Thats cool. I guess my OP was asking how these melodies come to us. Like do we conciously hum them in our head "da da da da da" and work on it from there, then try and translate it with our daws etc. Or do we open up our daw, load up a synth, or some keys, or plug in a guitar or whatever, and just start moving our hands, fingers and capture what manifests and then do what you say, build on it by plaing with tones etc.

I guess humming in our heads is an instrument in its own right isnt it. Then we translate it over through our abilities in playing instruments. I was just saying in OP that personally i produce better results when i just start exploring the keys, or strings, or drums. then i capture the phrases and riffs i come up with and continue to build on them. Furthr to my discussions yesterday, for me this doesnt mean i then look at circles of 5ths etc and scale apps to work out what should go next, i just continue the feeling it out process - i think both end up at the same destination, a peice which expresses something. Just interested in the two different ways...

 

Thats cool Do you write your ideas down on the paper first or do you just start jamming then write down the phrases etc that you come up with? Do you go into the experience thinking" ok, im starting with a Gmajor" and in doing so have a preconcieved notion somewhere of where you will go - or do you close your eyes and express yourself then write down what you incidently came up with?

 

I have friends and aquintences who are very knowledgable in music theory. One aquaintence is a secondary school music teacher who studied music theory at uni etc. He is evidently very talented - but, with all due respect to him, the music he plays in his bnd etc is very middle of the road, rock by numbers sounding. Not to say there isnt place for middle of the road rock by numbers. But i guess my observation is that though he has mastered the language of instrumentation and composition etc, his actual musical expressions lack that spark.. that thing that captures you and makes it feel like its something youve never expreienced before even though its really just the same old chords played in a different way slightly.

I have another friend, a closer friend, who isnt a music teacher but who i know has spent pretty much every moment of his free time since his teenage years mastering and finessing his tecnical abilities and knowledge on guitar. He plays guitar and sings in a band part time, he has a good voice and i love him very much. But again, with all due respect, even after a good 30 years of learning everything he could, inside out, backwards and forwards, his application is middle of the road dad rock. It lacks something untangible and raw. I realise this is my subjective view on this, and i know when his band plays the people who go to watch have a nice enough time - but the point im making is that there is something else needed. And that sometimes that something can be strong enough in someone that it surpasses any requirement of rote learning.

A lot of the problem with commericial music is that it is made by people like this. Who know the language and so can churn out contrived bullshit, same old rock song, same old edm song same old chord progression, track structure etc. These people are calculated. They say i want to write a love song, then they talk about all the minor chords etc and go into it with all sorts of preconcieved notions. this produces music and art that is obvious and stale. unimaginative and boring. Its tecnically all very well. And they can pat themselves on the bak because they can talk you through the whole composition by listing the tecnical terms, but the end product is guff.

A lot of the most exciting music came from people who were stronger in the second regard. Friends who locked themselves in a room and vibes off each other. No plan, just exploration. Of course there is a balance and ove already said that. You can know the language and then lose yourself in the moment. But equally you can be so strongly tuned into the energy that what manifests is coherant, tecnically correct but injected with an innocence and rawness that cant be reproduced by painting by numbers.

But again, dont confuse this with me saying that im into having algorythms and one sie fits all programs do the work. Im not talking about just using samples and loops and not understanding any of it. Im not talking about wanting to be famous and im not talking about pissing about and having no respect for the theory of music.

I believe that amazing compositions can be made from a place of empty mind - meditiation - not stupiditity.

Sometimes knowledge is a burden. and all that practice and by the book servitude leaves people medicore and similar to everyone else.

 

Last edited: Apr 27, 2019

An all this isnt to say i avoid learning anything haha. I know my software and daw very very well. When im working though i dont think. My hand moves and i just do things. What i do is correct tecnically. You know, im not making insane boosts in eqs, or putting random plug ins on things for no reason, im not just slamming my hand on the desk - i just go into a sort of autopilot where i just do what i do. I dont think ok, ive inserted a kick, i must now play my bass, or i will now found this type of sound, i just do stuff. And if it works i keep going, if it doesnt i continue the process. And its this thats led me to think that a lot of the tutorals etc you get caught up in become worthless, as you just have to explore and do you. and if you are musically inclined, if you have it in you, it will fall into place. If all you do is read books and watch videos - you will just sound like the people you are imitating. Know the principals - then foget them. that doesnt mean disregard them. that means internalise them enough then use it all to epress yourself and not what you think yourself should be, but whatever it actually is.

hahaha what a trip this thread has been thanks for all the discussion

 

I dont have the time to find the exact interview, but im sure Joe Strummer - who at the end of his life was obviously probably knowledgeable on music theory etc, said that in the beginning days of his musical life, before the clash, but then also when the clash first started jamming, some of them never really knew how to play the instruments - they just got together and vibed. they then captured a rawness that, paired with the musics sentiments, roused a generation and continues to do so for some. Dont get me wrong, im not saying they just randomly hit their instruments, but they werent lifelong trained musicians. they had something in them they wanted to express and they just did it. Ive read countless interviews with musicians who said a similar thing. They werent classically trained, only knew 3 chords but made music that defined generations (whether you agree in the value of the music is neither here nor their, they had their impact which is more than many of us will). Much of it was down to their energy, not the fact that they knew every chord and variation and could write sheet music. thats just rediculous.

 

But this is all digression. I just wanted to know if people pre worked out their songs in their minds - or if they just opend a blank project and allowed the idea to come to them that way... both regardless of how many music theory books they might or might not have read haha

 

It´s not the same process each time, but often it starts with a little piece of tune that has evolved in my head during the day and before I start playing it on the piano I´ve most of the harmonic structure, key etc in place and here starts all the fun because you have so many options... so what I actually write down as the first is the basic frame of the tune... which never end up being the final result anyway. Second writing will often be my first wild experimental harmonic drafts that are far beyond what the melody can handle anyway. And then I start working backwards towards my original draft.... perhaps this sounds crazy but it´s a lot of fun..... btw: After some time I leave the song for a few days and return with new ideas.

 

Last edited: Apr 27, 2019

Bad artists copy, great artists steal.

 

In music , a KEY is link between 2 cadences a major cadence and a relative minor cadence.
The link between them is a chord which is consonant with both them cadences.
So
In the KEY
Of C major ( easiest to digest)
You have a C major Candence
Dmin7,G7,C6
Then the relative minor cadence
Bmin7b5,E7,Amin6
The link which is consonant underneath those 2 cadences is FMaj7
Now when you look at the total chords all together
You have
CEGA
DFAC
EGBD
FACE
GBDF
ACEG
BDFA

That is a KEY in music.

 

The relevant thing about my above comment and this thread topic is that if you going to have a Melody in the KEY of C
It is going to exactly outline the structure
Of
DFAC,GBDF,CEGA
Or
BDFA,EG#BD,ACEF#
Now of course
You simply treat the other 11 keys the same way .
But cadences are not the only type of chords progressions.
You have a few different ones
Blues
I7,IV7,I7,I7,IV7,IV7,I7I7,V7,IV7,I7(V7)
This progression uses all dominant chords
(C7,F7,G7)

Or IV minor progression
Cmaj, Fmaj7, Fminor,Bb7,Cmajor
(This is using C minor)
Or
Using subdominant diminished 7
Cmaj, D#dim7,Dmin7,G7,Cmaj7
Dominant diminished
Cmaj7,c#dim7,Dmin7,

This means you have 3 main scales for all progressions ( and all their modes)
Major scale
Harmonic minor
Melodic minor

Any Melody you come up with will fall into these different progressions.

 

Once you learn about the progressions then you can learn to create re- harmonizations
Where you swap out chunks of a progression for similar but changed chord types
This combined with the info above gives you every
Option for every combination that a Melody or song your writing can ever be until the end up time.
Anything someone makes will fall into these.
So by learning them and knowing them you can develop your ears and hearing so you know right away what the structure is for your ideas , next you will know 100 options for what your idea is ever possibility is available to you.
It really is identical to your spoken language
Your subconscious over time , learns all the combinations to express an idea and you can choose the options which really represent the emotions or expression inside of you.

 

The biggest difference is that the musically ignorant
Are forced to use extremely simple and boring and lifeless vocabulary , where that same person
Knowledgeable about music can express a fully articulated emotion or expression which lives inside of them.

 

We all have very different prerequisites for writing music @MMJ2017! E.g. a genre like Blues which in many ways are pretty simple chordwise... Do you think the blues are a primitive genre?

Years back I did something very odd.
I wrote a few songs that was about 5 - 6 verses each and desided to write a complete new chord progression for each vers for all the songs. It was an interesting task but Im not really sure if was a good musically solution

 

Yes I love the blues.
Yes it simple in the sense that you can get started on it right away , but also from that simple blues structure comes infinite amount of options in detail.

I believe that everyone wanting to learn about music should have the opportunity to no matter how poor they are or restricted they ate, that they he given the knowledge such that they can develop the ability to express the deepest aspects of themselves through music.

 

My fav blues

 

Every time I hear " west end blues "
It makes me feel like it's the first time ever hearing music before, and that I have discovered the most important thing in my life for the first time.

 

All Im trying to say is that music dont have to be complex to be good

btw: That Charlie Parker tune is outstanding... have it on vinyl.... Also Louise Amstrong.

CP: Complex tune/complex chords and a master of improvisation
LA: Simple tune/simple chords and a master of improvisation

So what is best?

 

Last edited: Apr 27, 2019

It depends what you define the complexity.

IMHO only the people with the intellectual/academic background can analyze, appreciate and make complex music. According to my last research only 1% of music makers are educated (and the rest self-taught) and less than 1% of that 1% can make complex music.

For making complex music, complex disciplines must be identified and applied. Those disciplines are not ubiquitous everywhere and only the secret institutions and organizations have access to them.

Maybe @MMJ2017 works for one of them and has plans on AS. Who knows?

 

My understanding of simple music vs complex music is like this,

Imagine you have a top quality motion picture .
In one of the scenes a man is sitting on a bench and there is barely any movement on the screen
( Slow or simple music)

A few moments later a black van pulls up beside the man on bench and you see machine gun shells in slow motion flying out of machine gun in Van in slow motion.
Next you hear woman scream the man on bench dived out and does a tuck roll behind a tree , the gun in Van tries to reload then man from bench is turning down the alley next door and camera turns to van pealing away after him.
( Fast pace or complex music)

Now this analogy is pointing out that similarity with which which is your are going to need to describe fast or slow, simple or complex things at different times in music maybe even in the same 2 minute window.