What is CJT? People keep referring to it! I don't know what it is!

David_Cook_Wav... I'm sorry you had a bad experience after the concert. I wish I could answer your questions. You're one of a multitude of fans things like that have happened to, and your concert was one of the many in which he didn't come out. As for the group of people who did get through, I don't know. Maybe you can find an answer somewhere in the concert thread. Actually, you should probably repost your post in the concert thread. Maybe more people will see it and maybe someone can answer you.

Jayelgee, I don't think sharps and flats have a different sound. A normal scale starts on a base note and then goes up by a whole or half step in a certain pattern. When you start on a different base note, you have to then put in some sharps and flats to continue the pattern.

For chords, like the B vs. C that redana mentioned, a B is a more complex chord than a C. So what do you do? If you want to keep it in C, play a more complex version of a C chord!

Yes, David is very fond of minor keys, which have a different pattern of whole and half steps in the scale.

"A transcription I have of Straight Ahead has the chords in the key of Db major." This is David's thing. He can't be simple and do it in either C or D, he has to do Db. C is down a half step, D is up a half step from Db. E is up a step and a half. The reason I think he does this is because of his voice. He sings in whatever key he wants in order to maximize his voice and it just comes out this way. In order to sound as good as he possibly can, Db. For us to play along, use a capo. For him, use a differently tuned guitar.

Light On really opened my eyes to David's little bag of tricks. He did it in the studio in a certain key, because he was able to do retakes, but he couldn't do it in that key live because it was too high. So he lowered it. But then it was too low. So what he does to play it live is use a guitar tuned a half step lower, and he lets the audience sing on the low part.

And for CBTM/ADAM that Cimorene mentioned: I've heard this before and don't disagree. But, interestingly, ADAM was written 3 years ago. And David didn't even write CBTM. I guess those similarities are his comfort zone. The timing, the melody, he likes it.

normanTC: Ah - good question ( I should be workin, doggone it!) - so I looked up the scales just to be sure I had it right. The C major scale is very basic, and when you write in it - it has no sharps or flats, your melody HAS to come out upbeat and cheerful. That's just the physics of sound. So, the B major scale, while still major, has 5 sharps and looks like this:
B C# D# E F# G# A# B

It will have a different sound .

Now, it seems to me that David and his various collaborators often write in Minor scales, which lends a mournful, sad and moody tonality to your melody. Again, physics.

A transcription I have of Straight Ahead has the chords in the key of Db major. If you transpose it down to C major, it will have no sharps or flats and therefore have a more perky sound. Transpose it up to E, and you have 4 sharps. I guess once the best key for the voice and mood is picked, chosing whether you want to go for sharps or flats becomes a technical and chord choice.

I hope this is somewhat of what you were looking for. Boy - this is making me brush up on all the technicalities and will definitely help me revive my own songwriting.

check out all the musical scales, including exotics etc at www.musicalscales.com/scales.aspx

Ok, so I was at David Cook's kickoff performance at San Diego last night. I got there at about 6:30, even though the concert didn't start until 7:30. The grandstand was pretty much empty. All of a sudden, I see somebody stretching besides the stage. I immediately recognize it's David. I scream, at the top of my lungs (I was on the 4th level) "Hi David!" Then, the impossible happened. He waved back!!! It was magical. But, that's not why I decided to make an account, and post this. I decided to, because I was extremely disappointed with what went on AFTER the concert. Down by his trailers, there was a group of girls (including me) who were waiting for David to come out and sign our posters, pictures, shirts, etc. The security people who kindly asking us to move. But of course, star-struck women don't listen. All of a sudden, the security people ask us to step aside, and then, a group of people come between the crowd, and security lets them in backstage! By this time, we're all chanting "DA-VID", to see if we can get his attention, and so he realizes that there's a bunch of adoring fans out there! Anyways, after this, security tells us to shush, and explains to us that David is no longer here. We don't believe him, so we continue chanting, yelling random things such as "We know you're in there! Come out, come out whereever you are!' Then, the guard, who has been calmly watching this, says "Ladies, he's not coming out. As soon as he's off that stage he's gone. He had a plane to catch." Now, explain to me this. If he was gone, then why were they letting people go back there still? Hm? Please, enlighten me. Yes, I'm sure a couple of the girls that went in there were Neil and/or Andy's family, but I highly doubt all of them were. Please, if anybody has ANY idea, let me know! I'm one very disappointed fan.

--
--Amanda

ok, quickly, cos there is little time -- one thing i greatly appreciate re AH and also DCTR is the arranging, which D also showed off on AI to great advantage. someone here has removed the melody line from the dctr cuts so you can hear the harmonies D sings (somebody could link that) and I read a comment from someone once, Rob Cavallo maybe, that D just does these harmonies instinctively, does not have to overthink.

a lot of musical people do that once they've heard the chord structure of a song -- compose countermelodies extemporaneously -- like to songs on the radio. i find this more fun and interesting than singing along with the melody. countermelodies can be provided vocally but also with instruments.

for a great primer in how to build a song using countermelodies, i highly recommend the Beatles' original recording of Eleanor Rigby. I believe a most of the credit for this actually should go to George Martin their A&R man, from what I've heard about how they worked on this. The song is extremely short, less than 2 minutes, and a brilliant example of starting with a basic melody, adding countermelody with strings, adding harmonies with vocals. just wonderful stuff.

the arrangements of Permanent, both on the record and live, are reminiscent of this approach, in terms of starting with something fairly sparse using strings and then building to a denser texture and then fading out again. (I also love how Permanent ends on a chord that does not provide a resolution in the key, which is so appropriate to the subject matter.)

and another thing -- gah, i've been dying to discuss this stuff -- one theme in D's work I've seen discussed elsewhere (at the PB forum for instance) is the use of that 'oh oh oh oh' progression multiple times on DCTR -- and there are seeds of this in 'happy christmas/war is over', in the chorus, go take a listen. it's the same progression at the end of CBTM and ADAM, and it's used elsewhere on DCTR, but i'm on the road w/o a copy so.... next time. I cannot help but wonder if this is a deliberate homage to Lennon -- certainly its recurrence as a theme on the Record has to be deliberate.

--
I laugh at myself while the tears roll down....

Taylor_Sue - and now he has roadies to restring and retune the growing collection of guitars, so whatever alt tunings he uses per song, some guy in black just hands him a new ax.

Normanthecat@9:22: David is a huge fan of this. Why? SO HE DOESN'T HAVE TO USE A CAPO! Why does he hate capos? David, Neal, and Andy know their way around a guitar enough to know what keys change to what with a capo and with changing the tuning.

Jayelgee: but perhaps tuning the whole guitar down a half step avoids the sometimes complicated process of transposing songs to another key that often leads to impossible chords
Yes!

But, these chords are not impossible. Difficult and hard on the hands, but the boys play enough it's not too hard for them.

I tried this once. I had already had my guitar tuned to pitch, and I had a lot of trouble getting it into tune a half step down. I think the strings had already been stretched, so giving them some slack didn't work very well. But if you put on new strings and tune it to a half step down, I would think it would stay in tune a lot better and be useable. I'm sure David has a dedicated guitar and the strings are always tuned a half step down.

I hope this is coherent. I got interrupted at least 5 times and I couldn't keep my train of thought. This is why I can't participate in threads that require any thought.

Glad that you started this forum. I don't know a tremendous amount about music theory, etc., but I look forward to learning more. This may also help to alert DC, et al, that yeah, plenty of us would like to hear more about the music. I submitted a question to LK asking about DC's songwriting approach (lyrics or music first? Both together? How about when working with co-writers? Etc.). I'd love to learn more about that.

--
CJT Glossary.

Magic Rainbow thread.

I don't think it is an unsophisticated or out of place question. I hope for the purposes of this thread, there will be honest discussion, no trolls or pedestals.

While I can't answer with any technical knowledge as I have nearly zero music background, I think the way the record was made has a lot to do with it and not a loss of artistry.

While it relied on songs that were submitted as well as songs that David had a hand in writing, the whole thing was rushed. They used studio musicians (not saying they were not skilled) instead of "the" band. They just did not have time to do a lot of innovative stuff. So in that sense, the musical backing is generic (don't throw) and relies on David's voice to carry it. But that does not mean the songs are generic. Just if they had a couple of years to work on it the record might have been more sophisticated and innovative, if you will. But there was the Idol timetable and striking while the iron is hot that were the over-riding concerns. It is still very much worth taking advantage of the name recognition and Idol brand publicity machine for the winner. Look at where David is now.

I think the next record will be different. If nothing else, it will be made by a cohesive band that has played together for a couple of years. The collaborations will be more organic and have the time to grow and accumulate songs rather than "I need 20 songs STAT". That said, there is no one way to write songs. A lot of songs do come from musicians getting together for the purpose of writing. Others are by inspiration (I think David keeps a music journal). Permanent is one of the best songs and it was written and recorded very quickly, by all accounts I've heard.

I don't know if other people sounding just as good doing a cover of the songs is the way to judge music. (I mean, I don't know, not disagreeing). There are songs that nobody can sound as good as the original (see idol) until you get someone really good (see David Cook). Then there are songs that everybody sounds good in and they end up in Karaoke bars. Maybe I'm thinking of a different question, IDK. Somewhere there is a thread for covers of David's songs (primarily DCTR songs, I think).

--
The best revenge is massive success. ~Frank Sinatra

Oh, yay! Music! I have to chime in quckly and say how excited I am to see this thread (also dismayed, because, who has time for this? (smiley)). So, yay!

Here are links to a few of those on-line guitar tab sites where folks have posted chords for some of Cook's songs. Some versions are undoubtedly better than others.

ultimate-guitar.com

GuitarETab.com

911tabs.com

I promise to stick to the subject of DAVID COOK, but just as an aside, I've been playing around with MWK's Luna Despierta a lot lately, and I've discovered the whole thing is much easier to play if you tune your entire guitar down a half-step. I have a feeling a lot of Cook's older music (AH, Axium) may have been played that way, too. Not so much DCTR, except maybe BBS. Any thoughts on why they do that?

Did I mention this thread is great?

Ooooh, music! I studied music theory in school, and played several instruments, but that was mumblety years ago, so I'm a bit rusty, but definitely up for a discussion. Now where to start...

Time signatures. David seems to be quite taken with the 6/8 signature - he said it was one of the things he really liked about the Magic Rainbow (which made me sit up and take notice, because I have been lamenting the fact that many musicians seem to stick with a solid 4/4 beat - my pet peeve is when they transpose something that was originally intended as a waltz or a 6/8 into 4/4 "for ease of singing"). Songs of his that I think are either 6/8 or 3/4 (like already noted, it can be hard to tell the difference):
- Lie
- Mr. Sensitive
- Bar-ba-sol
- A Daily AntheM
- Stitches (which I flove for its rhytmic underpinnings)

It's so rare for songwriters to go outside the usual 4/4 beat, though 6/8 is not too uncommon. Having played and sung a few things in 7/8 myself, I can totally understand why. It's really hard to get it flowing naturally - the rhythm of the song needs to be something that's instinctual, because if you spend all your energy on getting the timing right then there's nothing left to make it into *music* instead of just a string of notes in an interesting beat. One singer who does it succesfully is Sting - he usually has at least one song with an unusual time signature on his records (which leads to some hilarity when he plays those songs live, because the crowd can never quite figure out how to clap in time with the music). Examples for illustration: Love Is Stronger Than Justice (the verse is in 7/4, the chorus in 4/4), Seven Days (in 5/8), Twenty-Five To Midnight (a seven-beat). (They're all up on youtube, but the spam filter won't accept me linking to them. Hrmpf.)

While David is nowhere near as adventurous as Sting (and really, who is? Sting himself certainly wasn't at David's age. At 26 Sting was just getting started with The Police, who while brilliant were not really pushing the envelope in time signatures in a pop/rock song, especially not on their first records), he's not stuck in a 4/4 rut either. I love him for that (and many other things, but that goes without saying here).

Now after reading I want to add more.

I am not a musician myself, I wish I was, I just haven't really pursued it. I played keyboard by ear for awhile, and just never really got into taking a class. I picked up the guitar a few times, but also didn't pursue it. I really could, and I would like to, but I don't know where to start.

I am in choir, and I think that even though we sing, well, baby songs, it is still interesting to be the 2nd or 3rd parts and to sing harmonies. I think it is better than being the melody, because it just adds way more depth and interesting-ness to the song. I would really like to explore this more, and see how you really create a melody. I don't know much about keys and such, and I can't even really read music.

Lyrically, I LOVE to think about and listen to DC's lyrics. In study hall, I doodled (yes, doodled) out some of DC's lyrics, and looked at ones that had the same pictures. It was really fun, and a good memory quiz to remember the lyrics just thinking about them.

Lately I have been really straying from the music and thinking more about how I love D as a person, and this thread kind of makes me think about how the music is really why we are here. He is so creative, listening to Analog Heart especially shows it. He really knows how to express his thoughts through words.

*sigh* Ok, done. It will be really cool to see what this thread turns into. I love it already (:

Hey, chawan, I want to list to that Elvis interview, but the link appears to be misdirecting....right back to this thread! Could you provide the URL, please?

Thanks.

Sorry to be repetitious, but I have listened to this Elvis Costello interview about 3 times now. I find it very interesting because it touches on some of the things we have discussed so far and covers a lot of ground in 11 minutes.
Elvis Costello
It is about 11 minutes long but if you are short of time, start at about just before 7 minutes to 10 minutes. He says that many of his songs are simple, but being able to hear and understand the potentials for complexity allows him to be more creative. (again, a top of the head quote). I take that to mean that a simple song is no worse than a complex one, and that complexity is not always required for a great song. It just depends on your vision as a songwriter, I suppose.

eta, that is a great example of a simple tune made complex in a variety of ways but still remains the same at the core.

--
The best revenge is massive success. ~Frank Sinatra

I,too, have never quite had the patience for music theory no matter how often my father ( who had been a professionla violinist in his youth) tried to teach me.

And, in pop music, some of our most genius of genuises dont' even write notation . Paul McCartney is one such person. When he composes his orchestral pieces, he works with a professional transcriptionist, so he can go ahead and create however it is he does it.

Others, like Elton John, Billy Joel, Pete Townshend, have had classical training of the highest caliber and then went on to do what they do so brilliantly.

There are "tin pan alley" types who write jingles and so on who can knock out songs using songwriting techniques and formulas.

but, as eta asked, what makes great music? Well, the brain sure can recognize it - but not everyone's brains will agree with each other. Just tonight I was watching a VH1 100 Best Heavy Metal songs - well, my brain will never"get" the beauty others hear in that, although I can recognize how that music moves people.

eta - I am with you in that very peeved feeling. I am of the belief that David alone or David and Neal will produce music that will blow the world away. I see D & N becoming the next Lennon-McCartney. KOTN shre signals that to me.

SQUEEEEE!!!!

(um. ah-hem... I mean, "Yes, I like this thread idea very much. Thank you.")

That will be all.

ETA: (I do that a lot.....my name is so appropriate.) Ok, now that I've gotten out my original reaction and read through the thread, I'm really excited.

By way of introduction, I'm a semi-pro (meaning, I've been paid for some gigs, but don't regularly work as a musician) oboist (geek) and a classically trained pianist. I have had a passionate aversion to music theory from the age of 7, but I will do my best to hang with such discussions, as I think they have merit here. If we don't start talking about it, how will any of us learn more?

The interesting thing to me regarding the complexity of music composition is that it doesn't necessarily correlate to the greatness of the song. I find this quite intriguing, and I think it must be like poetry in that sense.

For instance, some great songs (Amazing Grace, and Mozart's Variations on Ah Vous Dirai-je Maman - otherwise known as Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti6DtpgWJ1g come to mind) have fairly simple and repetitive structure, but strong melodic hooks that make them stick. If you listen to the video clip posted, you'll see how a basic cord structure can be elaborated on to sound very fancy, but at it's core, its the same melody. Same simple cord progression. Oddly enough, I found Matt Nathanson's music to be similar. Fairly uncomplicated structure, but dang, if he doesn't know how to write a melody that sticks like stink on a skunk.

So what makes great music great?

IDK how to answer that question yet, but I do know that the first time I heard AH, I realized we had a great musician - a great composer - on AI.

I could not believe it (and I still don't think I'm over the consternation of it) that the first single of DCTR was not even partially written by DC. Just floored me (and yes, honestly, peeved me more that a little bit.)

When he mentioned in that interview the other day that he is scheduled to start recording again in October, my heart kind a did a little flip.

New Music.

New DC Music.

<3 <3 <3

To me, that means new creative genius material to listen to and analyze. New music to process and feel.

And that's a real reason to 'squee'.

My take from all this is that when the next record comes out (have faith) the music/instrumentation might be a lot more complex than DCTR. Even though Neal was around, I understand most of the tracks were laid down by studio musicians so without the band intricacies and dynamics and being able to work on the songs as much as could be desired.

I'm also heartened to know that David is at least an adequate/decent/competent guitarist (he calls himself mediocre). Neil's experimentation is a good thing and glad that he is on board for David.

I don't know singing, but I too was blown away by David's song interpretation. A lot of times one's attention is captured by the glory note, and he delivered those, but it was the vocal nuances and story telling that made the performances so captivating and never stale upon replay. In fact, they often became more interesting when replayed as you notice more details and depth in his performance. AI might be a reality show, but there was magic there.

--
The best revenge is massive success. ~Frank Sinatra

Well.

I guess I opened the floodgates. How the heck did no one start this thread months ago, is what I want to know?

And KarenLE67,
ZOMG!!! MUSIC?! People want to discuss MUSIC?! Who are you and what have you done with DCO?
Damn, now I feel like even more of an insurrectionist. (lol)

Thank you, everyone, for your kind words and your embrace of the topic. I hope this thread will become a self-sustaining, evolving one, much like some of the more heavily trafficked threads here on DCO. And yes, ideally I think there's enough material to start a whole new forum beyond the "David Discussion" -- although I noticed that "Tell David" has mysteriously disappeared, so I don't really know what the requirements are for getting something like that set up and running permanently. But we'll start small, and see how much people want to talk, and maybe one day when we grow up we'll even be a pinned thread.

With regards to varying musical backgrounds, I agree that there will need to be some hand-holding involved on the parts of the more experienced musicians, and I don't just mean David (although I will be adding a link to my blog post in the OP shortly, per hoaloha's request -- and thank you for your kind words as well). I myself have 9 years of piano study, amateurish study of the recorder, and some instrumental composition and a capella song arrangement under my belt. But all that was, sadly enough, about 10 years ago at the latest -- college graduation meant job, then marriage, then kids, and RL caused me to put music on the back burner until DC reminded me just how much I shouldn't have done that. But I make no claims to understand all the terminology, either. I remember trying to teach myself guitar, and I think there's a mental jump you have to make to going there from being a keyboard player -- all the frets and key changes are like having to keep track of infinite keyboards, and it was difficult, so I never really got anywhere. So consider me a newbie, too, in some respects -- I only learned what a capo was today, too.

Thanks again, everyone, and keep it up!

lots of 'legit' musicians use capos... andy uses a capo for his thh gigs....

but i agree w/taylorsue.... they're playing multiple guitars, multiple tunings, when you get more scratch you can afford more axes and band guys to hand them to you, lol.

when you're all 'acoustic person open mic no money'? not so much. and it is true that a capo is a crutch in a way, because it allows you to adapt a song to your vocal range w/o a lot of transposition.... you can often just play basic chords like C/Em/F/G/Am even though you are singing in D# or some other key that would be hellish to actually finger the chords for.

karen is right re the vocab.... every key has a set of major and minor chords, usually notated with capital roman numerals for the majors and small for the minors.

for a major key, the series looks like this:
I ii iii IV V vi vii(dim)

or, for C major, the chords that are "in" the key:
C major (I)
d minor (ii)
e minor (iii)
F major (IV)
G major (V)
a minor (vi)
b diminished (vii dim)

there is a decent basic explanation here, including an explanation of the half-step distances between each of the notes in a major, minor and diminished triad, or chord:
http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/lessons/chords/what_chords_are_in_what_ke...

in a harmonically simple song, the writer will build a chord structure using the chords from the key. in other words, an expected progression, such as the very common I IV V I (in C, this produces a progression of C, F, G, C). Many folk songs are written using a limited vocab like this, with the ii and iv chords in a major key also being very commonly used, and multiple permutations of the vii chord (the major 7 instead of the diminished for instance). Because most of us are very familiar with Western music, this produces pleasing sequences ..... we "expect" the V chord to resolve to the I chord, for instance, or the G to resolve to the C if the song is in C major.

These songs can be very effective, but they can also be boring. thus composers often borrow chords from related keys, for interest. They might throw in an E major instead of an E minor, a d minor instead of a D major. They might go to a different key for the bridge -- for instance, the V of V (which takes the V chord, then riffs on the key that represents the V of THAT chord). In C, the V chord is G.... and the V of the V is D major, which is NOT a chord in the Key of C (whose d is d minor, or the ii chord).

there are some good music theory books out there. One that I really like is "Music Theory for Practical People" by ed Roseman.

If you listen to Neal's MWK stuff, you can tell a little bit what I mean.... he's all over the place, experimentally, he's borrowing chords from other keys, he's morphing into different keys.....

But a song like "Lie" is quite basic. "Permanent" is less so. and i'm on the road w/o my dctr and w/o my notes, so i can't quote you chapter and verse, but.... IDIFY is a simple chord structure, LOTM is pretty simple, CBTM is simple with some embellishment, Avalanche is simple.

--
I laugh at myself while the tears roll down....

OK, went back and reread and I messed up a bit towards the end as I got distracted by kids, but some of it is usable analogy to understanding the theory, while I misread kaydeecee's observation that DCTR is simpler, or less sophisticated or musically complicated than some of Dave's other music.

--
Karen

ZOMG!!! MUSIC?! People want to discuss MUSIC?! Who are you and what have you done with DCO?

My caveat is that I had a lot of musical experience in my early life, but never really grasped theory beyond what would be considered by a musician to be at a rudimentary level. "Theory" is the technical term for all the technical "stuff". Theory is the things like time signatures, key a song is written in, chord progression, etc. I understand enough to perhaps at least help explain what a term means and the basics of how it is applied. I did study singing, and can speak to that with some more technical proficiency than my rudimentary theory.

*****

"Thursday, June 18, 2009 - 15:16
lovethemusic:
ok, I will put in my non-musical background two cents worth in. David's lyrical enunciation and phrasing during idol caught my attention way before the "pretty" ever was noticed. As a listener, and not a musician, I appreciated the fact that he brought out the song's emotion and meaning which allowed me to really get into the song. I noticed that he controlled the music not merely singing to a tune that was played by the band. This was a "light bulb" moment for me when I realized that true singers and musicians are not singing along with the melody but the music compliments them."

lovethemusic - These are two of the most important things about Dave's performances on Idol, I think. When talking about ABMB, he talked about a Frank Sinatra quote that inspired him, that talked about going back to the lyrics when you're trying to figure out how to approach a song. Dave's connections with and interpretations of the lyrics drove his arrangements, which in turn contributed to your other observation, that he was more in charge of or part of the music, rather than simply being accompanied by the backing music. There are a lot of singers who have beautiful voices and a considerable amount of technical ability - but interpretation, finding a meaning of the lyrics which is true to you and using your technical and acting/performing skills to bring that meaning across is one great divide between competent singers and excellent ones. Another great divide is a deeper level of musicianship - being able to participate in a meaningful way in the technical aspects of the arrangements is another huge divide between the merely competent and the truly exceptional.

*****

kaydeecee: yes to the vocals with a little dirt (grunge?) on them vs. the more cleaned up studio perfection. Although I think the production values and tricks in regard to the vocals on DCTR are much less so than on albums of those with much less technical ability as singers. I do think Dave's vocals on DCTR sound remarkably, stunningly true to his actual voice, than those "singers" who don't have much voice to begin with.

*****

chawan: re time signatures. Now I'm going to have to go back and listen to a lot of stuff, darn you, but my initial impression is that most of Dave's music is in 4/4. Nothing has ever jumped out at me as being in something particularlyunusual like 5/4 or 7/4. I think Lie is in 6/8, sometimes it can be hard to tell without actually seeing the music written out if something is in 3/4 as opposed to 6/8, but based on the subdivision of the beat in the music underneath the melody, I'm gonna say 6/8.

*****
Thursday, June 18, 2009 - 18:59
chawan:
Min, please clarify...you say "not that sophisticated from a chord progression standpoint" then you say "vocab of chords that are a lot more complex than the ones most rock musicians use." What does that mean?

I'll take a stab at this... Very simplistic, basic rock uses a simple three or four chord progression such as I/IV/V/I (Roman numerals are used for chords, so read: one, four, five, one.) What that means is... When someone writes a piece of music, it is written in a certain key, the key being a specific group of eight notes. A basic chord is a grouping of three notes from the chosen scale, the root of the chord being the I/one, the IV/four, etc from the scale. This is like being able to write the simple, straightforward sentences of an elementary school student when putting together a simple descriptive paragraph.

The "vocabulary of chords" in Dave's music is much more complex, his knowledge of theory and his guitar skill goes well beyond the basic stuff any beginner or mediocre player would know, and so he is able to write a "paragraph" at the level of, say, a college English composition student as compared to an elementary school student, to go back to my previous analogy. He understands enough theory of how the notes and chords relate to each other to put together something more "sophisticated" than a simple 1-3-5 chord in a I/IV/V/I progression.

If you think of the notes in a scale as the letters of the alphabet, you can use those same letters (notes) to spell simple words (chords) like cat or dog or more complicated words (chords) like catechism or dogmatic. The way you organize those words (chords) into sentences (chord progressions) then can also be either simple subject -verb-object or adjective-noun-verb-adverb-preposition-indirect object....

Sorry, got interrupted by RL, will stop here and hope something I said made sense to someone.

--
Karen

I really hope this thread takes off, some great discussions could be had here. I too want to know everything about the music but I have no knowledge to base any discussion off of so for now I can only offer questions and read. I have no idea how one even begins to write a song or arrange one or how it works to cowrite with someone. I also would love to know more about the guitars and how guitar play changes the sounds of the songs both live and in the studio. I'm also really fond of the musical progression discussion, I find all the different eras different yet extremely cohesive and have no idea why. So thanks for the idea and setting this up, I hope it becomes popular and some interviewers think to ask David about the music more often.

I love your idea too, cimorene. Count me as another one who has only rudimentary knowledge of music theory, but I'm very interested in learning more. And I can't think of a better way to learn than through discussions and dissection of music I already know and love. I hope your thread attracts as many knowledgeable "music nerds" as the Charts thread attracts number nerds.

The difficulty I see going forward is what Taylor Sue pointed out: a little knowledge of the subject is necessary in order to have a conversation, and I would guess that very few of the regulars on DCO are music experts. I think that in order for this topic to attract followers, the people who are knowledgeable will need to be willing to make allowances - maybe even HUGE allowances - for those of us who aren't, at least starting out. For example, minstrel, in your post, giving a specific example of where and how the chord progression of a song "goes to unexpected places" might get more people thinking and talking.

Maybe the need to do that would make this too much like a teaching assignment than a discussion for you, though? If the gulf is too wide between those who know and those who just want to know, I don't know if there's a way around that.

A couple of you have mentioned that Cook's music isn't all that complicated; maybe in the interest of getting the discussion going, those of you who know what you're talking about could choose the song from DCTR or AH that you find is the most interesting musically, and tell us why you think that. I for one would be interested to see if and how your opinions differ.

Looking forward to seeing what develops here...

--
Declaration Tour iTunes artwork
Snark For The Cure

Cimorene - thank you for starting this discussion and I look forward to this thread becoming another of my favorites on DCO. I don't post often (and I know my avi is very amateurish), but I have learned so much about the music business on CJT, enjoyed some good belly laughs, snark and even some group hugs on DWOP and have soaked up the more philosophical side of how David affects us on the PB thread. But, THIS is all about the MUSIC and I'm so excited I could pop! As many have mentioned, David has indeed brought music back into my life too. I played piano as a kid and was in the HS band, but let it all slip away in pursuit of RL. This past year has opened my eyes to all that I was missing. I've since taken up the piano again and although I'm not good at it, it gives me great pleasure. And at the ripe old age of "mumblety" I'm now learning the acoustic guitar! Can't wait to actually try some tabs of David's songs! Although I might have to progress beyond the 3 chords I know - LOL! There's so much to learn and I can't wait to read and learn about alternate tunings, key signatures, chord progressions etc. as they relate to David's music. I say - bring it on Dave! we'll have so much to talk about we'll turn right away from discussions of your hair (well, maybe not entirely!)

ETA: Just looked up capo too - 1st thing I've learned here. Won't my guitar teacher be impressed!
--
You teach me to rise up, to open my eyes up... All these heroes come and go... you're still standing...