KVR Audio

JoeKabuke · Post by **JoeKabuke** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:39 pm

Agreed with pro-music theory continuation posts above

AND ANOTHER THING

Music theory isn't just about chords. It's about Rhythm, and DYNAMICS ! (pianissimo, forte, accents, crescendos and diminuendos)

AND ANOTHER 'NOTHER THING

You gotta learn instrumentation - the sounds you use. Pitches, rhythm, and dynamics are like the lines of a drawing that you color in with sound. And every different choice of sounds you use drastically changes the vibe of the picture

This will all help bring your music "to life"

YEP!

Tricky-Loops · Post by **Tricky-Loops** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:51 pm

xiujk71 wrote:On another song, I decided to hear for myself (tho I don't think I have 'super ears'). Since u have to always return to I, the last note of the chord progression should be the same, right? But then, nope. This song is different. The first two chords are the same, but the last one is always different. It just leave me more confused, since the progression doesn't return back 'home'.

Well, if you loop the melody, it sounds bad if there is a tonic chord at the end and at the start of the next loop again...

GirTheRobot · Post by **GirTheRobot** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 9:26 pm

I agree with everything said in this thread, and would like to add this:

Limitation breeds creativity. By knowing these "rules" (don't even really call them that, they're more guidelines) of music theory, you're able to do a LOT. Look at any music by any renowned composer and you'll hear and see that it's incredibly complex stuff. But all of those dudes, Beethoven, Debussy, Mozart, all knew music theory inside and out. That way they were able to stretch the limitations and mold it to their whim.

Learn music theory. It helps. A lot. And you won't regret it.

coyote · Post by **coyote** » Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:15 pm

im of the opinion that once you start learning the theory, you need to continue learning the theory as a lack of knowledge can often hold you back, but as you learn more stuff you get more ideas and are aware of more musical possibilities to explore.

certainly in my case I have in the past tended to stick with what I know, a very lazy basic grasp, and that has help me firmly in place. But since learning more I have found more creative avenues to explore because as I learn more I have more questions that I want answers to and the only way to answer them is to make more music and try out theories and stuff.

xiujk71 · Post by **xiujk71** » Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:03 am

Wow. This thread is still getting replies LOL.
I have started the theories, and have moved on. Now I am making music that I found myself enjoying. No regrets. Thanks guys! ^^

V0RT3X · Post by **V0RT3X** » Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:15 am

I think it would definitely not hurt to keep learning theory.

Ecto · Post by **Ecto** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:00 pm

I prefer not knowing anything else but chords, mostly because I'm afraid for it to limit my creativity. When i have a chord progression that i like, i usually start playing melodies on top of it. Then when i have a nice melody i delete the chord progression and start arranging the track. Thats what works for me

Sendy · Post by **Sendy** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:26 pm

Tricky-Loops wrote:
xiujk71 wrote:On another song, I decided to hear for myself (tho I don't think I have 'super ears'). Since u have to always return to I, the last note of the chord progression should be the same, right? But then, nope. This song is different. The first two chords are the same, but the last one is always different. It just leave me more confused, since the progression doesn't return back 'home'.
Well, if you loop the melody, it sounds bad if there is a tonic chord at the end and at the start of the next loop again...

No it doesn't. It can sound a little static as both ends of the loop are the same, but if you play that against some other element for interest it's fine. I'm sure there are good tracks out there with main chords that start and end on I.

Tricky-Loops · Post by **Tricky-Loops** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:33 pm

xiujk71 wrote:Now I am making music that I found myself enjoying.

After only one month? Compliment!

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:00 pm

Sendy wrote:
Tricky-Loops wrote:
xiujk71 wrote:On another song, I decided to hear for myself (tho I don't think I have 'super ears'). Since u have to always return to I, the last note of the chord progression should be the same, right? But then, nope. This song is different. The first two chords are the same, but the last one is always different. It just leave me more confused, since the progression doesn't return back 'home'.
Well, if you loop the melody, it sounds bad if there is a tonic chord at the end and at the start of the next loop again...
No it doesn't. It can sound a little static as both ends of the loop are the same, but if you play that against some other element for interest it's fine. I'm sure there are good tracks out there with main chords that start and end on I.

*It depends*. The statement in itself assumes every situation must be more or less the same, and indicates to us a cookie-cutter approach. It leaves out timing, rhythm in this assumption. How long is the I before looped to the I? Of course, everything is a factor of 4 [bars, and 4 to a bar inside that] by your cookie-cutter's authority so 'I - I' must obey that stricture.

This sort of arbitrarily negating of possibilities is a product of believing too much in 'loops' as a modus operandi, I reckon. Of course that kind of reply typifies an assumption these threads only ever apply to a narrow band of music [EDM], but believe it or not, there is a whole world out here where one can enjoy more freedom. You're ensuring a dullness and blandness by that, and one wonders if you actually prefer that bubble containing you.

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:19 pm

Ecto wrote:I prefer not knowing anything else but chords, mostly because I'm afraid for it to limit my creativity. When i have a chord progression that i like, i usually start playing melodies on top of it. Then when i have a nice melody i delete the chord progression and start arranging the track. Thats what works for me

So what are you choosing to leave off in favor of 'only knowing chords'? What do you know about chords? There are things to understand about the weight of chords, principles discovered about 'voicings' and 'instrumentation' that every person seeking to 'arrange' can benefit from. If one knows from 'voice leading', one has more to bring to 'chords'.

Are you incurious, or in a hurry? It's your call but it reads like a preference to remain in the dark out of a fear of knowledge. If you believe knowing stuff 'limits' creativity, you must have a strange, weedy construction of the terms 'knowing' and 'creative'. Maybe you could stand to read the thread.

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:23 pm

Are there posts in 'Production Techniques' where people are proud to not know side-chaining or particular techniques?
But Thanks For Sharing.

Sendy · Post by **Sendy** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:31 pm

The cold blade of Jancivil strikes again

. Though I more or less completely agree. EDM music and many of it's practitioners tend to assume and carry on asif their music is ALL electronic music, which marginalizes all other avenues. This is part of the "spiritual" (or "awareness" if you like) bankrupcy that I feel permeates it's culture.

It's not even that I dislike EDM music, some of it is very good, and certainly well engineered even if I don't like it all stylistically. It's the culture that stems from it, smearing the world of electronic music with assumptions spoken as facts. It's incredibly solipsistic.

Ecto · Post by **Ecto** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:07 pm

jancivil wrote:
Ecto wrote:I prefer not knowing anything else but chords, mostly because I'm afraid for it to limit my creativity. When i have a chord progression that i like, i usually start playing melodies on top of it. Then when i have a nice melody i delete the chord progression and start arranging the track. Thats what works for me
So what are you choosing to leave off in favor of 'only knowing chords'? What do you know about chords? There are things to understand about the weight of chords, principles discovered about 'voicings' and 'instrumentation' that every person seeking to 'arrange' can benefit from. If one knows from 'voice leading', one has more to bring to 'chords'.

Are you incurious, or in a hurry? It's your call but it reads like a preference to remain in the dark out of a fear of knowledge. If you believe knowing stuff 'limits' creativity, you must have a strange, weedy construction of the terms 'knowing' and 'creative'. Maybe you could stand to read the thread.

I know the chords that i like, and i know chords that i don't like. Thats the only thing there is to it for me. All of these techniques, scales, and what not, are all man made anyway, and should only be seen as a guideline. And i believe not knowing every thing behind the music makes you more free, and more likely to make something unique.

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:13 pm

The scales are man-made anyway, so only a guideline. That's just word salad, you know?

Your belief is bollocks. You're going to be limited by limiting yourself. Knowing more, having more of a palette, is expansive, not restrictive. Having more vocabulary is more, not less.
What you're doing, applied to another art, let's take writing, would be 'I prefer only knowing some words, and this 'syntax' you're all on about isn't for me. I feel more free this way.'

Anyway, I suggest reading the thread. You're actually coming onto the 'music theory' board in order to share "I prefer not to know this stuff", and following a thread where people have shown someone how they would benefit from knowing more and they have reported some benefit from it.

Should I continue learning music theory?