Help with Chord Progressions in Electronic Music

[YoungCrocket]

Hi everyone, I have another question about chord progressions. I generally compose electronic music. Mostly melodic dubstep at 140 or 70 BPM. My question pertains to the different types of chord progressions used in electronic music. If you have expertise in melodic dubstep that would be great too.

How should I approach writing my chord progressions? (sorry, I know this is a broad question) I've watched multiple tutorials and read quite a bit on the subject, but I'm having a hard time coming up with good practices to follow. From what I've seen in electronic music, the progressions are generally 4, 8, or 16 bars long. I know that progressions can vary from verse to chorus and I'm also familiar with cadences.

Cadences in particular have been a point of struggle for me. I read somewhere that your progressions should always end with a cadence, whether it be PAC, IAC, Half, or even deceptive. Is this true? It seems difficult to make this line of reasoning fit into a genre of electronic music where your progressions are only 4 or 8 bars long.

Anyways, I'm mostly just looking for helpful techniques that I can use while approaching chord progressions (if anyone can answer my cadence question too, you would be an angel lol). I'm in the process of doing more research and will hopefully have a better idea of what I'm doing with time. Anyways, thanks for reading thus far and take care!

P.S. If anybody knows of any good resources (I would even purchase a textbook if need be) on this topic I would love to study them. Thanks again!

[goldenhelix]

First, the question about cadences is sort of the easier question to answer: not all progressions in popular music will have a real cadence, in fact many do not. Whether or not you choose to end your progression with a cadence really depends on what you are going for in your music. What is somewhat more important, in my opinion, is that your progression takes you from a point of stability to varying degrees of tension and then resolves somehow. How you do this is a huge topic but basically speaking, the more you deviate from a basic triad in terms of the types of tones you have involved in the progression, the more tension you will have. A major chord with a 9th in it will sound slightly more tense than if it doesn't. Having 7ths similarly add tension. If you have a tritone anywhere in your chord, it will sound even more tense. I say tense and not dissonant because dissonance is an entirely subjective term and it is far more useful to think in terms of tension.

In terms of methodology, you might try writing chords in individual voices. You can start anywhere, but try out different things, such as starting with an upper voice which might sound a bit more melodic and then write the bottom and middle voices next. Good chord progressions quite often have satisfying voice leading and writing in individual voices can sometimes make creating this. You can read about common chord progressions and learn a lot but I think it's worth experimenting on your own and just playing with chords to see what you can come up with that you like. It's a good way of setting yourself apart if you come up with something people haven't heard a bunch of times. A game I like to play is take any chord on the keyboard of three or more notes and then try moving only 1 or 2 of those notes. This, again, is for voice leading purposes.

Hope that helps.

[YoungCrocket]

Thank you goldenhelix, That does help. Thanks for your reply on my other post as well. Ya I think I do just need to practice more, which is what I do every day lol but I try to do research as well which is why I posted on here. Thanks for the tips too, I'm going to try writing a piece right now that employs some of those techniques.

Thanks again!

[goldenhelix]

You're welcome. To clarify one point I made, the tritone does not have to involve the root of the chord, meaning it does not have to be a diminished chord. A dominant 7th chord, for example, has a tritone in it. In terms of what a chord does for the ear / mind, it is all about its constituent intervals. If you're looking for a fairly dry and intellectual but incredibly valuable book of music theory, you should read Paul Hindemith's book "Craft of Musical Composition" where he talks about harmony from the ground up (i.e. the harmonic series). He ranks the intervals from "lowest" to "highest" value, meaning lowest harmonic tension to highest. The order is octave, perfect fifth, perfect fourth, major third / minor sixth, minor third / major sixth, major second / minor seventh, minor second / major seventh, tritone. He then groups all potential chords (whether they are easily named or not) into groups of associated lowest and highest levels of value (tension) according to their constituent intervals. At the lowest end are the basic triads because they have fifths, fourths, and thirds. At the upper end are chords with multiple tritones, minor / major seconds, etc. The latter are chords of ultimate interest because of the level of tension they exude but one has to work into and out of them very meaningfully or they will have too much impact, if that makes sense. You are probably not, in fact, going to use these much if at all in popular music. You will probably be, at the peak of your harmonic tension, be using somewhat more moderate structure. The point of all this is that you don't necessarily need to know what your chords' names are, but it really behooves you to pay attention to what the intervals within that chord are because that tells you how tense it is and where it belongs in your progression. You might not want to start with a diminished chord and then go through several major and minor triads because you've blown your wad at the beginning of the progression, tension-wise. That isn't to say you can't do it, but you kinda have to justify it musically, if that makes sense. Good luck

[YoungCrocket]

That's a good analogy lol. I will definitely take that all into consideration. I think I'll purchase that book as well. Take care!

[jancivil]

Hi everyone, I have another question about chord progressions. I generally compose electronic music. Mostly melodic dubstep at 140 or 70 BPM. My question pertains to the different types of chord progressions used in electronic music. If you have expertise in melodic dubstep that would be great too.

How should I approach writing my chord progressions?
I've watched multiple tutorials and read quite a bit on the subject, but I'm having a hard time coming up with good practices to follow. From what I've seen in electronic music, the progressions are generally 4, 8, or 16 bars long. I know that progressions can vary from verse to chorus and I'm also familiar with cadences.

Cadences in particular have been a point of struggle for me. I read somewhere that your progressions should always end with a cadence, whether it be PAC, IAC, Half, or even deceptive. Is this true? It seems difficult to make this line of reasoning fit into a genre of electronic music where your progressions are only 4 or 8 bars long.

Well, if you have to obey a particular convention, find out exactly what happened in an exemplar of that convention, noting definite markers of the style. Do your own thinking, too, from what I'm seeing here you read shit which seems like it's supposed to be always true, and there is no such thing, everything we could ever discuss in a "music theory" board is going to either be conventional, where certain things are done to make that convention (and certain innovations may turn into the "theory" of that style because of frequent adoption) or there will be music that colors outside the lines. (And music that does both, even in the same piece.)

The things you mention sound just like the conventions of 'songwriting' in pop or popular styles in the larger sense. I will say that there is another word for 'cadence' in currency, as to pop, rock, jazz styles, and that is *turnaround*. So in the most general sense, this tends to be a move to V. And turns around in some fashion back to your inevitable I. If you would like to ignore that whole idea, more power to you. If you have to follow it, there is no reason it's not a thing or is a thing per se, 4 bars, 8 bars or no. All of these questions are musical questions and a matter of <does it suit your idea>? If you don't have ideas, no worries, just emulate something you think is the happening thing, as far as you can and make your own notes on it. Now you develop craft to bear on.

And I caution you to take any advice as to what to specifically do or specifically think with a grain of salt. For instance: I do not find that adding a 9th to a V7 chord means, through itself, that everyone is experiencing more tension by it. "Tension" may indicate that something should eventually be done to relieve it, at least hypothetically or 'in theory'. Well, for me a 9th may be less tense than the [more exposed?] 'dominant 7th' because it's lusher. The so-called Foxy Lady chord, major/minor 7 with a sharp 9 (let's place it at C: C E Bb D#); that's tenser, possibly, than the C7 but in Foxy Lady it doesn't resolve. It doesn't need to resolve. James Brown sits on a major/minor 7th for a whole song. Is that tension? In a sense, but then the whole of that sound is tense.
(note that I did not call the thing a dominant seventh chord. Because it isn't. That is a coinage with a contextual meaning.)

What does it mean, 'tension'? In conservative, stick-to-conventions-at-all-costs ideations it seems to mean 'OMG we must resolve this thing or else.' What does it mean in Dubstep? I don't know.

I DO know that the sounds you use for that whole type of thing are richer in harmonics than classical music ever gets. SO, that 7th chord might be rough if you voice it carelessly, or it might be rough, period. Further piling on = further problems. Here's another example: In metal, the use of the so-called Power Chord enjoys some prevalence. There is a physical reason for that: the inclusion of a third is too dissonant. The major third is already heard, only it's the natural interval caused by harmonic distortion, thru the amps. The third from the guitar tuned to 12 tone Equal Temperament (12tET) is probably sharper than that. Additionally, that 3rd is generating its own overtone series and we have, de facto, a pretty complex sonority moving the air molecules about. The minor 3rd generates 'problems' of its own the same way.

So THAT will be something to be mindful of. As to "Chord Progressions" I have no opinion, it's your taste and your predilections and I have no business advising you on the subjective stuff. Other than <it's the convention> and you obey what is laid down for you or you make your own way. You probably don't want to ignore convention like a rebel with no clue in the beginning, but emulate and take notes. EG: In metal, or dubstep, someone may decide that 'too dissonant, you can't do it' is something to say 'f**k you' to because THEY LIKE THAT. OTOH, if you have to sound like 'classical music' tends to, you have to know the procedures, the mechanics of it. The happening people innovated and that became noted by 'theorists' post facto. The really happening people do things like go to the Paris International Exposition of 1889 and hear Javanese Gamelan and wind up upsetting a bunch of people with a new thing.

[BbriteideAmusic]

Hi everyone, I have another question about chord progressions. I generally compose electronic music. Mostly melodic dubstep at 140 or 70 BPM. My question pertains to the different types of chord progressions used in electronic music. If you have expertise in melodic dubstep that would be great too.

How should I approach writing my chord progressions?
I've watched multiple tutorials and read quite a bit on the subject, but I'm having a hard time coming up with good practices to follow. From what I've seen in electronic music, the progressions are generally 4, 8, or 16 bars long. I know that progressions can vary from verse to chorus and I'm also familiar with cadences.

Cadences in particular have been a point of struggle for me. I read somewhere that your progressions should always end with a cadence, whether it be PAC, IAC, Half, or even deceptive. Is this true? It seems difficult to make this line of reasoning fit into a genre of electronic music where your progressions are only 4 or 8 bars long.

Well, if you have to obey a particular convention, find out exactly what happened in an exemplar of that convention, noting definite markers of the style. Do your own thinking, too, from what I'm seeing here you read shit which seems like it's supposed to be always true, and there is no such thing, everything we could ever discuss in a "music theory" board is going to either be conventional, where certain things are done to make that convention (and certain innovations may turn into the "theory" of that style because of frequent adoption) or there will be music that colors outside the lines. (And music that does both, even in the same piece.)

The things you mention sound just like the conventions of 'songwriting' in pop or popular styles in the larger sense. I will say that there is another word for 'cadence' in currency, as to pop, rock, jazz styles, and that is *turnaround*. So in the most general sense, this tends to be a move to V. And turns around in some fashion back to your inevitable I. If you would like to ignore that whole idea, more power to you. If you have to follow it, there is no reason it's not a thing or is a thing per se, 4 bars, 8 bars or no. All of these questions are musical questions and a matter of <does it suit your idea>? If you don't have ideas, no worries, just emulate something you think is the happening thing, as far as you can and make your own notes on it. Now you develop craft to bear on.

And I caution you to take any advice as to what to specifically do or specifically think with a grain of salt. For instance: I do not find that adding a 9th to a V7 chord means, through itself, that everyone is experiencing more tension by it. "Tension" may indicate that something should eventually be done to relieve it, at least hypothetically or 'in theory'. Well, for me a 9th may be less tense than the [more exposed?] 'dominant 7th' because it's lusher. The so-called Foxy Lady chord, major/minor 7 with a sharp 9 (let's place it at C: C E Bb D#); that's tenser, possibly, than the C7 but in Foxy Lady it doesn't resolve. It doesn't need to resolve. James Brown sits on a major/minor 7th for a whole song. Is that tension? In a sense, but then the whole of that sound is tense.
(note that I did not call the thing a dominant seventh chord. Because it isn't. That is a coinage with a contextual meaning.)

What does it mean, 'tension'? In conservative, stick-to-conventions-at-all-costs ideations it seems to mean 'OMG we must resolve this thing or else.' What does it mean in Dubstep? I don't know.

I DO know that the sounds you use for that whole type of thing are richer in harmonics than classical music ever gets. SO, that 7th chord might be rough if you voice it carelessly, or it might be rough, period. Further piling on = further problems. Here's another example: In metal, the use of the so-called Power Chord enjoys some prevalence. There is a physical reason for that: the inclusion of a third is too dissonant. The major third is already heard, only it's the natural interval caused by harmonic distortion, thru the amps. The third from the guitar tuned to 12 tone Equal Temperament (12tET) is probably sharper than that. Additionally, that 3rd is generating its own overtone series and we have, de facto, a pretty complex sonority moving the air molecules about. The minor 3rd generates 'problems' of its own the same way.

So THAT will be something to be mindful of. As to "Chord Progressions" I have no opinion, it's your taste and your predilections and I have no business advising you on the subjective stuff. Other than <it's the convention> and you obey what is laid down for you or you make your own way. You probably don't want to ignore convention like a rebel with no clue in the beginning, but emulate and take notes. EG: In metal, or dubstep, someone may decide that 'too dissonant, you can't do it' is something to say 'f**k you' to because THEY LIKE THAT. OTOH, if you have to sound like 'classical music' tends to, you have to know the procedures, the mechanics of it. The happening people innovated and that became noted by 'theorists' post facto. The really happening people do things like go to the Paris International Exposition of 1889 and hear Javanese Gamelan and wind up upsetting a bunch of people with a new thing.

Completely agree with you on all. Learned something on the way. With techno I tend to favor, starting out with i-VI-II-VII as in Cm-Ab-Db-Bb . with that progression you can do anything, add anything in M2 or m3, etc. Agreed that Cadences often don't resolve in trance so you usually have IAC, HC or PC. Really, don't we want our audiences wanting to hear more?

[Musicologo]

I think Jancivil was spot on on the advice. I might add that if your goal in your musical practice is to produce tracks to sell as a commodity to a certain target, then it's important to fulfill the expectations of that target. If your goal is to sign a contract with a certain record label you will want to please the A&R person, therefore you should know their values and what they value and expect.

As such, listen to songs similar to the ones that you want to make and learn what makes them sound the way they do. About chord progressions I think the most important thing is not the progression per se (probably anything goes if used consistently) but the pattern of recurrence: how and when they repeat and how and when they vary. Therefore: form/structure.

According to

The Addiction Formula - Friedemann Findeisen
(https://www.amazon.com/Addiction-Formul ... 9082391309)

Who studied these kinds of practices aimed at "generating hits" the most important thing is to keep the song interesting by their perceived energy levels which depends more on the business of the arrangement and quality of timbres and dynamics.

If you then study one or two songs you will probably find structures like this one:

https://musicmakingmatters.files.wordpr ... ture-2.jpg

where you'll see there are 16 bar sections going on in which something varies about them and you have to understand what it is and try to replicate that. After you know how to make the sound you are looking for then you can try to innovate. As a general advice each musical practice has their own values and their own theory, therefore if you want to sound like someone, learn how that someone makes those sounds. The podcast song exploder might also be a good idea if you find there a song that you want to emulate.

http://songexploder.net/episodes

[YoungCrocket]

Jancivil! I love you lol, seriously though your the best. I often find that somewhere in my head I already know the answers to musical questions such as these, but I often need someone to spell it out for me. You did just that. I appreciate all the help. Since I originally posted this I've come to have a much better understanding of how to make harmony work for me.

Thank you BbriteideAmusic and Musicologo too. I will definitely take that info into consideration in my future productions.

[imrae]

With techno I tend to favor, starting out with i-VI-II-VII as in Cm-Ab-Db-Bb . with that progression you can do anything, add anything in M2 or m3, etc. Agreed that Cadences often don't resolve in trance so you usually have IAC, HC or PC. Really, don't we want our audiences wanting to hear more?

Wait, your chord II from Cm is Db? What mode/scale is this?

[jancivil]

- with both that Db and the D natural from the Bb major, it's not easy to say, one of those will color outside the lines of a seven-note scale or mode. it doesn't have to be any of them, it doesn't seem the ostensible style is presenting youse with a barrier to that sequence...