|
Jason Sextro posted:This is all according to Berklee's very excellent jazz harmony book: in standard functional harmony, best practices around diminished chords depend on what kind of diminished seventh it is. #Io7 and Io7 are very different, for example. i never went to school for this, so your perspective is valued i wanna point out some stuff that i think is salient. im going to use your labels for the chords, but i wanna know: why do you prefer to talk about diminished chords with sharpened scale degrees? for me, the flats are easier to talk about because diminished chords are already built from flattened scale degrees between the chords #Io7, #IIo7 and #Vo7 each of the 12 notes shows up exactly once. none of them contain notes from the others what's special about #Vo7 is that 3 of its tones are diatonic to the major scale. #Io7 and #IIo7 together have the other 4 tones (2 diatonic tones and 2 non-diatonic tones in each chord) #Io7 has the 3 and the 5, in addition to the b2 (#1) and the b7 (#6) #IIo7 has the root and the 6, in addition to the b3 (#2) and the b5 (#4) #Vo7 has the 2, the 4, and the 7, in addition to the b6 (#5) so what i find cool about this is that it gives you an "excuse" to play any of the 12 tones when you're playing in a specific key. no matter which note you pick, it's going to be in one of those 3 diminished 7th chords. each of those 3 diminished chords feels different against the key you're playing in. im repeating myself, but i wanna emphasize again that these 3 diminished 7th chords go by lots of different names. because of their symmetry, their inversions contain the exact same intervals, which are just stacked minor 3rds #Io7 = bIIo7 IIIo7 Vo7 bVIIo7 #IIo7 = Io7 bIIIo7 bVo7 VIo7 #Vo7 = IIo7 IVo7 bVIo7 VIIo7
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
It's probably easier to think of sharpened degrees on the ascent, and flattened degrees on the descent. That's my guess; D-7 / D#o7 / E-7 where D moves upwards to E, but with, say, Ebo7 / D-7 it's moving downward. Obviously you wouldn't mix and match in the same song. The key difference is function. Regarding substitutions and things, to the (in this discussion) OP, that's actually a huge subject. One thing you can do is add dominants before normal chords in a progression. If you altered a Cmaj7 / A-7 / D-7 / G7 to: Cmaj7 / A7 / D-7 / G7, this would work because the V7 of D-7 is A7. You can do the same with D-7 because D7 is the V7 of G7, and this becomes Cmaj7 / A7 / D7 / G7. Another thing we can do is tritone substitution; where you can substitute any dominant seventh with its root a tritone away. An example is Cmaj7 / A7 / Ab7 / G7 where D7 is swapped with Ab7 because of the chromatic root movement. Another thing is, since every chord has an associated V7, it also has an associated II-7 to go with; applying it to the same original turnaround, we can get something like: Cmaj7 B-7 E7 / A-7 E-7 A7 / D-7 A-7 D7 / G7 You can apply tritone substitution to the associated II-Vs as well, which is actually how Blues For Alice operates. This is a simplified version: Fmaj7 / E-7b5 Eb7 / D-7 Db7 / C-7 B7 Bb7 / Bb-7 / A-7b5 / Ab7 Gm7 / Gb7 / Fmaj7 Ab7 / Db7 Gb7 / The skeleton of the blues is in place: starting on the tonic (F), moving to the IV in bar 5 (Bb). Preceding Bb7 in bar 5, we have C-7 B7 in bar 4; B7 is the tritone sub of F7, the associated dominant for Bb7. In the bar 4 before that, we have the tritone substitute dominant for C-7, which is Db7. What's interesting here is that, through judicious use of tritone substitutions, we have a 12-bar blues whose roots move through every not of the chromatic scale before returning to the tonic in bar 11, and then using more substitution for the turnaround leading back to the top. Sorry for leaving out some detail, I just remembered I have to make supper and it's getting late.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
Jason Sextro posted:IOne thing you can do is add dominants before normal chords in a progression. for anyone reading this who doesn't know: we call these chords "secondary dominants" http://www.teoria.com/en/tutorials/functions/secondary/index.php
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 16:55
|
|
|
Hey guys thanks for the replies. I play mandolin, I've been working on some Brazilian choro and some gypsy jazz, but I'm just a bit unsure how to build up that vocabulary for myself- I can comp trad and bluegrass myself by instinct, and I can hear what needs playing, but I don't really know how to approach it in jazz. Doesn't help that I've not really got anyone to play with...
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
is this the kind of stuff you want to play? does he sound good to you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uO56502_sI for me, its really difficult to understand a music theory concept until after i've applied it on the instrument practically speaking, that means learning to play this stuff first, and understanding what you're doing second. it also means listening to a bunch of this kind of music if you haven't already a big part of this kind of sound is having that chromatic descending bass line, which means using your inversions and tritone substitutions the youtube guy talks about playing only 3 sets of strings on your mandolin, and that jives with what they teach us on guitar. we call these chords "shell voicings". we typically omit the perfect 5th from our chords, and just play the root, the 3rd, and the 7th. i guess "less is more" when you're working with more complex jazz harmony if i were you, i'd find a gypsy jazz backing track and try to copy this youtube guy's chord grips. even if you can't get it going at-tempo, once you have those grips, you can break down why each chord "works" in the tune and internalize the theory behind it
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
The key to Brazilian jazz, as you've probably guessed, is the rhythm. The other biggest thing in comping is the extensions, because they tend to get used a lot. Listen to the music, especially, guys like Joao Gilberto and Antonio Carlos Jobim. The song Wave is especially worth paying attention to because Jobim radically altered a 12-bar blues in its A section, so it's worth looking at just for that reason alone. But really, if you want to know more about guitar comping (especially for big band), there's no better source material than Count Basie. Freddie Green was the absolute master. A good general rule of thumb is, the bigger the band, the less the guitar necessarily has to do. Big band is a balancing act, because you have a lot of instruments but you don't want to overdo the harmony too much and muddy the sound. Roots and fifths aren't always necessary because the bass usually provides those. In some cases Green comped playing only the third of the chord. You can, actually, imply a full ii-V-I turnaround using only two notes, and changing only one semitone at a time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
Yeah the Choro rhythms do my tits in, so I've been obsessively listening to Jacob do Bandolim, Hamilton de Holanda, and Mike Marshall's choro stuff (all excellent poo poo, btw). I am familiar with Zetterlund, I'll have to give that video a proper watch when I have time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
like this right? (assuming someone else is playing the root notes) Dm7 = F and C G7 (actually Db7) = F and B Cmaj7 = E and B reminds me of this guy talking about arranging the mario song for big band, how koji kondo had to use shell chords because he only had the triangle wave for bass and a couple square waves for everything else https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crLxHC48xwM&t=130s
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:Yeah the Choro rhythms do my tits in, so I've been obsessively listening to Jacob do Bandolim, Hamilton de Holanda, and Mike Marshall's choro stuff (all excellent poo poo, btw). I am familiar with Zetterlund, I'll have to give that video a proper watch when I have time. Those rhythms are hard as hell to get right. I have a lot of trouble with them myself, but from what I've noticed, you can basically play good old ii-V-Is, with extensions, as long as the choro rhythms are there and that's a great deal of what you need. Helianthus Annuus posted:like this right? (assuming someone else is playing the root notes) Yep. I remember reading some kind of harmony thing back in the 90s where the implicit hierarchy of chord tones in jazz is: 3rd, 7th, altered tones, fifth, root You can construct just about every shell voicing following that rule of thumb: Triads: 3, 5 Sevenths: 3, 7 Sixth: 3, 6 and so on Once you have those down, it can help for constructing quartals and clusters, but that's too much for a single post!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Modulation question: So let's pretend I'm in C major and I want to get to A minor through a series of key changes (I know it's the natural minor of C major and this would be silly but it's an easy example so bear with me). Now if I wanted to do this by ascending fifths, I could write a bass line like: C - G - D -A Simple enough. But suppose I'm in C minor and I want to get to A major via key changes, and I want to get there via scale runs in the style of like every sonata I've ever analyzed. Does it really matter, for purposes of technical correctness (whatever the gently caress that means in a subjective medium), whether the intervening scales are minor or major? Like is: Cmin -> Gmin -> Dmin -> Amaj "worse than" Cmin -> Gmaj -> Dmaj -> Amaj? Or are both OK? I mean they both sound OK to me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Just different I think. Second one you’re briefly modulating to D major, then to A major. I’m not at home so I can’t tink it out on a piano, but I’d guess the second one is a little more abrupt of a change from C minor to D major. My guess is the first one sounds a hair smoother there, but more abrupt at D minor to A major.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
the reason going from Cm -> A sounds more alien (to my ears) than C -> Am is because Cm -> A is a chromatic mediant, while C -> Am is a diatonic mediant. in roman numeral analysis of a major key, diatonic mediants are I -> iii (C -> Em) I -> vi (C -> Am) chromatic mediants are I -> III (C -> E) I -> bIII (C -> Eb) I -> VI (C -> A) I -> bIV (C -> Ab) some people call these next two "doubly chromatic mediants", and they are I -> biii (C -> Ebm) I -> bvi (C -> Abm) Try each of those mediants on your instrument to see how they sound. To my ear, they have a dramatic sound, well suited for film soundtracks. By the way, the relationship is "bidirectional", meaning that C -> Am and Am -> C are like two sides of the same coin. If one is a chromatic mediant, the other one is too. So, Cm -> A would be biii -> I, which maps to the first doubly chromatic mediant i mentioned, I -> biii (C -> Ebm). So these keys are thought to have a very distant relationship, which is why its not a straightforward modulation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_mediant i have more to say, but i'll make a new post
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:C - G - D -A just wanted to mention that moving between these keys in this order represents a series of "plagal cadences" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadence#Plagal_cadence Gnumonic posted:Cmin -> Gmin -> Dmin -> Amaj Neither of these chord progressions can be diatonic to a key. Assuming we're in A major, you can apply this roman numeral analysis to each biii - bvii - iv - I biii - bVII - IV - I So the second one has the IV which is diatonic to a major key. It also has bVIII which is not diatonic, but its a commonly borrowed chord. The first one has the iv, which is not diatonic, but its another commonly borrowed chord. bviii is not diatonic, and I don't hear it get borrowed too often. Both of them have that chromatic mediant biii. So I guess the second one has one more diatonic chord than the first one, and that might help explain the difference you're hearing. hm so i have been talking about chord progressions, and i now realize you're asking about modulating between keys. i think the same analysis works, but there are different considerations when applying it to key modulation vs chord changes
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 03:17
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:Modulation question: I have to admit I don't really know what "in the style of a sonata" is, but C minor is really just three whole tones away from F# minor, the relative minor of A. I say I don't know what "sonata form" means in this context because I have other suggestions that may not work for what you want. At the end of the day, if you like them both they're both fine. If you're going to play something "wrong" the best thing to do is commit to it and play it with conviction. The second one is actually fine even by 'orthodox' standards, because G can act as a pivot chord between C (harmonic) minor and G major, and then you're in clear sailing the rest of the way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 03:39
|
|
|
If I was in Cm and I wanted to get to A, I might use some voice leading to get from Cm7 to B7, which i would use as a secondary dominant to get to E, which leads to A Cm7 -> B7 -> E7 -> Amaj7 maybe rub a tritone sub on it Cm7 -> F7 -> E7 -> Amaj7 or rub a tritone sub on the other dominant Cm7 -> B7 -> Bb7 -> Amaj7 a diminished can work, too, and you can get nice voice leading from the diminished chord to the E7. these all work the same because the diminished chords are symmetrical inversions of eachother Cm7 -> Bdim7 -> E7 -> Amaj7 Cm7 -> Ddim7 -> E7 -> Amaj7 Cm7 -> Fdim7 -> E7 -> Amaj7 Cm7 -> Abdim7 -> E7 -> Amaj7 would love to hear other peoples ideas about how to traverse a double chromatic mediant modulation e: another idea is to use a backdoor cadence on the bVII, very similar to your 2nd progression, gnu Cm7 -> G7 -> A or maybe throw some extra stuff in there to pad it out Cm7 -> Cdim7 -> D7/C -> G7 -> A ee: using the diminished chord like a warp gate because Cm7 has 2 out of 4 tones in common with Cdim7, which contains ALL the same tones as Adim7.  Friendship ended with "SECONDARY DOMINANT"Now "PARALLEL FULLY DIMINISHED 7TH" is my best friendCm7 -> Adim7 -> A Helianthus Annuus fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Apr 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 03:40
|
|
|
Jason Sextro posted:C minor is really just three whole tones away from F# minor, the relative minor of A. but three whole tones is the same as a tritone, i don't typically think of keys a tritone apart as being closely related at all e: but i really like this line of thought, because it gives you the option of trying to target the F# minor instead, because you can just make a common diatonic move back to A major from there. i just dont think its any easier to traverse the tritone vs the chromatic mediant e: posting the key signatures C minor  A major 
Helianthus Annuus fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Apr 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 03:57
|
|
|
They're not really. But in terms of modulations, it might go something like this: Ebmaj7 | D#m7 | G#7 | C#maj7 C#m7 | F#7 | Bmaj7 | Bmaj7 Bm7 | E7 | Amaj7 | Amaj7
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
Er I probably should have been clearer that in the second example I wasn't thinking in terms of chords, the major/minor thing was meant to indicate key changes of an unspecified duration. Mozart loves to transition between the first and second theme of a sonata with a series of scale runs, and my question was really "If the easiest way to modulate between keys is to run up and down the circle of fifths does it really matter that much if I pick a minor or major key so long as I'm moving the roots up or down by fifths." So, I know that this:Helianthus Annuus posted:Neither of these chord progressions can be diatonic to a key. Is true, and I wasn't trying to write a pivot chord progression, I was just wondering what to do with the...key flavor? (there's gotta be a word for that). The reason why I was wondering this has to do with the difference between natural and harmonic minor; if I was just playing chords then (I think?) it would be smoother go to Cm -> Gmaj -> Dmaj -> Amaj, because in harmonic minor the V of Cm is a Gmaj (and the V of Gmaj is Dmaj and so on). I was curious as to whether modulating up and down the circle of fifths starting from a minor key "required" you to pass through major keys or if it was "acceptable" to modulate through minor keys. I hope that makes sense? I taught myself all the theory I know so I apologize if I'm missing something basic. Helianthus Annuus posted:If I was in Cm and I wanted to get to A, I might use some voice leading to get from Cm7 to B7, which i would use as a secondary dominant to get to E, which leads to A I need some time to digest this on an instrument but I think it's helpful. "Secondary dominant" just means the V of whatever chord you want to resolve to, right? So it's like a V of x where x is some chord in your current key that you want to get to. Is there a handy trick or massive tome or something that explains how to identify and use diminished chords in this way? I have this vague sense that diminished chords are magical musical glue but I never know what to do with them. This example works in every minor key right? Like if I wanna get from Im to VImaj I can use VIdim7 for the transition? I want more diminished tricks like that. Edit: Do chords that aren't major or minor have secondary dominants? If I'm understanding this right, if you're in C major and you want to get from I to iii, you'd use the V of iii's key to move between them. Since iii is Em and the V of Em (assuming harmonic minor here) is B7, so you could do Cmaj7 -> B7 -> Em7. But what if you're in Cm and you want to get to the augmented iii. But Eaug isn't a key so it wouldn't make sense to think of it having a dominant right? I guess you probably wouldn't ever want to resolve to augmented chords so maybe it just isn't a real problem in practice. Gnumonic fucked around with this message at 06:32 on Apr 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 06:21
|
|
|
I think you had the right instinct; Cm-G-D-A does flow better than might first appear for the reasons you mentioned. As far as whether it's "required", I wouldn't think so? Depends on your frame of reference, I suppose, but to me, the main difference is which chord is played at which time in the harmonic phrase, and I have no idea if that's the "correct" answer. I'm glad you asked the question, though, because I never really thought about mixing majors and minors in the way you're wanting to but I think it would work quite well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 06:58
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:Two questions: I don't think anyone has discussed this yet, but this is something I'm also interested in. At a high level, you have the Sonata form which is like the king of forms, plus Binary (AB or AABB), Ternary (ABA), Rondo (ABACA etc), and variations. I think that covers the main ones. But then you get into sentences and periods, and how modulation is important in defining the sections of a piece. Sentences are made up of your basic starting phrase, a repetition of that phrase, and then a continuation phrase which does things like fragmenting and changing harmony faster. See first part of Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 1. Periods are your basic question/answer/same question/new answer phrases, first answer ends on a weak cadence, second answer on a strong cadence. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL341D841389B2FEC7 - I think videos 3 and 4 in this playlist explain sentences and periods quite well. From your question you seem to be familiar with Sonata form so may understand these already, but others might find these videos helpful. Modulation is a very complicated but massively important part of defining sections I think, and I have tried to read a lot on it and analyse music to understand modulation and still don't fully understand the rules. Obviously starting in your home key for the first section, and then modulate to a related key for any B section. But from there... I dunno, go hog wild, is my understanding of it to be quite honest, as long as you recapitulate and end in your home key. From your question I assume you have a handle on modulation in Sonata form and that's the most complicated one. When I originally started this thread it was because I was considering what to do with a Rondo (ABACA) piece. Can my middle A section be in a key other than the home key, or is it strict? Well, I just called it A1 and said it's a variation, I mean nobody died just because I wasn't strict about the key, and it sounded good. Even then, once you've established a new key for a new section (e.g. modulating to the dominant key for the B section), you can still modulate a hundred times within that section. Konsek fucked around with this message at 14:31 on Apr 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 12:05
|
|
|
Hi, double post time! I've been a bit out of touch with my musical side for a while because work has been busy, but I want to keep the thread relevant. Are there any resources people want added to the OP? I can see there's a goon made website being discussed but I can't find the relevant post to link to it. Repost and I'll add it!
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
Konsek posted:I don't think anyone has discussed this yet, but this is something I'm also interested in. At a high level, you have the Sonata form which is like the king of forms, plus Binary (AB or AABB), Ternary (ABA), Rondo (ABACA etc), and variations. I think that covers the main ones. I'm going to add some jazz structures to this, if that's ok. You have two basic forms for jazz music - the 32-bar AABA and the blues. 1) The 32-bar AABA is generally just how it appears: you have an 8-bar A section, a repeat of the 8-bar A section, a B-section bridge, and then a return to the A-section. This whole thing is called a chorus. Typically, and certainly not always, you have 4-bar call-and-responses in the A section, and a contrasting section, usually with some sort of modulation, in the B section. You will probably also have different endings for the A section depending on when you're playing it, like going on to repeating it vs. transitioning to the B section. But! Even within that framework, you can have a lot of differences. Maybe you only want the B section to be 4 bars; or maybe you want each of the four sections to be 16 bars instead, or sometimes you want a 16-bar A-section and an 8-bar bridge. Or you can use a 12-bar blues as your A-section (like Jobim's Wave), or use the blues as your bridge. Over the years there's been more than a few variations on this. 2) Just about everyone knows the blues: I7 | I7 | I7 | I7 IV7 | IV7 | I7 | I7 V7 | IV7 | I7 | V7 However, it seems like the general rule of thumb is that you really mostly only need the tonic to start, and the IV in bar 5, and that you're free to go just about anywhere else with it in the meantime. This is how you get mutations like the A-section of Wave: Cmaj7 | Abo7 | Gm7 | C7 Fmaj7 | F-6 | E7 | A7 D7| Ab7 G7 | C-7 F7 | C-7 F7 There are also minor blues forms, something called a modal blues forms, bebop forms like Blues For Alice. You also get 24-bar blues, where everything is just doubled from a normal 12-bar; a 16-bar blues, like Herbie Hancock's "Watermelon Man", which repeats the V7 IV7 from the standard form twice. Much like your standard AABA, there's a fair bit of variety involved. I'm running out of time so I want to keep this short. I can't even get into aaa vs. aab vs. abc right now but maybe later. 3) There are also through-composed pieces, which are based on motive development rather than an AABA-type form; these are not set to any measure length, and can usually be anywhere from 40 to 64 bars in their standard form. You can also have ABCA type forms, which are uncommon, like Stella By Starlight; or the more common ABAC, which usually contains the climax of the song in the C-section. You might be wondering how jazz songs get long if the forms are usually short? They repeat. In big band, the AABA chorus is usually played four or five times, enough for the normal chorus, some solo sections, arranger's chorus and the shout chorus at the end. This has been a very brief look at jazz song forms, and I'm sorry I ran out of time to get into greater detail because it's probably the thing I enjoy the most!
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
Konsek posted:Hi, double post time! I've been a bit out of touch with my musical side for a while because work has been busy, but I want to keep the thread relevant. Are there any resources people want added to the OP? I can see there's a goon made website being discussed but I can't find the relevant post to link to it. Repost and I'll add it! wb op, heres the site that Gruffalo Soldier made https://www.chordinatr.com/ can you pls put a picture the circle of 5ths in the op, maybe even this one Helianthus Annuus posted:
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:Er I probably should have been clearer that in the second example I wasn't thinking in terms of chords derp. sorry! Gnumonic posted:I was just wondering what to do with the...key flavor? (there's gotta be a word for that). well, i've heard people say "chord quality" to describe the major / minor distinction, so maybe people say "key quality" Gnumonic posted:The reason why I was wondering this has to do with the difference between natural and harmonic minor; if I was just playing chords then (I think?) it would be smoother go to Cm -> Gmaj -> Dmaj -> Amaj, because in harmonic minor the V of Cm is a Gmaj (and the V of Gmaj is Dmaj and so on). maybe it would help to qualify what you "smoothness" means to you. my sense of it is "number of common tones between the chords / keys". in that sense, it totally matters Cm -> Gm -> Dm -> Amaj     Cm -> Gmaj -> Dmaj -> Amaj   check it out, either way you have a situation where everything is smooth except for one really rough change, either at the beginning or at the end Gnumonic posted:I need some time to digest this on an instrument but I think it's helpful. "Secondary dominant" just means the V of whatever chord you want to resolve to, right? So it's like a V of x where x is some chord in your current key that you want to get to. thats right Gnumonic posted:Do chords that aren't major or minor have secondary dominants? If I'm understanding this right, if you're in C major and you want to get from I to iii, you'd use the V of iii's key to move between them. Since iii is Em and the V of Em (assuming harmonic minor here) is B7, so you could do Cmaj7 -> B7 -> Em7. an augmented chord has the raised 5th, which generally escalates the tension rather than resolving it. but you could still use a secondary dominant to get to one. there's something interesting about augmented triads that i don't quite grasp yet. they're symmetrical like fully diminished 7th chords are, but the augmented triad only has 3 notes, meaning there are exactly 4 of these augmented chords. like the fully diminished 7th chord, it's not diatonic to a major key. i'm still trying to figure them out. Gnumonic posted:Is there a handy trick or massive tome or something that explains how to identify and use diminished chords in this way? I have this vague sense that diminished chords are magical musical glue but I never know what to do with them. This example works in every minor key right? Like if I wanna get from Im to VImaj I can use VIdim7 for the transition? I want more diminished tricks like that. hmm... if anything i think it would be really good to memorize which notes are in which diminished chord. i still need to do this myself the most salient thing about them is that there are exactly 3 of them in the 12 tone system the nice thing about the fully diminished chords is that there are only 3 patterns on guitar. i started with the 2nd shape  once you have these, experiment voice leading to other chords. for starters, pick a tone from the diminished 7th chord and lower it by one semitone, and you get a dominant chord. there are 4 tones in the chord, so that gives you 4 different dominant chords that you can get to extremely smoothly. i effort posted a bunch about diminished chords the other day, but i could go on and on. i should probably stick to answering specific questions instead of going off on one again Helianthus Annuus fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Apr 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
RE Brazilian rhythms, I've got this PDF from a closed source that some might find useful (the last page): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zYvXMGyt4JJLR95HEQGqmtZBynQ2eFM-/view?usp=sharing
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Are triad-inversions "supposed" to sound different from each other? I can tell major/minor triads apart but I can't hear if a triad has the 1, 3, or 5 on top. (But then again, I'm a beginner at this)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 09:55
|
|
|
the root position triad spans a perfect 5th 1st inversion spans an augmented 5th (aka minor 6th) 2nd inversion spans a major 6th maybe see if your ear can key in on those intervals
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
Pondex posted:Are triad-inversions "supposed" to sound different from each other? I can tell major/minor triads apart but I can't hear if a triad has the 1, 3, or 5 on top. (But then again, I'm a beginner at this) They're all composed of different intervals, some of which can get gnarly (the first inversion uses a minor sixth, for example), so I'd assume so, yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:wb op, heres the site that Gruffalo Soldier made https://www.chordinatr.com/ I have updated the OP with your suggestions, plus a few other bits and bobs, such as an explanation of functional harmony and a link to some charts, and some info on why the circle of fifths is cool and good to go with your suggestion. Pondex posted:Are triad-inversions "supposed" to sound different from each other? I can tell major/minor triads apart but I can't hear if a triad has the 1, 3, or 5 on top. (But then again, I'm a beginner at this) I am crap at this. Years ago, I hummed quietly to myself up the scale between each chord tone in my theory exams and I still do it to this day.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
Is determining the instruments in an arrangement/composition part of music theory? I've started composing and I generally use two (violin for melody, piano for harmony), but are there common/popular combinations? I'm leaning towards the classical/film/game side of things.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
Schneider Heim posted:Is determining the instruments in an arrangement/composition part of music theory? I've started composing and I generally use two (violin for melody, piano for harmony), but are there common/popular combinations? I'm leaning towards the classical/film/game side of things. Depends on what you're looking for. An orchestra will contain just about everything and seems to be more frequently used than anything else in film music, but you have different sorts of combos otherwise. Even in the cases of orchestrae, you won't have a standard size. They'll typically include a string section (violins, viola, cello, double bass), brass (trumpet, trombone, french horn, tuba), woodwinds (piccolo, flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon) and the percussion section, which could have just about anything like timpani, snare drum, triangle, xylophone, marimba, etc. A string quartet is usually two violins, a viola and a cello, and a string quintet usually has a doubled viola or cello on top of that, or sometimes a double bass. A woodwind quartet is most typically flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon. You don't usually see brass quartets, but brass quintets are common, and those are usually two trumpets/cornets, one French horn, one trombone, and one bass trombone or tuba. This has been a very quick and dirty rundown, as I'm glossing over a great deal of detail, because I generally know more about jazz big bands than classical orchestration. It seems that most quartets/quintets in the classical mould follow a SATB template for instruments, having at least one that can reasonably handle each voice. The number one thing to know about orchestration isn't necessarily theory, although I guess it is, but as far as I can tell: learn the typical ranges of each instrument, and also what the notes will sound like within each range. Lower notes on a trombone, for example, will sound different than higher notes. It can be difficult moving to arranging and orchestration if you're used to doing things for violin and piano because most other instruments have a much smaller range. Jazz bands are a bit different, but the question wasn't about those so I'll leave it there. EDIT: But there is no hard and fast rule. Just because a string quartet is typically violin + violin + viola + cello does not mean you couldn't swap one of those violins for a double bass. Experiment! Tokyo Sexwale fucked around with this message at 03:59 on May 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 03:57
|
|
|
Jason Sextro posted:Depends on what you're looking for. An orchestra will contain just about everything and seems to be more frequently used than anything else in film music, but you have different sorts of combos otherwise. Even in the cases of orchestrae, you won't have a standard size. They'll typically include a string section (violins, viola, cello, double bass), brass (trumpet, trombone, french horn, tuba), woodwinds (piccolo, flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon) and the percussion section, which could have just about anything like timpani, snare drum, triangle, xylophone, marimba, etc. Thanks. I'm actually in the middle of composing a waltz, and am fiddling around with a violin, a clarinet (I picked a bass one, but I should experiment more), and a piano. It doesn't sound like a textbook orchestration (at least to me), and I've been thinking of adding a brass instrument to round things out. Is that way of thinking weird, or perfectly part of the process? Also, are there good combos to start from? Admittedly I'm just teaching myself through Udemy courses and playing around in MuseScore, so I'm just going with what sounds good. But I have had 4 years worth of classical piano as a kid so studying music theory is straightforward for me.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
It's definitely not, but it sounds fun, so why not. I think composers usually choose instruments based on the tone colors they're looking for and the range they need. Is that what you're thinking of when you think about adding a brass instrument, or is there some other reason?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 06:09
|
|
|
I actually think a bass clarinet would be fine. It gives you an expanded range, and a much more solid bass than a regular clarinet might - but again, depends on what you want. Do you want a reinforced lower range, for example? I think it's fine to experiment, and gain experience that way. Once you have a clearer idea of how these things work, you'll get a firmer idea of what you want in the future.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 07:07
|
|
|
i was at a jam on saturday and a guy busted out a contrabass clarinet
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
Jason Sextro posted:Jazz bands are a bit different, but the question wasn't about those so I'll leave it there. i'll bite. how are jazz bands different?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:43
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:It's definitely not, but it sounds fun, so why not. I think composers usually choose instruments based on the tone colors they're looking for and the range they need. Is that what you're thinking of when you think about adding a brass instrument, or is there some other reason? I guess tone color is one way to put it, but I'm not sure how appropriate a brass instrument is for a classical-inspired waltz. I will keep at it!
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:i'll bite. how are jazz bands different? Jazz bands have Trombone solos. Actual answer, from my recollection, instrumentation is different first of all. A stage band will have a collection of saxophones, 4 trombones, 4 trumpets, a bass, a guitar(primarily used as a rhythm instrument), and a drum kit. Also a piano is very important. In orchestral music, strings carry the melodic weight, high winds are used for texture, low winds and low brass are bass, high brass are embellishment. (Modern film scores are all embellishment) Big band will use Saxes as strings, Trombones for bass, and trumpets act as much for texture as embellishment. The piano also will be both melodic and rhythm. Having 4 of the same voice allows any section to harmonize itself too. For the trumpet section, 1st trumpet plays the melodic leads, 2nd trumpet gets the bulk of the solo work, 3rd and 4th almost always are harmonizing in a lower register. Finally, all this is only kind of correct, especially the bit about Trombone solos (Mahler had one, for instance)
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:i'll bite. how are jazz bands different? Jazz combos come in a lot of different forms. At the very minimum, you have the jazz trio - bass, drums, piano/guitar. It's possible to have a jazz trio without piano or guitar, but usually the instrument has to be polyphonic to tackle harmonic accompaniment. A jazz quartet will very likely, therefore be a jazz trio plus a horn instrument of some kind, although it doesn't have to be. Usually some kind of saxophone, or trumpet, or clarinet. At minimum, jazz combos will consist of the rhythm section, bass and drums, and a chordal instrument. Once you get above a quartet, you get all kinds of combinations. Kind of Blue's lineup consisted of a jazz trio (piano, bass, drums), and three horn players. Birth of the Cool had a nonet: trumpet, trombone, french horn, tuba, alto sax, baritone sax, piano, bass, drums. Herbie Hancock had a simple quintet on Maiden Voyage, piano, bass, drums, trumpet, and tenor sax. One thing that always differentiates jazz bands, though, is the rhythm section. Because jazz does not typically use conductors, the drummer is responsible for keeping the time and the bass for the roots of the harmony. Big bands are a different beast altogether. You have not only drums, bass, piano, and often guitar, but a brass section and a saxophone section. While you always have trumpet, trombone, alto sax, tenor sax, and baritone sax, the numbers of each can vary. The most common, I think, is four trumpets, four trombones, two alto, two tenor and one baritone sax. Occasionally too, the sax players double up on other woodwinds. The alto players will also play flute, tenor sax players the clarinet, and the baritone sax player the bass clarinet but I think that's less common than it used to be.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
Schneider Heim posted:I guess tone color is one way to put it, but I'm not sure how appropriate a brass instrument is for a classical-inspired waltz. Well, a lot of it is up to your sensibilities. I would imagine you are drawing upon the general zeitgeist of what a classical waltz sounds like, so here's the instrumentation for one of the more famous waltzes, for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blue_Danube#Instrumentation
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2019 00:06
|
|