Best way to Solve this Problem, bassline and orchestration

[diijay]

Mike, forget about dance music, or one style only.

I am interested in composition and orchestration techniques based on that rhythm and chord progression, just for learning purposes.

Because is not a regular progression and to continue the arrangement we could use the chord progression from the chorus and if somebody asks for a melody we could use the melody from the vocal.

[tapper mike]

Fair enough

I'm interested in sleep. I'm sure I'll have more to offer you tomorrow.

[diijay]

Look what I found http://en.allexperts.com/q/Musical-Comp ... oicing.htm

Why you shouldn't use the third on the voicing if it is on the bass?

Stuff like that is what I am looking for,

Thanks.

[tapper mike]

Look what I found http://en.allexperts.com/q/Musical-Comp ... oicing.htm

Why you shouldn't use the third on the voicing if it is on the bass?

Stuff like that is what I am looking for,

Thanks.

That is subjective and does not recognize what we've already established that the 3rd on bass is already in the chord progression.

What they state is that rock only uses the root and 5th for the chords in the progression and sustain the chord for the duration of the measure.

We both know that is not applicable to our situation because.
1. Colin Hay is not sustaining the chords he's playing a straight 8 rhythm
2. His harmonic movement is not straight 1st and 5th (power chords) because He's using inversions.
3. Rock will often make use of 3rds in walking basslines.
The blues had a baby named it rock and rolls. Rock basslines unless the song is extremently heavy or metal can and do use thirds in walking basslines.


A lot of those theory guys talk out of their arse they take what little they do know in a limited situation and think it applies to all situations even ones they refuse to investigate for themselves.

Rock isn't as redundant as people make it out to be. There is a lot of intelligent writing in rock and one can't use one size fits all logic to accommodate it. Which is why I always say ....Try it out and trust your ears"
Ir's also why I'm supplying audio examples.

Theory isn't dogma. Theory isn't "This is the way you will do all things from now on to make it sound good because that's what the writer thinks should sound good" Theory is....more like your stuck getting from one point to another. Theory says "here's something to try....It won't work all the time but if it doesn't work here is another thing to try" Or here's something to try it that's worked before. Theory is evolving (though slowly) the constructs that defined music in the 16th century "could" apply if you were trying to write in that period manner. But also could not apply if you were trying them beyond the original framework.

There are a lot of people like.... Paul McCartney or James Taylor who never learned to read music and never had formal theory lessons. They had a lot of success because they trusted their ears and studied the works of others. Then there are a lot of guys like Stevie Wonder who studied the "art of the progression" as it applied to popular (jazz/r&b/gospel) music of his time. He studied it enough to know how and when to borrow from other songs and how to construct songs from the progression up. Most pop players are educated in this manner. It's the first way they learn and it's the way that "sticks" and they expand outward from the progression (even McCartney/Taylor work via connecting chords )


Arrangement generally stems from experience in a group first. I know you're not in a band I'm not in a band. that makes it tougher because you really need to physically work out parts to "get it" Listening to backing tracks is a poor method compared to working out your own backing tracks or working in a band and having other members to bounce ideas off of.

When learning a song there is "Play it like it is" and there is "Play it how I feel it" They both have certain benefits. Play it like it is gives you the tools of what is going on that you can apply to other songs. Play it as I feel or play it as a means to an end allows you to use what you already know or wish to create that will fit in "Your take" on the song. As I've been supplying different bass lines for this alot of basslines I know on a conscious or subconscious level come through me. But because I also know that they don't fit exactly I make adaptions or appropriations so they do fit.

If you studied electric bass in a class like every music store on the planet offers you would no doubt have to physically play the bass (which is important for you the developing musician) Along the way you'ld study the basics of scales and chords and moving from chord to chord as well you'd learn generic licks/patterns and songs. these get stored in your fingers or muscle memory as well as your mind. So that the moment you need it your fingers remember what to do without too much work or intellectualizing.

[tapper mike]

Okay I'm going to show you how I develop ideas.

In my mind there is a riff. It's part of my collective unconscious. It's based on a very popular song. I've never played it before physically so I have to work it out a little.

I'm sure you've heard this from a better bass player then me.
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/bjrough


There are several things wrong with this riff for the verse.
1. I'm playing sloppy because I've never actually played this lick in my life.
So I need to tighten it up.
2. It's in the wrong key
3. It doesn't support the harmonic movement i want it to

Now I don't want it to sound like MJ's Billy Jean so I'm going to vary the accentuation of the notes. I'm not going to play a staccato on the first note.
I am going to play the original pattern in a different key and I'm going to practice a little with a basic beat behind me to help tighten up my playing.

So I've got a different "Beat" behind me and my pattern slowed it down and gotten some practice time in as well as transposing it.


Great. Now I have a little liberty with the chord progression. Sometimes one can graft a bassline to accomodate a different chord (only sometimes) then the original.
In the original MJ version he is using a walk up then back down for the chords.
{F#m G@m | A G#m |
In these types of situations you can occasionally ignore the second chord in a measure and treat it as F#-A When working out a bassline.

I've transposed the bassline but I don't have to keep the chords verbatim.
When you have a bassline that contains no 3rd such as basslines that operate on the root, 5th and 7th the value of the third has yet to be determined. Even if you play a 6th in the bassline you still haven't established major or minor. What we do know is usually the root of the chord is most usually (not always) the first note that is played over a chord. But we have already seen where a 3rd was used for a guide tone in the bass rather then the third. Generally though when starting a progression you want to start on the root or the fifth. GENERALLY. If a chord progression does use an inversion you can subplant the lowest note of the inversion in the bass.

Lets here what I have now without backing harmony.
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/trans-beat

Notice I'm a little tighter in my playing and I've added some drums. The bass is still somewhat muddy as I'm recording the pc headphone out back into a screen cap but we'll survive.


So I'm going to add some supporting harmony that works with the new and improved bassline the harmony will support the bassline and I'm going to use the first bass note of each measure or the outline expressed to determine the chord progression.

The first note I play is a D Followed by A and C then it returns to D
DACD is the bassline for my first measure. What chords work with these notes most easily. Well both Dm and D will work. Yes you can use a 6th or 7th note in a bassline so long as the bassline is moving or "walking" and my bassline isn't just repeating the same note it is infact walking.

So what are the next group of notes. CAGA Well that "could be an Aminor7 but the bass note that I start with is the minor third. It also "Could be an F9"


So we are not quite there yet. But we are a little further along.
I've determined that the best two progressions are either D to C or Dm to F
All the same notes in the bassline fit either the key of G or the key of F or the key of C. There is no F,F#,B or Bb in any of it. The bassline only has four notes GAC and D it's how they are arranged that make the chord movement undefined by major or minor.

I'll stick with D-C
Now lets add some harmony and work out how we are going to express the notes of the bassline without changing the order or as little as humanly possible.

So I've changed the key, I've changed the progression I've changed the beat a little but now I'm going to change it more by introducing different rhythmic ideas on top of the chord progression. I'm going to drop in a pad and more of a sequened arpeggio on top.

The thing about two chord chord progressions is the longer they play the more the mind screams for them to go somewhere new then they've always been playing. Usually they are screaming for....the tonic. Progressions often start at the root and resolve to the root(tonic) or the V chord. They can also start on a different chord then the tonic and end on a different chord then the tonic. But you have to be careful and most important of all listen.
Ask your inner musician. The one that knows about taste but may not be able to verbalize "Does this sound right to me?" Don't discredit your own musical tastes.
So we beat up this D-C progression and we need to cap it. Obvious choice is G
It's not the only choice. Close second and third choices would be Em or Bm.
Em is the relative minor to G major. If you spell out an Em7 you get egbd if you spell out G6 you get gbde Same chord different order. If you spell out Bm you get bdf# if you spell out Gmajor7 you get GBDF#. Personally I don't like "Capping" a progression that's mostly major with a minor chord. That's my personal taste. Your personal tastes are not mine. There are times when I do "cap" or resolve a progression to a minor chord even when the majority of chords are major. It's not about what I think and it's less about what you intellectualize then how you feel when you encounter it by listening and playing. Emphasis on playing because...Playing/performing makes it real as opposed to programming or simply working with existing backing tracks. And playing gives you experiences that you cannot simply glean by reading what others have done or choose to do. In short you have to live the music and be in the musical moment of performance to fully internalize the construct.


So anyway.....I can't resolve to D because the progression is C-D and I've beaten that like a dead horse. I can resolve to G, Bm, Em. But you know how I feel about resolving to a minor. G is one option. On the jazzy side of things. Many jazz, pop etc players substitute The vi chord with a VI7. You'll here it in thousand and thousands of songs where the progression is played I-VI7-ii7-V7 The 7 cuts the edge off the fact that it has a non scale tone that is rough on the root. E7 EG#BD that G# really roughs up the key of G. The D note in the E7 helps to smooth it out a little.


If it were (but it's not) an ascending progression such as C-D-C-D you could get away with resolving to E (or Em) But it's not ascending it's descending.
It goes from D-C now. G might seem simplistic. Bm might be a little too close.
Am wounld't be the root. Bb

I've got to stop here. after I do somethings I'll demo my progression with the bassline and make use on variations of a theme.

C-D-C-D-C-D-Bb-Bb

Now if you are a smart guy and you are a smart guy. You'd be thinking to yourself what the bug in Mike's brain that makes him think this will work.

Number1 Trust your feelings, Use the force. Remember what I said about listening to your inner ear and letting it guide you? I trust my feelings. It feels good to end on Bb.
Number2. Remember when I said experience matters? I've played songs with this type of progression before and it worked for them so maybe it will apply here.
Number3 Not all chord progressions are build on diatonic scales.
Eric Clapton was the first guy I heard who would take the minor pentatonic scale and then build chord progressions based on it.
GBbCDFG each note then becomes the basis for a chord. All the chords can be major.
Sunshine of your love.
DDCD-DDCD-GFGG-GFGG-AAA..C..D-AAA..C.G-AAA..C.G-D____
And tonnes of other songs from the 60's through today use the same method of using the minor pentatonic scale to formulate progressions.

So I've got..
feels good.
Have experience with the concept.
Well used by many artists not just clapton.
Does apply to a theory even though it's not a "Classical theory" per say. Music theories are not constant they evolve. Applied theory is pragmatic not dogmatic.

[diijay]

Awesome!!!

Some questions:

Why the D on a Emajb7 would smooth things out in the key of G?

The fifth helps do that effect?

CAGCAG , Why is wrong to think C6?

Really like your ideas and your explanations besides giving examples of real songs are great!! Proves that really works.

Do you think about voice leading at this point?

Mike, in case it's easier for you, a midi file would be great to study your examples.

Thanks.

[tapper mike]

The D on an E dominant 7 EG#BD
Emaj7 would be EG#BD#

The D would smooth over E7 in the key of G because it' contains to chord tones shared by G ...B and D

Lets listen to a very common and very old timey I-vi-ii-V
G-Em-Am-D
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/i-vi-ii-v

Contrary to popular belief many "styles" do "jazz up" progressions adding 7th and 9ths as well as other extentions.

Jazzed up in the key of G
We get
Gmay7 (also written as GM7) Em7 Am7 D7 (when a chord is not written as a minor it is a major however when a chord has a 7 in it then it is considered Dominant not Major7th)
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/i-vi-ii-v7

No matter how you play it what style you try to lop on top of it It's gonna sound very very familiar with the added 7th notes.

So now lets make that vi a VI7
GM7-E7-Am7-D7

You've no doubt seen the 4chord video where the guys try to cover lots of songs using only 4 chords? Well the progression I-VI7-ii7-V7 was the be all end all during the late 40's the 50's the 60's and the 70's. Some songs from earlier and some songs from later. The progression would be played in different keys but the relationship of notes remained.
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/i-vi7-ii7-v7

But if we take out the 7 from the Emajor chord it will still Kind of but not really fit. It sounds a little rougher then when the 7th was added on.
And it doesn't matter what style you play the progression over it will still have that "more harsh" sound then the dominant 7
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/i-vi-ii7-v

Kind of fits, mostly doesn't to my ears. Trust your ears especially your inner one. The one that says "Do I like this? Is this what I want?"

Sometimes I like C-E
In the previous progression I was working out D-C. My inner ear doesn't like D-C-E or D-C-E7 or D-C-Em

Notice 4 different styles of music....Same essential progression. Some things you can borrow from other styles and somethings don't transcend styles as well.

So now I've got to get back to that D-C progression
That I was explaining earlier.

[tapper mike]

CAGCAG , Why is wrong to think C6?

It's not wrong. I didn't goof in my typing.

I didn't say it was a C6 because I wanted you to think of a chord I could use or you could use to fit the pattern. You did. And if you notice further down I did. I took the basic line and applied it to D-C

[tapper mike]

So I apply it to a more "retro" techno "style"

And I notice something.
The pattern sounds slow over
|D|C|
Even when the tempo is faster.
Here listen for yourself
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/c-dback

If I combine those two measures to one measure. I'll be able to preserve the basic pattern I started with and it will fit.
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/Cd

But do I want to?
If I don't want to what else can I do working with the basic framework?

Well what would you do?
scrap everything?
Re invent your basic pattern rhythmically to support the different style?
Borrow the notes that you already have and re organize them?

This is the process that all songwriters face

You have an idea in your head that kind of sounds like something you already know It's part of your collective unconscious just sleeping waiting to get out.
Or it's something that you are already aware of that you want to apply in a new way.

...It could be a chord progression. You try out different rhythms for the same progression. You try out different keys for the same progression. You try out different ideas for bass lines or melodies against the progression. In short you work it out.

...It could be a melodic idea or a bass line or a riff.
Well I just did that. I took a basic idea for a bass line, transposed it. Changed the chord progression, Changed the rythmic feel.


It doesn't always fall off your fingers the first time out. But if you practice it will get better. You'll gain more confidence to release the performer/composer in you. Your fingers on a guitar or a bass or a keyboard become an extension of your mind through muscle memory.

Practicing scales and chords and arpeggios are only as important as the context we give them. We give them context in songs. Learning songs, improvising on songs, playing songs, writing songs.

If I learn a pattern or a lick so well that I can only play that exact pattern or lick then I diminish my playing. Because I'm not thinking of ways that I could use it. Or how to make it musical.

Now I love playing covers. I LOVE PLAYING COVERS NOTE FOR NOTE. I also love a good cover that is played note for note. I know the song wasn't written the way I hear it when I listen to an mp3 or a cover of the song. I also know that if I play a cover note for note really really well. That I'm acting the song not just playing the notes. But if I do that too much I the part of me hat is a composer/arranger/improviser is lost.

I also love a good improvisation on a song. I like improvising on songs that I play and listening to people who really know how to improvise and how to rearrange songs for different styles or for soloist performance when they are "a one man band"

Writing, improvising, arranging takes knowledge and experience and the wisdom that comes from experience. But mostly determination.

[tapper mike]

So I've decided to move forward.

Here is macination number one.
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/macination1


If I play more staccato using this thick synth bass sound it's fine I only get into hot water If I try to sustain the notes.

Do I want to change the bass sound to something that's not as thick?
Do I want to simply play everything staccato?

Now you'll notice I really don't change the pattern up that much from the original but I do change it's structure. You should notice that its now more "phrases" as opposed to one bassline.

Now remember awhile back when I commented on...Backing tracks suck because you play to them they don't play to you????
I'm making some nice pockets with the way I'm phrasing. Playing "in the pocket" is filling the pocket. My backing track isn't doesn't have a clue what I'm doing so it isn't helping me.
...In a good or even decent band. Band members would get him to what the bass is doing if the bass is the foundational instrument and...support it not fight it and do anything they want or ignore it. A backing track only plays to the backing track.

I know I'm not in a band,,,you're not in a band

Again. What would you do?
Would you change the bass to something a little less thick?
Yes that would work.
Would you change the rest of the arrangement to accommodate the bass?
Would you drop the walking pattern for a simple root or root ahd 5th pattern?

Well I'm not done with that pattern. It's only my first machination and lets not forget that I do play other instruments. So I can rewrite the other parts to accommodate the bass.

So this is machination number2
http://soundcloud.com/tappers-examples/machination2

I like it. I need to work out my bass playing just a little because. I've tried so many different ideas and sometimes my mind wanders back to a previous attempt or tries to hard to vary things and it trips me up.

Note it sounds much more like Devo whip it then it sounds like Billy Jean by Michael Jackson

[diijay]

Great!!!

Really like the Devo jackson mashup!!

What would you do after you know the basic harmony and the instrument that will played, the guitar.

What would be your approach to create some synth,strings and piano parts on top of the guitar and bass, using florid counterpoint if possible and creating a countermelody.

Thanks.

[tapper mike]

Well If I keep the bass pattern Then I need to think about filling the hole you know ...playing in the pocket.

If I play in the pocket I can have a thick or thin sound in the pocket and it won't muddy up when it comes to the bass. That's the point. My bass is more energised sounding because I'm not trying to fill the entire measure with bass,

If I play constantly in the background like a 16th note figure then I'm going to need something at a lower volume and with a thinner sound.

[diijay]

Mike, I sent you a PM.

[tapper mike]

Thanks, I got it and replied.

I'm still working on this thing and life had dropped a lot in my lap that needs to be sorted.

[vurt]

A lot of those theory guys talk out of their arse

indeed, a lot of them spout shit all over the place telling others how to do this and that, when in fact they know so little themselves.