A new chord progression

Intro: C, F
Verse: C, Am, F, C, E
Pre-Chorus: F, Fm, C, G, E, Am, G, F, G
Chorus: C, G, Am, E, F, G, C, Am, G
Outro: C, Cmaj9, Am, E, F, G, C

thats very similir to Oasis- Dont look back in anger

Which in turn is Pachebel's Canon.

there is no 'new' chord progression. every progression has been used. your job is creatively play that progression. jimi hendrix played almost entirely I IV V progressions, and yet was creative about it. if you are strumming open/bar/power chords, you are not being creative.

Don't be a douche bottle, noob.

Seriously? You're basically saying that some chords don't count because they are open/barred? Even Ray Charles can see how narrow-minded you are.

what is it with you twisting words? open/bar/5th's have their place, but if that is all you are doing, no, they don't count as any real creative work, they're simply a backing track.

so bob dylan wasn't creative?

I think what Baudelaire is trying to say (or should be saying) is that just giving us chord names with no strumming pattern or voicing doesn't give us much to judge.


Though, just as a side note: in your pre-chorus, you are using a minor 4th. You really shouldn't do that when it isn't the final cadence, or a cadence to a part of your song. I think it sounds awkward in the middle of a larger phrase.

Yeah, I kind of agree with baudelaire in that it would be a good idea to include more about how it is played (strumming patterns, dynamics etc)... but he could have voiced it a lot better than he did.

I don't know... maybe just try to be informative without that bitter edge.

But as I said in Baudelaire's topic before the Admin removed it, "Thinking that you can't be creative in some aspect is a pretty uncreative way of thinking".

Yes, he's right that voicing and rhythm play a key role, but it's pretty ignorant to think that you can't be creative with a chord progression, let alone that "every" chord progression has been used. When you get into voicing melodies with chords, you begin to bend a lot of rules and uncover some really interesting progressions.

Well said, fellas. Maybe if the douche had said it like that, I would have listened.

musically, not really. he was talented, did a good job voicing his chords to fit the melody... but not really a creative guitarist. he was creative as a poet, not a guitarist. his strumming was one step above punk music. he's one of my favorite musicians, but his accompaniment is on the same level as any good rap or punk tune.

Who says you have to be creative as a guitarist to be creative musically. As far as musical creativity goes, his lyrics, harmonica bits, and etc. WERE creative.

Wow this thread amazes me, the first time I've actually fully agreed with what Skold has said, and you put it perfectly, you don't need to be creative on guitar to be musically creative, it's focusing on one aspect, like stoners always say, details man details look at the big picture

his poetry was excellent. his melodies are excellent. i said that. his guitar work is not, and it's laughable you mention his harmonica, because it's not that much better. it's done well, but by the numbers. it's clear that the accompaniment is just that - a backing track for the main show, which is his singing and lyrics.

His singing? Haha, nice try.

he's a good singer, he just has unconventional - some might say bad - voice.

Bob was not a very good singer, but it worked.

Okay, I'm not the most experienced here, but I just played tha (as best as I could anyway) and I quiet like your sequence, Skold.

Thanks, mate.

Why the new profile?

ye why?

Old one messed up. Couldn't post at all with it.

Back to the song, I played it giving each chord a couple beats and I do like the feel of the chorus

That's cool.

o...maybe admin can fix?

Maybe, but he seems to hardly ever be on.