Music theory questions

[darrenn]

Hi
I have been trying to get to grips with some music theory and have some things that I need to get clear in my head.
Below are some statements and some questions from my understanding so far - I would appreciate anyone taking the time to make sure I'm on the right track.

Songs are written in a specific key - be it major or minor.

1. Only chords from the chosen scale should be used in composition of a progression.
2. Any chord progression should start from the I chord (i.e. C minor if the scale is C minor).
3. Melodies and basslines should also only use notes from the chosen scale.
4. Notes or chords that are outside of the chosen scale should never be used.
5. The relationship between one chord and the next is used to create tension or release - it is this tension and release that gives a song it's emotion or energy.

Lets say for arguments sake I am writing a song in C major.
I create a riff or bassline (eg C C C E E E G E) and play this over the first chord in my progression (i.e. C Major) - when I come to the second chord in the progression D minor I transpose the riff to start on D the next note keeping the intervals the same is G# which clearly is not part of the C major scale. Do I use G# regardless and break the rules above or do I adapt my riff to play over each chord?

The other topic that is confusing me is when would I use modes or pentatonic scales. Am I right in thinking that you would only use a particular mode if it used the same notes as the songs key i.e. you could write a melody in A minor to fit in a song played in C major.
Are modes that relevant to modern music?

I mostly produce dance or pop music but most theory books are based on classical music or jazz - is there anything different about composing modern music or is the theory all the same.

Thanks ever so

Darren

[nuffink]

Songs are written in a specific key - be it major or minor.

Usually. However they often modulate from one key to another. And Jazz theory blurs the major/minor divide.

1. Only chords from the chosen scale should be used in composition of a progression.

No. There are a number of chords who's notes all come from the chosen key. These chords are called diatonic. This gets a bit limiting so all of the diatonic chords have a number of substitutions which are known to sound good.

2. Any chord progression should start from the I chord (i.e. C minor if the scale is C minor).

This is often the case but there are any number of successful exceptions.

3. Melodies and basslines should also only use notes from the chosen scale.

No. They will usually be diatonic to the "key of the moment". The key of the moment is defined by the chord which has just been struck. This is where a knowledge of modes will come in handy.

4. Notes or chords that are outside of the chosen scale should never be used.

No. As stated above they will normally be diatonic to the "key of the moment" if not they are called accidentals. Even when highly dissonant they can be used, usually as passing or approach notes.

5. The relationship between one chord and the next is used to create tension or release - it is this tension and release that gives a song it's emotion or energy.

That's the theory.

[Hovmod]

I think it would be a good idea if you think of music theory as a *description* of music, and how and why it sounds right or wrong or gives you goosebumps, rather than a recipe for making new music.

[kovacs]

5. The relationship between one chord and the next is used to create tension or release - it is this tension and release that gives a song it's emotion or energy.

Not every single chord can do this. It would be either an extremely boring song or too varied. Use chord progressions but add an occasional sus-note (like for example an Asus4 chord in E major). Variety is the spice of music - too much and the music gets too busy. You can write a piece with a C note droning all the way through - as long as you vary the overall chordal structure. Experiment!

I create a riff or bassline (eg C C C E E E G E) and play this over the first chord in my progression (i.e. C Major) - when I come to the second chord in the progression D minor I transpose the riff to start on D the next note keeping the intervals the same is G# which clearly is not part of the C major scale. Do I use G# regardless and break the rules above or do I adapt my riff to play over each chord?

You need to step away from theory and use your ears more. Your suggested bassline above would be quite boring - you can vary it by for example using drop 2 voicing (ie, play the E on the bass under a C chord).

The other topic that is confusing me is when would I use modes or pentatonic scales. Am I right in thinking that you would only use a particular mode if it used the same notes as the songs key i.e. you could write a melody in A minor to fit in a song played in C major.

This is just a matter of definition. Modal scales have different sounds. The major scale is simply one of the modals (the ionian). If you want to play, say, mixolydian, you need to use a lowered 6th and 7th. You probably wouldn't write an entire piece in one mode but move between several modes.

Are modes that relevant to modern music?

As relevant as you want, basically. They are useful for learning chords and scales and how tonality works.

I mostly produce dance or pop music but most theory books are based on classical music or jazz - is there anything different about composing modern music or is the theory all the same.

This is an excellent question. I have years of classical training but wanted to learn more about writing pop music. The solution was to take piano lesson from a pianist who specializes in chord voicings. It has helped me tremendously.

Good luck!

[lion_cub]

The logical melody line for D Minor would be DDDFFFAF then, following your example. Don't know where you got G# from.

[nuffink]

I think it would be a good idea if you think of music theory as a *description* of music, and how and why it sounds right or wrong or gives you goosebumps, rather than a recipe for making new music.

Sure. Theory is a description of practice. That's the way it should be. But once it's been codified into theory it's teachable to a larger audience.
Ideally we'd all be able to learn the use of the flatted 5th from Bird 'n Diz. Since we can't, a book will have to do.

[MackTuesday]

In my view, the first rule is, "Do what sounds good." I think many will agree that theory doesn't tell you what to do; it rather describes what is commonly done in a structured way.

Songs are written in a specific key - be it major or minor.

Yes, but modulations commonly happen as well.

1. Only chords from the chosen scale should be used in composition of a progression.

They're a good starting point. Many songs deviate from this in select places (not that you must deviate in order to write good music).

2. Any chord progression should start from the I chord (i.e. C minor if the scale is C minor).

This can happen, but take the IV-I-V progression for example. It very much sounds like a major key even though technically it's lydian.

3. Melodies and basslines should also only use notes from the chosen scale.
4. Notes or chords that are outside of the chosen scale should never be used.

Naaa...

5. The relationship between one chord and the next is used to create tension or release - it is this tension and release that gives a song it's emotion or energy.

I'd say this is a very good thing to consider. I always thought a song is like lovemaking: tension-climax-release.

I create a riff or bassline (eg C C C E E E G E) and play this over the first chord in my progression (i.e. C Major) - when I come to the second chord in the progression D minor I transpose the riff to start on D the next note keeping the intervals the same is G# which clearly is not part of the C major scale.

You really can go either way, but if you want to keep things within the scale you're using and not generate any annoying dissonances, stick to the notes in your chords rather than keep the intervals the same. In that case you'd want to use an A instead of an Ab.

The other topic that is confusing me is when would I use modes or pentatonic scales. Am I right in thinking that you would only use a particular mode if it used the same notes as the songs key i.e. you could write a melody in A minor to fit in a song played in C major. Are modes that relevant to modern music?

I don't have a thoughtful answer to this, mainly because I've never personally cared about it. If you want to freak out and use a pentatonic melody in the middle of your rock song, try it. It'll probably sound pretty cool.

That said, I suppose I can also say that the idea of modes is very important because they're central to Western music. Chances are, whatever you write will use modes if you grew up listening to Western music.

I mostly produce dance or pop music but most theory books are based on classical music or jazz - is there anything different about composing modern music or is the theory all the same.

The theory is pretty much all the same. You use the same core language to describe all forms of Western music.

[nuffink]

Are modes that relevant to modern music?

Missed this one.

Modes are used because they're easier to learn than the alternative. E.g...
The tensions which can be played on a half diminshed chord (without sounding dissonant) are b9, 9, 11, b13. Now, you can attempt to learn these for all 12 keys or you can learn the locrian mode (b9,11,b13) and locrian#2 mode (9,11,b13). Traditionally musicians have found it easier to learn the modes.

[Sascha Franck]

1. Only chords from the chosen scale should be used in composition of a progression.

Depends (as everything, but hey, I'll relate to "common" theory here).
Very often, in minor tonalities, this won't work.
As an example, let's take a progression basically based in A natural minor. Theoretically, all the notes of C major would fit, as A natural minor would be the relative scale. Still if you wanted to add a dominant chord to bring you back to your tonic chord, it's not unlikely this would be an E7 (E G# B D), with the G# clearly not being part of C major.
So, for this E7 you'd have to temporarily change the base scale - in this case probably to A harmonic minor, which actually contains a G# (there's further possibilities, but this one should do as an example for now).

Another one. Let's say we were in the key of C major, and would like to go from a c major to an F major chord. A very common thing to add between those two would be a C7, to add a "temporary" dominant tension which would be released when reaching the F chord (which would again be treated as a degree of C major). A truly common thing.

There's lots of such examples in classical and jazz theory, very often happening when it comes to secondary dominants.
How much they may apply to your style would be completely up to your style.

2. Any chord progression should start from the I chord (i.e. C minor if the scale is C minor).

I'm not sure what you're on about with this assumption/question.
In a (very common) II-V-I progression it ends on the tonic chord...

3. Melodies and basslines should also only use notes from the chosen scale.

More or less probably yes, but I'd reduce this to "target tones should use notes of chosen scale".
There's nothing wrong with the occasional dissonant note or chromatic passing tones.

4. Notes or chords that are outside of the chosen scale should never be used.

See 3.

5. The relationship between one chord and the next is used to create tension or release - it is this tension and release that gives a song it's emotion or energy.

Well. Maybe. Again, it depends, assuming we're still following your "everything in one scale" approach.
If you allways stay inside a given scale, you may miss some tension.
Let's say you go for some II-V-I progression in C major.
That'd be Dmin7-G7-C.
A very common replacement for the Dmin7 would be D7, functioning as a secondary dominant for the G7. Most likely more of a tension/release thing than using a plain Dmin7.

[I don't understand the G# from the next question]

The other topic that is confusing me is when would I use modes or pentatonic scales. Am I right in thinking that you would only use a particular mode if it used the same notes as the songs key i.e. you could write a melody in A minor to fit in a song played in C major.
Are modes that relevant to modern music?

There's no true answer to this.
A melody made over an Amin *might* fit over a Cmaj. But it also might sound stupid.
For instance, an A would be a proper target note in a melody over an Amin chord. Over a C it would be considered "jazzy", "open" or probably even "weak". But even that might depend.
Thing is, if I'd improvise over an Amin, it'd result in entirely different lines than when improvising over a Cmaj. Sometimes the lines might be exchangeable, but I think the vast majority of them would sound "weak" in one way or the other.
The same goes for melodies.

I mostly produce dance or pop music but most theory books are based on classical music or jazz - is there anything different about composing modern music or is the theory all the same.

Yeah, interesting point.
You can actually adapt jazz theory to pop music, but there's two things to consider:
1) Jazz becomes harmonically complexed when dominant chords and modulations kick in. A great deal of jazz arranging and composing is making extensive use of inbetween dominants, substitutes for them and then even some not so plausible chord tension replacements. An example: The Dmin7 in a I-II-V progression in C (Cmaj, Dmin7, G7) might be replaced by a D7 (as allready mentioned above). Then the D7 might become a D7alt and then tritone substituted by an Ab7. Now, finally the Ab7 might go through some "unplausible" modification such as becoming an A7sus4. All still based on I-II-V...
2) The "unplausible" exceptions in pop might be different from those in jazz. For instance, in pop music you may find quite some direct modulations, without any introduction - most common example: Hit transposings by a second or third on the last double chorus. In jazz based stuff there's a great chance that transpose would be initiated by some intermediate dominants.
Also, I believe that a whole shitload of some very great pop progressions are a result of trial and error, easy to be fingered guitar voicings and whatever.
If you can, you *need* to allow those trial and error results - or at least listen to them in case they're happening. Don't go the theoretical "no, that was freaking wrong" way. I did so very often in the past, and it didn't do me (or my creative output) any good.

[darrenn]

Wow - thanks everyone
Some things are now much clearer now - others I will need to work through some more.
Be sure I can use the trial and error method (I have many errors commoted to HD to back this statement up) but I have been reading up on theory lately and was trying to apply it to my songs.
I'll take some time tommorrow to work (listen) through what has been suggested.
Cheers
Darren

[TechNoiZ]

It seems to me there is a lot of confused talk about the nature of 'modes' in relation to 'key'

Modal writing - has little to do with 'key'.

Key is a term applied exclusively to the major/minor system of musical theory: tonality.
The theory of tonality is the one you're referring to when you talk about chord systems such as I, ii, iii, IV .... etc. They are diatonic chords which DEFINE a key. When you use notes outside of the tonality - non diatonic notes - you are NOT changing key, nor are you using a mode - the fact that some scales and deviations can be seen as modes is not within the remit of the system of tonality, or its vocabulary, to explain. You are using what are termed 'accidentals' - notes OUTSIDE of the key. These can be used to make a melody more interesting - or they can be used to 'temporarily change key': NOTE - temporarily - this is not deemed a change of key within the system of tonality - it is termed a modulation - a temporary movement to another keynote or scale.

Either talk about modes or talk about the system which superceded their common ussage some 400 - 500 years ago - tonality or the (major/minor) key-system:

You will find it enormously difficult to explain one using vocabulary from the other unless you have an almost unshakeable grasp of the explanation of either.

Believe me, it took many brilliant men 2 or 3 hundred years to codify the major/minor key system - and it is still not done ....

[nuffink]

It seems to me there is a lot of confused talk about the nature of 'modes' in relation to 'key'

Modal writing - has little to do with 'key'.

Key is a term applied exclusively to the major/minor system of musical theory: tonality.
The theory of tonality is the one you're referring to when you talk about chord systems such as I, ii, iii, IV .... etc. They are diatonic chords which DEFINE a key. When you use notes outside of the tonality - non diatonic notes - you are NOT changing key, nor are you using a mode - the fact that some scales and deviations can be seen as modes is not within the remit of the system of tonality, or its vocabulary, to explain. You are using what are termed 'accidentals' - notes OUTSIDE of the key. These can be used to make a melody more interesting - or they can be used to 'temporarily change key': NOTE - temporarily - this is not deemed a change of key within the system of tonality - it is termed a modulation - a temporary movement to another keynote or scale.

Either talk about modes or talk about the system which superceded their common ussage some 400 - 500 years ago - tonality or the (major/minor) key-system:

You will find it enormously difficult to explain one using vocabulary from the other unless you have an almost unshakeable grasp of the explanation of either.

Believe me, it took many brilliant men 2 or 3 hundred years to codify the major/minor key system - and it is still not done ....

eh?

I don't see much confusion in this thread. At least not from those giving answers.

And as for explaining modes, it's not difficult.

[Armoor]

Listen to a lot of music you like and see what the relationships are between all the aforementioned theory stuff. I myself am trying to learn a bit of theory and I am finding you really need to listen first, then ask why. You could apply principle after principle but I think great musicians are well versed in many styles and experienced listeners of many, many songs. Musical artists on the other hand, just make music that "sounds" good - which is sometimes genius because it breaks rules providing new combinations never before heard. We've all heard our favorite band start out their career with a cool new sound then after the 5th cd/album end up sounding like everyone else - in a sense.

Just my thoughts. Hope they help.

[herodotus]

And as for explaining modes, it's not difficult.

Depends upon which modes are being discussed.


There are church modes (the ones defined by Glareanus), there are the modes of limited transposition (Messiaen) and there are a whole ton of rather cavalier usages that are more or less related to these two.

By no means are all of these easy to explain.

And lets not get into the actual naming of the church modes, which was based on some rather extensive guesswork on the part of the aforementioned Glareanus.

[TechNoiZ]

It seems to me there is a lot of confused talk about the nature of 'modes' in relation to 'key'

Modal writing - has little to do with 'key'.

Key is a term applied exclusively to the major/minor system of musical theory: tonality.
The theory of tonality is the one you're referring to when you talk about chord systems such as I, ii, iii, IV .... etc. They are diatonic chords which DEFINE a key. When you use notes outside of the tonality - non diatonic notes - you are NOT changing key, nor are you using a mode - the fact that some scales and deviations can be seen as modes is not within the remit of the system of tonality, or its vocabulary, to explain. You are using what are termed 'accidentals' - notes OUTSIDE of the key. These can be used to make a melody more interesting - or they can be used to 'temporarily change key': NOTE - temporarily - this is not deemed a change of key within the system of tonality - it is termed a modulation - a temporary movement to another keynote or scale.

Either talk about modes or talk about the system which superceded their common ussage some 400 - 500 years ago - tonality or the (major/minor) key-system:

You will find it enormously difficult to explain one using vocabulary from the other unless you have an almost unshakeable grasp of the explanation of either.

Believe me, it took many brilliant men 2 or 3 hundred years to codify the major/minor key system - and it is still not done ....

eh?

I don't see much confusion in this thread. At least not from those giving answers.

And as for explaining modes, it's not difficult.

Modes are a piece of piss .... but from the number of questions regularly aked on this site about keys - and the actual number and range of 'answers' put forward, belies the fact that no-one has yet given a clear and simple answer ....

Why is this ...... is it because nobody on here understands simple music theory? I don't think so.
Is it because when one person gives a perfectly good and straightforward answer using one set of vocabulary - usually relating to 'tonality' ie chord structures, diatonic progressions etc. - somebody else jumps in and clouds the issue with talk about modes? Mmmmmmmmm. I wonder .....

Read your history books - jazz (a form of twentieth century music which primarily describes the scalic devations it uses from the given key as modal) is a form of EXTENDED tonality - and all I'm trying to point out is that you will find it difficult to explain the extension without explaining the basic unit.