Sorry again, it turns out, I was not looking for functional harmony but tendency tones, I had mixed the two up.

 

@user1293435134

Now that you've figured out the answers, can you write a melody (about 4 measures) and tell us how you used the answers and theories in making that melody?

 

I often talk to myself too.
I can't remember ever asking myself questions on a forum though; even after a can of Fosters.
This might even become interesting.

 

My ideas are too valuable.

 

I’m not @Riviera, what would I benefit from commenting from an another account? I made this post to learn some theory. Now I’ve done that. Stop trolling. This post was over a long time ago.

Look back to check how many comments ago the “Best Answer” was awarded.

 

For chords progression, these chord diagrams are most useful:


≃


And:



≃

 

Something else you might want to consider: melodic shape and phrasing. If you are writing, or wish to write, in a basic straightforward style, it is useful to be aware of how these kinds of melodies are constructed - antecedents, consequents, elaboration of a melodic fragment that brings you from one phrase to another. Often the melody will in itself imply its own harmonies, and from there you can make interesting alterations or substitute chords to create interest, tension and variety.
One has to be aware of how musical intervals are elaborated....a skip or a series of skips might require (musically) you to fill them with a scalar passage, or vice versa and when (or not) and how to effect closure...do you want to end a phrase here or should it leave a loose end so that you can or want to continue. All this rather informal terminology might not be immediately clear, but I think when you start looking closely at well formed melodies you will begin to get an idea.

There are, or have evolved, procedures or melodic forms that have proven over the centuries to lead to the most satisfactory melodies. As far as I know, these procedures haven't been reduced to rules, or codified. (well, actually, I am sure a number of Ph.D. dissertations by aspiring music theorists have dealt with this subject....you might google a bit). The best thing to do, it seems to me, is to listen closely, to\play\study the great melodists of the past who construct well defined melodic forms, the melodies that we all know even two centuries after their composition. Not that you are trying to imitate them, but rather come to a full understanding of what makes a good melody. I would recommend doing this while or before you just start improvising on your keyboard.

Who are the great melodists? there are legions. J.S. Bach in his major vocal works such as the b-minor mass, the St. John and esp St. Matthew Passion. His son C.P.E. Bach is a great one (the collection of 6 symphonies for string orchestra). Then much of Mozart, again, especially operas with the rich vocal writing, but also his chamber works (the string quintets) and symphonies where he has a complete melody rather than just motivic development (the last 6 symphonies are superb). Some of the 19th century symphonists such as Beethoven - the famous tune from the 9th symphony is a classic perfectly constructed melody with elaboration - but other movements in other of his symphonies as well. Schubert is a goldmine of superb melodic construction (his sets of vocal pieces and a particularly melodic piece, his 2-cello string quintet, first movement), as are the song cycles of Schumann as well. The slow movement of Dvorak's 9th, the New World Symphony, is also a classic example of melody writing and elaboration...and is derived from African-American tunes of the time. Mahler symphonies and works for voice and orchestra merit close study especially his Song of the Earth which is full of exceptional melodies. And closer to home, you should look at the way the great American songwriters constructed their work: Richard Rodgers (especially those with Lorenz Hart as his lyricist), George Gershwin (especially Porgy and Bess), Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, Vincent Youmans...and for an especially intriguing composer, Neal Hefti who did a lot of superb work for Count Basie (the Atomic Basie LP now in CD form). Oh, yes, Paul Desmond's "Take Five" is a master melodic work, Dave Brubeck's "In Your Own Sweet Way", Clifford Brown's "Joy Spring", Bill Evans' "Waltz for Debby"....there are many many fine tunes to look at, and compare to see what is happening "under the hood".

These just scratch the surface, but if you listen carefully and see how a melody starts out, is developed, is given contrast such that when it returns it is most welcome....you will begin to get an instinctive feel for melodic creation, which forms or melodic shapes are more satisfying and generate musical communication. It ain't easy, but it is a goal worth pursuing, especially since it seems you really want to get there.

 

Appreciated, BUT ONCE AGAIN I'M LOOKING INTO MELODY COMPOSITION!!!

I will just change the title and delete the harmonic functions picture. So people stop mentioning harmony.

 

There's no such thing.

 

But you got the idea of what I was referring to... the act of making/ writing melodies.

 

Anyway everyone please stop sending unrelated comments this is an Education post, not a social chat lounge.

 

It's a personal thing and you have to decide and do it by yourself. There are no systematized ways telling you to to start somewhere and take a certain path and get to a certain point. The recommendations are general solutions that give you a basic idea and open your vision further along the way to making a melody and nothing more than.

 

Would you say that by using these diagrams one is able to achieve an understanding/conquerenment over practical usage of Major/minor scale harmonically (chord progressions) or would there be more? In such case, what would that be?

 

stating that over those few charts would be nonsense, those charts are just exemplifying a few cadencial paths.

 

Last edited: Oct 19, 2021

in Tonal music there's no melody without harmony, again what exactly is your question regarding melody?

 

For centuries now we've been progressively looking for a way to not sound like copists of J.S. Bach's fugues and counterpoints ("tendency tones" considered), given its melodically driven degree of perfection - it cannot get better than that in 12 TET, I'm afraid.

However we have at our disposal a "modern invention" called harmony, so one could be able to derive, for instance, arpeggios (linearized chords) from any scale, thus to resort to a plethora of different intervalic paths soundwise...

 

One big question that keeps a lot of people's minds occupied throughout their lives is:

What is the best choice?

It's short, but the most complicated question of all human beings. Almost most people are looking for the best, and they sacrifice a lot of things, including their lives to achieve the best. They spend a lot of years thinking and striving to get to that the best thing or choice and in the end they realize:

Spoiler: Don't open this!

That best thing was nothing more than a mirage.

 

Opinion and reality are two separate things. Physical reality is independent of our opinions. Our opinions may or may not be consistent with reality. We don't make realities, we're just capable of building opinions.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, the world of music is full of different opinions. Every artist has his own opinion, but how much these opinions are consistent with reality, I leave it to the demons.

 

It is always maddening for me to hear talk, see clever diagrams connecting rows of Roman numerals all garnered to the purpose of supposedly composing melodies which are not made up of notes all lined up pretty in a row. That makes no logical sense to me, those cold hard souless hatches on a page or even tiny dots all cozy laying down on a flat two dimensional staff have infinately less to do with the business and pleasure of creating a melody than our hearts pounding bang bang bang there in the center of our chests. Without the passion added by the rests in between the notes, the interplay between anticipation and release, how it grabs us in almost a sexual way (but most definately in a sensual way) which is the true driver and master over melody. Without the element of timing there is no melody, just a boring one dimensional scale bereft of life. Musical theory is but a minor though integral partner to time, the texture and the glue of how all that fancy math can move a person, to grab them in the nads, to even claim ownership in an indirect way ("My favorite song", "My music") with music in people's lives.

As a guitar player I'll put it this way...music theory is your fretting hand and what you know. The picking hand is who you are and to the greater extent how you express your being and let pour out your soul. Intervals without soul are not worth all that much, but with just a drum one can make a whole worrld dance. To play Beethoven's 5th symphony entirely in quarter notes is to know that it takes much much more that music theory to even create a simple two bar melody.

In my opinion you can't actually teach someone how to write a melody but you can certainly intellectually break down and explain how someone did it in retrospect. How does one teach another the fundamentals of creation, to bring into existence from the aethers that which has not yet existed? Learning theory is a good idea but not the end all without the magic of the time in rhyme.

 

Music theory always examines and chooses the best cases, not all possible ones. Theory says all situations are not the best.

People want to be free and have access to all possible and even impossible situations, but theory doesn't allow that. Theory says the right thing is what I'm saying and everything else doesn't matter and consequently artists don't like theory very much for this simple reason.