This HAS to be THE most important thing that defines the "feeling" of music. Quick chord changes keep things exciting mostly, and long drawn out chords are more immersive.
Discuss, please
The Rhythm of Chord Progression
-
- KVRAF
- 7577 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
An interesting idea - the rhythm of the main chord changes in the music. Make it more interesting than the a chord change on every 1 beat. One I like is CxxxXxcxXxxxXxxxXxxxXxxxXxxxXxxx (x's are steps, c's are chord changes and capitals are beatmarks) and also CxxxXxcxXxxxCxxx.
This HAS to be THE most important thing that defines the "feeling" of music. Quick chord changes keep things exciting mostly, and long drawn out chords are more immersive.
Discuss, please
This HAS to be THE most important thing that defines the "feeling" of music. Quick chord changes keep things exciting mostly, and long drawn out chords are more immersive.
Discuss, please
-
- KVRist
- 445 posts since 24 Apr, 2005
The harmonic slowing down of music is something that really seperates Baroque from Classical from Romantic era stuff. If you look at Bach, for example, the chord will change on every beat, wheras compositions in later periods move to about one chord per bar.camsr wrote:An interesting idea - the rhythm of the main chord changes in the music. Make it more interesting than the a chord change on every 1 beat. One I like is CxxxXxcxXxxxXxxxXxxxXxxxXxxxXxxx (x's are steps, c's are chord changes and capitals are beatmarks) and also CxxxXxcxXxxxCxxx.
This HAS to be THE most important thing that defines the "feeling" of music. Quick chord changes keep things exciting mostly, and long drawn out chords are more immersive.
Discuss, please
-
- KVRAF
- 2744 posts since 5 Dec, 2003 from Harlan's World
Bah. I studied classical guitar and had 3 years of music theory every morning at 8am in college and Schenkerian analysis was perhaps the most uninspiring stuff I ever learned.Xnah wrote:Read (Heinrich) Schenker and (Joseph) Schillinger publications... both early last century.
Thank heavens I also minored in jazz improv...My Soundcloud Too many pieces of music finish far too long after the end. - Stravinsky
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7577 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
I looked at Schillinger on the net and he put out some kind of book with rhythms generated with his "theory". Anyone know about these?
A common rhythm I run into in analysis is CxxxXxxxCxxxXxxx and CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx. I think when it comes to these rhythms, they define the main beat of the song and the main percussion should fit it's pattern (if any percussion).
A common rhythm I run into in analysis is CxxxXxxxCxxxXxxx and CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx. I think when it comes to these rhythms, they define the main beat of the song and the main percussion should fit it's pattern (if any percussion).
-
- KVRist
- 70 posts since 24 Jan, 2007
I just recently analysed a trance track where I found an inspiring way of making a variation of the CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx rhythme. So I'm gona post it here, in case it can inspire anyone else.
First the Bass follows this CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx pattern. But not the melody. On each C in the previous patern, the bass note is the root of the chord. But a slight variation occurs the first time this patern plays, then it plays normally, and then it repeat the whole thing.
This way you have it play a lot of times in a row but the repeating pattern is of 8 mesures instead of 4...
this is the pattern
CxxxCxcxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx
what I like about this is that its very subtle, the variation is actually just a progression of a third down, and all you have to do to change the chord is put the second chord in 2nd inversion, meaning all you have to do is take the 5th of the first chord and raise it by a tone. Creating this pattern C...C.c.C...C... and this can be used anywhere is the basic patern, it can easly be taken out or put back in as a variation that occurs once in a while, and I think the beauty of this is that while that chord changes, the bass stay the same. It simply goes from being the root of the chord to the third of the chord. I also like this same half mesure variation in the last mesure, mike look funny cuse instead of going down by a third in that case, try putting a sus chord. but it fact, when you get into writing the parts, it will not sound like a sus chord but an anticipation of the start of the melody. Since you will simply take a chord that has no common tones with the first chord of the progression, and half way through the mesure, change one of the notes to a tone from the first chord (giving an anticipation that the chord progression will start over)...
this might not be very clear but I had little time to write it, hope you understand
First the Bass follows this CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx pattern. But not the melody. On each C in the previous patern, the bass note is the root of the chord. But a slight variation occurs the first time this patern plays, then it plays normally, and then it repeat the whole thing.
This way you have it play a lot of times in a row but the repeating pattern is of 8 mesures instead of 4...
this is the pattern
CxxxCxcxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx
what I like about this is that its very subtle, the variation is actually just a progression of a third down, and all you have to do to change the chord is put the second chord in 2nd inversion, meaning all you have to do is take the 5th of the first chord and raise it by a tone. Creating this pattern C...C.c.C...C... and this can be used anywhere is the basic patern, it can easly be taken out or put back in as a variation that occurs once in a while, and I think the beauty of this is that while that chord changes, the bass stay the same. It simply goes from being the root of the chord to the third of the chord. I also like this same half mesure variation in the last mesure, mike look funny cuse instead of going down by a third in that case, try putting a sus chord. but it fact, when you get into writing the parts, it will not sound like a sus chord but an anticipation of the start of the melody. Since you will simply take a chord that has no common tones with the first chord of the progression, and half way through the mesure, change one of the notes to a tone from the first chord (giving an anticipation that the chord progression will start over)...
this might not be very clear but I had little time to write it, hope you understand
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7577 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
I understand a little, you said bring it down to a third to the sixth chord? So the bass is still on the tonic note but is the third of the chord the melody is playing? Maybe you should take some more time typing or post an example audio clip to listen to 
Also that rhythm you laid out has the chord changing on every beat. In a trance song? That must be one helluva song!
Also that rhythm you laid out has the chord changing on every beat. In a trance song? That must be one helluva song!
-
- KVRist
- 70 posts since 24 Jan, 2007
I just erased a very long text full of giberish and details that would only have bored you. This was the bottom line. Instead of only looking at the chord change rhythme, also try to experiement and find how you can use that in connection with certain progressions and certaine inversions. It will really add an edge to it... And since you wanted an example, I'll give you one, but then again, the point I think is to experiment cuse this opens up a lot of possibilities...
EX:
(I don't know how that sounds, I made it up without a piano)
c3 = the third c on the piano
capital letter = beat marker
LEAD: G3-g3-g3-g3-B3-b3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
chords pattern = C...C...
chords progression: Cmajor...Eminor...
and then try this variation:
LEAD: G3-g3-a3-a3-B3-b3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
chords pattern = C.c.C...
chords progression: Cmajor.Aminor.Eminor...
or this variation:
LEAD: G3-g3-g3-g3-C3-c3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
chords pattern = C.....c.
chords progression: Cmajor.....Eminor.
A few things to notice about the example:
-You are starting from a basic CxxxCxxx Pattern (which btw I simplified but could have said CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx)
-The Bass note follows this same pattern in both variations; and if you are writing in a style where the bass cann be quite prominent, like hard trance, you'll see that even though the chords change in my variations, the flow is sort of the same if you relly on the feel of the bass. Try playing this:
No variation - Variation 1 - No variation - Variation 2.
And you'll see that the bass is always repeating the same thing. Making the variations easier to input in parts of your melody, as they won't nessassarly break the flow.
-In both variations, the rhythme of the chord change and the chord progression are both modified by simply raising or lowering the Lead note by 1 tone (this would be caracteristic to the Down By 3rd progression), in a way, everything is changed but so subtlely that it could even sound like an NCT (non chord tone - these things you add to melodies to spice them up). This could also have been done with the Middle line.
These lines probably suck, cuse I didn't realy work on them. Which is my point, if you practice on a piano and experiment a lot with Chord Rhthme, Chord Inversion, Part Writing, and Chord Progression, you will find that any chord Rhythms are possible, and that the trick is just to work on them enough to pull them off. By connecting all these things, chord rhythm won't be as dull and repetitive and modifications in chord rhythme will start getting easier to do.
Question: Did everything thing I just say make any sens? I'm realy no expert, by that was my 2 cents anyway. enjoy
EX:
(I don't know how that sounds, I made it up without a piano)
c3 = the third c on the piano
capital letter = beat marker
LEAD: G3-g3-g3-g3-B3-b3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
chords pattern = C...C...
chords progression: Cmajor...Eminor...
and then try this variation:
LEAD: G3-g3-a3-a3-B3-b3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
chords pattern = C.c.C...
chords progression: Cmajor.Aminor.Eminor...
or this variation:
LEAD: G3-g3-g3-g3-C3-c3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
chords pattern = C.....c.
chords progression: Cmajor.....Eminor.
A few things to notice about the example:
-You are starting from a basic CxxxCxxx Pattern (which btw I simplified but could have said CxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxxCxxx)
-The Bass note follows this same pattern in both variations; and if you are writing in a style where the bass cann be quite prominent, like hard trance, you'll see that even though the chords change in my variations, the flow is sort of the same if you relly on the feel of the bass. Try playing this:
No variation - Variation 1 - No variation - Variation 2.
And you'll see that the bass is always repeating the same thing. Making the variations easier to input in parts of your melody, as they won't nessassarly break the flow.
-In both variations, the rhythme of the chord change and the chord progression are both modified by simply raising or lowering the Lead note by 1 tone (this would be caracteristic to the Down By 3rd progression), in a way, everything is changed but so subtlely that it could even sound like an NCT (non chord tone - these things you add to melodies to spice them up). This could also have been done with the Middle line.
These lines probably suck, cuse I didn't realy work on them. Which is my point, if you practice on a piano and experiment a lot with Chord Rhthme, Chord Inversion, Part Writing, and Chord Progression, you will find that any chord Rhythms are possible, and that the trick is just to work on them enough to pull them off. By connecting all these things, chord rhythm won't be as dull and repetitive and modifications in chord rhythme will start getting easier to do.
Question: Did everything thing I just say make any sens? I'm realy no expert, by that was my 2 cents anyway. enjoy
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7577 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
Yeah it made sense. But I don't get that you wrote it like:
LEAD: G3-g3-g3-g3-B3-b3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
when this would have meant the same thing:
LEAD: G3--------B3--------
MID: E3--------G3--------
BASS: C1--------E1--------
You only need to note where the chord changes, not each time the notes play. Think of it like reading a chord analysis on the bottom of the staff instead of reading the notes.
The whole point of this kind of analysis is to, Im hoping, is to discover new beat and groove in the music that percussion doesn't make. Imagine using a polyrhythm and having the chord change every beat on it. It would sound crazy! lol. I think the rhythm of the chords is as important as anything else.
But Im also trying to break that mold of every new song I've made in the last year has followed a weak chord change of every bar and it's BORING and PREDICTABLE as hell!
LEAD: G3-g3-g3-g3-B3-b3-b3-b3
MID: E3-e3-e3-e3-G3-g3-g3-g3
BASS: C1----c1----E1----e1---
when this would have meant the same thing:
LEAD: G3--------B3--------
MID: E3--------G3--------
BASS: C1--------E1--------
You only need to note where the chord changes, not each time the notes play. Think of it like reading a chord analysis on the bottom of the staff instead of reading the notes.
The whole point of this kind of analysis is to, Im hoping, is to discover new beat and groove in the music that percussion doesn't make. Imagine using a polyrhythm and having the chord change every beat on it. It would sound crazy! lol. I think the rhythm of the chords is as important as anything else.
But Im also trying to break that mold of every new song I've made in the last year has followed a weak chord change of every bar and it's BORING and PREDICTABLE as hell!
-
- KVRist
- 70 posts since 24 Jan, 2007
your right, it does look weird the way I wrote it, perhaps I was trying to demonstrate that if you look at the notes, these chord changes can easily be mistaken for NCT (non chord tones) in the melodies...
-
- KVRist
- 70 posts since 24 Jan, 2007
If you find what you are looking for, I'm interrested, but for this, it would realy to know what kind of music you are making, cuse chord rhythm seems to have a lot to do with that...camsr wrote: The whole point of this kind of analysis is to, Im hoping, is to discover new beat and groove in the music that percussion doesn't make. Imagine using a polyrhythm and having the chord change every beat on it. It would sound crazy! lol. I think the rhythm of the chords is as important as anything else.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7577 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
I make music based on electronic elements, leaning towards trance and house.jee_pack wrote:If you find what you are looking for, I'm interrested, but for this, it would realy to know what kind of music you are making, cuse chord rhythm seems to have a lot to do with that...camsr wrote: The whole point of this kind of analysis is to, Im hoping, is to discover new beat and groove in the music that percussion doesn't make. Imagine using a polyrhythm and having the chord change every beat on it. It would sound crazy! lol. I think the rhythm of the chords is as important as anything else.