Question about creativity

[TimeToProduce]

So i never come up with a melody while away from studio. I just go in my DAW and insert piano and start playing. I mean i never come up with my melody before and when i try to express my feelings, it just doesn't work out. I mean sometimes something goes trough my head but i never remember it again. And i'm too lazy to record it and use it afterwards..
I also listen to lot of music and i just somehow come up with a similar melody. Those songs i listen to get stuck in my head and the only thing i can make is this song.


How do you guys come up with melodies? Is it like a creativity muscle that needs to be trained? Will music theory help?
I know i need to start recording some melodies that i have in my head (making awkward sounds while talking to my phone)

[cdverson]

How I start is I'll think about a memory of a time or place and try to express the emotion through the melody. Theory will only help you as it never hurts to learn a little.

[Ghostwave]

For me, a good chord progression is essential.
That being said, I usually get inspired by particular sounds. I try random notes in a particular scale and after a while a melody comes naturally. If I can whistle it an hour later, it's a keeper.

[DJ Warmonger]

I might be insane and my mind generates new melodies at random moments.

The difficulty is to actually transfer the idea from mind to DAW, and it's not easy as I'm not trained musican

[TimeToProduce]

For me is the complete oposite, i can't generate new melodies but i find it very easy to transfer ideas to DAW..

[Jorgeelalto]

I start with chords too; the melodies come right before finishing the track

[Ridan]

How I start is I'll think about a memory of a time or place and try to express the emotion through the melody. Theory will only help you as it never hurts to learn a little.

I'm essentially the same way in terms of certain memories triggering certain creative sparks.
That, and experimental Indie films for some reason get my right brain all fired up for sounds, melodies, and everything else in between.
Also use to listen to artists such as Luc Ferrari, Pierre Schaeffer, John Cage, ect. To get inspired, but after learning more about sound design, and music composition i sort of grew out of the habit of relying on them and others for inspiration and creativity.
In any case, memories, experimental films, and alcohol really get me going on a creative rampage.

Edit: @cdversion. I see you're from Memphis. Me too! Was born and raised there. Still have yet to miss it though.

[KBSoundSmith]

Working hard and with a purpose. That is how good melodies are made.

The notion of some melody floating down from the heavens into a person's brain where it is then transmitted to the world is fanciful at best. Or bluntly, inspiration is bullshit.

Here's the thing about noodling around, improvisation, throwing notes around in your DAW, humming, listening to a song then writing -- it's simply extracting bits from your memory and mish-mashing them without direction, purpose, or intent of any kind (or at the very least, being unoriginal). Now, there *is* a place for doing those things. I'm not saying they don't have value. However, what it does NOT do is give you command over the craft of writing. Those things are fine for helping you discover what your *tastes* in musical ideas are, but they will not give you skill.

When I write a melody, I set up very clear objectives for what I want to achieve. Then I execute it.

For example, I will decide what kind of mood I want for a melody. I will then make a list of the musical elements and decide how they should be used in a style that I associate with such a melody:

* I decide how fast the notes should be
* I decide whether the notes should start on or off the beat
* I decide what kind of rhythmic patterns will be there or not
* I decide how many phrases there will be
* I decide whether or not there will be repetition and where it will occur (ie, the structure of the melody)
* I decide whether the phrase should end on an accented beat (masculine ending) or on a beat that isn't accentuated (feminine ending) * I decide how fast or slowly the harmony should change
* I decide if the harmony should clash or correspond with the melody
* I decide the range/distance that the melody will travel up or downward, or whether it stays primarily at the same level
* I decide how loud or quiet it will be
* And so on, etc etc

And I do that without writing or playing a single note. After that is all decided, I then start making sketches of those elements to get them coordinated. Then I write the melody. I have a definite goal to meet, so I can judge after every sketch whether or not I have been successful. Then I can keep making new drafts until I have the melody written in a way that pleases me.

All of that can be done without a hint of "inspiration." It's pure craft. It is a skill. Whether or not it is "good" is largely determined by two things: how much I have sharpened that skill, and how much I have sharpened and refined my taste/judgement.

I'm not saying that a little improvisation here and there is a bad thing -- it isn't bad at all. But what it is NOT is original -- it's a mish-mash of your memories, and while it can occasionally give you insight into what you want your objective to be, it doesn't substitute for having the skill to knowingly construct a melody how you want it to be because you have command and mastery over musical phenomenon.

[chaosWyrM]

Working hard and with a purpose. That is how good melodies are made.

The notion of some melody floating down from the heavens into a person's brain where it is then transmitted to the world is fanciful at best. Or bluntly, inspiration is bullshit.

Here's the thing about noodling around, improvisation, throwing notes around in your DAW, humming, listening to a song then writing -- it's simply extracting bits from your memory and mish-mashing them without direction, purpose, or intent of any kind (or at the very least, being unoriginal). Now, there *is* a place for doing those things. I'm not saying they don't have value. However, what it does NOT do is give you command over the craft of writing. Those things are fine for helping you discover what your *tastes* in musical ideas are, but they will not give you skill.

When I write a melody, I set up very clear objectives for what I want to achieve. Then I execute it.

For example, I will decide what kind of mood I want for a melody. I will then make a list of the musical elements and decide how they should be used in a style that I associate with such a melody:

* I decide how fast the notes should be
* I decide whether the notes should start on or off the beat
* I decide what kind of rhythmic patterns will be there or not
* I decide how many phrases there will be
* I decide whether or not there will be repetition and where it will occur (ie, the structure of the melody)
* I decide whether the phrase should end on an accented beat (masculine ending) or on a beat that isn't accentuated (feminine ending) * I decide how fast or slowly the harmony should change
* I decide if the harmony should clash or correspond with the melody
* I decide the range/distance that the melody will travel up or downward, or whether it stays primarily at the same level
* I decide how loud or quiet it will be
* And so on, etc etc

And I do that without writing or playing a single note. After that is all decided, I then start making sketches of those elements to get them coordinated. Then I write the melody. I have a definite goal to meet, so I can judge after every sketch whether or not I have been successful. Then I can keep making new drafts until I have the melody written in a way that pleases me.

All of that can be done without a hint of "inspiration." It's pure craft. It is a skill. Whether or not it is "good" is largely determined by two things: how much I have sharpened that skill, and how much I have sharpened and refined my taste/judgement.

I'm not saying that a little improvisation here and there is a bad thing -- it isn't bad at all. But what it is NOT is original -- it's a mish-mash of your memories, and while it can occasionally give you insight into what you want your objective to be, it doesn't substitute for having the skill to knowingly construct a melody how you want it to be because you have command and mastery over musical phenomenon.

well...im gonna have to go and say if thats how you work great...but thats NOT the only way to work. its also unfair and inaccurate to suggest that coming to ideas through improvisation is unoriginal. if you want to say that "it's simply extracting bits from your memory and mish-mashing them without direction, purpose, or intent of any kind"...then ill put forth that anything you do is nothing more than that anyway. what one produces artistically is always an amalgamation of their personal experiences, influences, and tastes. if it were otherwise...then we wouldnt have things like genres and everything everyone made would be entirely 100% unique and original in every way...which nothing ever is.

"But what it is NOT is original -- it's a mish-mash of your memories, and while it can occasionally give you insight into what you want your objective to be, it doesn't substitute for having the skill to knowingly construct a melody how you want it to be because you have command and mastery over musical phenomenon."

nonsense. nothing about improvising takes away from any of that. i can and do knowingly construct ideas and melodies without having to sit there and plan it all out beforehand. i see no reason why anyone would think that that cant be done.

some people just dont work by plotting everything out before ever doing anything. some people work best by NOT deciding all those things, and letting the pieces fall into place as they go. in fact...your way of working sounds painfully tedious and confining to me. it also sounds utterly devoid of creativity and passion. if i tried to work that way...id absolutely never make anything at all.

this is not to say that one way is better than another...just pointing out that different people work, and are most creative working, in different ways. if thats how you work best...then thats how you work best.

as for my approach...ill get a kind of feeling that i want to express...it could be anything...it could be an emotional state...it could be a phrase...it could be in image that exists only in my mind. ill then proceed to try to build that with sound. i personally tend to work from the bottom up...in a linear fashion. i make intros first...and then start layering the other elements as i hear them in my head.

for me its almost as though the entire thing already exists in my mind...and all i have to do is make it come out of the speakers. i just cant hear one part, until ive heard the part its built on. i guess its akin to how sculptors say the sculpture is already in the stone...they just have to uncover it.

often (almost always) i wont know what the next bit is going to be until ive finished the bit its built upon (for obvious reasons). i have never thought of a melody first...and then thought "wow...thats a good melody...i should write a track around it"...not ever. i come up with a melody when its time to put one in the track...and its based upon the elements already there.

of course...i have made tracks using alternate methods...where i started off with a more specific thing in mind...but those are the exceptions. i also think its a good idea to try different ways to make music (or any art really) than what one normally does.

the hard work and purpose aspect is true...but where you put that hard work, and what the purpose is, is entirely dependent on how your mind works.

[jancivil]

Working hard and with a purpose. That is how good melodies are made.

The notion of some melody floating down from the heavens into a person's brain where it is then transmitted to the world is fanciful at best. Or bluntly, inspiration is bullshit.

Here's the thing about noodling around, improvisation, throwing notes around in your DAW, humming, listening to a song then writing -- it's simply extracting bits from your memory and mish-mashing them without direction, purpose, or intent of any kind (or at the very least, being unoriginal).

When I write a melody, I set up very clear objectives for what I want to achieve. Then I execute it....

For example, I will decide what kind of mood I want for a melody. I will then make a list of the musical elements and decide how they should be used in a style that I associate with such a melody:

* I decide (on a number of attributes in the abstract)

And I do that without writing or playing a single note. After that is all decided, I then start making sketches of those elements to get them coordinated. Then I write the melody. I have a definite goal to meet, so I can judge after every sketch whether or not I have been successful. Then I can keep making new drafts until I have the melody written in a way that pleases me.

All of that can be done without a hint of "inspiration." It's pure craft. It is a skill.

But what [improvisation] is NOT is original -- it's a mish-mash of your memories, and while it can occasionally give you insight into what you want your objective to be, it doesn't substitute for having the skill to knowingly construct a melody how you want it to be because you have command and mastery over musical phenomenon.

nonsense. nothing about improvising takes away from any of that. i can and do knowingly construct ideas and melodies without having to sit there and plan it all out beforehand. i see no reason why anyone would think that that cant be done.

some people just dont work by plotting everything out before ever doing anything. some people work best by NOT deciding all those things, and letting the pieces fall into place as they go. in fact...your way of working sounds painfully tedious and confining to me. it also sounds utterly devoid of creativity and passion. if i tried to work that way...id absolutely never make anything at all.

At one pole here lies this mythic Divine inspiration while at the other extreme lies a spreadsheet approach which as described here is totally dry and mechanical. Surely there's a middle way.
I have no idea where or how one would arrive at this notion of musical improvisation. I would seriously advise broadening one's scope and comparing notes with the world, with history: ask yourself what composers have done. Check it out. Composers improvise, hate to have to break it to you. The admonishment there is bizarre, I think. Improvising as composing in real time.

[improvisation] doesn't substitute for having the skill to knowingly construct a melody how you want it to be

Improvisation is the skill to "knowingly construct a melody".

There tends to be a crucial difference between people that came to DAWville from the standpoint of musicianship and people that never did music before the computer provided such facility, & it's not trivial. The OP evidently has "never come up with a melody while away from studio."

I also listen to lot of music and i just somehow come up with a similar melody. Those songs i listen to get stuck in my head and the only thing i can make is this song.

How do you guys come up with melodies? Is it like a creativity muscle that needs to be trained? Will music theory help?

I have melodies happening because I am prepared to, after a certain experience (and a certain disposition to that experience). After a couple of years of learning guitar I was consistently improvising melodic lines, music that made sense. Some of it may be a modest gift, but the fact is that my acumen for it grew in the fertile soil of improvisation; as a direct product of acquired skills on an instrument and an ear developed thru copping as much as I could off of records.

It absolutely is a developed set of muscles out of some quality of training.

My view is that the identity/handle "TimeToProduce" is a reveal here. It's probably time to obtain (better) chops applicable/appropriate to the goal.

[chaosWyrM]

of course theres a middle ground. i wasnt suggesting that one should work that way...i was only saying that one could work that way. i was saying that the idea that improvisation is unoriginal and that one can not make creative things that way was simply not true.

i wasnt suggesting anything realy, i wasnt offering the other pole. you highlighted the word "nonsense" but seemed to apply it to the method...i was saying nonsense to the idea that one couldnt be creative and original without all that planning. i wasnt saying that one couldnt be creative and original with it, though honestly...planning and creativity arent generally two words used together...which is not the point.

kbsoundsmith works best when he(she? i dont know) plans everything out...i work best when i let things gel on their own as i go.

both are equally valid ways to work. as is anything in between.

[MOK19]

Uh oh. Hopefully we can dodge a debate on the semantics of "originality."

To the original post:
Regarding music theory, I'm going to simply advise that you learn an instrument and theory at the same time. Preferably piano, but guitar is great too. Reason being that the immediacy of having a tactile instrument available allows you to better learn, explore, express, and ingrain what the theory has to offer. Consider piano lessons if you don't already have some piano chops.

I greatly regret having not done this. This is the biggest flaw in my musical life. Surely others get on fine without it, but I'm pretty certain that, all other things being equal, you're much better off if you can quickly bang on some chords comfortably.

Related, if I had the cash to throw around, and was in your position, I'd give this guy's program a try. I don't actually know if it's good, but I've been watching his youtube channel, and it has some great stuff in it.

[jancivil]

of course theres a middle ground. i wasnt suggesting that one should work that way...i was only saying that one could work that way. i was saying that the idea that improvisation is unoriginal and that one can not make creative things that way was simply not true.

Clearly you weren't suggesting that. In fact I was responding to KBSoundSmith who stated that improvisation was mere regurgitation of remembered music and the cure for it is what I called a spreadsheet approach. I assumed we both think "simply bits from your memory mish-mashing without direction, purpose, or intent of any kind" is nonsense.

So, KB would rather work it out via a spreadsheet of arbitrary-looking decisions than play a melody. (Who cares, really. Stravinsky liked to say he needed to touch the notes so he wrote with the piano.) For me, improvisation is IT. And I've spent days inspired and heard full pieces in dreams. I had the actual idea I could become a composer via hearing music rather full formed in my head at times. I started writing in earnest after woodshedding at my instrument for some 10 yrs. Producer is the new composer and everybody and their cat is rearin' ta go with little-to-no prep today.

I was steeped in purposeful improvisation with the end in mind of 'this is a keeper, as is', real-time composition for quite some time. Of course the results varied but I absolutely do create well-formed melodies on the spot. There is a kind of energy and flow, and an organic nature of music created in the moment that I would not wish to lose. It's because I have this that I invested in tech, not the opposite (which will ultimately tell on you).

[TimeToProduce]

Uh oh. Hopefully we can dodge a debate on the semantics of "originality."

To the original post:
Regarding music theory, I'm going to simply advise that you learn an instrument and theory at the same time. Preferably piano, but guitar is great too. Reason being that the immediacy of having a tactile instrument available allows you to better learn, explore, express, and ingrain what the theory has to offer. Consider piano lessons if you don't already have some piano chops.

I greatly regret having not done this. This is the biggest flaw in my musical life. Surely others get on fine without it, but I'm pretty certain that, all other things being equal, you're much better off if you can quickly bang on some chords comfortably.

Related, if I had the cash to throw around, and was in your position, I'd give this guy's program a try. I don't actually know if it's good, but I've been watching his youtube channel, and it has some great stuff in it.

The thing is, have piano at home and i play piano at school as i have some lessons where i can decide what i do (obviously i chose music) and there i get some time to play piano and get knowledge about which notes express certain feelings. And when i mean music theory, i mean more of a technical side of it.
And here is some coincidence happening, i'm actually planning to buy a guitar so i can learn play a guitar.

[recursive one]

Being able to really play a musical instrument is of great help. I don't mean you should become a virtuoso player, but if you are spending some time every day playing a piano/keyboard or guitar, even in self-taught manner, your sence of melody progresses naturally.