Looking for books/websites that explain the theory in particular pieces of music

[jason_bradberry]

I'm looking for websites or books that break down the theory in particular pieces of music, looking at how and why a particular composition works. I don't mind whether it's rock, pop, classical or anything in between, but so far my search has been dissapointingly fruitless.

Anyone know any good resources for this sort of thing?

[elnn]

You do it yourself

[BertKoor]

You seem to be after the secret ingredient of music. How can it affect our emotions? Music theory really sucks at that. It cannot explain what a brilliant lad unconciously or with only some intuition created.

Most art critics are really grasping at straws when they explain what an artist meant when he created a piece.

What I understand of music so far, is that taking another route than others have is the most interesting one to listen to. Step outside of I-IV-V schemas, do something slightly unexpected.

Music theory is good at explaining some key principles, like a driving school can teach you to drive. But it cannot make everyone a Formula-1 driver as succesful as Michael Schumacher. Sometimes it just takes a shitload of talent.

[jason_bradberry]

You seem to be after the secret ingredient of music. How can it affect our emotions? Music theory really sucks at that.

Hi BertKoor, thanks for the reply - I'm looking for technical analysis of the theory in a piece of music, or explanations of music/harmony theory using examples. Studies of emotional response to music are interesting, but not what I'm looking for.

Surely someone has published something along these lines!

[Aroused by JarJar]

Yes- music theory textbooks. Here's a classic of basic "you can't go wrong with this" stuff:

http://www.amazon.com/Tonal-Harmony-Ste ... 0073401358

[jason_bradberry]

Thanks, that book looks great.

After further searching, I've come across a great example of exactly the kind of analysis I've been looking for. The link below is highly recommended! If anyone knows any similar resources please share.

http://blog.fixyourmix.com/category/mus ... -analysis/

[elnn]

if you don't do this yourself and/or unable to do it yourself, then that webpage you just linked above me will be of no value to you (= 'oh man, I have to read this library, I'll be the best composer yet')

music is a practical thing, knowing the theory without putting it into practice and without bathing yourself in the said practice will bear no outcomes.

[tapper mike]

I've actually done this time and time again here, in this forum. But it all falls apart and I often wonder why I bothered. The endless troll bashing by armchair warriors who know nothing of the meduim and have no experience in the style to speak of always come trouncing in with high ideals that aren't applicable to the situation.

[arkmabat]

Just looking at a band's sheet music can be helpful in terms of composition.

[jancivil]

After further searching, I've come across a great example of exactly the kind of analysis I've been looking for. The link below is highly recommended! If anyone knows any similar resources please share.

http://blog.fixyourmix.com/category/mus ... -analysis/

That looks lively and it could stimulate. I think the person that fully grasps everything said in the two pieces I looked at is able to do those analyses and might come away with a deeper experience by their own lights. The first track discussed seems unusual to the extent I should be somewhat skeptical; particularly I recognize 'I may be imagining or missing some tensions'. I have had to be skeptical of my own ear here when things defied commonality past a point.

I would not discourage looking at that at all, but I would reinforce the DYI advice. Particularly as per reading vs doing. If those are the tracks you wanted to 'know how it works' the thing to do is what those writers did, find out by ear and make your own observations. Who can say 'what works' for you? Someone else may have a problem with what works for you.

This reading by itself, or studying scores on your own also has to do with level: I had to have part-writing instruction to really get what JS Bach was about. After I finished music theory at CCM I bothered the authorities to get me something else to do and I got to write a graduate paper on that, which was invaluable. But I had read nothing.

Be skeptical of the internet here, particularly.

[jancivil]

The endless troll bashing by armchair warriors who know nothing of the meduim and have no experience in the style to speak of always come trouncing in with high ideals that aren't applicable to the situation.

You mean you didn't like people insisting "voice-leading" has a definition in this world, which marred your efforts. Cool story, though, bro.
When you write, you want it reviewed by peers. It keeps us honest. Or it should. What a person writes could be some blather. You're an authority unto yourself, we get it. What do you have for the OP, though.

[jason_bradberry]

Thanks for all the advice/opinions.

Agree with the comments about studying theory and digging into songs yourself to get under their skin, but there's huge value in reading other people's observations. What one person might pick out as interesting might be entirely different to what I might pick out by doing my own study, plus chances are I'll come across analysis of pieces of music I might not otherwise come across on my own. Case in point, that Grizzly Bear track in the link I shared is amazing - never heard it before, enjoyed the writer's interpretation of what's going on in the music, and took away a wealth of ideas to experiment with in my own music.

Maybe there's just not many people out there writing this sort of stuff?

[stringtapper]

Maybe there's just not many people out there writing this sort of stuff?

Eh, no. There's a rich history of music theory texts using examples from the literature to present musical concepts.

The Kostka text that was linked is one of them. There are more. The Aldwell & Schachter text is probably the most comprehensive of this type of example-based pedagogy, but it can seem a bit impenetrable to the uninitiated.

There are also many anthologies that have examples or complete scores based on period and techniques. The Burkhart Anthology for Musical Analysis is probably the best known but there are many more.

Here's a bibliography of texts that might help:

http://www.collegeboard.com/html/apcour ... _list.html

Also check out Tim Cutler's databse of music theory examples of tonal music categorized by technique.

http://musictheoryexamples.com

[elnn]

Thanks for all the advice/opinions.

Agree with the comments about studying theory and digging into songs yourself to get under their skin, but there's huge value in reading other people's observations. What one person might pick out as interesting might be entirely different to what I might pick out by doing my own study, plus chances are I'll come across analysis of pieces of music I might not otherwise come across on my own. Case in point, that Grizzly Bear track in the link I shared is amazing - never heard it before, enjoyed the writer's interpretation of what's going on in the music, and took away a wealth of ideas to experiment with in my own music.

Maybe there's just not many people out there writing this sort of stuff?

Nope, there certainly are bands in their own little realm. First time listening to that Grizzly Bear bunch, some apparent influences, but different. That's the beauty of postmodern music of today, the permutations, juxtapositions, and reinterpretations of various titbits from various genres, currents, and paradigms.

Reading on other observations is great, of course, but only if you actually got into that track prior. Getting close and intimate with it, slowly touching on its heartbeat, its own flow of events, colours and pavements. When you get to the pith of it, analysis comes completely naturally, you start noticing the interplay between everything that goes on in the composition, and you won't even have to go to pen-and-paper most of the times, unless you want to really find out how something really specific goes, like chords and whatnot.

Do read on, but treat it as auxiliary information, a change of perspective perhaps, after you've already have a perspective on your own.

[xathesis]

Try, scripthica.com (I'm the creator)

If you're interested in learning about algorithmic music composition, I'm selling an e-book for $10 usd. I can garantee it will be worth it!
http://kck.st/1cgHV5D