Soloing: Melody or chords first?
-
Count_fuzzball Count_fuzzball https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=182471
- KVRian
- 765 posts since 9 Jun, 2008 from Ireland
I had a discussion with a guy I know about which to do first when soloing, Creating a melody first and then writing the chord progressions first or coming up with some chords and fitting a melody over them?
Any recommendations?
EDIT: Personally, I start with the chords first and build up a melody over that.
Any recommendations?
EDIT: Personally, I start with the chords first and build up a melody over that.
Last edited by Count_fuzzball on Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Banned
- 3299 posts since 20 Dec, 2008
Whichever way suits your workflow, but I would suggest it's easier to fit a chord to a melody than vice versa. There's no right or wrong answer.
-
- KVRist
- 179 posts since 11 Feb, 2008
That's not "soloing".Count_fuzzball wrote:I had a discussion with a guy I know about which to do first when soloing, Creating a melody first and then writing the chord progressions first or coming up with some chords and fitting a melody over them?
Soloing is typically used to mean playing an improvised part over an existing song. Usually you play melodic lines over an existing chord progression, though a "solo" could consist of chords "in the spotlight".
What you're doing is "composing".
Traditionally, Melody comes first, and is harmonized (i.e., chords put to it).
However, most modern "songwriters" do the opposite - they write a chord progression first, then create a melody to that.
In some styles, like Jazz and even Rock, the music is so chord-centric that people almost always come up with a chord progression first, then start to improvise (or "solo") over that chord progression because - and especially in jazz - that's how a lot of the performance is structured. They then find elements of their improvisation that they like and set that down as the melody.
But classical music was not composed this way - usually, an existing melody was used, or created, and then was harmonized. Either that, or the melody was conceived in conjunction with the harmony in mind.
Many students find it difficult to write convincing classical style music and most of the time the problem is that they're trying to "melodize a harmony" rather than "harmonize a melody" as they actually did back then (but note, even then some types of pieces are still "progression-based").
Best,
Steve
-
- KVRian
- 1084 posts since 12 Sep, 2008 from Your basement
I are confused. Can you define "solo" in the context of your question 
Last edited by Ogg Vorbis on Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
dirty oscillators dirty oscillators https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=122600
- KVRAF
- 2739 posts since 4 Oct, 2006
in composing i'd say melody first.
Eins zwei drei vier funf sechs sieben acht
-
- KVRAF
- 2028 posts since 18 Mar, 2004 from New York, N.Y.
That's the distinction between improvising and composing, but solos can be improvised or composed. Most solos, even in blues and rock, are at least partially composed, with some artists being incredible soloists, but never improvising (some examples are Alex Lifeson and Neal Schon, whose solos are as memorable as the vocal melodies)...llatham wrote:That's not "soloing".Count_fuzzball wrote:I had a discussion with a guy I know about which to do first when soloing, Creating a melody first and then writing the chord progressions first or coming up with some chords and fitting a melody over them?
Soloing is typically used to mean playing an improvised part over an existing song. Usually you play melodic lines over an existing chord progression, though a "solo" could consist of chords "in the spotlight".
What you're doing is "composing".
...
Of course, classical music is full of solos, which had little or no room for improv...
-
- KVRian
- 1084 posts since 12 Sep, 2008 from Your basement
jplanet wrote: That's the distinction between improvising and composing, but solos can be improvised or composed. Most solos, even in blues and rock, are at least partially composed, with some artists being incredible soloists, but never improvising (some examples are Alex Lifeson and Neal Schon, whose solos are as memorable as the vocal melodies)...
Of course, classical music is full of solos, which had little or no room for improv...
-
- KVRer
- 16 posts since 31 Dec, 2008
I do melodies first and fit chords to them. And tweak any notes in the melody that don't work with the chords.
-
- Banned
- 3299 posts since 20 Dec, 2008
Works for me as well. BTW, depending on the type of music produced, chords in themself are not always necessary.gregaudio89 wrote:I do melodies first and fit chords to them. And tweak any notes in the melody that don't work with the chords.
-
Count_fuzzball Count_fuzzball https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=182471
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 765 posts since 9 Jun, 2008 from Ireland
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
I think the approach of 'melodizing harmony' might be a little suspect, tbh.
In jazz, so often people find the solution of practicing a lot of stock licks, which tend to be ways of elaborating a scheme of chord changes. Which like anything, the result is down to how one has worked ones 'talent' into 'chops'. But, to me, it does not seem the best way of forming something memorable, melodically.
I'm thinking of a concrete example: Mike Brecker racheted up an awesome solo over the 2-chord vamp of Black Napkins by Frank Zappa, where he was forced to deal with almost pure line, I mean not depending on the interest of some really cute changes to maintain the interest...
In jazz, so often people find the solution of practicing a lot of stock licks, which tend to be ways of elaborating a scheme of chord changes. Which like anything, the result is down to how one has worked ones 'talent' into 'chops'. But, to me, it does not seem the best way of forming something memorable, melodically.
I'm thinking of a concrete example: Mike Brecker racheted up an awesome solo over the 2-chord vamp of Black Napkins by Frank Zappa, where he was forced to deal with almost pure line, I mean not depending on the interest of some really cute changes to maintain the interest...
-
- KVRAF
- 2028 posts since 18 Mar, 2004 from New York, N.Y.
Oh, that's easy. That's based on a groove that never changes key, it's referred to as "modal", because the fundamental key doesn't change. Just lay down a groove and wail! Or, if you have melodic ideas to start with, just find the root key of your melody and lay down a groove in that key.
Which brings us back to your question - which should you do first? Honestly, whichever one comes to you first. Don't over-think it, just start with what you have. A song can be developed from any idea, whether it's melodic, chords, groove, lyrics, or whatever.
-
- KVRist
- 179 posts since 11 Feb, 2008
A "solo" can mean a couple of things:Ogg Vorbis wrote:
![]()
Okay, please define "solo." I have the feeling we're are all talking about different things.
1. A passage of music or even an entire piece performed by a single musician.
2. A passage of music where one part is of more importance than the accompaniment, played by a single player typically (though the jazz term "soli" can be used when multiple players perform this important part, usually as a harmonized line).
The 2nd definition is what we're discussing here.
In the vernacular, to "take a solo" or "play a solo" or "solo over" etc. means for a single instrument to play melodic ideas (though could be chordal) that are "more important" than the other stuff going on.
Solos in popular music are usually instrumental.
Solos in popular music are often improvised, though may be pre-composed (and that pre-composition might have been inspired by improvisation initially).
Solos in popular music are often distinct change, or separate section from the rest of the song. The rest of the song may consist of Verses and Choruses, often a Bridge, and Introductions, Interludes, and Outros.
In the sense of "solo", a lot of people use the term "insturmental break" as well. Usually this might not mean a "true" solo, but a "breakdown" or things like that were instruments are featured, rather than the typical solo.
Also, the solo is usually distinct from the main melody line in some way. It may be totally new material, or in the case of many Nirvana songs, the "guitar solo" plays the vocal melody, what makes it different is it's on guitar rather than voice.
But "soloing" is not necessarily composing. If you are improvising a solo - or an entire piece - you're "composing" on the fly. Composing on the fly is called "improvisation".
A "solo" - as a section in a song, or something a player does while playing, may be pre-composed or improvised.
HTH,
Steve
-
- KVRian
- 1084 posts since 12 Sep, 2008 from Your basement
Those are the cases I would agree are "solos." So back to the OP's question, he must be talking about plain old "composing" then.llatham wrote:
A "solo" can mean a couple of things:
1. A passage of music or even an entire piece performed by a single musician.
2. A passage of music where one part is of more importance than the accompaniment, played by a single player typically (though the jazz term "soli" can be used when multiple players perform this important part, usually as a harmonized line).
The 2nd definition is what we're discussing here.
In the vernacular, to "take a solo" or "play a solo" or "solo over" etc. means for a single instrument to play melodic ideas (though could be chordal) that are "more important" than the other stuff going on.
Solos in popular music are usually instrumental.
Solos in popular music are often improvised, though may be pre-composed (and that pre-composition might have been inspired by improvisation initially).
Solos in popular music are often distinct change, or separate section from the rest of the song. The rest of the song may consist of Verses and Choruses, often a Bridge, and Introductions, Interludes, and Outros.
In the sense of "solo", a lot of people use the term "insturmental break" as well. Usually this might not mean a "true" solo, but a "breakdown" or things like that were instruments are featured, rather than the typical solo.
Also, the solo is usually distinct from the main melody line in some way. It may be totally new material, or in the case of many Nirvana songs, the "guitar solo" plays the vocal melody, what makes it different is it's on guitar rather than voice.
But "soloing" is not necessarily composing. If you are improvising a solo - or an entire piece - you're "composing" on the fly. Composing on the fly is called "improvisation".
A "solo" - as a section in a song, or something a player does while playing, may be pre-composed or improvised.
HTH,
Steve
Got it, thanks.
-
- KVRist
- 80 posts since 10 Jun, 2005
I just read the original post, but I'm not sure what the question is: are we talking about improvisation (solos) or composition (in the most traditional sense)?
If you're talking about improvisation, most people improvise on existing chord progressions. There are some exceptions to the rule: modal improvisations that only focus on the linear aspect (using, say, one scale over any number of chords) and free improvisation used mostly in avant-garde music and free jazz (chromatic scale, microtonality, extended techniques).
But generally speaking, you'll want chords first, and then improvise solos on them.
If you are asking about composition, there is no rule here. Some people work better when composing the "harmonic plan" first, then composing a melody on top of that. Others prefer to compose the melody, then come up with a chord structure that is going to support said melody. Basically, whatever works for you is good.
If you're talking about improvisation, most people improvise on existing chord progressions. There are some exceptions to the rule: modal improvisations that only focus on the linear aspect (using, say, one scale over any number of chords) and free improvisation used mostly in avant-garde music and free jazz (chromatic scale, microtonality, extended techniques).
But generally speaking, you'll want chords first, and then improvise solos on them.
If you are asking about composition, there is no rule here. Some people work better when composing the "harmonic plan" first, then composing a melody on top of that. Others prefer to compose the melody, then come up with a chord structure that is going to support said melody. Basically, whatever works for you is good.
Last edited by karacha on Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.