Music Theory

[tristia]

hteory is great when explained by someone who really knows what there talking about, Omeginatros, it only looks confusing when u try to figure it out without all the pieces like whats handed to you right here in this therad, bits n pieces though jazz is cool too

and the chord thing... yea, thats the whole point :-p if they werent built like that, ie: major is major third and a minor third... it would just be either a bunch of notes thrown on the page or one kind of chord... major minor augmented and diminished are just the way to categorize them.
edit : and if im right, dorian isnt minor... it starts on the second scale degree, and the ii chord is minor, but dorian is just not major... if i knew where my theory notebook from last semester was right now, i would bust out the tetra chords and figure it out just incase it was either the melodic or harmonic form of the minor, but that still doesnt make sense i dont think because they would have to start on the sixth scale degree anyway.... i think. i wish i knew where that notebook was.

[squarebear]

None of which you need to know in order to write music. Just make what feels right to you and don't worry about following any rules. As long as it sounds ok, it's mission accomplished.

[SpookG]

I think this is digressing more into a who knows the most theory than a real discussion on what music theory is. Music Theory is an attempt to explain why music works. A very technical, scientific look at music, and that is all it is. I don’t consider it a real working explanation, as it is doesn’t seem to convey the reasoning why music can so powerfully convey thoughts and emotions, which is in essence what music truly is, an expression of emotion beyond words.

A lot of what I have read is surface level retention of a theory class someone has sat in, and although I commend you on your knowledge, you are all missing the point, which is music theory is only part of what is music. The other critical ingredient is tension. Tension is a far more important aspect of music that gets overlooked by scales and modes because tension is much more abstract and well, you just KNOW.

I feel the same way about music theory as I do about people who just “play” an instrument. When it comes down to it, stripped down, you can get someone and drill them long enough and they can play some of the most difficult piano pieces ever written. Then ask them to write something and they can’t. I don’t believe you can understand music by just learning theory.

Classical music and trance operate on the same basic principles, but one has far more theory involved than the other, yet a classical piece can move you just as well as a trance song, so then theory must not to be the critical player involved. What makes movie soundtracks powerful? Have someone want to charge into battle? Dance their brains out at a rave?

Many electronic artists don’t know much theory, but yet can create powerful and moving pieces. Why is that? A DJ set is the purest form of tension. The “composition” is made up of complete songs, so by putting together a good set all you are concentrating on is the proper build up and release of tension. You can hear periodic rise and falls, just like a classical piece. Theory explains what music is, but without tension you would only have a bunch of notes.

Here is a good example…

Play any scale but leave out the last note. Something feels incomplete, and you are willed to finish it. You are waiting for it to finish and it hasn’t yet. You get this weird feeling inside... Finally hit the final note. That was the build up and release of tension.

Or listen to that one solo, you know, where the band stops and the soloist hangs on that note forever.. Theory isn't what is making that impact you, tension is..

I hope I have made at least some sense... It is generally hard for me to discuss music and have people understand me... plus it has been a very long night.

[tristia]

the only reason i got into modes and such was because it was brought up, and better to have correct information then not, but i agree with a lot of what spook said on this. The only thing is theory isn't what makes the music powerful, its the sound, or like was said, the tension. Theory is just a guideline to tell you what should invoke those feelings in people... or what combinations of notes would make those tensions. I cant get into electronic music because i know nothing about it. Like with the scale, the tension is what you hear, the theory would be how it looks on paper, or just that interval seperated from the rest of the scale. It wont tell you why it sounds that way, but rather show you what that sound looks like for when you want to use it again.

I also agree that there really shouldnt be any set rules, like was mentioned earlier, and that it shouldnt matter. And it really doesnt, well it does and doesnt at the same time. Music should just be what you want it to be, as long as your happy with your own result. Theory comes into that when people started to see patterns of what did and didnt work. thats why its called theory, its someones take on what should and shouldnt be done. the mistake came when they started calling these theories rules, but there really not. you learn them all to break them. It just lets you know when what would work in most situations. Its not meant to be fallowed exactly, (or else we would have a bunch of very blan and boring music, that all kinda sounds exactly the same, nor would we have advancements in music) but more or less there for when you need it. one example of that would be like... the V7 chord... perfect example.. when music was first beginning to be written down, no way... this chord didnt even exist, and now its an avid part of composition. It was just something someone thought might work, so they added that extra interval on to that chord and poof, the jazz chord was born. Another perfect example of breaking everyone of these rules is most 20th century music, they dont even write in some cases on a conventional staff... its screwy stuff.

the point is, Its just a theory, otherwise it wouldnt be called so. by all means write what you like, thats the music part, the theory part is just what goes on the paper, and more correctly the composition part.

[BluE_MeaniE]

Nice points, you two.
I agree, for the most part.
Many times I have tried writing songs using every bit of technical knowledge I know, but they don't turn out good. I just try to follow the rules, but it just ends up plain-sounding.

one example of that would be like... the V7 chord... perfect example.. when music was first beginning to be written down, no way... this chord didnt even exist, and now its an avid part of composition. It was just something someone thought might work, so they added that extra interval on to that chord and poof, the jazz chord was born.

Well, I don't know how often it was used, but that chord is a naturally occuring chord in the major scale. So it wasn't just invented for jazz. There are ways to use it that sound very classical, as well.

[tristia]

V7 doesn't happen naturally in the major scale... its just the V chord... because the major scale goes on the 3 note triads... V7 is 4 notes... and even when they do use 4 notes... its just the root repeated generally... the 7 is a different interval. V is naturally occuring, not V7.

and yea it is classical too, but its generally a jazzy sounding chord... just hitch it on the end of ur cadence instead of ur I chord, and tada... jazzy ending

[BluE_MeaniE]

But the mixolydian scale naturally occurs. That's what I'm saying. Or rather, what I meant to say. Well, actually only slightly. I am, in a way, covering for myself, but I still hold to my reason.
Yes, those four notes were not used as often, but they were still there.

[tristia]

you said major scale, not mixolydian mode... mixolydian mode isnt the major scale. and yes they (the four notes) were there, im not arguing that with you, but im saying it wasnt popular enough to have its own chord until it really started pushing through in jazz, then it became extremely popluar in composition, but this is getting into the history of things and away from what the thread is about... so...

[BluE_MeaniE]

Okay. You're right. I messed up again.
I think you get what I mean, but I'll explain it, anyways.

I meant if you take a major scale (C for example) and play that scale but starting on the fifth (G in this case) you get a G7 scale, which is mixolydian.

[tristia]

there ya go, that i can deal with

[Omeganitros]

I handle making music in a simple fashion:

1. Put down the first (#) of notes that you think up off the top of your head, in the order they came to you.

2. Think of Beat and Rythm for notes to follow.

#2 is the hard part.

3. If needed, switch note order around, if one feels it'll sound better that way.

4. Switch rythm and/or beat at any given time in process.

5. Add in "the works" (everything thats not Beat, Rythm, or Note).

6. Pitch the idea, having come up with a pile of crap.


Just my two cents.

[tristia]

thats basically what theory is, go on a whim and work with it... what we were talkin about was the patterns ppl generally fallow when they do it, but there not generally necessary

[Anonymous]

Music theory
Music theory is the study of why music does what it does. People who don't know theory still know the "modes". All it has to do with, is how and why your ear interprets sounds to create a desired feeling, and why the specific sounds worked, in order to create a melody, or what-not. Well, what's a chord? It's a sound. What is a sound? The particular auditory effect produced by a given cause. If I'm wrong in any ways, I welcome criticism.

[Apollo_Strife]

Wow, Login was screwed up. That was me above ^.

[slenderblade]

There are books on the music theory.