Members smtb987 Posted January 5, 2006 Members Posted January 5, 2006 does anyone have any tips/reccomendations for harmonizing guitar parts. Ive heard of two ways: 1) Taking the part and simply putting it into a different key 2) harmonizing with diatonic notes only. even if the intervals between the two parts switch between major thirds and minor thirds etc... Does anyone think that it makes a harmony sound bad if the two intervals between the two parts change? any info will be appreciated.
Poparad Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 It won't sound weird if the intervals change; it will sound natural. Whoever told you to write the other line in a different key is wrong, unless you're going for a Charles Ives version (Ives was a 20th century classical composer who liked to write music that involved two groups playing at the same time in different keys for the sake of being dissonant.)To harmonize a line, all you have to do is take the original melody and go up or down a chord tone. The strong beats in a measure (beats 1 and 3, which are the beats that the chords commonly change on) will be the beats you will want each part playing a note that belongs to the current chord. For the other parts of the measure, the voices can move together (parallel motion), apart (contrary motion), or with one voice staying the same (oblique motion). Here is an example of a harmonized guitar line:The progression is all in the key of D minor (F major), and all of the notes above come from that key.For the most part that is all parallel motion. On beats 1 and 3 of each measure, both parts are playing notes of the chord written above the staff. Beat 4 of measures 1 and 3 each have contrary motion, and measure 2 has oblique motion (the lower voice stays the same).The intervals change a bit too. For the most part they're all thirds, but there are a couple examples of sixths (which is what you get when you flip the notes in a third around). You can use other intervals too, but thirds and sixths sound the best for harmony parts. Those two intervals will give you that 'sweet' harmony sound.
Members Terje Posted January 5, 2006 Members Posted January 5, 2006 Originally posted by Poparad You can use other intervals too, but thirds and sixths sound the best for harmony parts. Those two intervals will give you that 'sweet' harmony sound. I wouldn't know about "best" but they definitely sound "sweet". The "best" is probably to have different intervals or it will sound boring.
Members bardsley Posted January 6, 2006 Members Posted January 6, 2006 Not really. I mean, if you want to create polyphonic harmony, you need to use different intervals, but if you're just trying to harmonise a melody, thrids and sixths are generally the best. You may want to sometimes move to the odd fourth or fifth, but if you analyse most pop tunes with harmonised parts, they tend to stick with thirds and sixths. Unlike proper counterpoint, the idea of adding another part to the melody is that it follows the same contour as the main part. If you go changing intervals too much you'll lose that contour and instead be making something idependant. Which is cool, if you want it to sound like Bach.
Members simeon Posted January 6, 2006 Members Posted January 6, 2006 there was a previous thread about this with some examples you might want to take a look at...http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1051880 sim
Members Terje Posted January 6, 2006 Members Posted January 6, 2006 Originally posted by bardsley Which is cool, if you want it to sound like Bach. And why wouldn't you?
Members bardsley Posted January 7, 2006 Members Posted January 7, 2006 Originally posted by Terje And why wouldn't you? I didn't mean to diss one of my favourite composers. I just meant that it's not always a style you want to emulate when you're writing pop songs. Of course, that's what the Byrds did when they covered "Tambourine Man". I remember watching an interview with the guitarist who was saying he concsiously worked in a riff taken from some Bach he'd been working on. Which is cool, excpept I prefer the orginal.
Members smtb987 Posted January 10, 2006 Author Members Posted January 10, 2006 Is it a good idea to keep the harmonized party mostly if not all diatonic if the 1st part is all diatonic?
Poparad Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Originally posted by smtb987 Is it a good idea to keep the harmonized party mostly if not all diatonic if the 1st part is all diatonic? I think the question should rather be "should the harmonized part be diatonic if the chord progression is diatonic?" When you're dealing with harmonized parts, you're really dealing with chords. You should try to make the harmony part fit the chords. If the chord progression is entirely diatonic, you will most likely have a harmony part that is entirely diatonic (there are ways to work in non diatonic notes, but this doesn't work for all situations and is a bit more of an advanced topic).
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.