Hi to all!
As you know horrific sounds used in some genres are dissonant to the ears. By analyzing some of them I noticed that they mostly use non chordal (degrees that are not part of any well-known chord) notes specially on their arpeggiators and sequencers. Not even respecting the prevalent scales. More chromatically and selecting any sound that satisfies them! Does that mean reading and feeling a book of 2000 pages about music theory that is mostly on scales, chords description and their selection and progressions are not needed for them and also disturbing? By listening to what kind of tutorials and musics they have learned that or they are doing just by randomly selecting the notes? BTW, what is the music?

Good luck!

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 17, 2015

I know all of (at least most of) the chords, but I still can't read music. It took years to figure it all out, stuff I picked up as I was composing, or emulating different styles, arrangements and techniques. I think anybody who makes music, even if you're not composing or playing it, has to have a rudimentary understanding of music theory.

 

I did not provide below table for memorizing or whatever. Just for clarification. It shows 58 Chords that are used most of the times.

I lowered the extended degrees one octave down that the table to be smaller. The numbers in the cells are just semitones not degrees. It's also been sorted on semitones.

If you consider for example (0 2 3 4 6 8 9) semitones in your keyboard with the root of C and look at the table you could not find any matching chord for those. It's obvious that the selected notes are not making any chord. Absolutely they are not from any scale too. No need to test. I have tested it previously.

What limits us not to use them simultaneously or in any melody structure or in the arpeggiator? My favorite genres that I have mentioned them are using this concept (or whatever you'd call, maybe shit) more and more.

As duskwings said:

They are doing the same thing?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 17, 2015

so what is this in your opinion? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octatonic_scale

 

So Good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromaticism
.
.
.
Chromatic chord
_______________
A chromatic chord is a musical chord that includes at least one note not belonging in the diatonic scale associated with the prevailing key.
.
.
.
Chromatic line
_______________
.
From the late 16th century onward, chromaticism has come to symbolize intense emotional expression in music. Pierre Boulez speaks of a long established “dualism” in Western European harmonic language: “the diatonic on the one hand and the chromatic on the other hand.

The chromatic symbolizing darkness doubt and grief and the diatonic light, affirmation and joy — this imagery has hardly changed for three centuries. When an interviewer asked Igor Stravinsky if he really believed in an innate connection between "pathos" and chromaticism, the composer replied "Of course not; the association is entirely due to convention.

Nevertheless the convention is a powerful one and the emotional associations evoked by chromaticism have endured and indeed strengthened over the years. To quote Cooke "Ever since about 1850 - since doubts have been cast, in intellectual circles, on the possibility, or even the desirability, of basing one's life on the concept of personal happiness - chromaticism has brought more and more painful tensions into our art-music, and finally eroded the major system and with it the whole system of tonality.
.
.
.
.................................................................
Does anyone have positive feelings about Chromaticism?

 

Shouting don't make you better understood.

Beside this last affirmation is not true,
"chromaticism has brought more and more painful tensions into our art-music, and finally eroded the major system and with it the whole system of tonality."
As chromaticism is only part of the actual music, and you can find a lot of compositions based on the old major system in pop music, jazz and even blues and rock. Chromaticism is an enrichment, an opening that goes on the old system but not against it.

It is an plus to music thinking, one more door open, you still chose the door(s) you open for each of your compositions, there is no absolute truth in art.

 

U really refuse to understand what u read and love filling your head with things that u don t know how to use, I think i ll copy kouros and will give up on u

 

Ok, was my last question!
Everyone be happy!

 

In the pure science, there is nothing like tendency and predilection but unfortunately in the field of art and esp music, people arise to demand ................. (please fill in the blank).

After all, before deeply getting into the practicing I just wanted to know the importance of dissonance because:
1- Most effort in playing and moving the fingers on a keyboard's keys or strings, etc is trying to get rid of that.
2- Most music theory and harmony tutorials and books do not cover and simply omit it.

Anyway, Thanks so much for at least reading this!

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 21, 2015

You should start practicing in a mindful manner, that would stop you from saying that kind of crap. You are wrong and probably deaf.. or blind, since you don't read what people tell you and insist on spreading your crap statements.

Just stop writing. You're getting away from "the truth" the more you read, please don't spread your misconceptions to other people like you're already doing in other people's threads.

 

A historical survey of consonance and dissonance mostly in western musics and also the physiological basis of dissonance:
(In my opinion, an open ended topic that should not be considered much)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consonance_and_dissonance
Thanks so much! Sorry for bothering you. I love all of you!

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 22, 2015

Foster911 If you could give us a link with an example of what type of sounds you're trying to emulate maybe people will be of more help. I don't think it's what your looking for,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secundal

But it might help.

 

BUy Gordon Delamont s "modern arranging technique", study it from the beginning, so maybe u ll stop saying that your questions are not answered and not discussed anywhere.U wouldn t be even posting here if u bothered at least trying to read a harmony book, which u evidently didn t.And to answer to u in a comment u posted in another thread,u didn t find a match between the scale degrees a nd the tobnality because with the crappy method of yours of refusing to learn enharmony, u didn t even realize that c minor scale is the minor relative to Eflat major scale,and u din t realize that what u called d#,g# and a# were eflat,a flat and bflat,with these premises,your stubborness and the wrong advices from certain people who think enharmony doesn t make a difference, u won t go anywhere.I wish u to get lucjy enough like kurt kobain or jack white and be abloe to write a hit single that will grant u lifetime income whitout the need to know anything of music

 

This again?

Like I said in that thread, his analysis was wrong and out of context BUT, it's not because of enharmonicity. He could've analysed it right with all sharps or all flats. Analysis is way more than getting a key signature right, in fact, that doesn't even matter.

If you refuse to understand why, don't assume that everybody who thinks differently is wrong and stop mentioning me in that manner.

 

just stop it,because u dont know what i m talking about,and i insist,giving stupid advice to someone who doesn t know anything doesnt help him,end it here, or
go to see his post

 

Last edited: Nov 22, 2015

More?

Let me tell you, if you think that the basis for analysis is getting the key signature right (and note names, etc), you have a narrow minded view about the subject. I've always respected the fact that you're very partial to the way you've learned stuff but please, don't force it on others as an universal absolute truth. Everything is subjective and has it's own place.

What's wrong in that post (regarding analysis) is that since he established C minor as the base scale, the Cm chord isn't a "vi", it's a "i".

That's all. The rest of what he wrote has no analytical value so I won't even bother commenting on.

 

A good way for better understanding the non chord tones existence is using slash chords.
(Maybe a harmony book is needed)

You can use non chord tones in the base notes of slash chords to simplify more complex chord structures or create exotic tonal color stemming form major, minor and modal scales and beyond.

Slash chords further demonstrate the contextual reality of all harmony. Any chord needs to be evaluated not only for what it is at any given moment but where it's coming from and where it's going to. Using slash chords unlocks some new possibilities of chord voicings and harmonic movements.

 

Shit man.. this is getting beyond ridiculous.

If you don't understand what either the slash chords or the roman numerals stand for and how they work/sound, none of that is going to do anything for you.


I am starting to second guess your intentions here.. You come to the "education" sub trying to teach other people -> realize you don't know much about the subject -> spread even more crap as "lessons".


What you should do is write all of your findings FOR YOURSELF, write them down but don't post them online as "education". Right now you're just dabbling with any piece of information you can find but you clearly have no idea or understandind on what you're doing so... why are you trying to "teach" other people?

 

sure, that s why all the immigrants speak the language of the countries that welcome them as if it was their native language, because they practice snobbing every rule.

 

Last edited: Nov 22, 2015