Whats the process of the way I create music called?

[jancivil]

varying degrees of harshness like it's fighting the chord so being dissonant. You don't have to obsess over everything must always sound as pleasing as possible. Infact when you move from something that sounds dissonant to conosant it's a resolution in and of itself. You can't have resolution without conflict.

rather than try to write, I think it would be better to provide examples.



is I think as good an example of non-chord tones resolving as a feature of the melody as there is. Simple stepwise, such as 2-1, 'resolution' of the poignant dissonance {For the record, 'dissonance' of say D vis a vis C minor means D vis a vis C, and D vis a vis Eb. However you could have a "CmAdd2" and the dissonance is a chord tone.}. I would say to take this kind of thing by ear and make notes about what happens. I learned to take things off records singing the note, the interval and if I have to transcribe things now I'll do it just from singing the intervals, vis a vis the chord or what-have-you.
I didn't have a reliable voice for it either, but it is essential I think.

[Aroused by JarJar]

Oddly no, but it wouldn't hurt too much.

Some of the best arrangers / composers are the worst singers. What learning to sing would do is help you to develop relative pitch. If you hear a note and can identify that note and then you hear another note you ask yourself is it the same as the note you heard prior or is it higher or lower and by how much. That's the essence of pitch training. While it can help you to figure out the notes that someone else is playing to figure out a song it doesn't really help when writing your own.

I think you missed the point. The point is not that you need to sing well or with a nice voice, or even sing in tune. The point is that when writing music that is made of what are essentially catchy riffs and lines, the riffs and line need to be... catchy. And catchy means singable, even if not literally so. Whether you sing it badly or well, everyone can sing the riffs of Smoke on the Water, Iron Man, National Acrobat, any Joy Division bass line, and so on. Korn and Tool are coming from those places, not from John Scofield or Steeley Dan.

[jancivil]

While [singing] can help you to figure out the notes that someone else is playing to figure out a song it doesn't really help when writing your own.

that's a truly strange dichotomy. I think most people that develop a facility with melody got there through singing in some way.
I think you and melody aren't the best of friends really.

[Aroused by JarJar]

cj31387, I'm guessing from context clues that you're into Christian rock, so you might not like my next bit of advice but I think you should take it anyway.

In "dark" music there are different main currents- one is the neo-Baroque/Viking kind of thing (arising from Iron Maiden, basically) and the other, darker, that's coming from Black Sabbath and post-punk/art-rock. Tool belongs to the second type, Korn is obviously influenced by bands coming from that direction (NIN for example).

One of the most influential bands of the second kind is Christian Death, from way back when.

Now from a jazzhole point of view bands like Christian Death just *suck*. But they inspired countless kids to make music in the way you're describing. Don't be put off by the "outdated" production, or the "style", just listen to how it's just a view simple- "amateur", really- riffs which add up together to make a kick-ass song.



There were many bands like this in the late '70s and '80s. Back in the day you'd get beaten up for being a "fag" for listening to them, but later they became part of mainstream culture because so many musicians were listening to them

You can make a tune with just a few simple lines.

[ghettosynth]

Recently I had this moral dilemma. I know my stuff but I'm reluctant to share as I have the classical camp who feel that all western music ideas come from that side of things and that side of things alone. And on the other side I have myself asking...What's the point of posting this stuff if someone is just going to graze over it and not try to follow through. And then I think to myself....well it took sometimes a second or even third look at a music theory construct before I applied it. Maybe it will be the same for someone else. Maybe they've read this before and this is the time they will read it and apply it. Or maybe it's the first time they've ever read it because they didn't have access to the books I've read or things I've experienced.

I also appreciate your efforts man. One of the key components of being an effective teacher is connecting what you're trying to teach to something that the student already knows.

[tapper mike]

Thanks man, Love your blog especially regarding the M1 and dated sounds can make for dated sounding music. it was shortly after I read it that I moved away from the M1 to more complex and enhanced sample based osc for my libraries and investigated different types of synthesis that are post 90's.

For the Peanut Gallery.
Re melodies derived from singing. No not really. You can write a melody and understand it's function better by playing it out. You'll know the literal values of the notes better when you aren't as focused on singing and see as well as hear how they work against various structures.

Actually though for the most part I loath Miles Davis during his bebop era. The Ostinato used on Miles Davis's "So What" is very catchy. It's so catchy that it is his most covered song and is a jazz standard played through out the world. It's right up there and even more popular then Devil Inside by INXS or Blister in the Sun by the violent femmes (though that has chord changes) or Led Zepplin's Whole Lotta Love. Sometimes you have to go outside the box to find something equally fresh (novelty) and catchy. Which isn't done by playing with the same limited perspective. Sometimes one has to cultivate an awareness of ideas that can happen when exploring "out of the box" Me providing a means for someone to do that is part of the discussion.

Those who would simply try to attack the theorums I present for that exploration or me personally in an effort to derail the conversation back on themselves. Well what kind of friend are you who would deny someone an opportunity for musical exploration in a different direction then you feel comfortable with?

Yes sometimes I do reach for examples outside of a given range of style. But quite often there is a cross over between styles using a theorem made popular in another format. As for example in your era Jan. Eight Miles High was inspired directly from Ravi Shankar and John Coltrane.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Miles_High

But I always start with a construct, explain the construct and show usage. Something very lacking from the armchair theorists which frequent the forum in their own dissertations which usually involve starting a shouting match and ad hominen attacks and are followed up by "I Know This Because I have a piece of paper that says I know it." All along waiting for me to interject ideas to the discussion before attempting to knock my ideas down.
Where as I take theory as...
[quote]: an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events

: an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true

: the general principles or ideas that relate to a particular subject
[\quote]
Not fact but theory a means to an ends of explaining a given circumstance which can be use as a vehicle of exploration along those lines. It's an idea that has been observed in other music and can work in your music if you choose to explore that route. Music is not science. Music is art or craft. As such theories derived from the observation of music are a means of exploration to ideas not isolated in a vacuum of a specific genre or style.

I've already digressed a bit too much in this post and it's time to move foreward.

[tapper mike]

Okay I slid over one concept so I'll backstep.

In contrapuntal motion (two melodic lines at the same time)
We have four methods at our disposal.

Contrary Motion{b] (I've already covered that)where two melodic lines reach in opposite directions
Similar Motion where by the separate melodic lines have non symmetrical distances but move in the same direction
Oblique motionWhere one melodic line remains repeating a constant note while the other one changes.
Parallel Motion where two or more notes move in the same direction.

Oblique motion can be also thought of as pedal tones or drone tones against a melodic line. You can apply variance through a number of means to make it sound Less boring. Such things as dynamics and filtering (synthesis) as well as articulations (mutes, vibrato) and rhythmic variation away from the primary melodic line. You can even use it in a harmonic context to varying degrees if you wish to develop a chord progression that has a repeated note throughout. A lot of EDM uses this type of repeating bass note figure. It's not limited to EDM. There is a section in Eugene's Trick Bag From the movie Crossroads(loosely based on Paganini's Caprice 14 (actually played by Steve Vai though Ralf Machio is shown playing where he goes through a cycle of 5ths arpeggiation sequence but always interjecting an e note as the pedal.
It's right around the 35th second mark


Pedal tone/oblique motion type ostinatos can also be used in a chord progression type movement to offer a sense of stability to the tone even though the chords around it change. Notable uses include but not limited to.
Paul McCartney Blackbird
Mike and the Mechanics - The Living Years
Brian Adams - It's only Love.

How you use Oblique motion for yourself is up to you. And you are free to unchain it from a hard steadfast matching of melody to secondary melody or harmony.

[tapper mike]

Parallel Motion (I love this concept)
Parallel motion is when you have two or more melodic lines that move in the same stepwise motion. It goes from the benign unison (two or more voices or instruments playing the same note at once. To the extreme such as block chord harmonization for piano and orchestrating big bands.

Think of it as a thickening agent to your primary melody rather then a counter melody as the other Contrapuntal motion methods utlilize.
In it's simplest terms if you have two traditional instruments playing the exact same note they wont hit that note exactly the same. One may fall shortly flat or sharp of the other. From chorus effects to the earliest of polyphonic synths to the latest ones you have a means of thickening the melodic line using some form of parallel motion be it unison or other secondary harmonies.

Octaves are also valid parallel motion for thickening up a basic melody line to help it stand on it's own with or without support of secondary moving melodies or static harmonies. When jazz guys like me think of octaves well we think of Wes Montgomery. However octave harmonization is alive and well in contemporary arrangements.
Pink also has a song called "So What" that's not the Miles Davis song. She uses Octaves to reinforce the ostinato line which she juxtapositions against her melodies as a call and response method.




Parallel motion in perfect fifths is also called Consecutive Fifths and octaves and were generally frowned upon by 14th century theorists who opted for "smart voice leading" type chord structures as a means to escape this type of motion. They found that it was to strict and it didn't allow for secondary voice independence. That type of attitude is often found today in contemporary theorists as well.

But we don't have to accept it as a given we are free to make our own decisions based on what feels right or sounds right to us. Melodic metal is resplendent not only in the use of "Power Chords" (root, 5th, octave) where the third is omitted thus giving the chord an ambiguous nature about it but also harmonized melodies in 5ths.

In the song Jessica by Dickey Betts of The Allman Brothers band the first figure has a simple "A vamp" no chord changes it's just an A riff.
The melody is first played as a solo then accompanied with perfect 5ths it a call and response approach. A progression (actual chord changes) doesn't occur till the B section.

When using these concepts you don't have to take the literal to extremes rather take the figurative as an "element" of your composition.

Thirds are the most common of the diad (two note) harmonization thus far and by pure definition and stepwise motion of your melody they "imply" a harmony of which you can choose to accept or deny. The implication is overwhelming. But an implication is not a fact. And there are too many examples from the web be it metal, jazz, rock, country or other to go through them all and deny one for another.

Which brings us to "three part harmonization" Block chords in conventional form and quartal harmonization.

[ghettosynth]

Good info. Thanks Jar and Mike. looking forward to what you are going to say about writing from melody. Also. I've realized I cannot go any further without music unless I learn to sing. I currently am horrible at singing. But I was thinking about it. Is there ways to find your natural range and make your songs at that range? Like maybe if I sung at my range my songs wouldn't sound like crap? Any info on this would be appreciated.

So, first the disclaimer: I'm musically incompetent and I suck as a singer. Take my advice with a grain of salt, I'm just sharing what has worked for me to go from "I am horrible at singing" to "I suck as a singer, but, I can entertain a (small) room full of drunk people in a pinch."

What I learned in a cover band, where you get to play songs (for drunk people) in a lot of different keys, is that the gaps in my vocal range did favor certain keys. The big deal, for me, was finding the range where the register of the song felt natural but the range of the song did not push my vocal range unnaturally. This is complicated by the fact that, for me, and I assume others, there is a difficult transition point from chest to head voice, and that it's harder to control pitch in low notes. I discovered the "good keys" through trial and error.

Once I realized this it did make singing some songs easier to transpose them to a different key. This works if the tonality of the song isn't changed too much and the song isn't dependent on the key for certain riffs to work. Simple country tunes, for example, "Peaceful Easy Feeling" worked well transposed. No amount of transposition, however, would ever make anything by Journey work for me because the vocals would just sound silly (No, I have never tried outside of the privacy of my own car, that's enough right there). Some songs are really dependent on riffs being played as recorded, or, at the very least, the other members of the band weren't willing to transpose/relearn the parts. Those types of songs can usually work ok just by tuning up or down up to a step.

Recently my range has improved a bit, not because I can sing any higher, but because I've been working on the chest voice to head voice transition and the ability to control pitch in the lower ranges. My point of sharing this is simply to say that, whether or not singing helps you to write a melody, you can get your singing to the point that it is useful to you and that, while you're getting there, there may only be a narrow range of keys that work well for you so transposing simple songs to find that range might be a worthwhile effort.

YMMV.

[cj31387]

cj31387, I'm guessing from context clues that you're into Christian rock, so you might not like my next bit of advice but I think you should take it anyway.

In "dark" music there are different main currents- one is the neo-Baroque/Viking kind of thing (arising from Iron Maiden, basically) and the other, darker, that's coming from Black Sabbath and post-punk/art-rock. Tool belongs to the second type, Korn is obviously influenced by bands coming from that direction (NIN for example).

One of the most influential bands of the second kind is Christian Death, from way back when.

Now from a jazzhole point of view bands like Christian Death just *suck*. But they inspired countless kids to make music in the way you're describing. Don't be put off by the "outdated" production, or the "style", just listen to how it's just a view simple- "amateur", really- riffs which add up together to make a kick-ass song.



There were many bands like this in the late '70s and '80s. Back in the day you'd get beaten up for being a "fag" for listening to them, but later they became part of mainstream culture because so many musicians were listening to them

You can make a tune with just a few simple lines.

Yeah. I'm Christian but I think a lot of current Christian music sucks horribly. I would like to make completely different Christian music than what is being played now. I grew up listening to Korn, Alice in Chains, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, Nin, Prodigy, Tool, APC, The Cure, Lots of 80s Synthpop bands, pretty much all 90s alternative music. But for some reason when I switched from making songs from guitar to electronic, which I did the last 5 years making like 1 electronic - 3 electronic songs a day for 2 years. I got in the habit of making 4 chord songs over and over. I'm sick of this habit. That's why I want to explore and know how to make music like the bands I grew up listening to.

[Aroused by JarJar]

Of course most the bands you grew up listening to were just that: bands. So unless it's a "backing band" kind of affair, or a band with a single writer passing out lead sheets and that kind of thing, bands usually make up songs together, each one coming up with his/her/it's own part. That's especially true of the metal and post-punk that influenced your influences. You probably don't remember the pre-MTV late '70s and the '80s up until the industry discovered that "alternative" sells, but there were tons of garage bands and cassette-tape bands with far more enthusiasm and talent than training or gear.

If you're making music alone with a sequencer, I think you'll have to imagine that you're a group, in a way, approaching each instrument as it's own thing.

I was listening to your pieces, and my first opinion is that you should spend a long time working up some fat drums first. It's a lot of work if you're not just stringing together store-bought loops.

[Aroused by JarJar]

By the way your first song "Vague Miscommunication" is good, in my opinion It has some naive motion that holds it back from being really good.

Heh, the internet sucks, unless you're trained in the lingo it's 1,000x easier to sing and play what you mean about music... this would take about three minutes in real life.

[ghettosynth]

By the way your first song "Vague Miscommunication" is good, in my opinion It has some naive motion that holds it back from being really good.

Heh, the internet sucks, unless you're trained in the lingo it's 1,000x easier to sing and play what you mean about music... this would take about three minutes in real life.

Give it a try anyway, can you be more specific. I'm curious how you think that the OP might change the track.

[Aroused by JarJar]

By the way your first song "Vague Miscommunication" is good, in my opinion It has some naive motion that holds it back from being really good.

Heh, the internet sucks, unless you're trained in the lingo it's 1,000x easier to sing and play what you mean about music... this would take about three minutes in real life.

Give it a try anyway, can you be more specific. I'm curious how you think that the OP might change the track.

Too much parallel motion between the voices- basically everything moves up and down together. It's like the thing that happens when you play the same barre chord up and down the neck of a guitar.

It's a really nice tune and production, though. That's just my opinion on something that would make it less static and more rewarding for multiple listens.

By the way, I'm highly trained in the lingo, I just prefer to communicate effectively, and that means different languages and descriptions in different situations.

One reason I linked to the Christian Death video is because for all the simplicity of the music, the contrary motions are striking and good. There'a a good Tool example too but I can't remember the song.

[ghettosynth]

By the way your first song "Vague Miscommunication" is good, in my opinion It has some naive motion that holds it back from being really good.

Heh, the internet sucks, unless you're trained in the lingo it's 1,000x easier to sing and play what you mean about music... this would take about three minutes in real life.

Give it a try anyway, can you be more specific. I'm curious how you think that the OP might change the track.

Too much parallel motion between the voices- basically everything moves up and down together. It's like the thing that happens when you play the same barre chord up and down the neck of a guitar.

It's a really nice tune and production, though. That's just my opinion on something that would make it less static and more rewarding for multiple listens.

Ok, so that I get. I thought that you were getting at something more detailed.