Finding root key and scale type - Example 1:

Listen and with your keyboard (or singing), try to find a tone that matches with the whole tune (if you play at constant tone, it fits, it's a probable tonic).

Push the spoiler button only when you think you found it.

Here the probable root key:

Spoiler: tonic

F

now, to be sure, find the V grade of the scale, that is

Spoiler: dominant

C
At times, dominant is mistaken for tonic

now, alternate dominant and tonic, you'll have what is called a perfect cadence, that will fit perfectly in the tune, if you chose correctly.

now, you have to find if the scale is major or minor, so play at least the first three notes of the scale you found (better the whole scale, but it will be enough to match the III grade of the scale, the mediant):

Spoiler: major scale?

F major scale has just Bflat, so play in sequence F,G,A. Does it match the tune? No? Try next

Spoiler: minor scale?

F minor scale (natural) has 4 flat: A,B,D,E, so play in sequence F,G,Ab. Does it match? I think so. Try to play the whole scale (F,G,Ab,Bb,C,Db,Eb,F) you'll see clearly that it matches indeed.

You have just found the root key (scale), and melody will fall (with due exceptions) within that scale.

For chords, it's a bit more elaborated, but they will usually fall within the same scale.

Other examples will follow.

 

Last edited: Aug 1, 2019

I like the direction @orbitbooster is offering here. I call it 'practical tips and tricks for identifying keys by ear'

However, even @orbitbooster's introductory example is assuming that readers have some basic music theory under their belt.
There are many basic music theory ideas mentioned there. So, if required, here's a nice link to explore for basic music theory ideas. http://www.daveconservatoire.org Lots of short informative videos. A major plus point is that music theory is presented without music notation until such time as you choose to also explore music notation.

Back to 'identifying keys'...

If you're experienced at this, you can easily forget how much is going on in your head and how much you had to learn to be able to do this.
So, something beginners might like to note...
@orbitbooster is (in teaching mode) describing useful ways of acquiring these skills,
rather than describing the skills being used after acquiring them.

After acquiring these skills, identifying a key for an experienced musician takes almost no time at all, you just hear something new and start improvising, that's it, all done! It all happens subconsciously. I'll bet that describes @orbitbooster 'at work'.

But that's 'within limits' of course... I find that, for familiar simpler music styles, I can treat identifying keys and key changes as a real-time 'jam along' skill. But that still leaves an infinite amount of beautiful music that I couldn't analyse at all without a lot of help and months of study. e.g., try dismantling some of Debussy's work! You always have to enjoy being totally baffled!

I think tips and tricks like @orbitbooster is describing really can guide people in acquiring these useful skills.
So, here's a couple of videos in the same area

How To Find The Key Of A Song By Ear On Bass: The Intuitive Method

EDM Tips - How to Find the Key of ANY Song – 4 Steps!

and then just a nice reminder that no matter how much we learn, we have to enjoy being baffled...
This video leaves me enthralled - but in terms of music analysis, it leaves me almost paralysed!
Happy Birthday in the Style of Debussy - Nahre Sol

 

Absolutely yes. You need at least a minimum of musical theory / harmony.
But I tried to introduce the terms you find in harmony in a simple layout, kind of "learning at work on site".
Then it's up to you: try to fly by instinct or by the numbers, I personally was not much able to get tunes without a little knowledge.
Edit: theory may not be necessary to find root key, but for the rest of analysis, helps a lot.

It's exactly what I meant in the first part of the example, thank you to have posted a much clearer tutorial.
Also the second clip shows more or less the same way I'm using, and extending the principle that tonic is NOT always the first note heard.

I had to add that somtimes ear is tricked, and it happened, at least to me, that I confused the V for the I, and that's why I added one more step before scale mode: doing the perfect cadence usually clears any doubt about what the root key is.

I play Debussy scores, but I don't even try to analyze them.
I have in the to do list also also "Reflets dans l'eau", but I'm a bit scared, seeing the difficulty.
Also Ravel, Gaspard de la nuit is a hell to analyze.
Just black boxes to me, from which come absolutely divine, trascendental music.

Exciting thread, this one.

 

Last edited: Aug 3, 2019

Of course we're drifting off topic here but...

You said... > I have in the to do list also also "Reflets dans l'eau", but I'm a bit scared, seeing the difficulty.
Wow, good luck with that, and kudos to you for being in a position to even contemplate it.
If I said that, in a piano skill sense, that's way, way, way, out of my league, it would be an insane understatement.

As for analysis of classical pieces like these, there's a huge difference between what I can understand after someone else does the analysis, and what I can analyse for myself. For example, I can instantly enjoy learning from the examples below, I can follow along with what's being explained; but I wouldn't be able to achieve any of these analyses myself without devoting super-human amounts of time and study, and even then I'd probably only figure out a small fraction of what's going on.

Debussy - La fille aux cheveux de lin- Jazz analysis/tutorial
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOTeF-CshU

and I really like the collection of harmonic analysis examples that this guy provides too
www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL613D1A6B3C4BBDF2

You said... > Just black boxes to me, from which come absolutely divine, trascendental music.
I agree, but with a lot of help from people doing fabulous analyses, some little peeks into those black boxes are irresistible.

 

https://www.groove3.com/tutorials/Developing-Your-Tonal-Ear-Explained Good luck

 

Screw this :D
This is the purpose of topics like this. Feel free to ask anything to help learning about music and feel free to tell own thoughts.
Free flow of thoughts is very powerfull. Always You can learn something

 

As far as I understand, this course pivots on the tonal COG (center of gravity) and interval relations, without pushing on the conventional scale names, and that's fine as long as you have to find the root key, but when you have to deconstruct a tune in the whole, it's a different story.
Also, I don't like much seeing calling DO (C) a SOL (G), in some way I see it as an unnatural forcing. Better to learn to read staff, helps a lot in future.

 

Last edited: Aug 3, 2019

Those are pretty advanced analysis, and for sure require a little more knowledge of harmony.

And speaking of (sweet) harmony,
Example 2:

Again, same procedure as ex. 1: sing or play a tone that seems to match.

Here the probable root key:

Spoiler: tonic

Eb. But to me there is some ear ambiguity with Bb, will discuss later.

Find the V grade:

Spoiler: dominant

Bb if Eb scale; F if Bb scale

While playing the tune alternate dominant and tonic and see if matches, to me, the first tone in list is stronger than the other.

Spoiler: major scale?

Eb major has 3 flat: E,A,B. Play the first 3 tones from scale: Eb,F,G, it doesn't match a lot, try also the whole scale: Eb,F,G,Ab,Bb,C,D,Eb.

Spoiler: minor scale?

Eb minor natural has 6 flat: E,G,A,B,C,D. Play the first 3 tones frome scale: Eb,F,Gb, seem to match, play also other tones: Eb,F,Gb,Ab,Bb,Cb,Db,Eb.

However here we have a "glitch": Cb (the actual B on piano keyboard), that doesn't seem to fit really well, while Bb minor seems to fit, the only difference with Eb minor scale is one note: Cb that becomes C.
Still, the center of tonality seems to me always Eb, but it's open to debate.

I have also deconstructed bass (very easy), melody (easy) and chords, maybe will see later.

 

OMG Beloved <3 Robert Miles <3
Children, Sweet Harmony - I love this tracks

Those examples are great <3
Thank You
@orbitbooster

How about Radiohead - Everything In It's Right Place?
I see few months ago Deconstruction of this track, but They didn't included how recreate melody.
You can only see a midi track in Ableton. I try to recreate by ear, but I can't, this is too speed and have layers, becaouse has very low rumbly pads hard to hear a melody for me. This track forced me to create this thread.

Cheers

 

@Roject, you opened a great thread.. and this ^^ is what it's all about!

--- non-mandatory reading ahead ---
@orbitbooster, you are right. It is in Eb minor. That "glitch" is because you are considering the Eb minor natural. When you'll be putting up chords (for the ex. chorus), there is a modal shift of the subdominant chord. I mean, the subdominant will be a major chord (not i v iv, but i v IV) which is perfectly fine if you consider Eb minor melodic scale, where you have the ascending Cb -> C (natural).. open to debate ofc. It's late here and I may be wrong..;) Pls check that and if I'm right you'll have to put it down the easy way - I think you are doing a great job at that!
---

You are playing with Radiohead, huh..;D Don't worry, we'll "extract" the melodies. But that one will be harder to explain. Or not.. I'll leave it to the guys for now. The important thing for you now is to listen and to try to find the connection between what you hear and that "key" tone. There is no need to theorize if it sounds right (I heard that from great minds..). Only when it does not, or if you want to check/ analyze something. But we are here to have fun, or what..;)

 

Yes, I imagined melodic scale was involved in some way, but while that solved Cb, it added the leading natural D "glitch", I was playing scale while listening the tune and feeling that something wasn't still quite right.
But it must be as you wrote, because even in intro chords you have IV (maj), the last in pics (inversions included).

At first ear I can say that starts with a descending arpeggio of Cmaj but it rapidly evolves shifting in C# and then other things I couldn't point my finger on it... YET!

Not kidding when I said this is a exciting thread!

All transcribers are invited!

 

For the Song "Sweet Harmony" - The Beloved
But also for many pop,rock,jazz, songs.

I will crudely describe the classical world's historical approach to analysis as...
"Figure out whether you're in Major or minor and then analyse everything from that perspective"

I want to try to persuade you that always being anchored to that traditional classical Major / minor
way of analysing is not helping here, and is frequently awkward in a world of modern pop, rock, jazz, etc.

For analysis of modern music, one of the best ideas to fully master, is the idea of modes (and it's an ancient idea)
I'm trying to avoid writing an essay though, so here are two diagrams which hopefully pack a lot of information into a tiny space.



Now what you need to do is see how the above diagram is a blueprint for the diagram below




I will also say that mastering this modal approach to analysis is an absolutely essential first step if you want to figure out what's going on in the Radiohead example. (which, very roughly, is toggling between C Ionian mode and C Phrygian mode and using beautifully sparse - and hence vague - chords)

I'd just like to add that, as an enthusiast for analysing stuff, I will always echo the sentiment that (for any song) just knowing the chords, and being able to play it, is vastly more important than being able to explain how it works.

 

Last edited: Aug 4, 2019

I think you got it, it perfectly fits the Eb dorian scale. This is something should be discussed properly, but I wanted to keep it simple in this thread: find the root key, bass, melody and chords.

With my limited knowledge, I start with the basic ionian (major) and aeolian (minor) and from that I compensate the "glitches" with my ear, it always worked.
I always think how an absolute beginner (I was absolute, now just beginner) would start his musical analysis.
And yes, chords are important, but if you don't find informations OR (in many cases) the key is transposed from original (something I personally don't like AT ALL), you have to deconstruct yourself.

I recently saw this wonderful deconstruction of Police, where instead a proper scale mode is used, but it's advanced analysis:

 

Yes that Police song "Every little thing" is just one more example where, like in thousands of pop songs, a classical Major/minor analysis wouldn't be the best way forward.
My claim is that, if you invest some time in feeling comfortable with modes, then many analyses become significantly simpler.
I also claim that when a modal analysis is suitable but avoided, just to conform to a classical tradition, then the analysis can often become far more complex than it needs to be.

What is always worth doing is 'identifying the diatonic landscape'. and identifying whenever it changes,
not just with modulations, but even chord by chord.

All methods of analysis should come up with the same answers to the task of identifying the (maybe shifting) diatonic landscape.
Then, all we're arguing about is how to describe the landscape.
If different methods are arguing over what the diatonic landscape actually is - then something's gone very wrong somewhere.


So, in Police's song "every little thing"... (this is just quick and rough - sorry if there are errors)

The verse: Diatonic Landscape
The notes/chords used just are the notes/chords that we find in a D Major Scale
But the tonal center is not focussed on D; it is focussed on G, and it sounds major.

So, now we know what the diatonic landscape is, now we can argue about how best to describe it?

Modal approach would be simple. Modal approach would describe it as 'Key of G - in Lydian mode"
In effect, play the D Major scale from G to G. Lydian mode is a major mode, so everything works fine.

The classical approach would do what?
- recognise the tonal center as G and as Major (OK)
- then start thinking in terms of notes in a G Major scale (why!!! we're not in G Major)
- and then go through some horrible contortions to describe how the G major scale (G Ionian) has been altered to accommodate the sharpened 4th (the C#)

Much easier to just start with G Lydian, rather than start with the wrong scale G Ionian and then alter it.

The Chorus: Diatonic Landscape
It's the same landscape as the verse! and now the D Major scale is more obvious
The chords are A, D, A, D, etc, which are V, I, V, I of the D Major scale
So, in this section the modal approach and classical approach would provide the same descriptions
Modal would say D Ionian, Classical would say D Major (and they're the same thing)

The Bridge: Diatonic Landscape
The song has modulated to a new landscape. The notes/chords used are those found in the F Major scale

But the tonal center is on Bb and is Major
So, again we have a Lydian mode
Modal approach would say 'Key of Bb - in Lydian mode"
In effect, play the F Major scale from Bb to Bb

Classical approach has the same problem as before
- recognise the tonal center as Bb and as Major (OK)
- but then go through some horrible contortions to describe how the Bb major scale (Bb Ionian) has been altered to accommodate the sharpened 4th (the E)

Again, it would be much easier to just start with Bb Lydian, rather than start with Bb Ionian and alter it.

In this example, the alterations that the classical approach has to accommodate are mercifully simple, just deal with a sharpened 4th, but sometimes these alterations just add up to a nightmare, and a nightmare that is completely avoidable just by seeing the correct modes to start with.

 

I just tried to work on scale modes on piano, you don't have a clue how hard they are to learn after years of traditional (Hanon book) scales. Not much a fingering issue (also), but mental resistance to this kind of acoustics.
Of course, performing all scale modes on white keys is a breeze, just C major starting from a different grade.

 

Ok, so basically, the tonal center must always be found as in examples, but in case major or minor don't fit perfectly, try different modes until the alterations are covered. Is it?

 

So why couldn't I say it as simply as that?
That will do nicely

Of course, we haven't yet touched on examples (even simple pop songs) where there is no mode that will accomodate us, and we find we're analysing a moving target (like the Radiohead example where it's toggling back and forth between two modes)
So, then we have arguments over whether we're 'borrowing chords' from other modes or indulging in modal interchange, etc.
The fun is, of course, how even simple music evades our best attempts to specify rules.
I think one of the first chord sequences I ever played on a guitar was just C Major, D Major, E Major.
Sounded good to me, and I had no idea it would be a bugger to analyse.

 

In the same vein as @orbitbooster started, here's another song to analyse.

The exercise is to
[1] identify the Key
[2] identify the chords

but with the important extra task of
[3] explain how the chords fit in the key

Why the extra task?
Because of the issue I already mentioned, where I think the classical approach to analysis isn't always best for pop songs, rock songs, etc.
By 'classical approach' I mean (crudely)
- figure out the tonal center - decide what key you're in.
- figure out whether it's major or minor, and then you know the right major scale or minor scale to use.

I mentioned above that thinking about modes instead of just major/minor is much better for many, many pop songs.

For this "Explain it" exercise, you've gotta love the song title "Can't Explain" - by The Who

The whole song uses only 5 chords and there are only two parts
Part 1. The Verse and the Chorus both use the same 3 chords
Part 2. The Pre-chorus uses 4 chords

The classical approach will work perfectly for one part of the song
The classical approach will be awkward for the other part of the song
(and I'm not saying which is which - yet)
But the goal is definitely to understand and explain why the above is true.

So, for anyone that enjoyed working on @Orbitboosters two songs examples (above) and who may also have enjoyed reading the follow up discussions, this exercise, and follow up discussions, should be a nice consolidating exercise.

The Who - I Can't Explain (Live at Kilburn 1977)

Best to work it all out by ear from the above video, but if you get stuck on figuring out the key and the chords, then that first part of the task is solved in the following video.
Guitar Lesson - Chords www.youtube.com/watch?v=osNLmxfJrTc

BUT that still leaves the important bit to solve, i.e., [3] explain how the chords fit in the key.

Good luck

p.s.
I hope no-one thinks I'm knocking the 'classical approach' unfairly. For one thing, what we're discussing here is only simplistic first steps, like a cartoon version of classical analysis. And I have huge respect for where real classical analysis leads.
I'm just critical of how simple major scale / minor scale analysis 'seems to fail' when applied to some really simple basic pop songs, and this can confuse and deter beginners unnecessarily.
For example, imagine you've just learnt your first very simple 12 bar blues chord progression in key of E Major,
It uses only three simple chords E7, A7, B7.
So, then you get your first music theory book and read about the key of E Major, and the E Major scale, and you hope it will explain your 3-chord 12-bar blues progression in Key of E Major. But it doesn't - in fact, it makes no sense of explaining that 12 bar blues chord progression at all! As a beginner, I remember encountering something like that and it almost made me want to throw my theory book in the bin. But I'm glad I didn't.

 

I went here for a clearer audio:

Ok, root key is:

Spoiler: tonic

E

Scale:

Spoiler: scale mode

E major - probable mixolydian because of natural D

Chords are:

Spoiler: chords

Emaj,Dmaj,Amaj
also Bmaj is used to close the chorus - it could be used also Bmaj7 (dominant 7) to create more tension falling back to E (V-I)

 

Last edited: Aug 5, 2019

Why analysing this simple song "Can't Explain - by the Who" is interesting.
and apologies for me turning this into a tute

Analysing this song illustrates a couple of useful ideas…
[1] What do we mean by 'being in a key'
[2] The classical approach of 'shoehorn everything into Major or minor' is not always the most useful approach.

---
Referring back to the original post where part of the question was… "how to recognize scales, chords, find key of the song"
Some confusion can come from this…
There are (at least) two different ways of interpreting what 'being in a key' means.
It is definitely worth knowing the difference.

1st interpretation of 'being in a key'
If you discuss which notes and chords are in a specific key, e.g., Key of C Major, then you are discussing the notes and chords that 'strictly' belong in the C Major diatonic landscape, i.e., the notes from the C Major scale (only) and all the chords that you can build using only those notes. They are C,D,E,F,G,A,B and nothing else, no sharps no flats, etc. That can be thought of as the strict interpretation of 'being in the key of C Major'. (there's a similar-ish story for being in a Minor key)

but that is not the same idea as saying that 'a song is in the key of C Major'.

2nd interpretation of 'being in a key'
To say that a song 'is in the key of C Major' is much less formal. It typically just means that the tonal center is C, i.e., the song feels like it is treating C as its home base, and the song has a major feel to it. Maybe most of the notes and chords used in the song will still be from the C Major scale, but there will probably also be notes and chords from outside the C Major scale that get used.

It is fairly straightforward to analyse a song if it stays strictly within a specific diatonic landscape.
It can be much harder to analyse a song if it uses notes and chords that are from outside a specific diatonic landscape.
For example, a song might be 'in the key of C Major' but it is also using notes and chords from outside the C Major scale.

It is much harder to explain how, why, and when various notes and chords 'work well' if they not part of a strict diatonic landscape. In fact, figuring that out is a life long study of musical forms, styles, genres, etc.

So, you just have to accept that only a very small portion of music is strictly diatonic. Almost everything interesting breaks out of the diatonic box immediately. So, even a really simple pop song that you would say 'in the Key of C Major' might use many notes and chords that are outside of the C Major scale.
This does not mean that it's a waste of time exploring and understanding what strict diatonic means.
Diatonic is still a foundation on which most (but definitely not all) music gets built.

One way (just one simple way) that music 'seems to' break out of the strict diatonic box is illustrated in the song being analysed here. "Can't Explain' by the Who.

Actually the song is strictly diatonic, but it does two things that might confuse a simplistic classical analysis.

Firstly, it does not conform to the classical 'shoehorn everything into strict Major or minor' approach.
It uses a Mixolydian mode instead. And that is typical of countless pop, rock, blues, jazz songs.

Secondly, it switches to a different mode for one part of the song. If we analyse that switch, we should say that 'strictly speaking' the song just changed key, but it does not feel like a key change at all, it just feels like we are in the same Major key but using a different flavour.

That's the summary. Below is the detail.
Your task is to see how the tutorial-ish woffle above matches the simple song details below.
And if there are any mistakes, sorry - do tell me.





Song Summary:
The tonal center is definitely E. So, we should say the song is in the key E Major, but it's not using the E Major scale.
The songs spends most of the time in E Mixolydian mode. The E Mixolydian mode is like playing the A Major scale from E to E.

For the pre-chorus section the song briefly changes its diatonic landscape. It plays a B Major chord - acting as B dominant (which is not in the A Major - E Mixolydian landscape) and that announces a change to the E Major - E Ionian landscape.
(The B Major chord to E Major chord is a typical V -> I chord change)
It then plays a short chord sequence E Major, C# minor, A Major, B Major (which is strictly in the E Major - E Ionian landscape)
After the B Major chord we're back to an E Major chord (V -> I again) but now the E Major has flipped back to E Mixolydian mode.

At no time does it feel like we changed out of the Key of E Major,
but we did go from E Major (Mixolydian flavour) to E Major (Ionian flavour) and back to E Major (Mixolydian flavour) again.


Comments
When an analysis fails to recognise the use of modes, like how the Mixolydian mode is used in this song, it is amazing how much rubbish you can find being discussed about how to analyse it. I have seen examples of when people refuse to see outside the classical 'shoehorn it into Major' approach and then they get into all kinds of weird explanations.
For example, they see the song in E Major, and they know that the E Major scale gives them a D# diminished chord.
But the song uses a D Major chord, so now they start explaining how the D# diminished chord was transformed into the D Major chord.
All just complete nonsense. It would be analogous to someone who is obsessed with cars, and when you show them a boat, they start explaining how the wheels must have been removed from the car - instead of just seeing it as a boat!

A sobering thought! Did "The Who" think about any of the stuff described above? Absolutely not!
They knew almost nothing about music theory. They were doing something far more interesting.
Just look at them live on stage. Listen to how beautifully the drums, bass, and rhythm guitar are knitted together based on years of being on stage. Then remember how studying theory and sitting in front of a DAW all day, has no chance in hell of creating anything as exciting as a decent band playing live.

 

Last edited: Aug 6, 2019