Though we're talking about melody rhythm (or well, melody?) in this topic, not exactly how to program drums. So I think it's fair to say that one can learn a thing or two from classical music. Then again, melody persists in every piece of music, so I do wonder, why classical is so often being referred in this context?


Perhaps because classical music is the clean form of music?

But on the other hand, how about something simple as Coldplay? Their melodies sure hit the sweet spot of most people. What makes studying classical music better option?

Though I do have a guess, more data available. I don't think anyone has specifically ever researched that much of the way that a certain band or group writes music.

Classical music won't help you much in this context. It mainly focuses on melodic development and performance. The rhythm plays much lesser role compared to electronic dance music.

Back to your original question...

The key to making interesting melodic rhythm patterns is to mix predictability with unpredictability.

If you play three 8th notes, the listener would expect to hear another 8th note. If you will not satisfy his expectation, it would create some tension which would add some interest to melodic pattern.
In addition consider what other elements in your track are doing. E.g. drums provide strong rhythm foundation, and therefore you could play a lot around the drums. I.e. if you play two notes over your kick drum and then syncopate the next note (by moving it early or late) it would give more interest to the pattern.
In addition consider melodic elements when defining the rhythm of the melody. For example if you syncopate the note it might sound quite awkward if you in addition move that note melodically. Therefore to create the interest you could change the pitches with notes that play on beat, while syncopating the notes which has the same pitch.

I have, yeah. Have you?

Yeah.

The last 2 "classical" works I listened to were The Firebird Suite, and The Four Seasons. The rhythmic components deployed within the melodies are a major factor in the success of these compositions IMHO.

So did you find it hindered their ability to make music in a DAW?

I haven't sat down at Ableton for about 5 months till today, my main focus has been and will continue to be teaching. I started on violin and grew up in the orchestra/quartet/chamber/ensemble culture, so music to me is a spiritual endeavor in which humans develop their bodies and minds together, helping each other, ourselves, simultaneously while putting out beauty into the world. Music is eternal, and will long outlast me.

I wrote this piece today cause I'm sick of this discussion. You the forum-reading public judge for yourselves if you think classical influences and learning how to play real instruments helps or not. Just cause I'm heavily influenced by it, would you call this "classical" at all? And keep in mind, this track was born at 8 am and mixing started about 1:15 which took about half an hour. So start to finish in about 6 hrs. (if you feel like it check out the other day-projects from back in November on soundcloud)

I'll make another one using entirely synths (won't try to emulate any real instruments) on sunday (or monday if it takes a little longer) after i finish teaching and post it to this same thread. Then you can see for yourself just how much learning music helps writing music even if its computer-generated music. PS the only "real" instrument you hear in this one is that infernal fiddle.

What if the wave of the future is an integration of technology AND heritage??? IMHO the best way to "progress" the musical community is to use our daws AND our instruments to resurrect the great concepts of past composers, rather than straight up ignoring them. The sapling digging in its roots and reaching for the sky simultaneously.

http://soundcloud.com/shankfiddle/3-30-ignorance-be-gone

Now, it may not be your cup of tea, but it sure as hell's got:
complex evolving melodies (played AND sequenced)
accomp. counter-melodies
counter-point/4-part harmonies (which break voiceleading rules sometimes, cause I felt like it)
multiple modulations
phrasing/mood shifts
rhythms
development
complex structures
in the context of midi orchestration
AND a real instrument thrown in there just to make a point. (i have an arpeggiator in my brain, do you?)

- so even if you only want to write techno (or whatever they call it these days) don't you want to know how to artistically manipulate all these elements? (i mean a lot of you edm-ers have been asking questions about how to do just that) They can all be utilized in whatever genre you choose to explore! Gimme a couple days and I'll show you an example of what it sounds like to apply these same skills to a purely electronic-dance piece. Get ready for complex time signatures

I know most EDM-ers don't have the patience for a track like this and will have plenty of shit to talk "it's boooring I want to feel a beat from the git-go, too much developmenttt, this doesn't fit my preconceived notions of what 'music' is... it's as if he completely ignored genre boundaries... is that even allowed?"

but as I was mixing a group of robins and sparrows gathered outside my window and started jamming along (they seemed to like the twinkly bells in the recap at the end). Good enough for them is good enough for me.

For those of you with the education/skills/background to follow along, here's the structural framework:

Starts with a 2 bar drone on C then
cm: [A][A][A][B]
C: [preC][C][C][C] [D][D]
em: [E] [A][A][B]
E: [preC][2nd half of preC][C][C][D]
C: [first half of D][end]

[A]
i | i2 | i(2-m)| V | i2 | iihd i2 | III+ V |
i | iv | III | V | i2 | III+^ | i | III+ |

[B]
i VII | i | i(o) | II | iihd | iio | iv | viio III/I | (= V/am but it settles in C major so for convenience...)

[C] (the preC is the last 4 bars of C)
I | I2 V | I(9) | I9 | vi | I(9) | ii | ii4 ii2 |

[D]
iii | vi | I | vi | ii IV^ | i iii4 | IV | I4 |
IV( 9) | iii- | III | IV | v | ii | {iihd/em | V7/em}| doesn't change when the D repeats in the new key.

[E]
i | II i | i viio | iv | iv | V | i | io |
III | VII | III | VI | vio | VII7 III | V | V7 |

[end]
ii | ii4 | IV | I4 | IV | I4 | IV | I | IV | I | - plagal candence cause I felt like being cliche


the smile is mandatory, I composed it into the piece.

"but I don't wanna"
"yaknow you've finally convinced me, musical training doesn't mean shit when it comes to music..."
hahahahaha

Write me a piece in one day, and see how it turns out
as someone else mentioned in another thread: time limits are one of the BEST tools a composer has at his/her disposal.

enough talk, enough excuses, we don't need to hear about how you learned some history or philosophy at one point... Let's continue this argument creatively.
Post your work, DO IT, and let's have the public compare the results of disciplined study vs. Not.

www.soundcloud.com/shankfiddle

Posting my work is pretty irrelevant, because for starters, I only started on the subject about 6 months ago. Secondary issue, I have nothing against learning an instrument. And I'm practicing with piano and hope that in future, it would be my primary tool for composing.

(And to be honest here, this may make me look bad, but I'm willing to admit that I can't follow exactly along your work. And I'm sorry for that, because I'd love to try and see!)

However, I'm getting some material lately and possibly going to publish soon my first track. I've read from another thread, that it's a really good way to learn music by forcing yourself to do something you can do in a certain timeline, just like what you did.

And I'm quite interested of trying that out. Though, it may be cheating a little since I practically have the notes already. Well, some of them. I'm yet missing the part that I really want, the sweet catchy part. Something, even a little catchy would do.

So far, I'm limited to a piano roll, since practicing even my own work (so far) is impossible task. My finger positioning needs a lot of work still.

Not to mention the fact that using two hands is still a mystery to me. I can only loop something really short with two hands, but progressive melody will fail at one point. But I'm working on that as well.


EDIT: Kind of mixed up two threads, obviously.

I don't see an issue with learning theory behind classical music at all.
But I do believe that it might not be exactly something to start with. If you want to focus on electronic music, I think that should be your primary subject. But I do agree that at some point, it certainly will not hurt you to learn concepts behind different genres and see what you can bring out of them into your music.

Thank you. I think my point's finally been made.

So in the future, when we're advising that people study music that has greater complexity such as classical...

Don't chime in with brilliant advice "studying classical is irrelevant for electronic music..." if you have not studied it! Cause as I've said before, how the f**k would you know?

And just think about it... if you have an orchestra with a minimum of 5 parts all playing melodies and countermelodies... That's 5 times more melodic ideas you'll get than one coldplay song

And you're right, unless you start at an early age, classical is not something to start with, you'll just get overwhelmed. But if you want more complex melodic/structural ideas, then just LISTEN, you don't have to understand all the theory, just throw some on a shuffle list on yer ipod, and those melodic ideas will still help you!

You have no clue how deep the world of music goes, if you haven't even branched out and studied the different facets of music, stick to asking questions and leave the teaching/advising to those who have done the disciplined work.


Nothing wrong with being honest and realistic about your abilities. We are only trying to help you (remember that before you think about arguing). Before you even try to follow the chord progressions, FIRST try to hear the repeating forms. It's a good exercise for your ear because you have to listen for when harmony repeats. I tend not to do a literal copy/paste of melody unless I'm using it motivically.

Also, if this wasn't apparent: the roadmap at the beginning tells you what key the forms are in. The roman numerals are all relative to the key except where otherwise noted.

Touche

I think one can learn that with no training at all. Some people might even know innately when something's out of tune with the other thing. But...

Knowledge of music, and experience WITH A DRUM would tend to disabuse you of inchoate ideations such as <tune your 'kick drum' to the sound of the track>. *Which* sound? Tonic note, root note of key?

Drummers do not retune to every new key. A kick drum is not a pitched instrument anyway. Of course you're talking about a synth patch... but once you have really dug a drum you will have a more subtle conception than you have.

Now, in Indian Classical music, the open tone of the tabla should usually be Sa or Pa, 1 or 5 and in tune pretty much. But forcing 'the kick drum' to be the same as the most frequently occurring bass note is a recipe for DULL. If you had experience with an instrument you'd have a subtler, more musical rationale to work with.

But, do whatever, limit yourself to what you know and argue to yourself what you know is as good as someone with far vaster experience with and knowledge of music, that's on you and it's nothing to me.
Last edited by jancivil on Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:58 am; edited 1 time in total

Amazing confidence you display talking abut something you reveal you don't know much of anything about.

"classical music" study certainly deals with rhythm. Now, one can argue that western european classical music of the common practice period is deficient compared with some other classical musics, or what-have-you, as regards rhythm, but the notion of melodic consideration separated from rhythmic consideration is just ignorant.

I rather doubt you have felicities in the rhythm dept that are going to be terrifically novel for a classical musician, guy.

I have had various musical experiences, including training as an instrumentalist at conservatory for a year and a half, and advanced theory training. This work goes back to 1970. I started in earnest with a DAW in late 2005.

Somehow none of that managed to make anything of sequencing more difficult... I even taught myself... imagine that. What problems ought I to have experienced?

What about Coldplay? I know one of their songs, 'Yellow' I think it must be called, is pleasant to me on the melodic front. OTOH I've heard them do a couple things I couldn't believe I was encountering on TV it was such crap. I guess they had exceeded their understanding, were trying to be cute.

"Most people do _" is poor. It's a known fallacy in argumentation.

What makes study of music that was done by masters, and as great and wide a variety that term 'classical music' seeks to describe, better than just following Coldplay? Is that your actual question?