M
moley
New member
Toker41 said:
Ah, but Elvis didn't actually write the songs now, did he?
The Beatles would have been a better example
Ah, but Elvis didn't actually write the songs now, did he?
The Beatles would have been a better example
T
Toker41
Better Than You
Elvis did infact write some of the songs. Just not many. I thought about the Beatles, but I wasn't sure about Paul.
Q
quattro_xxph
New member
On theory: Thats just it. Those who don't "know" theory are the ones who always follow it. "Theory" in science is nothing more than one's explanation on why things are the way they are... same thing for music. Those who are not versed in theory are precisely the ones who can't break it.
Now, I am not an expert in theory. At best I know the most topical and basic stuff... and all I can say is it really helps to know which rules you are incidentally following because believe it or not, there is a reason why you sound good when you play in tune and its because of something that theory can explain, not theory itself.
Theory will not make one a better songwriter. But it will help one explain how things work. If Rock n' Roll is all about breaking rules... wouldn't it be great if you actually knew which rule you're breaking?
Now, I am not an expert in theory. At best I know the most topical and basic stuff... and all I can say is it really helps to know which rules you are incidentally following because believe it or not, there is a reason why you sound good when you play in tune and its because of something that theory can explain, not theory itself.
Theory will not make one a better songwriter. But it will help one explain how things work. If Rock n' Roll is all about breaking rules... wouldn't it be great if you actually knew which rule you're breaking?
bdbdbuck
New member
Toker41 said:
You're not from this planet ....are you? This just prooves that I wasn't "seeing things" when I reported that U.F.O. a few years back! NURSE...........I need my medication now.
bd
sorry, just couldn't help it!
G
glynb
Balladeer
I think some people are mixing up two things - the existence of rules and consciously following rules.
The people who have argued along the lines of 'I don't need rules I just write instinctively and let it flow' are the ones who are 'subconsciously' following the rules. When they make a decision about which chord sounds right next of course they don't say 'now where's my rule book here', but their experience of listening to music over the years means that they are trained to expect certain chord progressions and to reject others as 'not sounding right'. What they think is 'instictive' comes about through listening and remebering over the course of their lifetime, in the same way that you talk to people, you don't consciously think about the rules of language, but you HAVE learnt the rules by experience.
Melodies are no different. They are a product of your culture, you learn your culture as you grow. So what is defined as a 'good melody' is what most people say is a good melody, thats it.
The rules don't need to be written down or learned in a classroom, just like to learn a language you don't need to go into a classroom but just hang around with people who speak it, but the rules exist and you absorb them - even if you are unaware of the process.
Theory is just writing down the rules which exist in practice.
Phew, not bad to say I had given up on this last week!
The people who have argued along the lines of 'I don't need rules I just write instinctively and let it flow' are the ones who are 'subconsciously' following the rules. When they make a decision about which chord sounds right next of course they don't say 'now where's my rule book here', but their experience of listening to music over the years means that they are trained to expect certain chord progressions and to reject others as 'not sounding right'. What they think is 'instictive' comes about through listening and remebering over the course of their lifetime, in the same way that you talk to people, you don't consciously think about the rules of language, but you HAVE learnt the rules by experience.
Melodies are no different. They are a product of your culture, you learn your culture as you grow. So what is defined as a 'good melody' is what most people say is a good melody, thats it.
The rules don't need to be written down or learned in a classroom, just like to learn a language you don't need to go into a classroom but just hang around with people who speak it, but the rules exist and you absorb them - even if you are unaware of the process.
Theory is just writing down the rules which exist in practice.
Phew, not bad to say I had given up on this last week!
M
moley
New member
glynb - I'm sure people do that. I wouldn't go so far as to say that everyone is subconsciously following rules.
But I do know that truly inspired creativity transcends that.
However, even if what you say is true - it's all in the head of the musician. If the musician is doing what you say, and subconsciously following what they've heard before, then sure, you could say they're following rules. *But*, the rules are all in their head - and they're simply using what's gone before as a set of rules for creating music. You don't *have* to do that.
My point is - there are still no rules. If there are, they are inside your head. There are no rules that govern all of us, and dictate what makes a good melody. There are no rules, but people seem to like to perceive rules, and follow them.
For a long time, people have thought there are rules - and have whinged and whined when people come along and disregard them. Guys like 'Trane, and Bird came along and played chords & melodies that were "wrong" - but they made them right. Thus, disproving any rules that said they were wrong...
But I do know that truly inspired creativity transcends that.
However, even if what you say is true - it's all in the head of the musician. If the musician is doing what you say, and subconsciously following what they've heard before, then sure, you could say they're following rules. *But*, the rules are all in their head - and they're simply using what's gone before as a set of rules for creating music. You don't *have* to do that.
My point is - there are still no rules. If there are, they are inside your head. There are no rules that govern all of us, and dictate what makes a good melody. There are no rules, but people seem to like to perceive rules, and follow them.
For a long time, people have thought there are rules - and have whinged and whined when people come along and disregard them. Guys like 'Trane, and Bird came along and played chords & melodies that were "wrong" - but they made them right. Thus, disproving any rules that said they were wrong...
joro
The Pie Guy
In songwriting....musically or lyrically....there are no set rules....
There are however formulas that have been successful in the past....
just like mathematics....people seem to follow formulas or "recipes" for songs......
you can play whatever you like and call it a song.....sing whatever you want and call it a lyric......
Beauty is in the eyes and ears of the beholder....
If people like it....cool........
if they don't........that's cool too.....
as long as you are not jerking yourself and everyone else off
by calling it art................there just has to be some kind of structure......ya know?
What do I know anyways...
There are however formulas that have been successful in the past....
just like mathematics....people seem to follow formulas or "recipes" for songs......
you can play whatever you like and call it a song.....sing whatever you want and call it a lyric......
Beauty is in the eyes and ears of the beholder....
If people like it....cool........
if they don't........that's cool too.....
as long as you are not jerking yourself and everyone else off
by calling it art................there just has to be some kind of structure......ya know?
What do I know anyways...
L
Layla Nahar
New member
quattro_xxph said:
erm why would that be great?
I use music theory when writing in this way. Say I've made a chord progression with my ears, and I get stuck - I can hear where I want something to go in my minds ear, but try as I might, I can't find it on the keybord. I'll figure out what the previous chord was, then treat it as a IV or V. (I don't stick to keys very closely when I'm making up chords for a melody - in fact, I don;'t stick to keys very closely when I'm making up a melody. they just come out that way) In one case, i tried to change the chord that sounded right into a dominant chord before moving to a I. But it didn't sound good anymore against the melody or in the context of the progression, so I ended up with a "VMaj7" going to a IMaj7.
Some will argue "Well, yoiu knew what rules you were breaking" but what does that signify? I simply used a basic knowledge to help me get unstuck more quickly than I would have if I only had my ears to work with.
All this stuff is about your minds ear. Music "Theory" is at its basic a set of tools to *help* the creative process. At its most extravagent it is the creation of academics who only wish they could write the stuff from within.
As to the "semantic" difference - it is not a subtle difference - that between 'rules' and 'tools'. Look in the dictionary. They are majorly different concepts. "Rules" implies that you *must* do this. Rather than rules, the word "tendencies" would be applicable. The "laws" of music theory are a result of after-the-fact analysis. A "tool" is an aide that lets us complete a task with less work.
Aaron Cheney
Favorite Chord: C 6/9
moley said:
Hmmm.... One's perception is one's reality. A perceived rule is a rule. When you stand in an elevator crowded with strangers, do face the side of it? Do you fart really, really loud?
I really have to agree with glynb, and I think he summed thing up very well.I think his language metaphor was a valid one. We can all speak a language. But actually studying the language, increasing your vocabulary, learning sentence structure, etc.... will make you a better communicator. Beyond that there are poets, who can manipulate words and wring meanings from them that are beyond their definitions. They create metaphors like "the stars were diamonds in a sapphire sky" to evoke images that are more powerful than just saying "the stars were white and twinkled in the dark blue sky".
And, very occaisonally, you have someone like Lewis Carol that manages to completely distort the perceived rules, and writes something like "Mimsy were the Borogoves." And yet, if you read that poem carefully, you will see that even it follows certain rules, like sentence structure and cadence. The Beatles also did that in a few songs. It is called "Nonsense Verse", for good reason.
In songwriting, and specifcally melody writing, we follow rules too. For example: A good melody should have movement. A good melody should resolve. A good melody should follow the chords of the song (or vise-versa). A good melody should allow for the natural pronunciation and emphasis of the lyrics, or else the lyrics should be changed so that the diction more appropriately follows the melody.
And as far as semantics goes, yes those words do have distinct and different definitions. I think they were being mis-applied. When I used the term "rules of theory", and someone else said they weren't rules, but "definitions", I felt we were both dancing with the same partner, so to speak.
Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
Aaron Cheney
Favorite Chord: C 6/9
Aaron Cheney said:
Sorry... I know I shouldn't quote myself, but I just got a chuckle out of this remembering the Mike Meyers scene from that new movie, where that stewardess says "We need to ASSes the situation." and Mike responds by saying "You put the emPHASis on the wrong syLABle." Funny!
Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
N
NEB
New member
Yes..I agree with glynb, he did a good job....probly because he partly agreed with me. Still I believe the best writers have a good understanding of the importance of both, intuition and rules.
I was inspired to hear that Leo Kottke has a good understanding of music theory, he told one of my friends to take a year of music theory if he wanted to improve. But Leo is a genius, i don't think he has to know a thing about theory to write well....but he probly realizes the importance of it and feels that as a musician he owes it to his profession to have a good understanding of it.
But trying to get to the root of it is like asking the question...what came first?.....the chicken or he egg?
A bit of general interest...i recently heard that whales' mating calls are numeric, and repeate and exponentiate year to year. And scientists are calling it music for this reason. Provocative.
I was inspired to hear that Leo Kottke has a good understanding of music theory, he told one of my friends to take a year of music theory if he wanted to improve. But Leo is a genius, i don't think he has to know a thing about theory to write well....but he probly realizes the importance of it and feels that as a musician he owes it to his profession to have a good understanding of it.
But trying to get to the root of it is like asking the question...what came first?.....the chicken or he egg?
A bit of general interest...i recently heard that whales' mating calls are numeric, and repeate and exponentiate year to year. And scientists are calling it music for this reason. Provocative.
Aaron Cheney
Favorite Chord: C 6/9
NEB said:
Don't be ridiculous. It is obvious the chicken came first, or else how could there be an egg!!
Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
crawdad
Dammit, Jim, Shut Up!
I look at it this way. Popular music is made up of repeating patterns. The rules kinda get made up as you go. Even if there were ten rules for creating the perfect melody, it would still be just as tough to find a good one. The song dictates the rules and the direction. Its all about the idea, really. There--I've said it all and I've said absolutely nothing! I expect everybody's songs to rise to new peaks of greatness now....
I expect everybody's songs to rise to new peaks of greatness now....
T
Toker41
Better Than You
When the first person started to write down the rules they were based on what sounds good, were they not?
So, as I stated before...
...If it sounds good it more than likely followed the rules even if you don't know what they are. However, there are exceptions to EVERY rule.
So, as I stated before...
...If it sounds good it more than likely followed the rules even if you don't know what they are. However, there are exceptions to EVERY rule.
joro
The Pie Guy
Toker41 said:
so.............who would that "first person" be anyways??
There are no " set in stone" rules man...just patterns...recipes.............formulas............
semantics aside....
here's one recipe for you
one lb. Harmony...chopped fine
one cup melody - puree....
2 teaspoons of lyrics
Mix all together in a shallow Berhinger...
Beat well with a snare and bass drum...
pour into a 2" tape....
Heat with a driving temp-o-ver-ture
(120 BPM should do nicely...depends on your altitude...)
let sit to cool off on a Publisher's desk for 2 years and you are ready to serve...
Bon Appetit
N
NEB
New member
Bravo.....!!
The first person was probly Mozart or Bach, or the gypsies. Or maybe some African tribe.
The first person was probly Mozart or Bach, or the gypsies. Or maybe some African tribe.
T
Toker41
Better Than You
It's really mathmatics. Anybody that knows anything about theory knows this.
B
Benreturns
New member
The first person to write down the famous 12 notes was a monk about 1500 years ago. Read it in a book i did. Forget his name now though he was made a "St" something.
Q
quattro_xxph
New member
It would be great because you will have some sort of guideline on what you're going to do next. Knowing some theory, you have "names" for things. Having names for things means you can identify them consistently and thus having the discretion to go away from such when you want to. It gives you a perspective that random experimentation lacks. Learning theory doesn't ensure good songwriting... but it helps.Layla Nahar said:
See, thats what I mean. You have a name for that and you can apply it as you see fit.
And yet again, you're proving me right. Theory is a TOOL. It makes things easier if you have it at your disposal because it helps one identify something with some degree of consistency.
Again Theory in itself is just a set of probable explanations on why things are the way they are. It would be a whole different ball game if they were called "Musical Laws".... which they are not.
T
Toker41
Better Than You
quattro_xxph said:
Like I said....Mathmatics.
There is a reason that a child that starts to learn a musical instrument by the age of 5 will grow up with developed higher thinking, and a better understanding of mathmatics.