I want to advance my music knowledge... help!

[sjm]

Listen to music outside your comfort zone.

[tieb]

get the book "1000 keyboard ideas" it's amazing, it touches on all types of spectrums of music in one book

[herodotus]

For instance, each octatonic scale contains 4 different triads, a minor third apart, that can be either major or minor. This can result in some interesting effects, such as playing an open fourth, and leading the lower note down a half step, and the higher note up a half step, to create an open fifth. This creates a sort of atonal cadence between harmonies a tritone apart.

That's a lot of fancy book learnin' for a guy who makes punk rock drum loops.

You know, it isn't nice to point out someone's birth defects.

[StudioDave]

... this is stuff you won't find in any standard theory book. The only ones that I know that get involved in these scales at length are John Rahn's Basic Atonal Theory, which was last printed in 1980 and costs over $100 new, and George Perle's Serial Composition and Atonality, which is also out of print and expensive.

I bought Perle's excellent book on-line a few years ago, you can still find it used for ~$20-30US. Rahn's book is another matter, the paperback sells for ~$50, ouch. I lost my copy years ago, but I never really got into it. It gets a lot of respect, I should look into it again soon.

Best,

dp

[herodotus]

Rahn's book is another matter, the paperback sells for ~$50, ouch. I lost my copy years ago, but I never really got into it. It gets a lot of respect, I should look into it again soon.

What I liked about it was the way he demonstrated that organized atonality didn't necessarily mean serialism. It really opened some mental doors for me.

It also got me interested set theory, but that is another matter entirely.

[Kinh]

Wow, everyone making this complex. How many of those who commented actually employ modes and theory to their music? My guess is 0.

So...

Here's the simpler approach:

Melody: get a midi drum machine, program the pads to certain scales and there you go.

Chords: learn about Turnarounds. That's really all you need to know. They're used to make your transitions interesting and come at the end of the progression.

Everything else like chords you should already know. If you're dealing with electronic music then jazzy, complex chords are only gonna make sense in the track as a transitional thing. You cant base your whole progression around them, it would sound too weird. So use em for "turnarounds". THat's it.

[someone called simon]

pop songs are in phrygian minor which cannot be achieved with any of the traditional western scales or modes.

what on earth are you on about... this is nonsensical.

[herodotus]

How many of those who commented actually employ modes and theory to their music? My guess is 0.

Your guess is wrong.

Neither StudioDave nor I make any secret of our music. And a short listen to a small selection of it will show that we do in fact use the theory we discuss.

Just to clarify that matter.

[rp314]

Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but as someone who grew up strongly influenced by John Coltrane's music, and flamenco and Spanish guitar stuff (just to name a couple that come to mind)...yeah, I guess there might have been at least a mode or two in some of the things one's come up with over the years...

As to the more interesting point of there being more than one path, I doubt that any of us believe that music analysis is either a necessary or a sufficient condition to getting it done.

[StudioDave]

... I doubt that any of us believe that music analysis is either a necessary or a sufficient condition to getting it done.

Agree++. My teacher used to admonish me about getting too far into analysis for its own sake. We went over a lot of music in detail, I learned a lot about how it works, but he would remind me that analysis isn't "composition in reverse". Wise words.

Best,

dp

[Chandlerhimself]

Of course you don't have to know music theory to write good music, but IMO it does help. The more you know the more things you can do. Think of all the great compositions John Williams wrote and all the colors he can pull out of an orchestra. Could he do the same with synthesizers? I doubt it. Could he do the same with a rock band? I remember watching Star Wars episode II and thinking how out of place and strange the electric guitars sounded. Is that because Williams is a terrible composer? No, it's because he doesn't know how to write for electric guitar. The more theory you know the more you'll be able to write.

IMO it's also a misconception that in popular music you can't use music theory or that the general public hates advanced concepts. Off the top of my head I can think of "Sunshine of my life" by Stevie wonder which uses the wholetone scale. "Let's ride", by Q-tip which uses Coltrane changes and "Frontin" by Pharell Williams which has a sequence of major 7th chords which modulate in 3rds. All of those were hits, so I don't think people hate music based on more advanced theory, they just don't care.

I'd say learn theory, because you never know when you'll have to use it. It's better to have that arrow in your quiver than not. Besides who knows what type of music will be popular in the future or what you'll be interested in.

[phantamquyen]

So basically, everything is fine if it's working. My basic understanding of music theory is good enough for making music. Advancing my music knowledge is either for the love of it, or for the fun and beauty of discovery. I learnt a lot from reading these posts, thanks so much guy. I guess I will continue to journey myself into this mist of knowledge, .

[phantamquyen]

Really enjoying 'Standing Here'. Love the field-recording ambience, and what you have done with the vocals

The only shame to me is the quality of some of the sounds(Drums, strings) Not sure what libraries you are using, but they seem to be holding back the dynamics of the piece

Anyway, I'm gonna follow ya

Thanks mate, so kind of you to do so.

[Kinh]

Of course you don't have to know music theory to write good music, but IMO it does help. The more you know the more things you can do. Think of all the great compositions John Williams wrote and all the colors he can pull out of an orchestra. Could he do the same with synthesizers? I doubt it. Could he do the same with a rock band? I remember watching Star Wars episode II and thinking how out of place and strange the electric guitars sounded. Is that because Williams is a terrible composer? No, it's because he doesn't know how to write for electric guitar. The more theory you know the more you'll be able to write.

IMO it's also a misconception that in popular music you can't use music theory or that the general public hates advanced concepts. Off the top of my head I can think of "Sunshine of my life" by Stevie wonder which uses the wholetone scale. "Let's ride", by Q-tip which uses Coltrane changes and "Frontin" by Pharell Williams which has a sequence of major 7th chords which modulate in 3rds. All of those were hits, so I don't think people hate music based on more advanced theory, they just don't care.

I'd say learn theory, because you never know when you'll have to use it. It's better to have that arrow in your quiver than not. Besides who knows what type of music will be popular in the future or what you'll be interested in.

Those tracks you mentioned didn't really have advanced theory applied to them. The prerequisites of any accomplished musician is know where the chords are and scales are and how to modulate. That's just basic theory. Also you'd find (especially in Pharell's case who samples a lot) that those songs were just based on progressions of other people's music, originality - minimal. as is nearly every Beatles song, Rollingstones, ELO, Bowie, Prince and everything beyond

[rp314]

... I doubt that any of us believe that music analysis is either a necessary or a sufficient condition to getting it done.

Agree++. My teacher used to admonish me about getting too far into analysis for its own sake. We went over a lot of music in detail, I learned a lot about how it works, but he would remind me that analysis isn't "composition in reverse". Wise words.

Watching good old Ennio Morricone thanking the academy for his second Oscar I recalled that he is one of the remaining students of the great Italian composer Gofreddo Petrassi who for almost 40 years taught at conservatories in Italy and Austria and had lots of students who would go on to do very well, including Franco Donatoni, Cornelius Cardew, Peter Maxwell Davis, Aldo Clementi and Richard Teitelbaum.

On the other hand, Gustavo Santaolalla also has a couple of Oscars and his background includes mostly playing in rock bands in South America and the U.S. and apparently does not contain any of what would commonly be referred to as classical training.

Once upon a time, not that long ago really, music theory was a very important part of keeping music alive. In the modern age of recordings and computers, there are indeed more options.

To me, music analysis still exists because it can help one understand how music works. And, once again, for each of us the question generally is not whether some musicians out there can do great things 'intuitively' (and it should be noted that sometimes such folks can be a bit disingenuous about their own training), but what we need to do in order to go forward in music.