Creepin' for Michael

Michael, here's Creepin' if you want to try to do something with it. Changes and mix-minus-guitar are attached. The original guitar comp was just quarter notes across the changes, but feel free to do whatever sounds best to you. It's intended to be a "Sixteen Tons/Stray Cat Strut" kinda hybrid.

A pentatonic blues scale works fine across these changes (and across Trevor's Tune as well) for solos and fills, but there's plenty of movement in the changes to do more than a blues scale if you hear something more fun.

This tune actually wants melody and lyrics/vocals - that's why the initial Hammond part is so simple... it's just doing the melody line I hear. Too bad Jimmy Mac hasn't been around for awhile, he writes some very nice stuff and I know he's got a home recording setup, too.

Views: 0

Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 21, 2009 at 1:14pm
I totally hear a vocal melody. Maybe I should play around with that first?
Permalink Reply by Chuck Mayo on October 21, 2009 at 1:23pm
Whatever you think. The tune's basically just a sound and something to solo over at this point.

The Roadhouse said:
I totally hear a vocal melody. Maybe I should play around with that first?
Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 21, 2009 at 2:27pm
I just sent you some possible lyrics. If you like the concept, I'll record vocals to a scratch track possibly tonight to give you a sample of the vocal melody I'm hearing. Chat with you soon.

Micheal
Permalink Reply by Chuck Mayo on October 21, 2009 at 2:48pm
Love the lyrics - just realized that the previously uploaded mix that says "No Guitar" actually has the guitar track, but no lead lines. I'm uploaded a mix now with no guitar and no lead lines... maybe one version will help more than the other with the lyrics and melody.

The Roadhouse said:
I just sent you some possible lyrics. If you like the concept, I'll record vocals to a scratch track possibly tonight to give you a sample of the vocal melody I'm hearing. Chat with you soon.

Micheal
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 21, 2009 at 3:08pm
It does the intro progression 4 times before the first verse right? (8 bar intro)
Permalink Reply by Chuck Mayo on October 21, 2009 at 5:14pm
Correct... 4 bars rhythm, 4 more bars with horns, then the verse begins. 8 bar instrumental intro.

The Roadhouse said:
It does the intro progression 4 times before the first verse right? (8 bar intro)
Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 23, 2009 at 6:53pm
Are you sure about these chords? Doesn't sound right on my end.
Permalink Reply by Chuck Mayo on October 23, 2009 at 7:52pm
Ohhh.... you wanted the right changes? Why didn't you say so?

Try these... [attached]

The Roadhouse said:
Are you sure about these chords? Doesn't sound right on my end.
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 23, 2009 at 9:33pm
I'm not sure about that F7.

Chuck Mayo said:
Ohhh.... you wanted the right changes? Why didn't you say so?

Try these... [attached]

The Roadhouse said:
Are you sure about these chords? Doesn't sound right on my end.
Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 23, 2009 at 11:06pm
Chuck,

I'm new to this, but I did a little chord analysis on the chords you provided. I made an assumption that we are in Eminor. If that's wrong, then none of this is right. But see attached for the source of my confusion.

MS
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Chuck Mayo on October 24, 2009 at 2:37am
I'm really not sure what to do with all that. Are you suggesting that every chord in the tune should precisely match the key signature with no alterations? I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be the same song if that were the case.

Given that the tune's in Em, the changes on the verse are basically Im IIIM IIM V7 with a tritone substitution for the 2nd V and the 5th, 6th and 7th measures reading I IIIM 4m 4#o V. The chorus is basically IVm Im IVm 2M 5M

The alterations aren't necessarily critical, I just gave you the changes I'm playing, but again, if we remove the flatted 9ths and raised 5ths, the tune loses a lot of subtle dissonant tension that I think really helps the overall sound.

To specific points:

E minor - yep - correct

G Major - yep - correct

G#/Ab Dominant 7 - nope - This change was corrected to F#7 on the revised chart, and F#7 is correct - F#7 with a major 3rd, dominant 7th.

G#/Ab - C - D#/Eb - G <== This doesn't look right - Indeed not - where'd those changes come from? There shouldn't be any G-sharp majors, C natural majors or E-flat majors in the changes. Looks like I left a G# uncorrected on the intro - uploading a re-revised chart. If I left any more, every G# should be written F#.

F Dominant 7 - possibly, but F instead of F#? - Yes. When the F7 occurs, that's the tritone substitution.

F# Dominant 7 - Should be diminished? - No, it's a II major chord with a dominant 7th.

B Major Flat 9 - yep, but what about 7th? - A ninth implies a dominant 7th, yes? The 7th here should be dominant.


Then again, I probalby shouldn't be replying this time of night, body and brain are both fried, but I'm pretty sure those are the chords I'm playing.








The Roadhouse said:
Chuck,

I'm new to this, but I did a little chord analysis on the chords you provided. I made an assumption that we are in Eminor. If that's wrong, then none of this is right. But see attached for the source of my confusion.

MS
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Michael Schaefer on October 24, 2009 at 9:40am
Ok, I was confused by the G#7 that's still in the intro. Cool. And tritone substitution? Ok, I've heard about that but you've exceeded by limited knowledge of theory. LOL. I'll keep playing around with it. Good discussion though.

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2012   Created by Abby Owen.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service