths.
I knew about tetrachords, and I knew about the circle of fifths and fourths. So I've seen this all before. But never was it explained so logically. Masterful.
Thanks for sticking with it! Some folks want bubblegum content but I like to dissect it so you can see how seemingly disconnected topics connect. I appreciate your comment Lawrence. Means a ton!
I purchased your new book and it is fantastic! 😀
Thanks!. Always learn something in your videos. 😊
Brilliant Ricky! Thank you!
This is so damn cool! Thank you for sharing!
Thank you Ricky.
Complicated but you explain it well Ricky.....
Very nice lesson! But one small bone to pick, BOTH the cycle of 4ths and 5ths live on the fretboard. Going from a low string to the next higher one is a 4th, but in reverse it's a 5th. Except for that pesky B string tuning. These kinds of lessons of yours is what I should have been introduced to as a new student of the guitar many years ago. I'd be so much better now.
You are correct…I’ve battled with saying the circle of 5th lives on the fretboard. It does. BUT practically it’s easier to just use the circle of 4ths. In my early teaching days I would have agreed. I haven’t found that much benefit thinking in 5ths. The natural way to see movement is from thicker strings to thinner strings. I get it but adding 5ths as a navigation tool hasn’t been effective as sticking to 4ths. It’s all about efficiency for me. I guessed someone might bring it up!
@@rickysguitar Fair enough. But let's say you stand the neck up vertical. Then, it's just a matter of looking to the left of a note to see its 5th, and to the right to see its 4th, just like the fretboard is on a circle. ;-)
Thank you all, I was looking for some explanation about living/not living on the fretboard
I have another lesson coming soon that really hammers home why 4ths is a better system for guitar. Saying that I'm not a 4ths purist (like Tom Quayle et al). I love that nasty Major 3rd tuning between the G and B string. Personally I don't use the circle of 5ths for guitar theory/visualisation. I don't think there's much value in it.
I use it for composition which is when it becomes a valuable tool. Especially with string arrangements as those instruments are tuned in 5ths. Stick around for that lesson! I think you'll dig it!
Just received your booklet.....fantastic!!!
Your use of drawings, paper, combined with explanations is very clear and helpful. Thank You
Great guitar book , especially the way , guitar theory is explained. Couldn't recommend enough. Thanks Ricky 👍
Excellent lesson. That is a lot to learn and memorize. Thanks.
Crystal clear!
I’m
Amazing
Can you do the same for minor? For the tetrachords?
Yes you can!
Wow! A very clear explanation of what would take hours to learn in a classroom and far longer to figure out on your own. Great explanation, Ricky!! Thank you!!
Thanks Ricky, Currently on chapter 40 of your book. Its a great resource and helps keep me focused on learning.
This is epic!
I’m not where I should be theory wise, but thanks to a good teacher I’ll get there.
Question. I feel the need to understand why you picked Cmajor as a guide to begin. Why not pick another major scale. Everything flowed from it, so am I even right to ask if things would be different should you have picked another? I know you said in the video C major has all the notes from C thru to C (as octave) without sharps and flats - but why is this the crux point, as it were, for the rest of the video?
I don’t have the knowledge to know if my question even makes sense for those who understand more.
I have to piece together info.
And this happens with almost everything with nuance in life. Very frustrating. But very glad to see good teachers who can do well in this regard.
This explanation is incredibly easy to digest as somebody learning theory ahead of their first instrument (ukulele in my case) being obtained. I've been gobbling up theory everywhere I can find it and I found this to be a standout as exceptional. Thanks for your contribution to my fret board education.
Great explanation. Thank you.
Great as always Ricky. Thank you !
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Could you do a lesson explaining why everthing in the natural scale is based around C, with no sharps or flats? Why wasn't it created around A, for example? Couldn't the half-steps been arranged differently? With C right next to D
That's more of a history thing than a theory thing... it has to do with notation starting with voices then moving to other instruments. (Trust me, I had the same question! 😄)
You have to go back to Pythagoras and on into the middle ages to reveal the building blocks of western music.
Note names are just an agreement. You give a sound with a certain frequency a name so people can make music together and know what you are talking about when you toss around with note and chord names. Today most people agree that the a' should be 440 Hz. 200 years ago it was a tone with 409 Hz. About a semi tone lower than today. For the late baroque guys it was still the a'. Please note that our western scale starting with the c is quite new when it comes to the "most important" scale. When musicians started to describe music with music theory the natural minor scale was considered more as the "most important scale". It was simply another time with different taste of music. Thats why our minor scale starts with an A. It was logic for the people at this time to start their most important scale with the first letter of the alphabet. Now when you take the A minor scale and start it from the C you get our major C scale we all know. And regarding C right next to D, well, there are scales where you start a scale with a half step. Read about modes and you will understand (but you would start with C, Db in western mode scales). And there are many other scales "non western style" that have a different whole - half step distribution to it. There are scales with 8 notes or 12 or as many as you like. Some devide an octave into 24 steps. Music theory with all this whole step half step, scales and modes stuff is only there to describe what we like to hear and what "works" for our music. Music is not a product of music theory. Usually its the other way around.
@@heinoherrlich3263Ok. Thank you for nice explanation.