composition question

[felipescalador]

How do you compose..

diatonically? I mean like saying lets compose a song in C aeolian. Made a chord progression of C aeolian and then jam over the progression using all the notes of C aeolian but when stopping/landing in a chord usually use the 1, 3, 5, 7 of the chord that is currently sounding, and use the rest of the notes as passing notes???

Are this how great songs are made??

or simply jam using al the chords you know.. to make a progression you like not thinking in theory and later analyze the chord progression and see what scales could be used over etc..? also using the notes of the scale but when landing in a chord using the 1,3,5, (over a note of the chord sounding)??

what is a good way to see what scales can be used over that progession you made??

(I dont think jimi page or hendrix)or any rock band for the matter said something like.. lets compose a song in C dorian.. and just use the chords and notes of C dorian. Or did they??

tips, guides on how to compose music will be greatly apreciated. I already understand the thory but I havent done any thing worth hearing

[Jafo]

Use consonant tones (those in the chord) when you want to sound consonant, and different tones when you want to sound dissonant. Simple.

Some people follow the classical rules of composition, and create great music. Some people follow the classical rules of composition, and create poor music. (I'm in the second category.)

Some people go purely by ear, and create great music. Some people go purely by ear, and create poor music.

There are formulae you can follow to guarantee you create something halfway decent -- they're the classical rules of composition, which is why you study them in school -- but that is all they can promise.

It's not enough to eliminate mistakes. Sometimes it's a lack of enough good, as opposed to having too much bad. Rules can only help with the second case. Maybe it's a matter of inspiration, or grace; all you can do is keep at it and hope it'll strike you. *shrug* Or maybe I'm just not one of the lucky ones.

[jancivil]

I was a musician for about 10 years before I ever thought of myself as a composer; when I was around 14 I caught myself imagining (hearing in my head) music pretty clearly, and not just a fleeting glimpse, that didn't seem like was remembered particularly from anywhere; & I got the idea I could do this. So I set out seeking knowledge. I copped things off of records. Whole things, whole arrangements, or at least everything I could make out on my little teenage stereo. I watched everybody I could, I asked anybody that would sit still for it specific questions. I sat in my room for hours playing modes over a drone. When I was able to get into community college I took theory courses. These involved sight singing, daily. You connect an abstract concept with your head and your ear and eventually you 'know' what note you're looking at, the outcome desired is you'll know what note you want in a line or another context.

By the time I had a 'master class' in composition and presented a couple of things, playing them live for the man, I had some vocabulary, and some confidence, and when he critiqued it I understood enough to have a different opinion than he did on a couple of his points.

Do people decide eg., "I'm going for Aeolian on C" and that is a determinant, YES. (In fact, Indian raga is an extemporaneous treatment of a model based in a set of prescriptions and proscriptions built on something that we can call a parent mode.) Do they think "using all the notes of C aeolian but when stopping/landing in a chord usually use the 1, 3, 5, 7 of the chord that is currently sounding, and use the rest of the notes as passing notes"? Not if they're composing, no. They will have internalized ideas like that if they work as desired. (And as far as using a mode on a tonic. whatever chords you pick should not necessarily lead your decisions in a line. That's painting-by-numbers. Enjoy the mode and learn its felicities, the intervals, the character, this note against the C or another tone. You might hang on D over say your C minor type of thing and never 'resolve' to something obvious and it be a good thing!)

There is no paint-by-numbers that is going to guarantee anything but maybe a 'safe' result. And if the person carrying out said formulae has no ear, there's certainly no guarantee they are applying knowledge and not just some information.

I don't understand the idea of someone that's supposedly composing music and not doing it by ear. If you're following known principles and getting a poor result, the problem is a disconnect between these principles and your ear as far as I can tell. The ear can know, rather than just make guesses all the time.

[istyle]

I hear original music when i 'm releax or travelling on moving vehicles ( which is not driven by me )
I then try to memorise them and record them in my computer ,all of them ,good or bad doesnt matter.

After sometime i will comeback and evaluate each one to see if i can compose them into good songs with good theory technic behind them,sometime i develop them more til they're totally new songs!!!

Music is art,the heart of art is developing the work to its full extent,like a flower that goes full bloom

[tapper mike]

Composer such a literal title. I was writing/recording music within a week of being able to move from one chord to the next. Back then we never thought this has to be as good as some such famed artist. We were more about what we could do with what we had/knew. I enjoyed the songs for the songs sake and the writing process for the sake of writing. We made goals for ourselves like a song a day or a song a week. Sometimes they were throw aways and sometimes they were keepers. Writers acknoledge paths but don't dwell on them. You either do it or you don't. When it's done you have something. Maybe you'll never use it, Maybe you'll rework it at a later date.

With writing it is actually more about pulse then anything else. Once I establish a beat/vibe/pulse everything else falls into play.

Check out what this piano teacher says at 5:20


Take any spoken phrase, extract the rhythmic value of it and then apply a single note line, a repeated note or a chord to it. You can choose to apply traditional concepts or conventional concepts of chord progressions or impose your own harmonic values on the piece. If you play the same rhythm enough you'll wittle it down to something useful and be able to build responses to the original rhythm.

[dandmkirkwood]

I believe great songs express a certain emotion. A good songwriter will make you feel a certain way and this kind of talent can't be learnt no matter how hard you try. They will put together a progression or melody that expresses how they feel and go from there. Take tears in heaven by Eric Clapton. You can analyze it all you want but with going through what he went through with his son dying and all, and an amazing talent for expressing emotion, what he achieved by touching millions with that song is undefinable. An artist is someone who feels things differently to most people and has the ability to create emotional content in whatever medium they are using. Also the best songs in the world are usually really simple. Start with a message, find a nice progression that puts you in that space and open up and write how you feel. Don't worry about making it too complicated trying to show off how good you are and you will find when people hear it, they will love it. Good luck.

[tapper mike]

That type of belief system will forever keep you from attaining those specific qualities. There is a very good book on called arranging for the electronic synthesist. In which is spelled out how to formulate emotive values by use of rhythm primarily and harmonic/melodic qualities secondarily.

People who are both knowledgeable and honest will freely admit to using those very techniques. When you know what you are doing and still allow yourself to be swept up in the process is when you'll find the greatest benefit.

It also doesn't hurt to be influenced by those who have gone before you.

[dandmkirkwood]

I'm not saying you don't have know anything about music theory, but if it's all you know and your trying to 'think up' a really good song that reaches people on an emotional level it's not going to happen. I hear what your saying, the composer must use all his resources to take his music to the next level, but knowledge and knowledge alone is not enough. I think of Kurt cobain, his songs were as basic as it gets, but he achieved greatness with his ability to express himself. That's called talent. Sometimes we just need a push in the right direction.

[Loki Fuego]

My composition method is perfect for me as of now. I program everything in piano roll:
1) Put a bunch of (almost) random notes on piano roll
2) Move them, change pitches and lengths until you hear the melody and think: "Yeah! That's it!"
3) Add the bass line using melody as starting point and keeping it connected with melody
4) Create couple of chords using bass line and melody as the basis
5) Adjust voicing of those chords to keep it interesting
6) Identify the scale used and try different scales/keys for variation
7) Give it to someone who had 10-year formal musical training and ask for feedback
Usually the feedback is positive, so go on with arrangement/mixing

Quite easy. Everyone could do it

[Loki Fuego]

I think of Kurt cobain, his songs were as basic as it gets, but he achieved greatness with his ability to express himself.

If you analyse what Kurt Cobain did, you will hear a certain techniques used to create that expression. You will also be able to use these techniques. No talent required.
However, in order to develop your own personal techniques you would need something, that's beyond learning.

[dandmkirkwood]

Seriously you think you don't need talent to do what Kurt did? Man, what is going on? Honestly man, the dude was a prodigy, and he didn't even have to try. I believe when it comes to composition it has to come naturally. Anything else is just TRYHARD. To be able to put your heart on a page (in music). Maybe iv had too much to drink right now, but if you can write songs as people like this did without natural talent and a heart full of real suffering why isn't every Tom dick and Harry that knows something about music theory doing it? Consider the classical giants, beethoven, Puccini, etc. Sure they knew what they where doing musically, and they knew how to apply it, but it was the emotional content that made it awesome! And you don't need a high level of music theory to have this factor, it is Talent. When you compose, you need to have the ability to let go and let all that you know only be a vehicle to take you where you want to go. God speed,

[tapper mike]

Everything is learned in this life. Whether it is sub concious or concious. As for Cobain, or any other artist one can name. Once they learn/discover a successful idea they re invent it again and again. You can say he did or didn't find it in a book but you will never know for sure because you didn't live inside his brain 24/7 while he was alive.

Theory is more then set values or specific time intervals. Theory is an amagamation of many techniques and many styles which cover things we assume are pure emotion or emotive values. Things like accents and where the note lands on or slightly off the beat, timbre intonation and more. What people don't know about theory because they know so little of it confuses them into believing they know all therums universally and all therums can be applied universally. Both of which are equally false assumptions. Just like the assumption that

[dandmkirkwood]

Ok, let's say you had a formula that worked. After a while it would just be annoying. You start in a major key, work your way down to the relative minor and throw in a 4th or 5th and stick strictly to the major scale. Eventually it wouldn't be enough. You would want a temporary minor key change or a total shift into a totally different key or whatever. The basic princie of emotional content still applies. Whether the melody falls on the beat or the offbeat or even if the melody is subject to compound rythum where it is basically all over the place, there is one thing that's consistent for a song that people can relate to, that is a MESSAGE. What are you singing about? What are you expressing? What do people wAnt to hear? Isn't it what they feel but can't find the words or the sound to put Into a medium what they are already feeling? People need to be able to relatate to the medium. I know from experiance. People have cried at peices iv written. I'm not bragging, even tho it sounds like I am, people are so closed up, sometimes it just takes one note that they can connect with that wi release some of that emotional frustration, and allow them to feel what they would not be able to feel on their own. This is achieved by releasing your own emotions that have been wound so tightly and not being afraid to put how you really feel on the line. With every great endeavor there is risk, what are you prepared to expose for the cost of greatness? What would you risk for the opportunity of havin someone say to you:" that song touch me in such a deep way? " give everything, expect nothing in return, that's my motto.

[wrench45us]

Cobain acknowledged that he borrowed the whole soft/loud structure form the Pixies, buit so did a lot of other bands at the time. It doesn't mean a lot everybody works within a context

what Cobain had was what some commentators mentioned with Amy Winehouse -- authenticity -- and in both cases maybe a little too much authenticity

[rbarata]

When I'm studying theory, I always do it by creating my own compositions following the theory rules and change them according my own personal taste (always following the rules).

When I'm not studying I always compose by ear. When everything is almost finished I always analyse it according the theory rules. If I find something "incorrect" I correct it and keep it if it sounds good to me. If not, I forget the rules and keep it as it is, the way I like it.