chord question(s). something thats been bothering me

[showtimeee]

sup? pretty noobish question here as i'm only really just grasping the basics of it because i'm sick of just playing by ear...so i apologise if it sounds really stupid to some people..

i'm a straight harmonic composer, always start chords/harmony first and not once have i started with a melody, problem is i seem to spend a most of my time coming up with a chord progression that i actually like because i seem to only like a certain ''type'' of chord progression and i'm trying to work out what it is...because like a ton of progression types i'm assuming there's a name for it..

I tend to gravitate towards epic sounding chords, not necessarily chords that are spread over octaves or just inverted, but pretty much anything heard on a real uplifting trance breakdown, like andy blueman, arctic moon, soundlift progressions, but i'm not a big fan of anything with to many diminished chords or augmented, not too keen on some popular jazz progressions etc, i'm also a sucker for real cheesy upbeat chords, like a 1-6-4-5 in C major for example, C, Am, F, G. just ''sounds'' and ''feels'' very...complete? or a 1-6-3-7 progression..i know a lot of the time it's the sounds used and how the chords are built, but i notice it even just on a piano..

can anybody help?

thank you.

[rifftrax]

Problem, is the melody and way you are playing the chord (broken, inversions, ways it's been augmented) is going to work itself heavily into how the chord progression feels (whether it's natural or not).

I've found that going from one static "chord" to another sometimes sounds right or not determined soley by the melody and whether an inversion I am using causes it to be more like a different chord. You really just have to mess around with that type of thing on a nice piano to get a feel for how that can work.

[kbaccki]

So what's the poblem exactly? That you can't break out of the chord structures you gravitate to? BTW, if I catch your drift, it sounds like by "type" of chord progression you mean "cliche". Seriously, though... nothing wrong with that. Most (western) music you hear on a day to day basis is based on cliche structures and harmonies and resolutions, whether it's pop, rock, dance, techno, country, etc. And non-western music has their cliches too. Nothing wrong with that, IMO.

The question is: what do you do to make the cliche interesting? Textures... counterpoint... unexpected surprises. Try simple things like not having your bass follow the roots of your chords 1-for-1... maybe one or two chords use alternate bass notes (i.e., like a "slash chord", if you know what that is). Break the strict harmonic structure of the progression and modulate to a major chord in place of a minor chord... or try a sus chord to open things up a bit. You don't have to go crazy with "jazz progressions", per se... some simple alterations not too far removed from the base cliche structure can add an interesting twist.

Also, regarding starting with the melody... even if I'm starting with the melody, I can already here chord harmonies in my head. It'd have to be a pretty simple riff or hook for me to just hear it in a vaccuum, without any target context. That's me, anyway. Starting with chords all the time isn't necessarily a bad thing, I don't think.

[showtimeee]

thanks for the advice so far.., haha it was more of a general outloud thought than a specific question but i'm getting the answers i need..it's difficult to ask questions specially when you only know stuff from what you hear? so I tend to just type till I get my point across? anyway.

I guess i'm a very harmony driven person, like even down to the music I myself listen to...I can't stand Drum and Bass for example, or a majority of Tiesto 'dance' music (traffic is a ewwww song) but give me uplifting trance any day of the week. And yeah, I'd gathered they were pretty cliche progressions, like C, Em, Am, F for example, or D, A, Bm, G and i know being cliche isn't a good thing but surely it's not a bad thing cuz...they must sound good to have got to that cliche status? but I know everything like that gets hated on lol...reminds me of that 4 chords thing on youtube, and yeah i'm guessing it's not just western music that ''suffers'' from cliche progressions...Problem is yeah, everything I start with is chords or harmony, and I tend to stick to progressions that are easy on the ear (cliche) and end up messing with the same ones each time..

And yeah it's funny you mention slash chords because only recently I've been looking into them...like inverting chords also, i did that without realizing at first, and i've had pretty good results. So thats definetly something to look into...Another thing i've noticed when I study how uplift trance pads are put together for example, tends to not be like say a A minor chord of A, C, E in a traditional sense, it'll be A on one octave, A one octave higher and C on the next highest or something, i'm guessing thats a popular thing also? sometimes it's 2-3 instruments playing a chord, say a pad and a synth line, rather than one instrument..which I haven't really worked with yet..haha i'm thinking outloud now excuse me =D

And with melodies it's like...as soon as I have the progression down, like if it's a pad for example or some strings in a R n B song, the melodies just come out for days like I could sit there, press record and literally record 15-20 different melodies, thats never really a problem, it's just i'm too geared towards harmony and can't do melody first. it's like when people tell me ''oh that song has a ........... progression'' and unless it's harmonized really well, or has straight block chords or strums or something i tend not to notice =D

anyway thank you for your answers again guys...if anyone has anything too add i'm all ears

[wrench45us]

I'm the same way
I find chord progressions I like and go from there
except I tend to be rather loose about genre and try to steal from the best

My issue is I have fallen into a particular style of keyboard playing based on rather rudimentary keyboard skills. as problems go it's not so bad -- nice harmonies, nice progressions, but treatment is very similar
personal limitation becomes personal style -- it always seems to run that way -- sort of what all these tools are about plus gives a direction for what obsrtacles to overcome with either DAW tools and/or study and practice

[groovizm]

Seems to me you are looking for 'modal' chords. It works something like this:

When you play simply c-d-e-f-g-a-b-c you are in what we call c major. (You know that.) Now by playing the same notes (white keys in this case) but starting starting on one the 7 different notes you can play when of the 7 modi.

Start on the d for instance: d-e-f-g-a-b-c-d. This is D Dorian. Any progression you Used in C major (or rather Ionian in modi-speak) can be played in D dorian. For instance your C, Am, F, G now becomes Dm Bm Gm A.

But I guess there's enough out there on the net to help you further...

Regards,

Huddie

www.soundcloud.com/groovizm

[jancivil]

No. There are fundamental errors here.

B minor does not apply to D dorian. The idea you are looking for, the 'vi' chord on the tonic D, will be B D F. The minor triad on that root contains an F#, which is not in that set.

B D F is a diminished triad. Which will, for a beginner, for sure be a function of C Major. It will not work in D dorian unless someone is very clever and subtle, and it will be quite exceptional. The tritone in that harmony, B/F will lead to the impression that C major is the goal. It is not a 'modal chord'. Applying seven triads to a mode isn't modal usage, it's diatonic harmonic practice. The term 'modal chord' hasn't any real meaning. A chord is a chord. Chordal usage is determined by context.

The difference between C major and D dorian isn't trivial. The reason for D dorian is that it has a particular character, ie., its interval relationships refer to the tonic D.
Once there is the impression that 'here is C major', ie., the tonic or key note is perceived as C with that set of tones ('white keys'), the term 'Dorian' does not apply. The statement 'any chord you used in C major can be played in D Dorian... sure, not a problem on paper. But once you use a chord which typically leads you to C major, guess what. You're in C major. Do a G7, or a B diminished in D dorian, and unless one is somewhat expert, you've ruined the effect of Dorian, as the pull to C from here is usually irresistable. An exception proves the rule, and it's tricky at best.

G minor is not a triad that occurs naturally in D dorian either. It contains a Bb. The triad that naturally occurs on that root is G major.

"Dm Bm Gm A"... if you make a row from these chords, that reads: D E F F# G A Bb B C C#. A ten note scale. And it's an odd progression. Nothing wrong with either, per se... but 'dorian chords' these are not.

[groovizm]

No. There are fundamental errors here.

B minor does not apply to D dorian. The idea you are looking for, the 'vi' chord on the tonic D, will be B D F. The minor triad on that root contains an F#, which is not in that set.

B D F is a diminished triad. Which will, for a beginner, for sure be a function of C Major. It will not work in D dorian unless someone is very clever and subtle, and it will be quite exceptional. The tritone in that harmony, B/F will lead to the impression that C major is the goal. It is not a 'modal chord'. Applying seven triads to a mode isn't modal usage, it's diatonic harmonic practice. The term 'modal chord' hasn't any real meaning. A chord is a chord. Chordal usage is determined by context.

The difference between C major and D dorian isn't trivial. The reason for D dorian is that it has a particular character, ie., its interval relationships refer to the tonic D.
Once there is the impression that 'here is C major', ie., the tonic or key note is perceived as C with that set of tones ('white keys'), the term 'Dorian' does not apply. The statement 'any chord you used in C major can be played in D Dorian... sure, not a problem on paper. But once you use a chord which typically leads you to C major, guess what. You're in C major. Do a G7, or a B diminished in D dorian, and unless one is somewhat expert, you've ruined the effect of Dorian, as the pull to C from here is usually irresistable. An exception proves the rule, and it's tricky at best.

G minor is not a triad that occurs naturally in D dorian either. It contains a Bb. The triad that naturally occurs on that root is G major.

"Dm Bm Gm A"... if you make a row from these chords, that reads: D E F F# G A Bb B C C#. A ten note scale. And it's an odd progression. Nothing wrong with either, per se... but 'dorian chords' these are not.

Jancivil is right, I made some foolish mistakes here. I stll think, though, that the modal sound is what showtimeee is looking for. I think Jancivil's 'The difference between C major and D dorian isn't trivial. The reason for D dorian is that it has a particular character, ie., its interval relationships refer to the tonic D.' explains it best.

Wikipeadia have an excellent article on this too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_mode

[Parasiticus]

It sounds to me that you are just stuck on that I-vi sound. You've learned it so well that you are comfortable with riffing off of it...so it's time to move on and expand your palette. Find another progression you like and learn it as well. Save the I-vi for special occasions.

I have a few progressions I just fixate on too though, I'm sure everyone does.

[music producer]

However, let's remember 1-6m-4-5 can't be all bad - it is, after all, "Heart And Soul", the timeless 4 hands piano standard that many grew up pounding out just for fun! But hey, on this forum, there may not be many that remember or recognize that particular song...