Putting theory to Dance Music? Multiple parts create chords?

[AvonBarksdale]

Ive been lurking on kvr reading some of the excellent posts for a while.

There is one thing ive been struggling to get my head around and that is putting theory to dance music. Particularly chords.

For example i read so much about chords and progressions yet in many of the dance tunes i like, there are no chords played as such. Except for pads during breakdowns

But i have noticed there will be synth leads, basslines and other simple synth lines playing at once.. Am i right in thinking the chords are split between these parts?

Here are a couple of tracks i like and hopefully want to learn to write in the style of







They're quite simple tracks but made up of multiple layers, do these layers work together to make chords?
If so are there actual chord progressions?

Or am i totally wrong and these tracks are just separate melodies working in harmony?

Any help will be really appreciated

[VicDiesel]

I'm listening to the first track. It's really a 4-chord progression, something like Am-Dm-C-G. And you're right that the voices that are playing together make up, or at least imply, those chords.

If I wanted to write that track, I would lay down those chords, start writing bass lines and melodies over it, and then stop playing the chords. In effect, the chords are implicit in the melodies that play.

You can also start from a bass line you write, figure out what chords would fit it, write a melody or arp pattern based on those, and then erase your chords again.

Classical theory still applies to your bass line and melodies, because parallel fifths will still sound stupid, contrary motion makes it more interesting, &c.

Victor.

[AvonBarksdale]

Thanks that really helps it make sense.

So the separate melodies (voices) dont have to strictly follow chords from the progression but imply it.

By the way, is this a common technique? Is there a correct term for this way of writing music?
Or perhaps just a new thing which has spawned from dance music made by not formally trained musicians?

I feel like this is a big breakthrough actually as ive been reading up on theory for some time, learning about chords and progressions but never managed to connect it to the music i wanted to write, until now.

[dreamkeeper]

Is there a correct term for this way of writing music?

I believe it's called trial & error.

[VicDiesel]

So the separate melodies (voices) dont have to strictly follow chords from the progression but imply it.

Right. Imply it, or at least don't clash with it. And don't clash with each other.

Quick example. Take chords Dm / Dm / Bb / Bb and keep repeating.

Bass line in quarter notes: D4 D A D / R D A D / D D Bb D / R D Bb D where R means rest.

Melody in eights: f8 e d e f e d e / f e d e f g f g / repeat those two measures.

Those two go together, they unambiguously imply the chords, and they don't clash.

But you could also write a melody for the same chords: e8 f e f d f d f (repeat 4 times)

and that would clash with the other melody, though not with the bass, since it would be two octave higher or so.

With that bass and either melody, the implied chords are clear enough that there is not need to play them explicitly, though you could of course use a trance-gated pad or something like that.

By the way, is this a common technique? Is there a correct term for this way of writing music?

In a way it's polyphony. A different idiom from classical music, but nothing really new in the ideas involved.

Victor.

[cosmicdawn]

This was something I thought a lot about before. You think you need to play triads all the time but simple lines that just gives the idea of the chord can be better. And this is nothing new. The instruments used in classical music seldom play chords on their own.

[The Fex]

I hope this doesn't confuse matters, or start any arguments.... my aim is to put some of these ideas in the right order, IYSWIM.

Scales come first. Chords are derived from scales. Any given scale has a set of associated chords, made by simply building triads on each note of that scale. Even so, inverting those chords, substituting some of them with chords that don't theoretically belong (e.g. D maj often takes the place of D7), or playing power chords (which are just root notes and 5ths, and so technically intervals, and not actually chords at all) will often work equally well.... because together, in context, they imply the parent scale.

[ocmtime]

This is a very good program to make chord progressions in different voicings with just a click and the arrows point you to the right next chord.
I think this is not in the kvr database.

http://musictoolsforpeople.com/Music_To ... Trial.html

[Nystul]

It's not so much a matter of the parts layering together to form chords. They do, to an extent. Certainly the bass is usually playing the chord roots, which makes the harmony that much easier to recognize. But you can take just the one synth line with just one note at a time, and the harmony is already clearly implied. I'm sure you're familiar with synth arps, and the classical definition of an arpeggio is a broken chord. That is to say, when one plays the notes of a chord one after another (in any order), the listener is able to understand the harmony even though the chord never sounds as one. Taken a step further, you can add notes that aren't part of the chord to the arp and create a melody where there is still enough chord notes on strong rhythmic positions to make the chord obvious. You can hear this type of thing in the left hand of a Mozart piano piece, in a Guns N Roses guitar riff, many places.

So it is nothing new. The part where EDM seems novel to me is that there is so often no main melody on top of these riffs. There is only the background music, or rhythm section so to speak. Unless of course some hot chick sings shallow lyrics over the top in a simple melody... much better then.

[Scottyg6000]

really helpful thread

[SampleScience]

I have always been lost in music theory... one of the reason is that I always felt that my music sound cheesy when respectly all those rules, or I just use the theory the wrong way (which must be the case!)...

[The Fex]

My feeling is that the rules are made to be broken, but a real artist should have some idea what those rules are in the first place. The rules are there to inform our creative decisions, not to restrict them.