By popular request: here are a few practical examples on how to use Negative Harmony when you write a song. They also explain the (important) difference between Negative Harmony and Modal Exchange: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
pasha biswas When you make a “negative” chord, you find the inverse of every note in that chord. For G, you have G B D, which invert to C Ab F respectively, aka Fm. For G7, it inverts to Dø7 because you add F, which inverts to D, giving you the notes C Ab F D. Another way of looking it is inverting the root, and then finding the notes with the same intervalic relationships DOWN from that root. So a G7 chord looks like G-M3>B-m3>D-m3>F, so the negative chord should start with a top note of C and go DOWN those same intervals: C-M3>Ab-m3>F-m3>D
It’s not a “music theory”. It’s one more stupid attempt to replace education and practice with “one more simple magic formula which explains everything and requires no effort to understand”.
I learned about negative harmony for m Jacob Collier, and after some serious research I can say that this video is the best "for the rest of us" who are more inclined towards comprehension than performance: Simple, straight and with many answers.
When I started out writing songs, I wrote totally anarchic non diatonic progressions, and in the intervening decade it has transpired that there was a name for everything I did. It’s fascinating how any sound you can be drawn to has a relational logic. Who knew country music with a minor IV chord could actually be describe in terms of negative harmony? :)
I think a lot of times people just write music that they think sounds good, then someone will analyze it later on and create terms for everything. I took music theory in college and I'm pretty sure that's what my teacher told us about the course, that Beethoven and Mozart and other composers kind of did whatever and someone analyzed it later on to create "music theory"
@@jackhunt9725 no they didn't do whatever lol they also studied hard a lot. it was just called music. music theory tries to explain how music works, as it is a theory it's always developed to match what humans are doing. music theory is not just beethoven or mozart obviously
@@深夜-l9f you're right, they studied hard a lot. They also wrote their own music based on whatever they felt sounded good. Mozart wrote the first version of "minuet and trio in G major" when he was 5 years old; I don't imagine he studied a whole lot before that, at least not consciously. My point was that the creation of music usually precedes the development of the theory that explains it. Innovation in music usually comes before explanation. Inspiration plays a big role in all works of art. I think we both agree there. I also said "Beethoven and Mozart and _other composers_ " in my original comment.
A while ago I found the chord progression C-G-Fm-C and I couldn't figure out why it sounded so good, but this explains it so beautifully! Thank you for the video!
Easy way to think of it - Going Up the C Major (or whatever) scale, is equivalent to going DOWN the C (or same) NATURAL Minor Scale. This also works for the chord relationship. So C becomes C Minor , D minor becomes Bb, and say, A minor (6th up in the scale of C Major) becomes Eb (6th Down in the Natural Minor Scale). Try playing your C major scale up , then your C Minor Scale Down. Think about what number you are on (either going up Major, or Going Down Minor) and then that number becomes is the Negative Harmony of the other one :) So SCALE UP C, Dm, Em, F ,G ,Am, B dim ,C (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) Becomes = Natural Minor Scale DOWN Cm ,Bb ,Ab ,Gm, Fm, Eb, D dim ,Cm (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) Just match the numbers and substitute the chord!
i love how this video explains the dominant function of a borrowed minor IV chord, like in all those Beatles songs. you could think of that Dm7/b5 as an inversion of the usual seventh chord of C.
I've been playing Don't Look Back in Anger for 15 years and I always wondered how the Fmaj to Fmin worked within the C major key, and now I know, great vid, thank you
Well explained. One criticism though: In a video like this where your audience is trying to keep the chord progression you just played in memory to compare it with the next (negative) chord progression, having music playing in the background is very unhelpful.
I always had to rewind and reaply every step, that fucking music kept distracting my brain again and again, how am i suppose to concentrate on a lesson if I have music in my hears
From the perspective of someone who knows minimal theory and learns everything by ear, I found the music absolutely essential to be able to put it in perspective.
I hear this when I play but totally NEVER thought of the musical science behind what I was hearing! I would not like ending on certain notes.. but this totally explains it. Now if I can just stop being "blown away" with amazement and focus on what he's teaching me... lol!! This channel opened up a whole new world to me! Thank you!
Thanks! If you're interested, I have also a playlist where I show some application + some advanced concepts on Negative Harmony ruclips.net/video/qHH8siNm3ts/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
This ones over my head presently sir. I’m still working on the fretboard note mastery instruction. Your lectures are by far the most understandable. I recently rediscovered my interest in the instrument. And obtained some nice gear as a mid life reward. 51 in a few days. Slowly things are starting to piece together. My goal is the sound and harmonies never heard before and really enjoy your content. Have a great day.
What an insanely amazing way to look at borrowed chords! I've been learning about parallel modes but this puts into a different perspective as to why it works other than just saying "the root note's the same." Love all your videos and you are quickly becoming my #1 youtube channel. Many thanks
I didn't even know the term “negative harmony,” but it makes so much sense in terms of what I keep hearing when I listen to music. BOOM! New knowledge module plugged in. (subscribed)
I watched this vid when I was pursuing a course in music theory and boy I felt like I was lost in space... 3 years after putting my music theory into practice, I can actually understand and see the application of ur subject. I can now create very interesting harmony from this. I also watched ur vid (the wrong chords sound better) where u built complex/ext chords from combining simple diatonic chords and I was in awe of how simple u made something that was seemingly sooo complex. Thank u for sharing ur wealth of knowledge Mr T. 👏👏👏
My pleasure... and allow to throw my own courses in the pot in case you want to go at the next level: www.musictheoryforguitar.com/guitar-theory-lessons.html
Usually I don't comment on videos. But this video was so didactic and easy to understand that it deserves to be commented. I did not know about negative harmony, but it was really good to learn about, because it allows you to give a different color (sound) to any composition. Thanks again for sharing this with us. Best regards!
Am I seeing a pattern? Always take the 1and 5 and switch position, flatten the third, switch the 2&4, and switch the 6&7 then flatten to make the minor scale?
@ricky gervais My same question... an example with a different key tone would close the deal to understand this... more so because am writing my thesis on artificial intelligence that learns to compose music
@ricky gervais If I got it right, it works with any scale (western tonal system seven notes scale at least) by just writing down your scale in a circle like in the video and draw the axis (perpendicular to a line connecting your I and your V) and exchange your notes as shown. Instead of starting with a C, you start with any other note, and instead of using the intervals of the major scale, you can use dorian, phrygian, harmonic minor, and so forth...
Nice explanation. I like to think of it as inverting about the tonic and transposing up a fifth. I also like to show that it works visually with the circle of fifths as well.
Senor, I have been watching circle of fifth videos , on and off, for five years but I have never seen it being demystified before this video. Take a bow, sir. You are a genius.
I am so happy that I took the time to click on this video. Now I finally see in a clearly defined and crystallised layout what I have "known" instinctively for a long time but have been unable to explain to others or myself.
I did grade 1 music theory 46 years ago, and can play a bit by ear. You have made negative harmony quite clear to me. Thanks. I really wanted you to play that melody and then the negative melody.
If you check out the playlist, I play many more examples in different contexts (melodies included): ruclips.net/video/qHH8siNm3ts/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
I had 2 years of formal music study. In the years since, I've read countless books and watched countless videos. And now I just stumbled across one of the best music theory lessons I've ever seen! Your ability to present this material in a way that is easy to learn and use is the mark of a great teacher. Excellent job, and thanks for posting this!
OMFG!! you just opened a portal to another world for me!! Thank you SO MUCH!!!! (I didn't have the slightest idea about negative harmony, even the name is new for me)
@@philwithnotes Could you, please, point me in the direction of some tutorial, site or any other resource where I could find a more plausible explanation of the reasons why those chord substitutions do in fact work?
First, I'm not making it up: Negative Harmony is not my theory, it's been invented/discovered by Ernst Levy, and musicians like Jacob Collier and Steve Coleman popularized it. I'm just explaining it. Second, yes, there are other explanations for those chords( like modal borrowing). I am making a video where I explain the difference and show how to use those tools too. The fact that there is more than one explanation does not necessarily mean that one is right and the others are wrong, especially if the two explanations bring different tools to the table.
Here are some practical examples that show how to apply Negative Harmony and how it is different from the standard modal exchange: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
The only thing with that is if you want to apply it in another key than C major, you have to replace the axis according to the relative major key. For example, in D major, the axis would separate the top one: C, Db, D, Eb, E, F, from the bottom one: Gb, G, Ab, A, Bb, B. So the A7 chord would become Em7b5. It's interesting, cause you could explain these subs with other musical theory concepts and it would come to about the same results, but it makes me think of it a different way, and this is always inspiring.
Yes, that was one thing he didn’t make clear. The REASON you place the axis there on the circle is because it’s exactly half way between the C (the root) and the G (the fifth or dominant) You just have to work out what the root and the fifth are of whatever key you’re in and place your axis exactly half way between them.
That's a good observation, platinum Diamond. Negative harmony is indeed similar to modal borrowing, since they both access the parallel minor harmonies, but they are not the same. As procedures, modal borrowing and negative harmony create different results. This is easier to see if you apply it to melodies than to chords. If you apply a melody and you 'negative harmony' it, you obtain a specific inverse of the original melody. If you instead proceed as modal borrowing, you would simply alter some scale degrees (the 3rd for sure, the 6th and 7th if appropriate) but the melody would not be inverted. This can be generalized to 4-part (or n-part) voice-led progressions: the difference is not in the harmonic progression but in how the voices are led. (It's a bit more complex than that, of course)
You do such a great job with explaining everything. I'd only argue with the resolving-patterns ( stable and active notes), or especially with the resolvement of a´. First my professor told me about, how you should see the a´ not only resolving up to c" but also to g´. With this technique you can either resolve a´ a stable g´ or you can make g´ "aktive" and resolve it in e´. To be faire, it doesn't sound "right" all the time. But with this way of thinking, it opens up a lot more possibilities, to especially work with negative harmony, to resolve it, most of the times, quiet more pleasing. All that aside, thank you for the great explanation and have a lovely day, Moritz
This negative harmony idea is very interesting and makes a lot of chords that I hear in songs and pieces more sense. Thank you for going into depth on this. I took 6 quarters of music theory, and we never learned about negative harmony.
Just get the relative major minor and then replace the notes using the formula below. 1 = 5 2 = 4 3 = 3 4 = 2 3 = 3 5 = 1 6 = 7 7 = 6 In major the first chord is C E G or 1 3 5 In minor the first chord is C Eb 5 or 1 3 5 In major the second chord is D F A or 2 4 6 In minor the second chord is D F Bb or 2 4 7 Just like with the normal change from major to minor the only notes that truly change are the 3, 6 and 7 If your melody in major is 1 3 5 or C, E, G In negative harmony the melody is 5 3 1 or G, Eb, C With melody you retain the order of notes but with chords you rearrange into root note structure and then make your preferred inversions.
Until recently I've never heard of negative harmony. I can't say I understand it all, but it sounds interesting. I'll have to play this video again and again. Thank you.
I absolutely love this video. I am a self taught musician who understands music theory. It took years of being highly focused and at times seemed an absolute impossible mystery but I eventually broke the code and I have an extremely solid understanding of theory and I have the guitar/chords/scales/modes etc. completely mapped in my mind. The biggest challenge I find on RUclips is finding a video that is at my level of understanding and yet allows me to expand my knowledge. I could easily apply this to writing chord arrangements. Especially since I love to write chord arrangements that move all over and allow interesting melodies. I wonder how often I’ve used some of these negative harmony chords.
Hi Tommaso , hoping you doing well , I´ve studied classical guitar during my childhood , and nowadays I´m studying electric bass; and let me tell you that your point is truly shocking for me!! No one told me before about negative harmony! It´s fantastic!!! Now I'm subscribed tou your channel looking for more!! Congratulations!!! Greetings from Santa Fe, Argentina!
Thanks! If you're interested, I have also a playlist where I show some application + some advanced concepts on Negative Harmony ruclips.net/video/qHH8siNm3ts/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
Quick tip for memorizing this on any scale: The tonic are the same, but with negative harmony the chords pairs opposite ways (I with I, ii with VIIb, iii with VIb, VI with v, V with iv, vi with IIIb, and vii° with ii°. Or for those who don't know about roman numerals, 1st with 7th, 2nd with 6th, 3rd with 5th and so on) It is _negative_ in every single way lol
This is the best explanation of "Negative Harmony" I've seen. I think "Negative Harmony" is probably a useful shorthand term, but the term is not descriptive, and the concept described isn't an alternative system of harmony, so it's a little misleading. While the following is more wordy, I believe it describes the process and effect a little better "micro-tonal axis derived chord and melody substitution system". Melody substitution system might be a little generous, since any "negative melody" will simply be an inversion. As a chord substitution system, it's not that far removed from mode mixture, and I'd dare say you might get more adventurous results by handing music to an undergrad and asking them to go crazy reharmonizing something. It is interesting that at the E 1/2 b axis that the relative stability of the tones is maintained, though I would say that phenomenon is more a coincidence in aligning the inversion axis so that nonstable tones map onto each other. The biggest problem with this system comes in hearing the process after the fact. Can someone, even someone knowledgeable about "negative harmony" determine from hearing alone that a negative harmony has been used, or that a iv chord has been used as a substitute for V? I've seen some extremely confusing videos where people who allegedly use this system, and allegedly understand it try to to explain it. Again, this is the best explanation of this idea I've seen. Thanks!
Thank you Roderick. I agree with every single statement you make. And yes, at the end of the day Negative Harmony is simply an inversion that preserves the stability of the tones. For me it's just a tool among many others that you can use in your harmonic toolbox.
I made this for myself and thought others might benefit from this more universal info for transposition: All chromatic major/minor chord possibilities should be covered but make sure to remember symmetric property (i.e. if looking for VI remember to read right to left as well) Major and Minor Scales Diatonic Chords I = i ii = bVII iii = bVI IV = v V = iv vi = bIII vii* = ii* Nondiatonic chords bII = vii bii = VII II = bvii biii = VI III = bvi #IV = #iv #iv = #IV
Wow. Excellent explanation. The mathematics of music fascinates me. It ties it to an absolute that frees it to be anything. It is the stuff of the universe.
i have just recently found ur vids left a few comments ur the most helpful sweet man of all time if u have a vid series or anything i will buy it because u deserve compensation for this
I rarely comment on RUclips videos but have to say thanks so much for this, negative harmony is a new concept to me and I find it very interesting and hope to apply it myself and with your excellent explanation I feel I understand it. Great videos from your channel man, thank you!
You are an excellent instructor! Thank you for your clear, concise explanations! It would be easier for me to concentrate without the unrelated music playing in the background. I always love your instruction and explanations.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar please do not confuse "not sounding good" with "less tonal". The tonal feeling is weakened, but it does not at all sound less good.
Wow ! Great content ! I love the way you explained this. I thoroughly understand it now. It's not a big mystery at all. Thanks for the new tools in my toolbox. You teach very well, and resonates perfectly with me. I really enjoyed your video !
so the negative substitutions come from the parallel minor scale backwards. 1 = 1 (from minor scale) 2 = 7 (from minor scale) 3 = 6 (from minor scale) 4 = 5 (from minor scale) 5 = 4 (from minor scale) 3 = 2 (from minor scale) 1 = 1 (from minor scale)
I am trying to think (me?) if the same would be true in the reverse, too. Like, instead of C major start with C natural minor, then line up C major, start on the fifth and descend. OR am I loosing my mind but minor or major; thinking parallel (staying natural minor) and go in opposite directions, but the root of the first = the fifth of the second for its starting point. One goes up and the other goes down, not sure: C D Eb F G Ab Bb C (upward) would maybe = G F E D C B A G (downward)
By my reckoning, not quite the parallel scale backwards, but please tell me where I'm wrong, if I'm wrong... 1 = 5 (from minor scale) 5 = 1 (from minor scale) 2 = 4 (from minor scale) 4 = 2 (from minor scale) 3 = 3 (from minor scale) 6 = 7 (from minor scale) 7 = 6 (from minor scale)
@@johnwilloug2717 i see where you got confused. you're comparing one note to one note. i'm comparing a full chord to a full chord. the negative harmony chords are spelled backwards if you do them note by note, but the triads are still clear. G Eb C for example is still C minor even though it's spelled backwards if you substitute one note at a time. C E G becomes G Eb C. in other words 1 (major) becomes 1 (from the parallel minor). D F A becomes F D Bb. in other words 1 (major) becomes 7 (from the parallel minor). etc etc for the rest of my chart. I hope that's helpful.
@@zachtaylor1939 It is helpful, but I had to sit down and think about it a bit more. Thank you! OK, got it - but my non-musical brain means that as I change every chord note by note, I have no idea what the substitution chord will be called, and have to search around for a name for it. Oh well, a surprise every time. Just to check I got it right, in the example above, Fmaj -> Gmin, and Em -> Ab min ? If you have time to answer this, tell me where to send the tuition fee... : )
Wow, up until now I did this sort of thing intuitively on my (attempts at) songs, and also noticed it being done on other people's tracks. This video helped me understand what was actually going on.
nice and inspiring. my understanding of this transforms is that they are elaborations and experiments around standard blues: when you go C7 -> F7 -> C7, which is a common starting blues phrase, you get the change from major to minor scale ... in root of C. and then you just apply various substitutions. but there are so many possibilities that you really need a lot of experience to use it nicely, or you just pick one limited rule, or you do your homework, prepare a specific chord progression and play over it. thanks, keep up
The thing about the 'negative harmony' trend is that it actually isn't accomplishing anything new in terms of harmony. These kinds of chord progressions have been popping up for hundreds of years as the result of voice leading and melodic motifs like appogiaturas, inversions, etc. and mode mixture and tonicization. The negative harmony wheel is basically just a simple tool to generate chord substitutions for those who don't really have a deep grasp on theory, but the substitutions it produces are not any different or more varied than what has been around for ages. Anyone with enough background in theory can tell you why all of these substitutions work without resorting to any kind of 'negative harmony' theory. I have nothing against it as a simple tool for those who are interested, but I'm a bit puzzled that everyone seems to think its a major revolution in music theory or harmonization.
I share your puzzlement, and I agree with your observations. I did this video because people asked me to do it, and because I was tired of seeing Negative Harmony explained like it was some complex, mystical, all-powerful theory. To be fair though, while Negative harmony is similar to mode mixture, since they both access the parallel minor harmonies, they are not the same. As procedures, modal borrowing and negative harmony create different results. This is easier to see if you apply it to melodies than to chords. If you apply a melody and you 'negative harmony' it, you obtain a specific inverse of the original melody. If you instead proceed as modal borrowing, you would simply alter some scale degrees (the 3rd for sure, the 6th and 7th if appropriate) but the melody would not be inverted. This can be generalized to 4-part (or n-part) voice-led progressions: the difference is not in the harmonic progression but in how the voices are led. (It's a bit more complex than that, of course)
So how would you explain it without the wheel?. I dont like this wants to resolve stuff either. Its music after a while it can really just be anyway you like.
rykirk algiz - I believe that calling this method of substitutions 'dark harmony' is simply to make it fun and mysterious, as one aspect of substitutions.. it's an interesting visual way of remembering the process. Funny how your comment matches your name.
Thank you for the ingenuity of simplicity in your explanation! I would love to see a video on chordal melody. The rules for proper harmonization with a single line melody. And if certain inversions are required for guitar? Thank you.
Tommaso nailed it, as the level of engagement with other viewers confirms , kudos facilitating discovery and understanding to your audience(a quick google)mentions to Ernst Levy in 1985, and Jacob Collier as revivalist since now this some findings after the first few hours of watching - the chromatic circle / graphical presentation aid is very helpful and considers going outside of the key which is embraced in jazz, the half dim in key C's diatonic chords is B I believed until now - This appears to convert as a Cminor aeolian scale: C D Eb F G Ab Bb scale notes resorted A Bb B Ab C G D F E Eb F D G C - diatonic 7 chord interpretative using excel data mining of big data CM7 Cm6 (w min 6) Dm7 Gm7 Em7 Fm7 FM7 Gm6 (w min 6) G7 Fm6 (w maj6) Am7 Cm7 Bb5-7 Bb7 3 note voicings, and then with characteristic chord note coloring will get added to practicing this so far cerebral process , time to get the ears out :)
Bravo! A very good explanation which explains to me some chord changes, which I usually identify more with the ears, in an understandable context, which now makes the application much easier.
It would be nice to hear the excellent presentation without the background music, in order to let my mind to roam over the possibilities. Great work, either way!
![TUTORIAL: Writing Melodies With NEGATIVE HARMONY and Modal Exchange [Practical Examples]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/heISdRNnEnw/mqdefault.jpg)
![TUTORIAL: Writing Melodies With NEGATIVE HARMONY and Modal Exchange [Practical Examples]](/img/tr.png)
![What You Can Do With NEGATIVE HARMONY As A Composer [Music Theory]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GdCFYTii1Gw/mqdefault.jpg)
By popular request: here are a few practical examples on how to use Negative Harmony when you write a song. They also explain the (important) difference between Negative Harmony and Modal Exchange: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
Could not comprehend how G negative harmony became Fm and also how G7 became Dm7b5...???
pasha biswas When you make a “negative” chord, you find the inverse of every note in that chord. For G, you have G B D, which invert to C Ab F respectively, aka Fm. For G7, it inverts to Dø7 because you add F, which inverts to D, giving you the notes C Ab F D.
Another way of looking it is inverting the root, and then finding the notes with the same intervalic relationships DOWN from that root. So a G7 chord looks like G-M3>B-m3>D-m3>F, so the negative chord should start with a top note of C and go DOWN those same intervals: C-M3>Ab-m3>F-m3>D
José Rodriguez : I like your “other way of looking at it”.
Good explanation.
MusicTheoryForGuitar ii
MusicTheoryForGuitar ii
For the first time in my almost 64 years, I'm beginning to grasp the logic of music theory. Many thanks for your great instruction.
It’s not a “music theory”. It’s one more stupid attempt to replace education and practice with “one more simple magic formula which explains everything and requires no effort to understand”.
Yikes...
Коротко і ясно nerd
Коротко і ясно are you ok?
@@Короткоіясно-ь8р If he has a hypothesis and can be proven it can be called a theory
You have musical fingers. When I write notes on a whiteboard and then point to them, nothing happens.
HAHA :)
Incredibly underrated comment.
Underrated video
Underrated website
@@bluemoonyoshi Underrated internet
This is the best explanation about why and how negative harmony works that I have seen. Thank you, Tommaso!
@@mcfahk beeing negative disharmonious? :-D
@@mcfahk I found it very confusing. I am left puzzled as to what negative harmony actually is. Maybe further views will clarify.
I concur!
I learned about negative harmony for m Jacob Collier, and after some serious research I can say that this video is the best "for the rest of us" who are more inclined towards comprehension than performance: Simple, straight and with many answers.
Not gonna lie, the accent helped keep my attention.
I'm a lifelong pianist, and I found this explanation very useful - that's the beauty of music theory taught well! Really nice job!
Same here
When I started out writing songs, I wrote totally anarchic non diatonic progressions, and in the intervening decade it has transpired that there was a name for everything I did. It’s fascinating how any sound you can be drawn to has a relational logic. Who knew country music with a minor IV chord could actually be describe in terms of negative harmony? :)
Also explains why I have always loved a I - bIII sound.
Four minor to One Major is plagueal cadence.
I think a lot of times people just write music that they think sounds good, then someone will analyze it later on and create terms for everything. I took music theory in college and I'm pretty sure that's what my teacher told us about the course, that Beethoven and Mozart and other composers kind of did whatever and someone analyzed it later on to create "music theory"
@@jackhunt9725 no they didn't do whatever lol they also studied hard a lot. it was just called music. music theory tries to explain how music works, as it is a theory it's always developed to match what humans are doing. music theory is not just beethoven or mozart obviously
@@深夜-l9f you're right, they studied hard a lot. They also wrote their own music based on whatever they felt sounded good. Mozart wrote the first version of "minuet and trio in G major" when he was 5 years old; I don't imagine he studied a whole lot before that, at least not consciously.
My point was that the creation of music usually precedes the development of the theory that explains it. Innovation in music usually comes before explanation. Inspiration plays a big role in all works of art. I think we both agree there.
I also said "Beethoven and Mozart and _other composers_ " in my original comment.
I've been playing the guitar for over 40 years and studying musical theory. And I have never met such a didactic person like you. Thank you!
7:17 gave me an eargasm... so beautiful
A while ago I found the chord progression C-G-Fm-C and I couldn't figure out why it sounded so good, but this explains it so beautifully! Thank you for the video!
Easy way to think of it - Going Up the C Major (or whatever) scale, is equivalent to going DOWN the C (or same) NATURAL Minor Scale. This also works for the chord relationship. So C becomes C Minor , D minor becomes Bb, and say, A minor (6th up in the scale of C Major) becomes Eb (6th Down in the Natural Minor Scale).
Try playing your C major scale up , then your C Minor Scale Down. Think about what number you are on (either going up Major, or Going Down Minor) and then that number becomes is the Negative Harmony of the other one :)
So SCALE UP C, Dm, Em, F ,G ,Am, B dim ,C (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) Becomes = Natural Minor Scale
DOWN Cm ,Bb ,Ab ,Gm, Fm, Eb, D dim ,Cm (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)
Just match the numbers and substitute the chord!
Great explanation, so simplified and easy to understand. Thank you
Hey
Do you have an idea How the f does G7 becomes Dm7/B5 ?
@@whysolittlemoney write down all G7 notes and do negative harmony - it becomes Dm7/b5
@@willwang22 thx m8
The hero we all needed thanks
i love how this video explains the dominant function of a borrowed minor IV chord, like in all those Beatles songs.
you could think of that Dm7/b5 as an inversion of the usual seventh chord of C.
the Dm7/b5 could also be seen as an inversion of a G7alt in a 2-5-1 in C major
I've been playing Don't Look Back in Anger for 15 years and I always wondered how the Fmaj to Fmin worked within the C major key, and now I know, great vid, thank you
Well explained. One criticism though: In a video like this where your audience is trying to keep the chord progression you just played in memory to compare it with the next (negative) chord progression, having music playing in the background is very unhelpful.
I always had to rewind and reaply every step, that fucking music kept distracting my brain again and again, how am i suppose to concentrate on a lesson if I have music in my hears
soooooo true, wandering what they think when they do these tutorials...even if this one is very easy to understand and helpful
From the perspective of someone who knows minimal theory and learns everything by ear, I found the music absolutely essential to be able to put it in perspective.
It was a good brain exercise.
I did not notice the background music until I read this comment...
I hear this when I play but totally NEVER thought of the musical science behind what I was hearing! I would not like ending on certain notes.. but this totally explains it.
Now if I can just stop being "blown away" with amazement and focus on what he's teaching me... lol!! This channel opened up a whole new world to me! Thank you!
The clearest explanation of negative harmony I've seen. A belated thank you.
I hesitated to watch another video trying to explain it in a simple way. Im glad i clicked on the video. Good job
Thanks! If you're interested, I have also a playlist where I show some application + some advanced concepts on Negative Harmony ruclips.net/video/qHH8siNm3ts/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
This ones over my head presently sir. I’m still working on the fretboard note mastery instruction. Your lectures are by far the most understandable. I recently rediscovered my interest in the instrument. And obtained some nice gear as a mid life reward. 51 in a few days. Slowly things are starting to piece together. My goal is the sound and harmonies never heard before and really enjoy your content. Have a great day.
What an insanely amazing way to look at borrowed chords! I've been learning about parallel modes but this puts into a different perspective as to why it works other than just saying "the root note's the same." Love all your videos and you are quickly becoming my #1 youtube channel. Many thanks
I didn't even know the term “negative harmony,” but it makes so much sense in terms of what I keep hearing when I listen to music. BOOM! New knowledge module plugged in. (subscribed)
I watched this vid when I was pursuing a course in music theory and boy I felt like I was lost in space... 3 years after putting my music theory into practice, I can actually understand and see the application of ur subject. I can now create very interesting harmony from this. I also watched ur vid (the wrong chords sound better) where u built complex/ext chords from combining simple diatonic chords and I was in awe of how simple u made something that was seemingly sooo complex. Thank u for sharing ur wealth of knowledge Mr T. 👏👏👏
My pleasure... and allow to throw my own courses in the pot in case you want to go at the next level: www.musictheoryforguitar.com/guitar-theory-lessons.html
this was the clearest explenation of anything i've ever heard
Why do natives make so many mistakes in their written speech? Is that because we studied classical language variant?
@@BloodyOrange1 What?
Usually I don't comment on videos.
But this video was so didactic and easy to understand that it deserves to be commented.
I did not know about negative harmony, but it was really good to learn about, because it allows you to give a different color (sound) to any composition.
Thanks again for sharing this with us.
Best regards!
wow dude, you hear that. You're video was soo god that you got EDUARDO ROCA to comment. His comments are as rare as a pregnant female seahorse
Hahahahaha, I nor understand nor know what was the point of your comment. 0_0
In fact, you beat me. That was a rare comment...
@@3rg3 as rare as my dad showing effection
Whole heartedly agree...Ben fatto signore!
Am I seeing a pattern? Always take the 1and 5 and switch position, flatten the third, switch the 2&4, and switch the 6&7 then flatten to make the minor scale?
Yes!
@ricky gervais My same question... an example with a different key tone would close the deal to understand this... more so because am writing my thesis on artificial intelligence that learns to compose music
omar lopez thats fucking dope dude
@ricky gervais
If I got it right, it works with any scale (western tonal system seven notes scale at least) by just writing down your scale in a circle like in the video and draw the axis (perpendicular to a line connecting your I and your V) and exchange your notes as shown. Instead of starting with a C, you start with any other note, and instead of using the intervals of the major scale, you can use dorian, phrygian, harmonic minor, and so forth...
Noted. Thanks
your accent makes this even better i love listening to your voice
Most accurate and comprehensive explanation of negative harmony. Everybody else fall short. Thank you a lot!
Easily the best explanation of negative harmony that I have seen anywhere.
Nice explanation. I like to think of it as inverting about the tonic and transposing up a fifth.
I also like to show that it works visually with the circle of fifths as well.
Something I was trying to learn for months , figured it out in minutes, even took notes
6:44 "D half diminished", Great video! Thank you!
Senor, I have been watching circle of fifth videos , on and off, for five years but I have never seen it being demystified before this video. Take a bow, sir. You are a genius.
Omg! Where were you all this time? I am gonna take notes! Thanks, this makes so much sense now.
Brilliant presentation on this aspect of music fundamentals, much easier to understand than my college professor, thank you!
I am so happy that I took the time to click on this video. Now I finally see in a clearly defined and crystallised layout what I have "known" instinctively for a long time but have been unable to explain to others or myself.
This is an outstanding video. I have never heard negative harmony taught so quickly and concisely. Really impressive.
You were right !
Negative harmony is very simple... when your teacher is good as you are !
Un grand merci !
I did grade 1 music theory 46 years ago, and can play a bit by ear. You have made negative harmony quite clear to me. Thanks.
I really wanted you to play that melody and then the negative melody.
If you check out the playlist, I play many more examples in different contexts (melodies included): ruclips.net/video/qHH8siNm3ts/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar Thanks very much! I'll check that out.
I had 2 years of formal music study. In the years since, I've read countless books and watched countless videos. And now I just stumbled across one of the best music theory lessons I've ever seen! Your ability to present this material in a way that is easy to learn and use is the mark of a great teacher. Excellent job, and thanks for posting this!
Thank YOU! :)
OMFG!! you just opened a portal to another world for me!!
Thank you SO MUCH!!!!
(I didn't have the slightest idea about negative harmony, even the name is new for me)
Same here.
Juanjo Abad It’s new because he’s totally making it up! Total rubbish. There is no such thing as negative harmony.
@@philwithnotes Could you, please, point me in the direction of some tutorial, site or any other resource where I could find a more plausible explanation of the reasons why those chord substitutions do in fact work?
First, I'm not making it up: Negative Harmony is not my theory, it's been invented/discovered by Ernst Levy, and musicians like Jacob Collier and Steve Coleman popularized it. I'm just explaining it.
Second, yes, there are other explanations for those chords( like modal borrowing). I am making a video where I explain the difference and show how to use those tools too.
The fact that there is more than one explanation does not necessarily mean that one is right and the others are wrong, especially if the two explanations bring different tools to the table.
Here are some practical examples that show how to apply Negative Harmony and how it is different from the standard modal exchange: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
Pure gold Tommaso! Sounds very natural to my ear. Now to digest and internalize.
Dude! I haven't seen more concise explanation of that topic. Seven thumbs up! Loving your videos
I like how his accent helps me focus more. Great content brother.
The only thing with that is if you want to apply it in another key than C major, you have to replace the axis according to the relative major key. For example, in D major, the axis would separate the top one: C, Db, D, Eb, E, F, from the bottom one: Gb, G, Ab, A, Bb, B. So the A7 chord would become Em7b5. It's interesting, cause you could explain these subs with other musical theory concepts and it would come to about the same results, but it makes me think of it a different way, and this is always inspiring.
Yes, that was one thing he didn’t make clear. The REASON you place the axis there on the circle is because it’s exactly half way between the C (the root) and the G (the fifth or dominant) You just have to work out what the root and the fifth are of whatever key you’re in and place your axis exactly half way between them.
The sounds of the chords helps a lot! thank you man! nice work
This is cool, I've never heard of this or learned anything about it in school or anywhere else. Thanks for this!
because it's not real music theory. this just some pretentious bullshit for modal mixture and borrowed chords.
That's a good observation, platinum Diamond. Negative harmony is indeed similar to modal borrowing, since they both access the parallel minor harmonies, but they are not the same. As procedures, modal borrowing and negative harmony create different results.
This is easier to see if you apply it to melodies than to chords. If you apply a melody and you 'negative harmony' it, you obtain a specific inverse of the original melody. If you instead proceed as modal borrowing, you would simply alter some scale degrees (the 3rd for sure, the 6th and 7th if appropriate) but the melody would not be inverted.
This can be generalized to 4-part (or n-part) voice-led progressions: the difference is not in the harmonic progression but in how the voices are led. (It's a bit more complex than that, of course)
Here's a better explanation of the difference, with practical examples: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
You do such a great job with explaining everything.
I'd only argue with the resolving-patterns ( stable and active notes), or especially with the resolvement of a´.
First my professor told me about, how you should see the a´ not only resolving up to c" but also to g´.
With this technique you can either resolve a´ a stable g´ or you can make g´ "aktive" and resolve it in e´.
To be faire, it doesn't sound "right" all the time.
But with this way of thinking, it opens up a lot more possibilities,
to especially work with negative harmony, to resolve it, most of the times, quiet more pleasing.
All that aside, thank you for the great explanation and have a lovely day,
Moritz
I did not fully understand this. But now I need to learn those 7th and major 7th flat 5th chords. They do resolve amazingly !!
Fascinating and brilliant presentation. Never heard of it before though. Thanks
its for da jazz heads
like me
Roderick Staples That’s because it doesn’t exist. This is total bullshit.
This negative harmony idea is very interesting and makes a lot of chords that I hear in songs and pieces more sense. Thank you for going into depth on this. I took 6 quarters of music theory, and we never learned about negative harmony.
Just get the relative major minor and then replace the notes using the formula below.
1 = 5
2 = 4
3 = 3
4 = 2
3 = 3
5 = 1
6 = 7
7 = 6
In major the first chord is
C E G or 1 3 5
In minor the first chord is
C Eb 5 or 1 3 5
In major the second chord is
D F A or 2 4 6
In minor the second chord is
D F Bb or 2 4 7
Just like with the normal change from major to minor the only notes that truly change are the 3, 6 and 7
If your melody in major is
1 3 5 or C, E, G
In negative harmony the melody is
5 3 1 or G, Eb, C
With melody you retain the order of notes but with chords you rearrange into root note structure and then make your preferred inversions.
Until recently I've never heard of negative harmony. I can't say I understand it all, but it sounds interesting. I'll have to play this video again and again. Thank you.
If it can help you, here are some more practical examples: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
I absolutely love this video. I am a self taught musician who understands music theory. It took years of being highly focused and at times seemed an absolute impossible mystery but I eventually broke the code and I have an extremely solid understanding of theory and I have the guitar/chords/scales/modes etc. completely mapped in my mind.
The biggest challenge I find on RUclips is finding a video that is at my level of understanding and yet allows me to expand my knowledge. I could easily apply this to writing chord arrangements. Especially since I love to write chord arrangements that move all over and allow interesting melodies. I wonder how often I’ve used some of these negative harmony chords.
Hi Tommaso , hoping you doing well , I´ve studied classical guitar during my childhood , and nowadays I´m studying electric bass; and let me tell you that your point is truly shocking for me!! No one told me before about negative harmony! It´s fantastic!!! Now I'm subscribed tou your channel looking for more!! Congratulations!!! Greetings from Santa Fe, Argentina!
Finally neg harmony explained in a clear way and in few minutes. Thanks!!!
Every beginner musician out there needs to watch this
And probably no beginner will fully understand this. I think it’s more for advanced musicians.
Nice explanation but PLEASE KILL that
background muzak......
yessss!
Absolutely. The excellent explanation of the topic deserves attention!
yes, I don't know if I can finish this because of the muzak.
@@Qwerty-ks8dn it's italian flavored english
@@Qwerty-ks8dn You know idiots are idiots no matter what,we're waiting for your Italian course,come please.
Great job explaining this concept! Thank you!
Thanks! If you're interested, I have also a playlist where I show some application + some advanced concepts on Negative Harmony ruclips.net/video/qHH8siNm3ts/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
This is the video I've been waiting for since the beginning. Thank you very much
Quick tip for memorizing this on any scale: The tonic are the same, but with negative harmony the chords pairs opposite ways (I with I, ii with VIIb, iii with VIb, VI with v, V with iv, vi with IIIb, and vii° with ii°. Or for those who don't know about roman numerals, 1st with 7th, 2nd with 6th, 3rd with 5th and so on)
It is _negative_ in every single way lol
Edu Cabrera 1 with 1, 2 with 7, etc. You.made a typo.
I been using negative harmonies for years without even knowing the name of the theory behind it, btw Killer lesson!! New sub
This is the best explanation of "Negative Harmony" I've seen. I think "Negative Harmony" is probably a useful shorthand term, but the term is not descriptive, and the concept described isn't an alternative system of harmony, so it's a little misleading. While the following is more wordy, I believe it describes the process and effect a little better "micro-tonal axis derived chord and melody substitution system". Melody substitution system might be a little generous, since any "negative melody" will simply be an inversion. As a chord substitution system, it's not that far removed from mode mixture, and I'd dare say you might get more adventurous results by handing music to an undergrad and asking them to go crazy reharmonizing something. It is interesting that at the E 1/2 b axis that the relative stability of the tones is maintained, though I would say that phenomenon is more a coincidence in aligning the inversion axis so that nonstable tones map onto each other. The biggest problem with this system comes in hearing the process after the fact. Can someone, even someone knowledgeable about "negative harmony" determine from hearing alone that a negative harmony has been used, or that a iv chord has been used as a substitute for V? I've seen some extremely confusing videos where people who allegedly use this system, and allegedly understand it try to to explain it. Again, this is the best explanation of this idea I've seen. Thanks!
Thank you Roderick. I agree with every single statement you make. And yes, at the end of the day Negative Harmony is simply an inversion that preserves the stability of the tones. For me it's just a tool among many others that you can use in your harmonic toolbox.
This for me is the best explanation of the theory and application of negative harmony. Great video, thanks for making this sir!
Fantastic video, Tommaso! This has got to be the most concise & coherent explanation of the concept that I have personally heard to date. Thank you!
I made this for myself and thought others might benefit from this more universal info for transposition:
All chromatic major/minor chord possibilities should be covered but make sure to remember symmetric property (i.e. if looking for VI remember to read right to left as well)
Major and Minor Scales Diatonic Chords
I = i
ii = bVII
iii = bVI
IV = v
V = iv
vi = bIII
vii* = ii*
Nondiatonic chords
bII = vii
bii = VII
II = bvii
biii = VI
III = bvi
#IV = #iv
#iv = #IV
I like your style of teaching!!
Wow. Excellent explanation. The mathematics of music fascinates me. It ties it to an absolute that frees it to be anything. It is the stuff of the universe.
I must say this was a much better explanation than I ever got from a Music Theory professor!
Wow! The matchless explanation my bro. Thanks for making my evolution to the revolution!
Wow mind-blowing stuff delivered easily digestible.
7:54 i actually loved this chord progression, i dont know why
Wow! Thanks. I always just called it "The Beatles thing"
You learn something old everyday
lol, I was thinking the same thing
i have just recently found ur vids left a few comments ur the most helpful sweet man of all time if u have a vid series or anything i will buy it because u deserve compensation for this
I do have several courses available at www.musictheoryforguitar.com/guitar-theory-lessons.html
I rarely comment on RUclips videos but have to say thanks so much for this, negative harmony is a new concept to me and I find it very interesting and hope to apply it myself and with your excellent explanation I feel I understand it. Great videos from your channel man, thank you!
This is so exciting and not scary anymore... Thanks Tommaso
Wow this is really fascinating. The ii chord sounds really good when you changed it to the m7b5 chord
Interesting concept, but the presentation steals the show!! Amazing!!!
Man you make it sound so simple, you are a great teacher
You are an excellent instructor! Thank you for your clear, concise explanations! It would be easier for me to concentrate without the unrelated music playing in the background. I always love your instruction and explanations.
7:54 "it isn't sounded good"
my J A Z Z brain: I don't think so.
That's great! I just said that *I* don't like it, but I have no pretense to tell anybody what *they* like or not like :)
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar you’re so nice
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar please do not confuse "not sounding good" with "less tonal". The tonal feeling is weakened, but it does not at all sound less good.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar plus at this point, using negative harmony for some chords only is just a chord substitution with minor degrees...
@@MrSamuel1438 these are similar, but not the same: ruclips.net/video/heISdRNnEnw/видео.html
Wow. I stumble onto this sometimes but never knew the principle.
Great explanation! I can't believe that for the first time, I'm actually starting to understand negative harmony.
My new favorite youtube channel. You are an incredible teacher! Thank you!
Lol this is the first vid I have seen on this channel and I am greeted with HELLO INTERNET lmao, great vid man
Wow ! Great content ! I love the way you explained this. I thoroughly understand it now. It's not a big mystery at all. Thanks for the new tools in my toolbox. You teach very well, and resonates perfectly with me. I really enjoyed your video !
so the negative substitutions come from the parallel minor scale backwards.
1 = 1 (from minor scale)
2 = 7 (from minor scale)
3 = 6 (from minor scale)
4 = 5 (from minor scale)
5 = 4 (from minor scale)
3 = 2 (from minor scale)
1 = 1 (from minor scale)
Oh wow, that just clicked! That's maybe an even easier way to remember this.
I am trying to think (me?) if the same would be true in the reverse, too. Like, instead of C major start with C natural minor, then line up C major, start on the fifth and descend. OR am I loosing my mind but minor or major; thinking parallel (staying natural minor) and go in opposite directions, but the root of the first = the fifth of the second for its starting point. One goes up and the other goes down, not sure: C D Eb F G Ab Bb C (upward) would maybe = G F E D C B A G (downward)
By my reckoning, not quite the parallel scale backwards, but please tell me where I'm wrong, if I'm wrong...
1 = 5 (from minor scale)
5 = 1 (from minor scale)
2 = 4 (from minor scale)
4 = 2 (from minor scale)
3 = 3 (from minor scale)
6 = 7 (from minor scale)
7 = 6 (from minor scale)
@@johnwilloug2717 i see where you got confused. you're comparing one note to one note. i'm comparing a full chord to a full chord. the negative harmony chords are spelled backwards if you do them note by note, but the triads are still clear. G Eb C for example is still C minor even though it's spelled backwards if you substitute one note at a time.
C E G becomes G Eb C. in other words 1 (major) becomes 1 (from the parallel minor).
D F A becomes F D Bb. in other words 1 (major) becomes 7 (from the parallel minor).
etc etc for the rest of my chart.
I hope that's helpful.
@@zachtaylor1939 It is helpful, but I had to sit down and think about it a bit more. Thank you!
OK, got it - but my non-musical brain means that as I change every chord note by note, I have no idea what the substitution chord will be called, and have to search around for a name for it. Oh well, a surprise every time.
Just to check I got it right, in the example above, Fmaj -> Gmin, and Em -> Ab min ?
If you have time to answer this, tell me where to send the tuition fee... : )
Wow, up until now I did this sort of thing intuitively on my (attempts at) songs, and also noticed it being done on other people's tracks. This video helped me understand what was actually going on.
nice and inspiring. my understanding of this transforms is that they are elaborations and experiments around standard blues: when you go C7 -> F7 -> C7, which is a common starting blues phrase, you get the change from major to minor scale ... in root of C. and then you just apply various substitutions. but there are so many possibilities that you really need a lot of experience to use it nicely, or you just pick one limited rule, or you do your homework, prepare a specific chord progression and play over it. thanks, keep up
The thing about the 'negative harmony' trend is that it actually isn't accomplishing anything new in terms of harmony. These kinds of chord progressions have been popping up for hundreds of years as the result of voice leading and melodic motifs like appogiaturas, inversions, etc. and mode mixture and tonicization.
The negative harmony wheel is basically just a simple tool to generate chord substitutions for those who don't really have a deep grasp on theory, but the substitutions it produces are not any different or more varied than what has been around for ages. Anyone with enough background in theory can tell you why all of these substitutions work without resorting to any kind of 'negative harmony' theory. I have nothing against it as a simple tool for those who are interested, but I'm a bit puzzled that everyone seems to think its a major revolution in music theory or harmonization.
I share your puzzlement, and I agree with your observations. I did this video because people asked me to do it, and because I was tired of seeing Negative Harmony explained like it was some complex, mystical, all-powerful theory.
To be fair though, while Negative harmony is similar to mode mixture, since they both access the parallel minor harmonies, they are not the same. As procedures, modal borrowing and negative harmony create different results.
This is easier to see if you apply it to melodies than to chords. If you apply a melody and you 'negative harmony' it, you obtain a specific inverse of the original melody. If you instead proceed as modal borrowing, you would simply alter some scale degrees (the 3rd for sure, the 6th and 7th if appropriate) but the melody would not be inverted.
This can be generalized to 4-part (or n-part) voice-led progressions: the difference is not in the harmonic progression but in how the voices are led. (It's a bit more complex than that, of course)
True. Realize all useful theory are explanations of what has gone on before. And multiple theories can exist, some float others’ boats.
Yes
So how would you explain it without the wheel?. I dont like this wants to resolve stuff either. Its music after a while it can really just be anyway you like.
rykirk algiz - I believe that calling this method of substitutions 'dark harmony' is simply to make it fun and mysterious, as one aspect of substitutions.. it's an interesting visual way of remembering the process. Funny how your comment matches your name.
Thank you for the ingenuity of simplicity in your explanation! I would love to see a video on chordal melody. The rules for proper harmonization with a single line melody. And if certain inversions are required for guitar? Thank you.
completely mindblowing, thank you so much. let me pick my jaw up off the floor and write some songs with these principles!
Tommaso nailed it, as the level of engagement with other viewers
confirms , kudos facilitating discovery and understanding to your
audience(a quick google)mentions to Ernst Levy in 1985, and Jacob Collier
as revivalist since now this
some findings after the first few hours of watching
-
the chromatic circle / graphical presentation aid is very helpful and considers going outside of the key which is embraced in jazz, the half dim in key C's diatonic chords is B I believed until now
-
This appears to convert as a Cminor aeolian scale: C D Eb F G Ab Bb scale
notes resorted
A Bb
B Ab
C G
D F
E Eb
F D
G C
-
diatonic 7 chord interpretative using excel data mining of big data
CM7 Cm6 (w min 6)
Dm7 Gm7
Em7 Fm7
FM7 Gm6 (w min 6)
G7 Fm6 (w maj6)
Am7 Cm7
Bb5-7 Bb7
3 note voicings, and then with characteristic chord note coloring will get added to practicing this so far cerebral process , time to get the ears out :)
You're a great music teacher,
Im a keyboardist and i have learned many music theory from your channel ❤️
Amazingly clear and inspiring ! 🙏
Bravo!
A very good explanation which explains to me some chord changes, which I usually identify more with the ears, in an understandable context, which now makes the application much easier.
The first time i wasnt getting it i rewatched and i get it. Thank you! I like your accent haha
Second to the ugandan
Very interesting and simple to comprehend. I’m going to apply it real soon!
Wow, this is awesome. I never thought about Harmonics this way!
so negative harmony is kind of like borrowing chords from the parallel minor key?
Excellent explanation! The background music is slightly distracting. Otherwise loved the visuals!
It would be nice to hear the excellent presentation without the background music, in order to let my mind to roam over the possibilities. Great work, either way!
Slightly !!! zgrnglbrbrbrrr !
6:37 is the exact chord progression of 'All I want for Christmas' in the key of C.
Man, that was superb!
Awesome clear and understandable presentation of the material
My oh my, your guitar course is tickling my fancy!