Composition books, tutorials, videos?

[Tricky-Loops]

Arranging techniques for the synthesis.
http://www.amazon.com/Arranging-Techniq ... 082561130X

This is a great book, and I've already read most of it, the only problem was that it was a bit too advanced for me.

That's my problem, generally, most books that I've found via Internet are either too superficial or too advanced.

I rather search for a PRACTICAL songwriting book with techniques & ideas & practices about composing with chord progressions and how to harmonize melodies, especially for keyboarders, as most practice books about chord progressions are for guitarists.

Something practical like "Harmony for Computer Musicians" but aimed at composition with chord progressions.

[bluedad]

I'm not talking down, I'm talking frankly. There is already a lot of this here and making a new thread seems selfish. I feel free to say it.

Frankly, sometimes it goes a long way in helping a forum run smoothly by not saying some things. If you don't like a thread, simply don't bother reading it. There are plenty of questions asked over and over in all the forums, that is just the way it goes.

[bluedad]

To be OT, I've learned the most about chords, arranging etc from trying to dissect and learn the songs that I like. That's why all my songs turn out sounding like the Beatles I reckon.

[jancivil]

Well, let me take the opportunity to reiterate the spiel I've done countless times.

Expecting to get it emphasising book reading, tips and tricks and all this can be a real mistake. You don't learn to do something by reading about it. You do it. It's like swimming, you cannot learn to swim in the library. If you want to know how chords work, having the coherent information is quite helpful in the context of doing some music. It will click when you're involved with your ear, and to the extent of that involvement.

As I said to someone that for a long time keeps trying that approach (emphasis on the long time) I remember when I first took a class in music theory. I had some experience as a musician and an arranger by this time. But I wanted to 'cop' JS Bach and this magnificent counterpoint. I had access to a library, I had a grant that allowed me some leeway to buy scores, and I embarked on theory courses at the community college.

The part-writing exercises made some things clear to me that I wouldn't have guessed or been able to copy off a record and get.
But writing in that style meant having that kind of exercise created for me and I can connect the dots. When I got into a school more-or-less made to create professionals, if mostly teachers, I decided on a JS Bach suite to present for jury and I talked someone into 'Form and Analysis', a graduate level course which forced me to write a paper on this suite.

So, should I have to sound like that, it does come naturally.

Your ear is what is primary. Blind people can be really great at music.

[tapper mike]

Practical songwriting - http://songstuff.com

The focus is on songwriting and many take that solely as lyric writing. It's a nice place.

You are ruining an article I'm writing right now over there but anyway....

A great deal of the writing process is experience. Take what you know and apply it. When you learn a concept like.... Back stepping. Try to learn a few songs (by playing not just listening) Then try to write/perform "doodles/ditties" a simple "A section" of a song using the device.

While back stepping is most commonly found in Bossa's It's also evident in trad, modern, post modern, and smooth jazz, rock, pop and folk. Back stepping is when you take a simple melodic line(motive) and then repeat the line though starting on the note behind it. It is a way to stretch a motif across a progression. And while there are ways to play "Connect the chord" using the technique if your foundation is strong enough you don't need to be as concerned with chord changes.

Standards off the top of my head that use back stepping.

All of Me
Blue Bossa (the most recorded jazz bossa instrumental of all time)
Autumn Leaves
The "B" section of Take Five (Paul Desmond, Dave Brubeck)
Fly Me To The Moon (though somewhat obtuse)

There are thousands more from all genre's but as I'm a jazz devotee I reach from what I know.

First you have to understand the concept. I've explained back stepping. Next you have to hear the concept (not read but listen so you can recognize it)
Then you should try to learn a song(perform) that uses the concept so you have it in your head and it gets out via your fingers. Finally you should try to both improvise and write using the concept. Even if it doesn't work out the first time to your expectations. After that it will be one of those things you pull out of your hat when you want to write something. It may not be the thing you think you need but it will be there nonetheless.

[stringtapper]

"Backstepping?"

Uh, yeah that's called a "melodic sequence."

No need to make up new terms when perfectly good ones exist already.

[vurt]

Well, let me take the opportunity to reiterate the spiel I've done countless times.

Expecting to get it emphasising book reading, tips and tricks and all this can be a real mistake. You don't learn to do something by reading about it. You do it. It's like swimming, you cannot learn to swim in the library. If you want to know how chords work, having the coherent information is quite helpful in the context of doing some music. It will click when you're involved with your ear, and to the extent of that involvement.

As I said to someone that for a long time keeps trying that approach (emphasis on the long time) I remember when I first took a class in music theory. I had some experience as a musician and an arranger by this time. But I wanted to 'cop' JS Bach and this magnificent counterpoint. I had access to a library, I had a grant that allowed me some leeway to buy scores, and I embarked on theory courses at the community college.

The part-writing exercises made some things clear to me that I wouldn't have guessed or been able to copy off a record and get.
But writing in that style meant having that kind of exercise created for me and I can connect the dots. When I got into a school more-or-less made to create professionals, if mostly teachers, I decided on a JS Bach suite to present for jury and I talked someone into 'Form and Analysis', a graduate level course which forced me to write a paper on this suite.

So, should I have to sound like that, it does come naturally.

Your ear is what is primary. Blind people can be really great at music.

while what you say is of course valid, doing something for real obviously helps the learning process.
some of is, when we dont have the ability to actually "do" stuff, like to read about it, to help the process.
eg when were in bed, on a bus or at the beach 9not me, hate the sun)
otherwise, why would anyone write the books?

[jancivil]

Does it look like I'm saying don't read? I'm fairly well read, myself. I have said this so many times, and I believe, actually I'm sure what I wrote there is clear and isn't difficult. Yes, hmmm, I described my own process in reading along with doing.
There are people today, particularly encouraged by vast amounts of information on the internet, whose comfort zone is reading and they prefer that to doing. And never do it. I'm on about it seeing it so frequently here. People with the same quality of question again and again, for years sometimes.

"doing something for real obviously helps"

I'm certain doing something for real is sufficient in itself, since there are people that never read, such as... Stevie Wonder? Ray Charles? Come on.

[vurt]

well yes, maybe worded badly, i just meant reading can supplement the learning for some people.
nothing wrong with listing books, just bacause some people didnt read (or couldnt)
there are deaf musicians and composers too, should we all ignore our ears and use physical vibrations through our teeth or feet to learn music? come on...

[jancivil]

Since I never said one should necessarily never read - what I did do was the reduction 'you do not need your visual apparatus to be a musician' - what you say there applies not at all, that's quite an invalid sort of argument, isn't it? My reduction isn't absurd, 'come on'. I know of exactly one musician, Evelyn Glennie who's done what you refer to; in statistically every case one requires the hearing apparatus to be a musician. It's argumentative for the sake of it and it's kind of just illogical. Since I never said don't read, your whole tack seems empty.

[vurt]

ok

[Tricky-Loops]

This is KVR. A (very) few people are attacking a thread like pirates are entering a ship, spread some arguments and wanna fight. That's why I wrote, I only want to have suggestions for books, tutorials and that stuff.

Neither did I say I'd only read books in my bed nor did I say I'd only play keyboard without reading anything.

Of course I do practice what I read in songwriting...

[wrench45us]

http://www.amazon.com/How-Write-Songs-K ... 0879308621

rikky rooksby series of sonngwriting books -- simple and effective

follow through and this will provide a good foundation for moving in any number of directions

[Tricky-Loops]

Practical songwriting - http://songstuff.com

The focus is on songwriting and many take that solely as lyric writing. It's a nice place.

Bookmarked!

These are the tutorials and tips I've looked for! USABLE informations about songwriting!

[tapper mike]

Wow a lot of posts while I was writing/editing this.

@stringtapper:
I didn't need to. Someone did long before I was born.

Whereas melodic sequencing can move upward or downward. Back stepping is specifically downward. Also as "sequencing" has a different meaning for those who use sequencers to build "loops" of the same phrase repeated exactly without variation "melodic sequencing" does not apply to. However as the term "sequencing" has a changed perception with the development of electronic devices and computers that use "sequencer" type software such as FL, Abelton Live (etc, etc) Even though the term has shifted from "sequencing" such as a drum sequencer.

Whilst I'm not for trying to rename note values. Much of contemporary popular music (over the last 100 years) has been written by itinerate musicians. Along the way they have introduced different definitions either from lack or classical training or to accommodate a "novel" approach which later become standardized. Terms like "Bumping" and "Dive Bomb" for example.

Glissando/Gliss is a glide from one pitch to another. It is an Italianized musical term derived from the French glisser, to glide. In some contexts it is distinguished from the continuous portamento. Some colloquial equivalents are slide, sweep (referring to the 'discreet glissando' effects on guitar & harp respectively), bend, slide, or 'smear'.

The "colloquial" equivalents are actually more specific to circumstance then the generic traditional term. As a slide, a sweep/rake and a bend are quite different and rather specific.