|
where is the interesting **** in electronic music
|
View this Thread in Original format
| fritz perls |
I took piano lessons for years when I was younger...and I rember towards the end I learning about different sounding chords. I think some of them were like augmented or something-ian...they were way cooler sounding than just your typical major/minor.
It would be sweet if some of these were used in house. Overall house is pretty fun to listen to and the production can be good and complicated, but how about some cool chord changes or different song structures outside the same old ?
Would it not be cool if say like you had a house song that moved through all 12 keys...like an old coltrane solo.
Wheres the creativity at??? |
|
|
| Enigmatic XTC |
| The problem with doing something like moving through all 12/24 keys is that edm is made to groove and dance too. When you start using lots of chromaticism it begins to draw attention away from the groove. Plus, with the large amount of harmonics in the sounds used in edm small intervals like dimished 7th chords sound even more dissonant than on traditional instruments. |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| quote: | Originally posted by Enigmatic XTC
The problem with doing something like moving through all 12/24 keys is that edm is made to groove and dance too. When you start using lots of chromaticism it begins to draw attention away from the groove. Plus, with the large amount of harmonics in the sounds used in edm small intervals like dimished 7th chords sound even more dissonant than on traditional instruments. |
Also, a big bunch of trance producers don't really know any music theory whatsoever... |
|
|
| Derivative |
It doesn't make any sense to me when people say some chords are more interesting than others.
Chords are chords. Whats the difference between an F chord and a C chord? The fundamental frequency and thats about it.
An F diminutive chord? Big deal. Its an F where the 2nd and 3rd note of the triad are flattened twice. Whoopdy ing do.
The important thing is the relationship between chords. How they transition from one to another because then you start to create rising and falling actions and these can be used to express a feeling.
The one thing I never understood is people who write music and want to put certain chords in there from the start. Its not pick and mix. The point isn't to start a mix and you want a few diminutive chords, 1 or 2 augmented chords, a minor chord, some jelly beans and some fizzy cola bottles.
The point is to evoke an emotion. Anything beyond this end point is pretentious fluff. Complicating music for the sake of complicating it. If trance doesn't evoke any sort of meaningful feeling from you then may I suggest you listen to Pat Metheny. Or something.
Alternatively, if you dislike the direction Trance is going in and its simplicity in terms of harmony, then why don't you try and write it with more attention paid to the harmonies involved? I personally dislike it and thought the harmony driven dance music I scored was total rubbish. |
|
|
| Vizay |
it's always about getting the balance between overdoing it and the oposite.
Sometimes it's way more good sounding if you just keep it simple and let the simpleness talk it's own language.
The thing with dancemusic (this has already been said) is that you have so many elements you want the listener to focus on.
In dancemusic the melodies aren't always the main thing to focus on, most of the times it's the beat that get the track moving.
If you start playing mad piano solos and stuff like that it will probably end up in a big mess where you don't know what to focus on, it will be hard to get a good grove going with thoose circumstances. |
|
|
| Beautiful Beast |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
The point is to evoke an emotion. Anything beyond this end point is pretentious fluff. |
so true.
BB |
|
|
| ASFSE |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
It doesn't make any sense to me when people say some chords are more interesting than others.
Chords are chords. Whats the difference between an F chord and a C chord? The fundamental frequency and thats about it.
|
+1 |
|
|
| Enigmatic XTC |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
It doesn't make any sense to me when people say some chords are more interesting than others.
Chords are chords. Whats the difference between an F chord and a C chord? The fundamental frequency and thats about it.
An F diminutive chord? Big deal. Its an F where the 2nd and 3rd note of the triad are flattened twice. Whoopdy ing do.
The important thing is the relationship between chords. How they transition from one to another because then you start to create rising and falling actions and these can be used to express a feeling.
The one thing I never understood is people who write music and want to put certain chords in there from the start. Its not pick and mix. The point isn't to start a mix and you want a few diminutive chords, 1 or 2 augmented chords, a minor chord, some jelly beans and some fizzy cola bottles.
The point is to evoke an emotion. Anything beyond this end point is pretentious fluff. Complicating music for the sake of complicating it. If trance doesn't evoke any sort of meaningful feeling from you then may I suggest you listen to Pat Metheny. Or something.
Alternatively, if you dislike the direction Trance is going in and its simplicity in terms of harmony, then why don't you try and write it with more attention paid to the harmonies involved? I personally dislike it and thought the harmony driven dance music I scored was total rubbish. |
While its true that the point is to evoke an emotion, the chords used are extremely vital in this. The diffference between a major and a minor chord for instance. Chords and modes/keys are what are used to evoke the emotion. If you want something sad and depressing you probably wont be using all major chords, more likely it will be minor and diminished. To say that no chord is different than another is very ignorant. Thus setting out to create with certain chords in mind is just as legitimate as starting with a melody. Both are means to an emotion. I believe that trance needs more producers to learn music theory. You dont have to use it all, but it helps to know. I know classical theory up to the 20th century very well, but i dont put it all in my productions. Trance was meant to be simple. It is the simplicity that creates the "trance" that comes from listening to it. |
|
|
| Lindo |
^----- +1 Well said.
Music in general IS meant to evoke an emotion and since certain chords and scales can give a certain "aura" so to speak, knowing which chords and progressions to give this feeling is vital in my perspective. Although...sometimes you can just "stumble" on these certain progressions that really make the track flow nicely.
I have found that listening to classical music really opens up a person's ears to different types of sequences to use in their music compared to the same chord changes you hear every other song. |
|
|
| fritz perls |
I read the posts in respone and I agree with a lot of the points.
The problem with current classical composers is that they take technical complex but their music is mostly unlistenable. I couldnt agree more that just throwing complicated together is a dumb idea, house music has to be accessible first and foremost. However my idea is to take these more out there chords and make accesible music, which is totally possible.
A great example of what Im talking about is Sondre Lerche, indie rock guy. Music is way accesible, however he has some cool chord changes, different than youd usually come across.
So maybe youll here from me in the future (just getting started here). |
|
|
| Derivative |
| quote: | Originally posted by Enigmatic XTC
While its true that the point is to evoke an emotion, the chords used are extremely vital in this. The diffference between a major and a minor chord for instance. Chords and modes/keys are what are used to evoke the emotion. If you want something sad and depressing you probably wont be using all major chords, more likely it will be minor and diminished. To say that no chord is different than another is very ignorant. Thus setting out to create with certain chords in mind is just as legitimate as starting with a melody. Both are means to an emotion. I believe that trance needs more producers to learn music theory. You dont have to use it all, but it helps to know. I know classical theory up to the 20th century very well, but i dont put it all in my productions. Trance was meant to be simple. It is the simplicity that creates the "trance" that comes from listening to it. |
You are right but sometimes I just feel that people are trying to get complexity in there when it isn't always necessary.
I'm a real fan of Ockham's Razor - Keep it simple, get it right. The best songs in my opinion are the ones that cut the bull. The only stuff that should be in the mix is the stuff that needs to be there. Everything else is superfluous.
Fleetwood Mac - Dreams is a really good example of that. The bassline is like 2 notes. There are a couple of basic guitar chords. A killer voice. Probably the most simple drum track you can bosh out.
No pointless solos. No complex harmonies. No wandering melodies. No excessive bird wailing. Nothing that doesn't need to be there. And it sounds ing great because of it.
The only difference between chords is the amount of consonance and dissonance there is. Consonant chords resolve harmonically so they tend to seem 'right.' Disonant chords do not resolve harmonically and so they tend to seem 'wrong' in some way. Strongly dissonant chords sound even more 'wrong.' What emotions you connect to this are subjective.
And then there is nothing that differentiates a C and an F chord except the root. The other notes are simply in relation to the root.
A Cdim is exactly the same as an Adim except that it has been transposed down 2 whole notes. This doesn't take into account the frequency of the note or its harmonics and its fundamentals but then theres more to think about than just the musical theory.
You know you are up creek when you reduce the entire spectrum of human emotion down to a bunch of variations in sharps and flats.
You have to ask yourself - if you do not think about the interaction between chords - just in terms of chords themselves then you really just have a variation of 2 colours to work with. Those chords which sound kind of right. And those which sound kind of wrong. And thats a really ty palette to work with. You create new colours by mixing things up.
The real art of music (at least in theory terms) in my opinion comes about when you create movements with these chords. When you start transitioning between chords. And then theres tempo. You can create urgency or slowness by changing tempo. Crescendo and diminuendo where you gradually increase/decrease the volume/velocity of notes to create a sense of increasing intensity or a sense of diminishing power.
Theres alot of things to think about but the weird thing is - you can actually do this all on feeling and the end point of the theory is how you eventually end up doing just that. You memorise scales because you don't think about them when you play - its all on reflex. Most of the study of music theory shows how musicians througout the ages consistantly break the rules and still end up writing ing good music.
Some people like Aphex Twin and Explosions in the Sky don't even learn the theory and cannot read a note of sheet music but write amazing music because it cuts the and gets right to the root of what sounds good to their own ears.
These days I don't even think about the scales I am playing. Or the chords. I just play on autopilot and muscle memory. It feels natural to do it this way and it sounds it too. Don't know about you but I am not interested in listening to music because it is harmonically complex or because its got more augmented and diminutive chords in there. I listen to music because of how it makes me feel. When it comes back round to theory it makes you wonder what the point is of investing thought into the theoretical side of writing music if it is only going to detract from the soul of it?
By all means I recommend to read up about it. Theres no harm in reading. But when it gets to the stage where as a criticism you are asking why certain chords aren't commonly used in a certain style of music, I just feel like you are missing the point. |
|
|
| Enigmatic XTC |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
You are right but sometimes I just feel that people are trying to get complexity in there when it isn't always necessary.
I'm a real fan of Ockham's Razor - Keep it simple, get it right. The best songs in my opinion are the ones that cut the bull. The only stuff that should be in the mix is the stuff that needs to be there. Everything else is superfluous.
Fleetwood Mac - Dreams is a really good example of that. The bassline is like 2 notes. There are a couple of basic guitar chords. A killer voice. Probably the most simple drum track you can bosh out.
No pointless solos. No complex harmonies. No wandering melodies. No excessive bird wailing. Nothing that doesn't need to be there. And it sounds ing great because of it.
The only difference between chords is the amount of consonance and dissonance there is. Consonant chords resolve harmonically so they tend to seem 'right.' Disonant chords do not resolve harmonically and so they tend to seem 'wrong' in some way. Strongly dissonant chords sound even more 'wrong.' What emotions you connect to this are subjective.
And then there is nothing that differentiates a C and an F chord except the root. The other notes are simply in relation to the root.
A Cdim is exactly the same as an Adim except that it has been transposed down 2 whole notes. This doesn't take into account the frequency of the note or its harmonics and its fundamentals but then theres more to think about than just the musical theory.
You know you are up creek when you reduce the entire spectrum of human emotion down to a bunch of variations in sharps and flats.
You have to ask yourself - if you do not think about the interaction between chords - just in terms of chords themselves then you really just have a variation of 2 colours to work with. Those chords which sound kind of right. And those which sound kind of wrong. And thats a really ty palette to work with. You create new colours by mixing things up.
The real art of music (at least in theory terms) in my opinion comes about when you create movements with these chords. When you start transitioning between chords. And then theres tempo. You can create urgency or slowness by changing tempo. Crescendo and diminuendo where you gradually increase/decrease the volume/velocity of notes to create a sense of increasing intensity or a sense of diminishing power.
Theres alot of things to think about but the weird thing is - you can actually do this all on feeling and the end point of the theory is how you eventually end up doing just that. You memorise scales because you don't think about them when you play - its all on reflex. Most of the study of music theory shows how musicians througout the ages consistantly break the rules and still end up writing ing good music.
These days I don't even think about the scales I am playing. Or the chords. I just play on autopilot and muscle memory. It feels natural to do it this way and it sounds it too. Don't know about you but I am not interested in listening to music because it is harmonically complex or because its got more augmented and diminutive chords in there. I listen to music because of how it makes me feel. When it comes back round to theory it makes you wonder what the point is of investing thought into the theoretical side of writing music if it is only going to detract from the soul of it?
By all means I recommend to read up about it. Theres no harm in reading. But when it gets to the stage where as a criticism you are asking why certain chords aren't commonly used in a certain style of music, I just feel like you are missing the point. |
I think we are both presenting the same point in different ways. I completely agree that you should only use what is necessary and not add superfluous crap. I also agree that the way chords move is the important part. The reason i said that the quality of the chords is important is because of the way they move and resolve. I agree that feeling should be first and formost, you shouldn't set out with a formula of chord progressions to create something. I do think that knowledge of chord progression is important though, if for no other reason than that it makes composition less frustrating. Knowing how chords move allows you to convey the feeling much easier. I don't feel that a single chord in itself really means anything until you add another one after it. But i do believe that it is necessary to know what should follow to convey whatever message or feeling you are aiming for. |
|
|
|
|
