While I don't think this would work very well in rock and pop genres where, as others pointed out, clear rules have long been established on how 'simple' triad or some 7th chords flow from one to another and that's what the human brain finds very satisfying....which why popular music is called pop in the first place, lol

OTOH, in so called jazz, fusion, funk, freeform, or whathaveyou kind of styles other than rock and pop... iow, the more 'cerebral' stuff, I'm of the opinion that pretty much any chord can follow the other providing:
1. At least both chords have a note in common
2. Usually works best it's a leading or melody tone. However, inside and bass movement works as well.

However, if you've been educated in jazz theory and played long enough in that form to where all your learning has become second nature and no longer have to think about what you're doing, everyone else should rely on, hopefully, with a good enough ear to know when a chord movement sounds good or not.

I mean, I can come up the some long winded progression and have no idea or regard to cycling 4ths or 5ths or II-V-I's or whatever.
For all I know in the moment, I could be changing keys at each new chord, lol. However, if you'd go an analyze afterwards, you'd wind up finding a jazz rule that'd 'justify' each chord movement. And that justification is also most likely tied with the change also sounding good in the first place. In a way jazz allows for pretty much anything because of using altered chords and substitution rules

 

Last edited: May 27, 2018

You have posted others music pretending it is yours. From what you posted in this thread I am pretty sure everything you have posted sounding professional is made by someone else.

https://audiosex.pro/threads/coherent-and-well-thought-out-jazz.38679/

 

@foster911 you are invicible here,
ineluctable, people have devoted paragraphs and pages, and threads and threads of their time trying to help you,
and entertaining your "theories",.but as of today buddy I have finally seen enough... I'm ignoring you..

cheers and godspeed pinky. .

 

Last edited by a moderator: May 28, 2018

I used below chords totally by ear. If you consider their notes, you would see all 12 notes have been used and don't belong to only one specific key. Also the flow is smooth.

B6 Bb7 Ebmaj7 G7 F#7 Amaj7 Db7 Ab7

It could be longer than that but I just wanted to show the idea. Now I don't know how you're going to analyze it but please don't do it because it won't add anything valuable to the practical side.

 

Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2018

It depends on just yourself how to sketch your path. Your ears are your theory.

 

What's the point of this comment? As you can see I make different examples to show that it works.

 

Thank you for the elaboration but non of them is my intention. I want freedom to be able to make everything I want according to different situations. In my philosophy, Freedom = Harnessing the chromaticism and I'll get it completely soon or later and this thread was only a starting point.

 

NeverGoFullPotato.jpg

 

To me, without further context, that progression on behalf of itself sounds quite schizophrenic. To prove your point you would have to put a melody that makes sense to it. I am not at all saying it cannot be done and sound great. What I am saying is that if YOU can't do this we actually have proof that YOU need some theory to help produce something worthwhile listening to. I will be waiting to hear what you can come up with.

 

Jazz theoretically is deep but the major problem in it is those analyses are not unified and compatible with each other in most cases and that incompatibility makes the situation more obscure and doubtful and you don't know what you should do exactly in any moment so you let your ears guide you.

 

I never post any of my works to music section. Also I think famouslut described everything. BTW, which of my works sounds professional? Would you tell me to be proud of it?

 

I've postponed experimenting with Micro-tonal for the after life.

 

It was just a simple chord succession. I don't say progression because I didn't care about any rule.

You can do everything you want with that. I think it's better to put it into practice by yourself and you'd see different results.

 

I get the feeling foster911 is actually that Steve Faoki guy...when he dissaperaed foster appeared ? coincidence ? I think not !

 

With due respect to foster, his choice of sound, plus the very jarring quantized effect, plus the voicings, yeah it doesn't come across very well. But for shits and giggles I just picked up my guitar next to me, ran it through and in that context it does sound perfectly fine.
Please don't ask me to spell it out, lol, but even with my almost forgotten jazz theory skills I can see right off the bat how that progression would make 'sense'.

 

And I have shown that theory is after your experimentation. I don't say my experimentation is new or old. Before me, lots of people have tested different ideas and published the results. No allegation they are wrong or right. I just say you can do it by yourself and can have your mindset that works for you rather than having other people's mindboggling suggestions in your mind and don't know what exactly you're going to do.

 

• Guy starts with a dumb Authentic cadence
• finds out dominant 7 chords lead to whatever the fuck you want them to
• ... Thinks he coined something new

Foster-"DownSyndrome"-911

 

I agree, i think he probably found the progression somewhere. The funny thing is he wouldn't even know where to start to put a melody to it. And if he managed to, it would take him a lot longer than if he actually would read up on some theory. Another funny thing is that he is using music theory to get the progression across, I thought he could do without theory. And if he says he does not use theory at all, how does he know what to call his chords. And why would he even use thirds as a concept at all.

 

I'm curious. What's the beef then. That foster claims coming up with something new and different by basically being a monkey banging away at a typewriter, lol, or that he just did a bit of something that, while bearing analysis, just hackneyed nonetheless?