How to really ingrain chord progressions in my mind?
-
- KVRer
- 3 posts since 2 Nov, 2012
I finished a chord progression book (Harmony for Computer Musicians), and while I'm more aware of everything that goes on, it is by no means ingrained in my head. Some things I've thought are to analyze music, or just go chapter by chapter again in the book and try creating stuff with the ideas they present. What have you guys done to really learn chord progressions? One thing for sure is I'd want to do a more hands on approach that involves creating, playing - exercising my brain. This for EDM/house type stuff fwiw.
-
- KVRAF
- 1577 posts since 20 May, 2002 from Cambridge, UK
you shouldn't need to memorise chord progressions unless you just want to create some formulaic thing which lacks any creativity or imagination. If you play around long enough with all the chords, you'll soon learn the relationship between them all and be able to improvise interesting progressions on the fly as the creative ideas pop into your head. Theory isn't a set of rules, just a description of conventions and you probably don't want to be *completely* conventional
THIS IS MY MUSIC: https://spti.fi/rZyjX7i 
-
- KVRAF
- 2118 posts since 1 Apr, 2004 from Athens, Greece
Just analyze and play any piece of music you like. Then steal from them!
Of course the whole thing takes time but it's fun, plus you expand your repertoire which you never know when it will be needed professionally, or just to get laid.
Unlike Jbravo, I do believe it's a good practice to memorise chord progressions from songs, otherwise how are you gonna learn the relationships between chords? Just by reading books?...
Of course the whole thing takes time but it's fun, plus you expand your repertoire which you never know when it will be needed professionally, or just to get laid.
Unlike Jbravo, I do believe it's a good practice to memorise chord progressions from songs, otherwise how are you gonna learn the relationships between chords? Just by reading books?...
-
- KVRist
- 235 posts since 18 Oct, 2002
Hello, ted1.
Music theory is a set of rules, but it is a set of rules for things that have already been done, not brand-new things. So, it all depends on what you want to accomplish. If you want nothing but brand-new stuff, things that have never been done before, be prepared for very few other people to understand it, and probably for not many to like it. To some, this doesn't matter, which is fine; their call. But, if you want to write and play things that sound appealing and fresh, then lean on the old things for the most part, but through in a some new things along the way.
There is an old saying: "There is nothing new under the sun." So, a productive approach, at least for me, is to say something old, but say it in a new way. It makes it easier for others to understand, and like, and it is a lot more fun and interesting for me! So, you might start out by simply exploring a few simple, familiar things, but try to be creative with them. Then, as you feel sufficiently in control of those, move on to some more obscure things. That way, you won't have to worry so much about memorization, it will just occur naturally, in its own time. And, you will probably find that you are much more in control of your music writing, as well as your playing.
Baxter
Music theory is a set of rules, but it is a set of rules for things that have already been done, not brand-new things. So, it all depends on what you want to accomplish. If you want nothing but brand-new stuff, things that have never been done before, be prepared for very few other people to understand it, and probably for not many to like it. To some, this doesn't matter, which is fine; their call. But, if you want to write and play things that sound appealing and fresh, then lean on the old things for the most part, but through in a some new things along the way.
There is an old saying: "There is nothing new under the sun." So, a productive approach, at least for me, is to say something old, but say it in a new way. It makes it easier for others to understand, and like, and it is a lot more fun and interesting for me! So, you might start out by simply exploring a few simple, familiar things, but try to be creative with them. Then, as you feel sufficiently in control of those, move on to some more obscure things. That way, you won't have to worry so much about memorization, it will just occur naturally, in its own time. And, you will probably find that you are much more in control of your music writing, as well as your playing.
Baxter
Last edited by Baxter on Sat Nov 03, 2012 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- 235 posts since 18 Oct, 2002
Hello again ted1!
Ok, I'm back for part 2. There are a few easy tricks you can use to remember the most common progressions. The most basic, and most common ones deal with the I (root), IV (sub-dominant) and V (dominant) chords. I will not go into these specifically, but describe a simple relationship that involves them. But first, a short detour to get us there.
The second most common chords are the ii, iii and vi chords. (I will be using lower case roman numerals to indicate minor chords and upper case roman numerals to indicate major chords.) But, the interesting thing about them, and the thing that makes them easy to understand and remember if you already know how the I, IV and V chords function, is that they function exactly the same, if you think of the ii, iii and iv chords as being in the relative minor key of the I, IV and V chords.
So, if you are in the key of C major, the I chord is C Major, the IV chord is F Major, and the V Chord is G major. And going onward, the ii chord is d minor, the iii chord is e minor and the vi chord is a minor. But, if you think of these last three as being a part of the relative minor key, which is a minor, they become the i, iv and v chords of that key, and they function exactly the same as the I, IV and V of the major key. (the relative minor of any major key is 1 and 1/2 steps lower [or 3 half steps], and you must skip one letter name. So, the relative minor of A major is F# minor, and not Gb minor.) And, you can substitute all of the chords freely: root chords for root chords, sub-dominants for sub-dominants, and dominants for dominants. This allows you to really multiply your knowledge and expand the chordal possibilities. Hope this helps! I'll try to check back and see if you have more questions about this later, so be sure to post them.
Baxter
Ok, I'm back for part 2. There are a few easy tricks you can use to remember the most common progressions. The most basic, and most common ones deal with the I (root), IV (sub-dominant) and V (dominant) chords. I will not go into these specifically, but describe a simple relationship that involves them. But first, a short detour to get us there.
The second most common chords are the ii, iii and vi chords. (I will be using lower case roman numerals to indicate minor chords and upper case roman numerals to indicate major chords.) But, the interesting thing about them, and the thing that makes them easy to understand and remember if you already know how the I, IV and V chords function, is that they function exactly the same, if you think of the ii, iii and iv chords as being in the relative minor key of the I, IV and V chords.
So, if you are in the key of C major, the I chord is C Major, the IV chord is F Major, and the V Chord is G major. And going onward, the ii chord is d minor, the iii chord is e minor and the vi chord is a minor. But, if you think of these last three as being a part of the relative minor key, which is a minor, they become the i, iv and v chords of that key, and they function exactly the same as the I, IV and V of the major key. (the relative minor of any major key is 1 and 1/2 steps lower [or 3 half steps], and you must skip one letter name. So, the relative minor of A major is F# minor, and not Gb minor.) And, you can substitute all of the chords freely: root chords for root chords, sub-dominants for sub-dominants, and dominants for dominants. This allows you to really multiply your knowledge and expand the chordal possibilities. Hope this helps! I'll try to check back and see if you have more questions about this later, so be sure to post them.
Baxter
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 3 posts since 2 Nov, 2012
Thanks for the responses.
I wouldn't want something formulaic, but also, I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel. I like what Justice has said, create simple music that delivers simple emotions.
I do think when you hear a statement like that, sometimes people will blow off music theory. But I feel its more of having great understanding of the theories, chords, etc, that in the end, delivers music that sounds simple.
I wouldn't want something formulaic, but also, I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel. I like what Justice has said, create simple music that delivers simple emotions.
I do think when you hear a statement like that, sometimes people will blow off music theory. But I feel its more of having great understanding of the theories, chords, etc, that in the end, delivers music that sounds simple.
-
- KVRAF
- 2707 posts since 23 Mar, 2005 from Detroit
Easiest way: Play any real melodic instrument or get a midi keyboard controller, or even use the QWERTY pc/mac keyboard to play soft synths. You can learn some chord progressions to start out, but your ears will tell you what sounds right, so learn to play by ear and improvise if you really want to get those ideas out of your head and into musical form. I've played guitar for many years, but only have been doing the computer music/recording thing for about 10 or so. I still can't program/notate/write out a part in a sequencer to save my life. I can do very basic stuff, but it just doesn't feel like I made music. If it's keyboard/synth stuff, I try to play it and get it at least 95% there or perfect, and then only maybe go in and edit and adjust a couple wrong notes or timing issues. My synth stuff usually starts out with maybe knowing previously the scale/key of the guitar chords/riffs as the base (whether I go on to use the guitar parts or then take them out), and then building piano chords and riffs around that by ear. I couldn't even tell you the exact chord names used/formed once recorded, but I know how a major/minor/diminished chord is supposed to sound or how to make something more jazzy or blues sounding etc. On the other hand I do know my way around the fretboard of a guitar much better and can easily write chord progressions/changes and record them, then play and figure those out by ear on the keyboard. In that way, I write/record key/synth parts on the guitar, but then possibly take those recorded guitar parts out once the keys are recorded. You will learn faster with an actual instrument, and then when and if you still go to write your parts you will already know some theory or where to start. But if you want to just try to write, it will be a slower process in the beginning stages, with lot of trial and error on the piano roll. I am not knocking that method as I have friends that do it that way and can make a catchy tune, and I have sat there and watched them try to do it, and they get frustrated a lot of times and give up on idea that was promising. I will have my guitar with me, and play something close and be like "Is this what you were trying to do..."
-
- KVRAF
- 2707 posts since 23 Mar, 2005 from Detroit
Having a midi controller for soft synths will also help you figure out quicker what octave and note range will work best for a specific sound/patch and how to write music for that sound or then tweak the sound to match the music. Some synth patches are meant to be played a certain way to get certain sounds, or maybe it's a patch that recreates a famous sound. If you don't know what mono poly or legato etc. modes are and how to play them. I saw one of my friends write chords for use on a mono synth patch once 
I told him "You know that patch your using for all those chords is only triggering one note each chord, instead of the full chord, and it's not triggering them musically as well...". He obviously had no idea, and I tried to explain it to him but he didn't exactly understand, didn't want to use a different patch because he said he liked most of the sound. I told him if I had a midi controller here, you could play the patch in real time on a keyboard and then it would make perfect sense, and you would write a more sensible part or tweak the patch or use a different sound.
I told him "You know that patch your using for all those chords is only triggering one note each chord, instead of the full chord, and it's not triggering them musically as well...". He obviously had no idea, and I tried to explain it to him but he didn't exactly understand, didn't want to use a different patch because he said he liked most of the sound. I told him if I had a midi controller here, you could play the patch in real time on a keyboard and then it would make perfect sense, and you would write a more sensible part or tweak the patch or use a different sound.-
- KVRAF
- 7852 posts since 20 Jan, 2008
If you want to ingrain ideas into your head muscle memory will do better then external memory.
If you look at a progression then most likely you will remember looking at the progression. If you practice the progression away from the reference material then you will remember doing it more then looking at it. The doing it part without external visual stimulus such as seeing the chord progression makes it real in your mind and real in your fingers.
If you really really want it to stick. When you aren't playing it think about it. Turn on that little music box in your head and turn off your ipod. When you are doing things that don't require your full hearing capacity play the song /progression in your head. This is what musicians do when they can't practice incessantly and need to learn as quickly as possible. They both first listen with their eyes. If you are reading this you are listening with your eyes the little voice in your head is saying each word you read.
Then the play to get the mechanics down.
Then they play the song in their head and imagine themselves playing it. Playing songs in your head helps with your ear training as well.
A buddy of mine a million years ago was a keyboard player who eventually got a job as a transcriber with a publishing house/ Anyway he could figure out songs like no one's business and I asked him about this magical talent of his.
He said it's not magic. I listen to the notes and chords and I reference them with songs I know. I know the songs I'm referencing because I've played them before and I remember how they went in my head.
A progression is only made manifest in a key. If you haven't played the progression in a few keys then you are less likely to make a mental connection to the harmonic movement.
Do this. Walk away from the computer or atleast go offline. Close the browser don't come back for at least a half hour. Don't read anything. Just play one chord like D major. Play and listen. Hold the sound in your head. Now just listen to that sound in your head without playing. And think just think of songs you might have heard it in before. As you go through your day/night avoid music for a change. Just use that music box in your brain and try to remember how the chord sounded and how it felt. The more you do this the more it will awaken your inner music box. The one that plays songs you know when your drifting. The one that gets the song in your head that you can't tolerate stuck there. If you listen to the chord you play or the notes you play in your head and listen to your little brain music box singing songs you know you'll be able to develop relative pitch/music consciousness. It will make things easier both in getting a song idea out of your head and into the world and it will make it easier to decipher what other people are playing when you listen to them.
If you look at a progression then most likely you will remember looking at the progression. If you practice the progression away from the reference material then you will remember doing it more then looking at it. The doing it part without external visual stimulus such as seeing the chord progression makes it real in your mind and real in your fingers.
If you really really want it to stick. When you aren't playing it think about it. Turn on that little music box in your head and turn off your ipod. When you are doing things that don't require your full hearing capacity play the song /progression in your head. This is what musicians do when they can't practice incessantly and need to learn as quickly as possible. They both first listen with their eyes. If you are reading this you are listening with your eyes the little voice in your head is saying each word you read.
Then the play to get the mechanics down.
Then they play the song in their head and imagine themselves playing it. Playing songs in your head helps with your ear training as well.
A buddy of mine a million years ago was a keyboard player who eventually got a job as a transcriber with a publishing house/ Anyway he could figure out songs like no one's business and I asked him about this magical talent of his.
He said it's not magic. I listen to the notes and chords and I reference them with songs I know. I know the songs I'm referencing because I've played them before and I remember how they went in my head.
A progression is only made manifest in a key. If you haven't played the progression in a few keys then you are less likely to make a mental connection to the harmonic movement.
Do this. Walk away from the computer or atleast go offline. Close the browser don't come back for at least a half hour. Don't read anything. Just play one chord like D major. Play and listen. Hold the sound in your head. Now just listen to that sound in your head without playing. And think just think of songs you might have heard it in before. As you go through your day/night avoid music for a change. Just use that music box in your brain and try to remember how the chord sounded and how it felt. The more you do this the more it will awaken your inner music box. The one that plays songs you know when your drifting. The one that gets the song in your head that you can't tolerate stuck there. If you listen to the chord you play or the notes you play in your head and listen to your little brain music box singing songs you know you'll be able to develop relative pitch/music consciousness. It will make things easier both in getting a song idea out of your head and into the world and it will make it easier to decipher what other people are playing when you listen to them.
Dell Vostro i9 64GB Ram Windows 11 Pro, Cubase, Bitwig, Mixcraft Guitar Pod Go, Linntrument Nektar P1, Novation Launchpad
-
- KVRist
- 33 posts since 16 Jan, 2012
Oi, what?
Music theory isn't a set of rules at all. There's a bunch of stuff in music theory that is all about rules, yeah, but the field itself is only a collection of techniques with explanations. There are no rules unless you want to apply the techniques, and you typically want to apply them because they almost always work.
Really, the OP could easily solve their chord progression memorization ordeal by practicing a couple off-the-shelf techniques in counterpoint and voice leading.
To figure out what sounds good, you need some kind of standard to determine what 'good' is. What notes work in a chord, how the chords should connect [how its voices 'lead into' other harmonic destinations], and whether the chord should be blocked out or melodically defined determine a chord progression more than any symbols and graphs do.
I first looked into those "for computer musicians" and "arranging songs and writing chord progressions" books when I started doing music, and they all only describe existing entities - the authors never tell you how to make new ones, mainly because they don't know themselves. It's like they half-learned harmony and are trying to pass it on through a book in as professional a way as possible, but kinda miss the point of the material.
Imagine a phrase book for a language you don't understand. Try writing a new book in that language just using a bunch of those prefabricated, practical phrases with general subjects. Man, that is going to be one culture-barren and damn uninteresting book to absolutely everyone who can read it.
That's the kind of music those 'instant harmony' books encourage you to make! They're just survival guides to help you communicate and somewhat contribute in a musical society, but everything in them is generic and over-simplified. They really don't help you build up a working knowledge of the language, and even if you memorize the whole thing [or even many different volumes], you'll never pick up the nuances of grammar and phrasing until you start practicing other techniques those kinds of books don't describe.
Go out and grab the most boring, old, and dry music books you can find and force yourself to read and practice through them. Look for tomes on counterpoint and harmony / voice leading to get a glimpse at immediate solutions, maybe look into basic music theory books to get a handle on the prerequisites for those solutions if it's all over your head.
Those are far more useful than whatever popular entry-level books are out there now that describe chord progressions, and you'll learn much more doing that than mucking around on a keyboard by yourself, randomly punching chords and trying to connect them. It's even better if you can take a course at a university or from a tutor [who can at least write a two-minute fugue in 30 minutes - if they can't do that, they're not worth your time], since those will at least give you a study plan to encourage fighting through the bland infancy of pre-understanding.
Music theory isn't a set of rules at all. There's a bunch of stuff in music theory that is all about rules, yeah, but the field itself is only a collection of techniques with explanations. There are no rules unless you want to apply the techniques, and you typically want to apply them because they almost always work.
Really, the OP could easily solve their chord progression memorization ordeal by practicing a couple off-the-shelf techniques in counterpoint and voice leading.
To figure out what sounds good, you need some kind of standard to determine what 'good' is. What notes work in a chord, how the chords should connect [how its voices 'lead into' other harmonic destinations], and whether the chord should be blocked out or melodically defined determine a chord progression more than any symbols and graphs do.
I first looked into those "for computer musicians" and "arranging songs and writing chord progressions" books when I started doing music, and they all only describe existing entities - the authors never tell you how to make new ones, mainly because they don't know themselves. It's like they half-learned harmony and are trying to pass it on through a book in as professional a way as possible, but kinda miss the point of the material.
Imagine a phrase book for a language you don't understand. Try writing a new book in that language just using a bunch of those prefabricated, practical phrases with general subjects. Man, that is going to be one culture-barren and damn uninteresting book to absolutely everyone who can read it.
That's the kind of music those 'instant harmony' books encourage you to make! They're just survival guides to help you communicate and somewhat contribute in a musical society, but everything in them is generic and over-simplified. They really don't help you build up a working knowledge of the language, and even if you memorize the whole thing [or even many different volumes], you'll never pick up the nuances of grammar and phrasing until you start practicing other techniques those kinds of books don't describe.
Go out and grab the most boring, old, and dry music books you can find and force yourself to read and practice through them. Look for tomes on counterpoint and harmony / voice leading to get a glimpse at immediate solutions, maybe look into basic music theory books to get a handle on the prerequisites for those solutions if it's all over your head.
Those are far more useful than whatever popular entry-level books are out there now that describe chord progressions, and you'll learn much more doing that than mucking around on a keyboard by yourself, randomly punching chords and trying to connect them. It's even better if you can take a course at a university or from a tutor [who can at least write a two-minute fugue in 30 minutes - if they can't do that, they're not worth your time], since those will at least give you a study plan to encourage fighting through the bland infancy of pre-understanding.