| LearnJazzPiano.com archives: Composition | |
| smg -- 01/26/2004, 09:42:49 -- #1075138967 | |
| re-Jim Lindstroms' thread last week | |
| Hey Jim,Albetan,et al..let's keep on dealing with this over here....I'd be interested in checking out how the songs' developing.As far as what you were asking about,what I'm doing is completing stuff intended to serve as the musical part for songs with lyrics. I'm putting together 6-track versions of these songs, using the built-in recording/mixing mechanism in my keyboard, which are"complete"(except for lyrics)in that they are demo-type arrangements with chords,melody,drum and percussion,bass,strings,guitar,etc.I am working out a few versions of each with a different vocal melody and in some cases a different rhythmic concept.Some are"cast" for R+B singers,some for pop; in addition I have tracks which are instrumentals I'd like to market,and in of themselves any of the "song demos"could work as instrumental versions. My plan is to make a demo tape(or two,I have alot of stuff)and then "shop them" to A+R people,producers,etc,based on the fact that the music in of itself is in a completed form and could easily serve as the basis for tracks for a singer who already has their own lyrics.Although,based on the research I've done online about the industry,I am full aware that many of the people I'll be sending the demos to usually only want to hear sonmgs with lyrics already added,I am very wary about any "collaboration" with a lyricist before getting my stuff heard by people since I don't want its' musical value and marketability to be in any way negatively impacted. Right now I'm dealing with finalizing the forms and structures,grooves and melodies.My focus has been on coming up with melodies that work for lyrics in terms of verse/ chorus/bridge considerations,dealing with technical aspects of melody writing like repeated motives and when to change to a "form" of the original motive in an 8-bar section,differences between melodies used in the verse and in the chorus over a harmonic structure that stays constant while the rhythm changes,form/structure considerations I've gone into above regarding the extent to which non-standard song and section length(in terms of bars)can work in the categories I'm interested in shopping my demos in,the difference between what type of progressions and melodies work for verse,bridge,and chorus sections,etc. A lot of my stuff originally was concieved of as jazz-type improv structures,with a lot of different connected sections(rondo form) and only one or two repeating,this is what's behind the type of thing I've experienced at times inthe process of getting these into marketable form- it seems like what's going on is similar to what happens when cells divide(!!!);I start to work on the tune sectionally,take the ideas for melodies I have and work with them and find things getting more and more involved,such as what I thought was one song actually turning into the makings of two, or coming up with melodies which lead to using sections differently,etc, which is the opposite of what I'm trying to do in terms of completing the song.Based on the process I used to compose all this stuff,which was to make basic tracks,"solo" over them,then transcribe melodies I thought would work vocally/lyrically and work with them,I have come up with different melodies for each section as options to choose from and I put them all on tape,then take sections from one song and put them together with another. Coming from jazz,a lot of the concepts I composed with originally(especially in terms of modulation)have had to be modified to make them more viable in the categories I'm directing my efforts toward.However,many of the songs by contemporary singers in R+B use structures very similar to those in jazz,especially harmonically(modal,quartal concepts,altered 7ths etc.)and vamps are also used a lot which much of my original stuff was based on. Anyways that probaly gave you a pretty good idea of why I leave my crib at some point everyday and come over here to the college across the street's computer lab and get into things on LJP as a way of taking a break from this!! | |
| jbl81 -- 01/26/2004, 19:37:19 -- #1075174638 | |
| RE: Life of SMG | |
| Hey SMG, Thanks for the snapshot of what you're pouring your life efforts into of late. You're clearly a LOT more into composition than I am (or may ever be!), but it's very interesting to read about. Maybe you could offer up some snippets of one of the songs, or talk about the process you undergo in conceiving one, both for the sake of conversation and because I'm interested in the idiosyncracies of how each musician/composer goes about his craft. Do you tend to start with one track and write then fill in vertically? Or come up with a progression and then take another couple passes, filling out the skeleton each time? Or write horizontally (time being horizonal) hearing the whole orchestra as you go? Or another method? While I'm focused in a jazz in my performing/improv practices, I am not really (yet) very interested in jazz composiiton. I am more interested toward classical styles of composition (particularly Romantic styles), but also all things twentieth century (by which I mean, the mostly academic styles of whatever was at one time during that century called "new" or "experimental"). I already posted this last piece I wrote to the old LJP, but that was before we had a forum for discussion of composition. I'll offer it up again if anyone else is interested in Romantic styles: http://divigate.com/jim/track4.mp3 http://divigate.com/jim/prelude.pdf Sections of this piece are typical of how I go about music: I usually start by finding (often by accident) a bar or two that I like, and that seems to "lead me somewhere" for a few bars. I usually can expand that with no effort to a short section (like the A part of this AABA piece) with not much work. That's the Easy Part(tm). Usually though, I reach a point where I am both satisfied/excited with what I've come up with so far, but also disappointed/frustrated by not being able to turn it into a work of a length/significance that makes me happy. This piece was typical in that respect, I finished the A part, and then got stuck. Repeating an A section and adding variations, though, is the oldest trick in the book, but very infrequently my feeble compositional skills allow me to do it passably. This piece was also atypical for me, insofar as the B section was composed almost by improvization, sort of like solving a maze. I had no method, no higher-level plan, but made moment-to-moment decisions. Sometimes I had to back backtrack, but I think that's normal. In the end, I think this makes the B section very contrasting to the A section, for better or for worse. Practicing jazz improv, I think, has changed me, and improved my ear, and it was exciting to be able to apply those skills to a new setting, like classical composition. I'm even more interested in the "new" or "experimental" compositional styles of the 20th century, but I'll leave that discussion for later (and maybe elsewhere, depending on interest here...) | |
| smg -- 01/28/2004, 09:16:46 -- #1075310206 | |
| JB101 | |
| I saw your reply below,I'm wondering if you are the person who asked about composition links a few months back?I haven't had time to get into things yet,I want to listen to those comp you posted.Maybe in the early part of next week we can get more into this. Here's the link I posted before-http://members.fortunecity.com/odradek5/resources/composition.html#harvoi | |
| smg -- 01/29/2004, 11:24:36 -- #1075404276 | |
| just figured out who you are | |
| Hey Jim,I didn't even realize it was you!(jb101 threw me re-last post asking if you were a person from 3-4 months back)I just listened to the first of the two comp and when I saw your name figured I'd post this-thought we'd lost you in the transition to the new forum,all week I've been checking the user log to see if you'd registered!!So what's up with the blues?Did you finish it,if so let's see what it turned out like....I'll most definitely get into the comp-specific stuff in your post in the beginning of next week..... BTW-Liked what I heard,quite impressive both compositionally and pianistically,heading back to check out #2,more later..... | |
| jbl81 -- 01/29/2004, 14:51:15 -- #1075416675 | |
| re: just figured out who you are | |
| SMG.. Hey, no worries. Sorry for the confusion. I'm still interested to hear your replys to my original post though! Thanks for the compliment on my piece. Most of the people who have heard it are friends or family who have no harmony/theory/composition background, and thus their responses are less meaningful to me. As for the blues stuff, I have made zero progress. I started out along the lines you mentioned, but I really couldn't wrap my head around the sound IV7 expanding to IV7 - bVII7. It seemed to lack the forward momentum present in the I7 - IV7 expansion of I7. This week has been a busy one for me, and so I haven't put any more thought into it. [A side note: I intentionally made no effort to copyright or claim ownership of that little diddie. If anyone (such as yourself, SMG) is so inclined as to make something of it, I'm all for it.] My original conception was of it being just a I-IV repeated vamp, ending in a gospel or blues turnaround, then using that as an intro to something. I think I'll leave it in my notebook of musical puzzle pieces and maybe it'll fit with another piece some day. jbl | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| smg -- 02/03/2004, 13:42:36 -- #1075844555 | |
| I'm hoping this section will be used by more people,I didn't mean to turn it into an extension of "360"..please involve yourself in the dicussion going on here between myself and Jim Lindstrom that we started back when the old forum ended if you want,or post anything else re-composing-the thread we're dealing with is on the last page of the old forum if you want to check it out,called something like "THE I-IV CADENCE,PLAGAL HARMONY" Hey Jim-Here's a copy and paste of my suggested completion of that from the old forum- Here's what I would do-the three bars you've got there are pretty much right out of a standard blues groove in terms of the underlying progression-i.e.I7-I7-I7-I7/IV7-IV7-I7-I7/V7-IV7-I7-V7=12.What you're doing is expanding on the harmonies in the first two bars-1.I7-IV7 2.I7-IV7 (3+4) using again standard blues harmonic concepts. What I'd do to complete the tune is this-Use something like a Bb7#9 in bar 4,in bar 5 go to Eb7,in bars 6 + 7 use the same device of moving to a 7th a fourth away as you did in bars 1 + 2 structurally,i.e.Eb7-Ab7/Eb7-Ab7 then go to Bb7 for bar 8,the VIIb7-I7 progression is hip in this context.(end) I just went back over there to see what I had been thinking re-using the bVII...this was one of some "learning-related" ways I gave you for movements from the IV in general;once I saw the sheet you posted I was thinking more along the lines of the above.I just figured I'd mention this in the context of something I'm dealing with right now re-having done what you're talking about(file it away for later) to the point where I have a lot of stuff that now I'm working on completing and setting up a very organized way of doing this. The questions you asked me I kind of answered in my first post in the third from the last paragraph.Actually what I posted is part of a larger message I'd been posting on a bunch of songwriting sites at the end of the summer,trying to get some feedback and help with my stuff(which I did get)....over the last few months I've developed my process somewhat and I'll get into that a little. Originally the stuff I composed in 2001-02 was an outgrowth of spending a lot of time figuring out things I knew about as a saxplayer/improviser in their harmonic context.The more I saw how to connect the types of melodic stuff I'd been working on with the contexts they worked in harmonically,the more I started getting ideas for vamps/progressions and I decided to develop this,using the keyboard like I described above.So the tapes I have of last years' stuff are of these "extended vamps" connected sectionally and "parts of songs",all with a lot of "jazz lines" being played over them. I decided to see about making this approach into something I could market since a lot of the stuff was right on the dividing line between R+B and modal-type stuff,along with another aspect of music I was into composing in,influenced by tunes like "Naima"-extended chords over a pedal,and chords progressing based on the movement of the upper extensions.( A vague description of stuff I can get more into if you and others want to,in the context of this section). So I went back to a lot of the non-jazz listening I'd done and immersed myself in different influences,trying at the same time to keep an awareness of what is contemporary(i.e.while I dig 70's R+B and think it's some of the hippest stuff compositionally,many of the stylistic elements are dated in terms of my producing a marketable demo)by studying progressions/form/melody/rhythms used in the musical categories of the last 10 yrs.I thought my stuff would work in. As a result,I have a mix of stuff I've composed since getting all this type of studying done based on what I'd been into last year along with new stuff I've composed off of either theory/harmony studies or influences from contemporary music(i.e.I needed to really immerse myself in standard diatonic/triadic progressions and all the things you can do with this,while I was into this I was also studying stuff currently being played on the radio/album cuts,etc.so I was able to concieve of things using this framework,and gradually understand the type of stuff I'd been hearing/composing last year in light of these studies,along with things from last year that I've reworked. I'm going to stop here and I'll get into this some more later this week or something.But before I do I just want to mention one thing,it relates to what you were talking about re-developing your comp.It's called "welding"in this interview I read with George Harrison,talking about how the Beatles composed.Basically I'm in the process of organizing all the sections I have into specific categories, identified by whether they sound to me like they'd work as verse 1,verse 2,pre-chorus,chorus,bridge,vamp in standard song form. (more to come) | |
| jbl81 -- 02/06/2004, 10:30:48 -- #1076092248 | |
| TGIF | |
| SMG: Thanks for the response. I have been getting hammered (no, not drunk, just long late hours) at work this week and haven't had time to respond yet. In a semi-related note... I bought a DVD burner this week and am in the process of creating a single disc with all the jazz I own (and some new additions -- thanks, to whoever posted the msg about emusic!). In the process of ripping my CDs, I came across a jem I forgot about. Cameleon! It's got to be the most famous I-IV vamp song of them all! I had entirely forgotten about it, but had some fun playing around with it today. I have so many sounds on this keyboard (Yamaha S90) that I haven't gotten around to using yet, and funk songs bring out some of the best of them! I'll respond to your post more thoughtfully this weekend.. jbl | |
| Scot -- 02/06/2004, 12:31:40 -- #1076099500 | |
| Cool, you have an S90, eh? That's what I've been using for a year and a half. Just bought a 50 key Edirol to go along with it. I love the "early fusion" wah-ep sound! | |
| jbl81 -- 02/06/2004, 15:25:01 -- #1076109900 | |
| S90 | |
| Yeah, I just got it a couple months ago and am very happy. My landlord informed me yesterday that he was receiving complaints about neighbors above me and next door about "an organ." Part of my me wanted to plead ignorance -- no organ here =).. Serriously though, I'm pretty satisfied with it. I think the piano sounds are passable, though not the best. But I am crazy about the action and about the abundance of really fun sounds. A lot of the sounds are so dead-on that I feel like they suggest a song in one note. One makes me think Stevie Wonder Superstition, another makes me think Rev. Horton Heat Rockabilly, and my favorite one of all is Jimmmy Hendrix Star Spangled Banner all the way. My only real complaint is that w/o a set of stereo speakers, I find the default piano patch unpleasant. For some reason, a pair of speakers renders it passably, but take it down to mono and I don't care for it. Ah, well.. It'll do until I can get a yamaha with a little more depth (6 or 7 feet would be wonderful) to it ;) | |
| Scot -- 02/06/2004, 16:19:13 -- #1076113153 | |
| Why not just get a nice headphone setup?The piano sounds on the S90 sound great when properly amplified. I know what you mean by a sound suggesting a composition- I've had that happen a lot of times. Some of the compositions are pretty cool, some of them have been filed forever :) | |
| Billy Miller -- 02/09/2004, 20:27:22 -- #1076387242 | |
| Jazz composition | |
| what do you guys think of it? Its my first composition, that ive finished anyways that is jazz. My chord progression is rather repetative, how would i make it less repetative without clashing with the melodies? | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| jbl81 -- 02/09/2004, 20:42:48 -- #1076388168 | |
| file list | |
| Am I the only one too stupid to get to this file? I only see an Upload link in this room... jbl | |
| Scot -- 02/10/2004, 09:07:41 -- #1076432861 | |
| Sorry! My fault, the file list should show up now. | |
| Billy Miller -- 02/11/2004, 14:57:49 -- #1076540269 | |
| 20 people have downoaded my composition, and none have commented? :( | |
| Ryan -- 02/11/2004, 17:04:17 -- #1076547856 | |
| Just my thoughts on your tune | |
| Hey Billy, I am just checking out your tune now, and I think it's a great first attempt. Here are some things I would do differently... 1.) Since you're playing with a rhythm section, there's no reason to keep the piano so restricted playing the same root position chords the whole time...try and get it in the upper register with some nice occassional stabs. 2.) Your "horn hits" shouldn't be right on the beats each time...this takes away the swing. Try putting them on the "&'s" and you'll hear a big difference. Also included in this category would be anticipation. Jazz is a very "forward motion" oriented music which means that it is common for hits (on the next chord) to occur before they are "written" in the progression. For example in your tune, try playing the Ebm7 chord on the & of beat 4 while technically still on the Bb7alt. This is a common piano comping technique as well. If you transcibe guys alot of times, you'll see that they'll be playing on the next chord change while still technically on the previous one just to create that anticipated movement. Other than that, it sounds pretty good to me! Maybe you could add a bridge or something to vary it up in the middle. Hope that helps | |
| Mike -- 02/11/2004, 17:12:54 -- #1076548374 | |
| well that just means that 20 people listened to it or some of it. They may have just had a second of time to listen for a minute and had to run. I would not read too much into it. If you feel you absolutely have to read into it, then I think that for whatever reason 20 people had "no comment". The night I listened to it I was more curious how the composition room was working mechanically. I was curious whether there would be a lead sheet there or a sound file when I clicked on the file. I never had any intention on critiqueing anyones work, as, if you have ever read my posts in the previous forum... you would know that is something I consider to be in bad taste, unless specifically asked to do so. But this forum is explicitly set up and explains that is its purpose I do understand... still that is not what I am about. Maybe one or two of those other 20 are the same. Nor am I a light cheery sort of guy who walks around easily saying "sounds great!, cool!, dig that shit man!" I have kind of been addicted to the truth for quite a while and if I do not have something well thought out and sincere to say I prefer to have "no coment", maybe one or two of the 20 are like that as well. I have so very many compositions that no one has ever even heard. Take some pleasure in that 20 people apparently heard what you had to say. | |
| Mike -- 02/11/2004, 17:31:09 -- #1076549469 | |
| oh so by the way... where is your lead sheet to the tune? | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| Billy Miller -- 02/11/2004, 19:18:50 -- #1076555930 | |
| Hehe, thanks for that indepth explanation of why 20 have downloaded and no reviews... And, thank you much Ryan for your help. well, i havent exactly made a real lead sheet to it yet. I use finale, and have now clue how i would export it to gif or jpg format. | |
| Mike -- 02/11/2004, 21:08:23 -- #1076562503 | |
| for time immortal composers have found lead and paper handy little devices as well. Then if you have a scanner you are in business. | |
| Ryan -- 02/12/2004, 05:05:57 -- #1076591157 | |
| Finale Graphics | |
| Billy, To save your chart as an uploadable file, go to the graphics tool under the advanced tool palette. Then just go to the Graphics menu and choose export pages. There aren't many choices...I think you can only export as a .TIFF. That's one of the many reasons to switch to Sibelius :). | |
| jbl81 -- 02/12/2004, 06:16:36 -- #1076595396 | |
| Finale -> PDF | |
| Or, do what I do (from Finale). You basically just print it to a file, then use ghostscript (free) and gsview (free) to do the conversion fron a .PRN file to a .PDF file: http://www.sibelius.com/helpcenter/resources/creating_pdf.html (As a side note: there's nothing Finale-specific about it. You could do it from Word or Explorer as well, once you set up the printer driver as described) | |
| Billy Miller -- 02/18/2004, 19:57:12 -- #1329 | |
| Wow....sorry man, i dont know what i was thinkin, perhaps i was tired or somethin.... |Ebm7|Ab7 Ab7 Bmaj7 Bb7alt| Eh, first bar is ebm7, 2nd goes Ab for half the bar, and then goes Bmaj7 Bb7alt for the remaining 2 counts. Jeez....2 chords wrong and then the timing was off too...sorry man, i can see how you would get confused. Well...for the most part i know my chords pretty well, i jsut cant read music. But...seems like i jacked that one up pretty bad...sorry | |
| smg -- 02/19/2004, 09:37:18 -- #1364 | |
| B section | |
| Here's something I came up with...You mentioned how the chords"just repeat"...in jazz lots of times we listen to extended sections like this at the end of a song because that's where some hip lines are played by the soloist as the song fades out;structurally this is an A section that is used. The way I deal with the form of a song is like this: using the two bar progression you have,x x/x x= one time through the progession,(x = one of the 4 chords)...4 times these 2 bars = 1 eight bar section or an A section in an AABA form. (2 X 4= 8) X 2= 16 = A Using this formula as a guide,you can see how to develop your song.Like I said at the beginning,I took the liberty of composing a little B section which you can use if you want,or use the root movement involved but other chord types/other chords re-substitution. Ebmin11-Ebmin69/C#min9-F#13/Dmin7b5/Dmaj7b5/F#maj9/Gm7/Bmaj7/Bbsus7-Dbsus7 both over a Bb pedal and functioning as a 4 bar vamp leading back to the top of the A section like this-for 3 bars you do this,using this rhythm for each chord respectively-(1+2/+3+4+)= 1 bar,then for bar 4 use the Bbsus then use the Dmaj7b5 again in place of the Db;if you want instead of a 4 bar vamp,hold the Dmaj7b5 for 4 more,up to you... The style of this B section is a nice contrast to the groove in the A section I think;this is something that's important in composition...like you with this I have a lot of sections I'm working on putting together into complete songs and I try to keep this concept in mind....(not so much of a contrast as to sound like two different songs).. Like I said,it's up to you if you want to use this B section as is or recompose it using the root movement as a framework...the second 4 bars are in one of the styles I'm into-using maj and minor 7ths or 9ths moving by steps or thirds....the chords are for the most part fairly standard in the first four bars- a descending stepwise ii-V(Ebmin69=Ab13) as an "elaboration" of the tonic minor(Ebmin)going to chords based on two forms of the V chord(Bb7)-Dmin7b5=Bb9 starting on the third,Dmaj7b5=Bb7#9b13 again starting on the third,then using this same concept of substituting a chord built on the third of a standard one in a basic progresssion,F# maj9 =Ebmin11,Gmin7=Ebmaj9,I followed the progression you use in the A section rootwise but changed the chord quality for the next(B maj7=Abmin9;the voicings I used for the vamp are built on the 5th of each sus7-FAbBbEb to AbBC#F#...... Here's a link I happened across this AM-if you think you want to get more into it,online there's a lot more-http://www.playpianonow.com/how-to-read-music.html | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| jmjelder -- 03/04/2004, 11:23:42 -- #2092 | |
| Would Rick and Billy please let me know how their scores were prepared and put into the Paint Box format. Thanks. Joe | |
| jmjelder -- 03/04/2004, 11:26:10 -- #2093 | |
| Correction: Looks like I should direct the question to Rick only. Thanks, Joe | |
| Rick -- 03/05/2004, 02:33:53 -- #2121 | |
| I used Sibelius 2- its easy to use. Once you've typed in all the dots and everything, just go to "save as graphic" and follow the instructions on how to save it as a jpeg or gif file. If you dont have Sibelius 2, there are plenty of other music notation packages out there, or you could just use the more traditional method (which ive failed to manage) and write the music down on paper and scan it in :-) | |
| jmjelder -- 03/05/2004, 08:50:09 -- #2133 | |
| Thanks Rick. It appears I'm way behind the curve in current technology. None of my sequencer or notation programs allow conversion to jpeg or gif file and I have no scanner. I guess I'll just have to get into the new century.:) Joe | |
| J -- 03/06/2004, 19:49:07 -- #2176 | |
| Just posted up a ballad. | |
| If anyone had something constructive to say about it - that would be welcome. It sounds awful on a cheap soundcard btw - needs playing through some okish equipment to get balance and tone as intended. It would be good to make things 'hipper'. Any suggestions there anyone? And some ideas for soloing lines would be appreciated. Thx - J. Changes (i'm not a chord man so these are guesses ) are ... |*** vamp - Emi *** | | Emi7 | | Cmaj7 , Bmaj #5 | | Emi7 | | Cmaj7, Dmaj something| | Gmaj7 | | F#7 , F#7b5 | | Bmi | | Bmi | X2 | F#mi7 | | F#mi7b5 | | Emi | | Emi | | Ebmaj | | Dbmaj | | D | | D | ****** | |
| J -- 03/09/2004, 04:47:49 -- #2231 | |
| Hmmmm | |
| Ok so no tips or advice. Punishment for this silence will be a full funk/fusion version complete with an A section, hip lines and a 438 minute solo. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| smg -- 03/09/2004, 08:03:19 -- #2236 | |
| Hang on a minute,J | |
| Being one of the people that gets involved here,I'll check it out this week,see what's what...probably some of the other people that post stuff here will ,too.... | |
| smg -- 03/12/2004, 08:44:39 -- #2416 | |
| re-comp by J | |
| Took me a few days to get around to it,but I just listened to it....liked the concept overall,and some parts of the progression in particular(bars 31-34).As far as the form,here's what I'd suggest: After the 8 bar intro,the next 8 uses what I'd call the "second 8" progression in a standard 32-bar form,which you then repeat in the next 8 again.I'd make this first 8 after the intro the same as the previous in terms of the chords,then go to the progression in the next 8 like you do to lead to the "bridge" progression in the 3rd 8;if this is confusing,here it is explained- 8-intro w/progression 1 8-same progression again 8-as is 8-as is 8-as is | |
| J -- 03/12/2004, 18:13:55 -- #2446 | |
| Thanks Garry | |
| Yeah the form is a bit in a hurry to develop - will try out your suggestion along with a couple of others - is always good to have a second opinion. Thx for the compliment on the 'cool moment' - was one of those happy accidents - had a few more since with this progression. Will post up V2 for everyone to have a chuckle at as soon as it's reasonably 'bullshit free' and beaten down into managable form. | |
| smg -- 03/19/2004, 11:00:12 -- #2661 | |
| update | |
| just wanted to let people interested in composition-related areas that I posted a new file over at 360 that gets into this kind of stuff in detail........... | |
| J -- 03/19/2004, 11:23:04 -- #2662 | |
| Anyone got anything nice to say about this take? | |
| Reworked 'Ballad' - is a little more contemporary but still kept reasonably simple to keep piano errors down, most things I'm trying here are new. Drums are from 'Midi moment' (mostly) whilst the bass riff was taken from a very nice ballad called 'Moorea' by Mallet Cat. The progression is all mine though. Tried out some melodic scales and a couple of others I don't know the names of also. J | |
| jbl81 -- 03/23/2004, 14:44:33 -- #2841 | |
| minor 4 in a major context | |
| Is there any classical theory to "explain" why the progression (this is simple chords using all triads): C - F - Fm - C sounds so appealing? In a jazz context you can say the Fm is just the upper extensions of a G7 chord. But with all triads, I think this explanation is invalid. This progression even works well in a rock setting, which really seems to support the idea that the minor four chord isn't acting like "far out" jazz extensions. Is there some other explanation -- or does it "just work"? I've been writing a non jazz piece lately (kind of a down-tempo rock piece) using these progressions: Verse: | E | A | x 4 Pre chorus: |C# - B - A | x 2 (the three chords span two bars) Chorus: | E | F#7 | A | A | x 3 | E | F#7 | A | am | Its that last two chords that I really love, but can't for the life of me figure out how it fits into non-jazz functional harmony. jbl | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| Scot -- 03/23/2004, 14:55:55 -- #2842 | |
| There's an easy explanation- look at it like G7b9sus chord over an F. Change the bass note to a G once and see what happens. | |
| smg -- 03/23/2004, 15:27:34 -- #2844 | |
| re-does it "just work"? | |
| Even though you're looking at the progression using a "jazz harmony" approach,the same theory applies-if you take a look at the file I posted last week it gets into this.The whole thing boils down to the three areas harmony deals with tonic,subdominant,and dominant(1-4-5 for the rest of this thread in the interest of making things 'user- friendly' even though I know you can think in these terms if necessary) Our ears hear chords used in a specific context the same way,1-4 is used as a "self-contained"progression(resolving or as a vamp)in a lot of pop...in the other posts where we were getting into the 1-4 progression we were talking about how it's supposedly less strong than 1-5..probably back in the old daze this was true because that's how it was used but in 2004 especially in the style you're working in it's one of the most common progression and uses theory that you could call 'blues-based',or you could explain it(4)as being the 'upper extension of/slash chord on' 5 with the root implied(I usually use an add 9 chord in these situations,here it'd be ABC#E,using B = 5 in the key,the 4 chord implies a 5-1 resolution in pop(this applies irregardless of chord quality i.e. maj/minor)whether the 5 is present in actuality or just implied....probably where you're complicating things for yourself in getting a clear view of what's going on here is the beginning where you use the term "classical theory",not to split hairs but "jazz,classical,or even pop" theory/harmony/analysis are stylistically based past the point where they all deal with basic musical principles they share......"in-common-practice" is the basis for all of them.....there are a bunch of sites in the links over at 360 that will get into more detail,tomorrow I'll see which ones to point you in the direction of...BTW are you using the F#7-A movement as a form of 5-5(F#7-B7)with the B7 in "extended form w/an implied root" like that file gets into?Maybe you've really got this progression going on-v.=4-b7,pc.=2-1-b7,c.=4-5-1dom7-1dom7 in another form or the am as an upeer structure chord on F#7(see "chords on dom.tensions file")-I'm not at the crib or else I'd check this on the piano but a lot of times two keys on the cycle of fifths can both contain the same progressions used in a different place in each...let me know if this seems to answer things Jim....good to see you back into comp man!! | |
| Barry -- 03/23/2004, 15:59:28 -- #2847 | |
| I think it could be more to with the tensions and resolutions created by the lines within the chord tones. If we are in the key of C, when the subdominant or F chord goes to Fm, a scale tone (A) has moved down a semitone to a non-scale tone (Ab) and therefore created a tension. This sets up the expectation that the tension will resolve by a similar half-step movement. When you return to the C or tonic chord, that expectation is confirmed. At the same time, the note of F emphasises the strength of this resolution by resolving itself to an E. Add into the equation that the IV-I or Plagal cadence is also a common sound and you have a progression that creates tension and resolves it in a very short space of time. | |
| jbl81 -- 03/23/2004, 17:15:07 -- #2850 | |
| Hey guys, thanks for the timely responses.. Going into this question, I was operating under the assumptions that (A) different genres of music use different (but mostly overlapping and common) forms of functional harmony, and thus that (B) something our ears are used to hearing in jazz wouldn't have the same effect on top-40 listeners' ears who've never heard a G7b9sus chord WITH that root and 3rd, much less one where those tones are implied. I am a big Ben Folds fan, and having looked at a lot of his sheet music, I'm comfortable saying that F triad over G bass (in the key of C) is extremely common in the piano-rock world. So, I guess I'd be satisfied with saying that my Am chord (in E major) is a slash chord. What bothers me is when you say, see: just change the A in the bass to a B and see what you hear. As a brief aside: I've been really interested over the last 5 or 10 years in chaos, computational complexity, and the like. One of the things I've taken away from those texts is that science definitely teaches us to push things into bins -- even if they don't want to fit. Remember the game when you were a kid where you've got blocks of various shapes and you have to put them into holes that they fit into? You can easily make any block fit any bin if you've got a chisel or jack hammer nearby. All these readings have made me hypersensitive to overfitting, to attempting to fit things into a structure where they may legitimately be outliers. For that reason, I'm very uncomforatble saying, "It's a G7b9sus ... except you just change a note to another note". Even though it's theoretically close, it's no cigar. Also, again, even though you and I are comfortable making that aural inference, I doubt my top-40s listening friends are. I guess I'll accept the slash chord as the best explanation functional harmony has to offer, but it's still vaguely unsettling. I don't mean to attack either of you, Scot or SMG. You're both far superior musicians to me, and I'm confident your grasp of theory far exceeds mine. I'm just saying, instead, that I'm not comfortable with theory's response in this situation. (And I'm generally a big theory proponent!) I do really like Barry's response, though. I see functional harmony as being built on top of basic aural conditioned responses (like how we respond to tension and release, and what we even consider tension or release). I'm not happy with functional harmony's explanation in this case, but if you scrape that away and use the underlying ideas about tension and release, I think you get a pretty reasonable explanation like Barry's. That explanation seems less powerful and harder to apply ahead of time (you have to start thinking of individual notes rather than thinking at the macro level with chords), but it seems less wrong =) Maybe this is the start of a good ol' fashioned theory war! I guess one question I'm still curious of your feelings on is what SMG touched on (And what I stated my opposition to): the question of whether different genre's have different versions of theory or not. Thoughts? | |
| Whacky -- 03/24/2004, 08:37:43 -- #2876 | |
| I think Barry answered your question. It's not new either...Brahms did it, the Beatles did it...etc... I don't see the point of over analyzing it...if it sounds good, then let's play! | |
| jbl81 -- 03/24/2004, 14:38:13 -- #2897 | |
| Whacky, You're absolutely right: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Lounge/7109/songs/you_wont_see_me.html "You won't see me" is a good one from the Beatles that uses that progression. I'm not claiming to have been the first person to have thought this one up. I'm just curious where people think it fits into theory. I'm happy with Barry's answer. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| jmjelder -- 03/24/2004, 21:30:10 -- #2900 | |
| jb, If I may stick in my 2 bits worth about the progression E F#7 A Am: We have a Imaj going to a II7, a good old fashioned step which we expect to resolve to a V7 I or perhaps a more modern IIm7 V7 I. But this resolution does not take place which this makes it more interesting. Instead we go to a IV chord which could go back to the V7 or straight to the Imaj. Again it does not happen. We go the IVm for the sound Barry explained and finally to the I or as the original progression seems, hangs there instead of resolving, a very modern sound. Try these: E F#7 B7 E - E F#7 B7 Bm7 F#7 E - E F#7 B7 A B7 E - E F#7 B7 A E - E F#7 B7 A Am E - to hear the comparisons. The ears brought up on euro-american music are completely familiar with these progressions and it is just up the artist to pick a style, chord sequence AND melody to make it happen. We would like to hear your tune if you could midi it an upload it that would great. Joe | |
| jmjelder -- 03/24/2004, 21:38:02 -- #2901 | |
| Oops, Sorry, in my haste I missed one. It shoud be I F#7 F#m7 B7 E of course. Joe | |
| jbl81 -- 03/25/2004, 06:45:41 -- #2903 | |
| jmjelder: It's not a jazz tune and I don't have it in midi, otherwise I'd have uploaded it. I haven't got a recording I'm satisfied with yet, but one that gets the idea across is http://www.divigate.com/jim/remember_memphis.mp3 | |
| 7 -- 03/25/2004, 10:01:01 -- #2908 | |
| ` The answer is much simpler than anyone has postulated do far. In the case of substituting a minor chord for what would normally be a major chord is just "borrowed parallel harmony". You can substitute a parallel chord (of the same root name) any time you feel like it and it will work fine in the sequence. This is universal practice in Rock and Blues. 7 | |
| smg -- 03/25/2004, 11:52:23 -- #2916 | |
| nah.....don't think so Jim... | |
| "far superior musicians to me"...man I'm a very basic pianist technically...just do a lot of studying and spend a lot time involved in music(11+ hrs.yest I'm proud to report)..that file you uploaded back on the old site is much more advanced than anything I can do...I record each hand separately most of the time!! I'm looking forward to hearing the new file and checking out jm jelders progressions..as far as the possible"controversy"brewing we might be percieved as being on "opposite sides of" here,I doubt that's going on either,probably just semantics,I'm in complete agreement w/what you posted in terms of the underlying factors involved...(more to come) | |
| smg -- 03/25/2004, 11:58:02 -- #2917 | |
| BTW re-J's comp | |
| I'm going to check out the reworked version in the next few days too man,looking forward to seeing what it sounds like now......... | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| jbl81 -- 03/25/2004, 21:43:58 -- #2936 | |
| Re-7 | |
| 7.. I see value in theory in terms of both its power to describe things after the fact (analyzing/"explaining" an existing composition) and its power to suggest things before the fact (giving ideas for a new composition). Your answer has tremendous power in the first sense: it can "explain" almost anything. However, it suggests so many chords (if you go two levels out (parallel major to the relative minor, or relative major to the parallel minor) you can include almost all chords) as to be powerless in this case. What are some of the more commonly borrowed chords in Rock and Blues that seem to work well? I hear the two I used (II7 and iv) quite frequently. I also hear bVI-bVII-I quite frequently. Are there others that are quite common too? | |
| jbl81 -- 03/25/2004, 22:25:48 -- #2937 | |
| Re-me | |
| Following 7's line of thought I was trying to think of other borrowed chords that don't get a lot of play. Here's a progresion I used in a terrible song a long time ago (I don't have a recording or midi of it, and wouldn't make let anyone listen to the crap if I did, heh) that uses a different borrowed chord that I don't hear too often: minor-v in a major key: | E % | EM7 % | bm7 % | A AM7 | am % | f#m % | B B7 | E % | Voiced the right way, the top voices of the chords give a nice descending, then ascending line: http://www.divigate.com/jim/progression.PNG | |
| 7 -- 03/29/2004, 12:28:59 -- #3031 | |
| Borrowed Parallel Hrmony cont'd | |
A typical example of inserting a borrowed parallel harmony is Santo & Johnny's surf classic "Sleepwalk". Normally the progression would go | C Am | F G | (Derived from the circular progression | C Am | Dm G | and substitutes the Dm's relative major [ F ] ) In "Sleepwalk" they chose to use | C Am | Fm G | This does not alter the root motion but gives a great deal of "flavor" to the progression. 7 | |
| smg -- 03/31/2004, 10:28:41 -- #3096 | |
| re-reworked comp by J | |
| Hey man,where is it?I went to the file list to see RC's tune and was going to check yours out too,didn't see it.......... | |
| J -- 04/02/2004, 02:34:38 -- #3161 | |
| I mean why bother? | |
| What is this, it's ok to talk about making music and when you actually do no-one has anything good to say. Then there are you jazz snobs. I don't have a purple rinse and don't really give a shit about this theory or that theory when it's just like 1 note different from a known scale and is something you make up as you are playing anyway. There's a good reason jazz isn't popular. It's people like you, apathetic who just ignore anything that isn't to the taste of a dried up old prune so keep on yakking about the same bs. I put like 2 weeks into my effort i pulled down from here and i get like zero comment either to help or discourage. If i wanted to play the music that gets LJP's approval then i'd have learnt the violin or something or maybe even medieval choir singing. You think it's about transcription and something out a book? You think you can fool me with that bs? And the only way to progress is some intellectual path and if not you get BLANKED?! Cheers guys and FUCK YOU - was last time i WASTE MY FUCKING TIME on an ORIGINAL for you fucking HEATHEN. Go JERK off to your latest transcription or COME at learning a new scale with this or that Just remember to go play it too eh?no more contributions from me - waste of time . | |
| Scot -- 04/02/2004, 08:28:55 -- #3179 | |
| It appears you have some personal issues to deal with. I'd recommend doing a little bit of soul searching and finding the root of your anger and offensive feelings. Your belligerance is certainly not a product of Learn Jazz Piano. If people don't comment on your piece, it means that they didn't comment on it. Nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps you would garner more comments if you asked something specific about it. Not everyone has time to sit down and analyze someone's piece for an hour, you know? | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| 7 -- 04/03/2004, 15:36:24 -- #3234 | |
| ` Mr Jason Darling was obviously in a bad mood when he wrote that. I wrote in the the Lobby Lounge that I liked his piece, and asked why he pulled it. I guess this is the answer. The only reason I know that "J" is Jason Darling is because I DID listen to the piece (using the VanBasco player where you can see the author's details - if given). But as I said in the Lobby Lounge thread addressing the same issue, I felt that writing that "I liked it" would sound just plain stupid and not particularly constructive. He's obviously a very clever guy, and some of his humor has had me in stitches. But if he doesn't want to visit this site any more, I guess that's his decision. Too bad. If *I* wanted to pout because only a dozen people out of over 4000 had listened to an upload of mine, I could. But instead I feel flattered that even that many care enough to listen to something I put together. And maybe somehow I might have influenced one or two. Jazz pianists constitute a very small minority of people in the world of music. And out of all of them, only a miniscule minority care about anything I do or say. So for that I should throw a tantrum? Wait till he gets up on stage and plays his great oeuvre d'art and not one single person applauds. It happens ALL the time. It's a dangerous and stupid thing to tell a room full of strangers to put it where the sun don't shine and walk off the stage. You can pull that prima donna stuff "anonymously" on the internet, but don't try it at home kids. 7 | |
| jbl81 -- 04/03/2004, 18:37:24 -- #3242 | |
| I live alone, I can't pull prima donna stuff here either ... Or, well, I guess I could. Technically I *am* the most important person who lives in this humble apartment =) | |
| J -- 04/04/2004, 15:38:52 -- #3259 | |
| umm nope | |
| Well thx 7 for the support last year but it won't happen, i don't have the talent or stage confidence to have a band. As for mad stuff in a room full of people ah well guess we are all good at something. There was some techno jazz (don't know if this is correct word for it) on a big station here the other night. It really was just very cool music using latest technology and whoever made it knew a lot about jazz but it wasn't jazz. That kind of music was great and very complicated and interesting. Made hotel piano look like what it is - something for old ladies. Said enough. | |
| Billy Miller -- 04/04/2004, 22:42:59 -- #3269 | |
| techno jazz? | |
| i think you probly mean acid jazz, or perhaps even some Drum and Bass. I must say, i love that stuff, in fact, i am currently workin on a DNB Acid Jazz Hybrid. An online friend of mine from berklee is going to play the sax parts for me and perhaps do the final mixing of the song. perhaps ill show it to you guys when i finish. I wouldnt call that hotel piano stuff "stuff for old ladies" though. I like that stuff! | |
| 7 -- 04/05/2004, 10:04:06 -- #3277 | |
| ` Getting older is better than the alternative. 7 PS: Good music is timeless. | |
| Rick -- 04/05/2004, 13:21:55 -- #3287 | |
| J, was it Sowento Kinch by any chance? (ps...mind the spelling of Sow..en...no what?) | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Bill Evans | |
| Scot -- 04/06/2004, 07:26:16 -- #3315 | |
| Hotel piano jazz for old ladies?!? You've been going to the wrong hotels! When I played my hotel house gigs, and I did for close to ten years in Asia and the states, we rocked out. Originals, funky stuff, whatever we wanted. Obviously it's about the business so you can't go on a free jazz exploration for two hours. But then again, what pro musician would want to do that? | |
| 7 -- 04/06/2004, 08:59:23 -- #3323 | |
| ` Aaaah, little old ladies. They know what they want and they know how to get it. Gotta love 'em. They pay well and are very appreciative of the service. Paid for every dance, Selling each romance, Every night some heart betraying. There will come a day, Youth will pass away, Then, what will they say about me? When the end comes I know They'll say "Just a gigolo," Life goes on without me. Za Za Za zubedi bop | |
| jbl81 -- 05/30/2004, 17:50:59 -- #4687 | |
| The jazz form | |
| I have for a little while now been interested in combining classical and jazz sounds. The aspect of jazz I enjoy is its rich harmony and the freeness of improvization. I love classical music, though, for it's well thought out, intricately designed sections. I have been thinking recently about how one could combine those two aspects in a single piece of music. The typical jazz format seems to be [head - trade solos - optionally trade fours - repeat head]. What I would like to do is to include prearranged classical or jazz-classical hybrid sections throughout the song. Current jazz form, though, seems to limit prearrangement to the head section. When I say "prearranged sections", what I really mean is spaces of time where the interaction between two or more players is at least partially scripted. This could mean, as in the case of classical music, that each person reads exactly off a page. In this case, there needs to be be some agreed form telling the improvisers when to play the prearranged section: do we do it after each person solos? Or when one player signals everyone else with a lead-in phrase? Etc.. Alternatively, when I say "prearranged sections", it could mean something slightly less restrictive than that. Maybe, for instance, the song could specify a set of call-response pairs, such that when one player blows one line, another player blows the response or blows the accompanying line. I guess what I'm really looking for is ways to embelish or extend the traditional form into something richer that can include written out sections or sections with more interaction than simply 1 person solos and (n - 1) people comp. Does anyone else have ideas or experience here? | |
| Peteboypete -- 05/30/2004, 18:15:47 -- #4688 | |
| I don't have any experience here, but it seems like you should look to the big band arrangers for this kind of thing. Ideas with various solis, backgrounds, and improv are things that modern arrangers seem to use a lot. I think Gerry Mulligan's Concert Jazz Band with Bob Brookmeyer would be helpful listening. Of course, Miles Davis stuff with Gil Evans is very classically inspired. I'm sure some close listening to those things and similar stuff would give you a wealth of ideas. Good luck Peter | |
| jbl81 -- 05/30/2004, 18:40:34 -- #4691 | |
| Peter.. Thanks for the tip. The similarity of this to some big band arranging hadn't struck me before, but that's not a bad thought. When I first read your post though, I had a sort of aversion to the idea of big band, as it strikes me as too old fashioned. Probably the parts of it that seem old fashioned though, are not the parts that relate to its form, but rather to the note choices and such. Something else struck me after writing that first post that I thought I'd mention. Back in college I was really interested in various "new music" composers -- music profs trying to really stretch the limits of music (see phillip glass, john cage, schoenberg, etc, etc). One guy who I was particularly fond of (Zach Browning at U of Illinois) had an interesting idea. His "scores" had real departures from traditional notation. Lots of it was just sketching shapes and broad outlines of what he wanted. The idea was that the performer should fill in the gaps (basically improv). One idea he had though, was to have a big rectangular box over a staff that might last anywhere from 1 to maybe 10 bars or so. Inside the box would be a collection of melodic or rhythmic ideas that are to act as a motif for the performer to base an improvizaiton on for the length of time that the box lasted. I found that approach particularly interesting because it seemed to be an acknolwedgement of the idea that, even though you have a score, there still is room for improvization. It seems obvious that if you write a tune as a lead sheet that people will play it differently every time. But not all composers want the performer to take great liberties: e.g. when they write out the song note for note. This idea of giving the performer a box of ideas though, seems to be an interesting way to still be the source of ideas and constrain the performance in some way, but to explicitly ask the performer to take great liberties and add his personal touch to the piece. I'm getting long winded, I'll stop now. | |
| Kai -- 05/31/2004, 00:52:20 -- #4693 | |
| Paragraph 2 message no #4691 | |
| This sounds like a resolution of an on-going discussion of two friends of mine. One (A) is a really (musically as well) well educated musician (flute and various clarinet/sax) and the other (B) a (not very musically trained) guitarist from the sixties who has fallen in love with jazz. B believes that improvising is 'noodling' and A says that improvising is more than just that and tries to explain about developing motifs etc. They decided that they would settle for a definition that improvising was 'structured noodling'. Since the rest of us (not including A) are all learners but decided to go along with B we tried to improvise over Milestones, with very little success. Perhaps we should try Zach Browning's method! Any ideas? | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| smg -- 06/01/2004, 11:04:14 -- #4705 | |
| Actually there does exist a lot of stuff that deals with this-people like Charles Mingus,George Russell,Gunther Schuller,John Lewis,and Miles/Gil Evans were into this back in the 60's while other players were off into the free thing..they had a band called Orchestra USA...this was known as "third-stream" music...should be info online about it..... | |
| jbl81 -- 06/02/2004, 15:34:33 -- #4740 | |
| Third Stream | |
| SMG. Thanks for reminding me of that. I'd heard of Third Stream a while back, but it was before I was interested in doing something like that myself. Since then I'd forgotten the idea entirely. I did some searching around on the web and found a few brief bits on the topic. I was hoping to find a more theoretical/analytical discussion of the form and structural differences and innovations used by the various folks involved, but didn't have a lot of luck in that respect. Maybe I'll just go buy some recordings and take a listen for myself. Thanks again.. | |
| smg -- 06/02/2004, 16:34:05 -- #4743 | |
| try these | |
| http://www.harlem.org/ubb/Forum7/HTML/000192.html http://www.jazzinamerica.org/l_stylesheets.asp?StyleID=17 http://www.musiccentre.ca/mus.cfm?subsection=jaz http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:99rN5TjjqB8J:www.ranblake.com/pdf_files/BlakeCMSarticle.pdf+Third+Stream&hl=en | |
| jbl81 -- 06/02/2004, 20:28:20 -- #4746 | |
| I did a pretty fair raking through leaves over at Google and found the first three of those links last night, but that last one looks very interesting. I have to be in the right state of mind (less manic than I often find myself) to read anything over 2 paragraphs, but I'll return to it in a few hours and give it a patient read-through. Once again, thanks =) | |
| jbl81 -- 06/28/2004, 21:24:09 -- #5215 | |
| Discovery versus invention | |
| This post is less a question than it is my current thoughts on creativity and composition. I'm curious to see if anyone has similar or contrasting views on the subject. I have for several years been trying to hone my composing skills, and have only very recently (in the last 8 months or so) gotten to a point where I can produce songs I'm happy with. As I've improved, I've been trying to occasionally step back and make observations about my own creative process. I feel my creative process (and probably that of others, too) is a combination of two components. One I consider a black-box, one which I consider a rational process. The black-box aspect of creativity is that part of you that spits out ideas (be they rhythms, motifs, whole choruses, etc) seemingly from your subconscious--from out of the blue. This aspect of creativity seems largely beyond one's immediate control. However, one can train this black-box over time by listening to new music, critically analyzing music, practicing things repetatively, etc. Over time, one can add depth to this black-box, but at any given time, this box is entirely a sub-rational, subconscious process. This is the aspect of creativity that I call discovery. Discovery, because I really don't feel capable of taking a lot of credit for the output. True, it came from me. But it was almost as if the idea came from elsewhere and I merely happened across it, or discovered it. The other aspect of creativity is that which I call invention. This consists of a set of more rational ideas. This is largely the set of "rules" you know. When I'm trying to work up an arrangement of a piece, I know lots of rules like "on a seventh chord, one's right hand can play a triad a minor third down and it'll have some nice tensions" and "when you play a minor chord, sometimes the Kenny Barron voicing sounds good", etc, etc. This body of knowledge is more explicit, and can be enumerated in some sense. If asked to, you could list out lots of the rules you know. These are the means by which you invent. I've noticed that composing, for me, is an interesting combination of both discovery and invention. Very often the discovery is the seed for me, and without that initial discovery, I can't force anything. Often this is frustrating, as the discovery (as I mentioned before) is really beyond my control. I can often "prime the pump" so to speak, by choosing a different instrument than I'm used to, or by turning on some drum beats. After this intial discovery (perhaps a short motif, or several. Maybe a melody. Or maybe a sequence of chords), I usually run out of discoveries that seem worthwhile, or I just decide to turn off the discovery process for a minute and try to invent. Once I've got some paint on my palette, so to speak, I like to try to do something "intelligent" and "rational." Add structure, place the ideas into a known form (sonatta, fugue, ABA, blues changes, etc). I think this dichotomy also represents roughly the distinction between how many 20th century western composers differ from the few eastern composers I've met. My professors at school, and many of their predecessors (Cage, Scheonberg, Glass, etc), seem to believe that one can only create "new" music by ignoring one's black-box creativity, as that creativity is often simply a mirror of what one hears in the culture within which he has developed. These kinds of composers seem to rely heavily on the invention aspect of creativity, and less on the discovery side. The few Eastern composers I know, on the other hand, seem to fall more toward the discovery side of the equation. Alright, I'll stop blabbering.. Can anyone else comment on their thoughts? | |
| ClosetBlues -- 06/30/2004, 09:42:01 -- #5256 | |
| Excellent post! I'm sure others have read it and agree, but I just wanted to give you some feedback. Your description of the "black box" seems very appropriate and the whole discussion made perfect sense. I also think of the two components as "left brain" and "right brain." As someone who is extremely logical, rational and linear in my thought processes, I am envious and amazed at the magic generated by artists who are tapped into the "black box" of creativity. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| jbl81 -- 06/30/2004, 12:12:58 -- #5260 | |
| ClosetBlues.. I appreciate the feedback. I, too, consider myself a native of the engineer/scientist camp and only immigrant-status in the musician/artist camp. I imagine nothing in this post is terribly controversial, and so probably won't elicit a lot of feedback. Just thought I'd bounce it out and see what came back =) | |
| albetan -- 07/01/2004, 12:16:56 -- #5295 | |
| Good thoughts about the black-box process in your subconscious. All great composers have a marvelous connection of conscious mind with subconscious when they are creating something.. Practising jazz, you are developing powerful skills for composition, because you are creating music in real time. | |
| 7 -- 07/02/2004, 14:32:26 -- #5338 | |
| I'd like to respond to the following quote: "Cage, Scheonberg, Glass, etc seem to believe that one can only create 'new' music by ignoring one's black-box creativity, as that creativity is often simply a mirror of what one hears in the culture within which he has developed." 1. Sid Thomas once said "If you come up with something that doesn't sound like anything you've ever heard before, it's probably crap." 2. I once had the opportunity to meet John Cage while in Paris visiting Bob Drewry who is the contrabassist with the Paris Symphony Orchestra. Bob is a fantastic award winning classical musician and at the time was working on a project with John Cage (this was probably 1988). He played me a scratch recording of the project and showed me the score. It was a bunch of cacophonous rubbish that reflected the random hen scratchings of the printed page. After having played the cassette for me he asked for my opinion. I said "Who's paying for this jerk-off session anyway?" He told me that it was the French government and then he told me what he was making for being a part of this project. It was an absolutely obscene amount. At that point I said "Well, don't you think you could give them better value for their money?" He laughed. It was the laugh of irony. It was the laugh of "screw the French government". Then he asked if I wanted to meet John Cage "today". I said "Hell no!". What would I say to John Cage anyway? "You've made a mockery of music" "Your shit sucks" "How dare you call that crap art?" 3. I reflected on the "mirror of culture" statement above. The music I like IS culture, and it's MY culture. If my music is "just" a mirror - then so be it. I can still come up with an infinity of NEW musical ideas based on the conventional elements inherent in the styles of music in my "culture". I don't need to break all the rules and annoy everyone to make something new. Sid Thomas also said "We all stand on the shoulders of giants". Without continuity, heritage and respect for our "fore-brothers" the culture becomes lost. 4. As far as the actual composition process is concerned, I'll often get an intellectual idea while away from an instrument. Later when I get a chance to try the idea out on an instrument, I'll find that it needs significant tweaking to get from the realm of theoretically correct possibilities to transform it into true musicality. The feel I go for is that even if no one has ever written anything quite like it before, it should have the organic quality about it that makes it sound as if it were ALWAYS MEANT TO EXIST. Getting that quality of fluidity, naturalness, and conveyance of emotion requires a deep understanding of what makes music MUSIC - as opposed to just playing notes that are theoretically correct but in fact are nothing more than sterile finger exercises. For more on my preferred method of composition, please visit: http://www.JeffreeBrent.com/Lessons/suggest.html 7 | |
| jbl81 -- 07/02/2004, 15:07:00 -- #5340 | |
| 7, Good stuff. I'm glad I riled someone enough to elicit an opposing view. =) Ultimately, it's purely asthetics. I happen to like 4'33", Einstein on the Beach, Williams Mix, Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima and lots of other pieces in those genres. Do I listen to them constantly? No. But that doesn't mean I don't like them nor that I haven't grown as a musician and person by listening to them and trying to understand them. So, before even beginning this post, I'm admitting that ultimately it's futile to even respond to your post -- except to say, "ok, you don't like that stuff, but I do." That being said. What I *can* do is explain *why* I like those pieces. I would classify those songs as conceptual art, and so I offer my defense not of any specific piece, but of conceptual art, in general. People in all endeavours of life are self-limited by the way they conceive of things. In many cases people aren't even aware that they are limiting themselves. Two of the great revolutions of twentieth century music are that (A) pitch doesn't have to be the most important parameter in music, and (B) even allowing music to continue to be pitch-centric, there are other ways to organize pitches beyond those taught in European classical theory books. Certainly genres other than conceptual music have contributed to both of these revolutions, but conceptual music seems entirely dedicated to those ideas. Insofar as it does that, I think it is valueable. The general public (and even most musicians) won't be directly impacted by conceptual music. But who can deny that innovation in music is exiting and interesting. The attention that twentieth-century music has given, for instance, to non-pitch parameters such as timbre and rhythm is a big part of what makes music interesting to me. Having a keyboard with a million different sounds at one's disposal is a great joy. Having programs like csound where one can design a new "instrument" at his leisure is liberating and exciting. Changing directions somewhat. As someone with a heavy background in science, math, and engineering, I may have a different view of what is beautiful than you or others here who have different backgrounds. I see beauty and elegance in symbolic things: grand-unified theories that integrate two or three of the physical forces, the golden ratio, chaos theory, automata (see Wolfram), etc. I enjoy music that can turn beauty in one domain into (as I see it) beauty in a different domain. If one can, for instance, turn a well-played chess game into an interesting piece of music that captures the essence of the chess game while still presenting interesting aural artifacts, I find that very attractive. I know that a lot of people don't share these ideas of beauty that I have, but for those of us that do ... well, it's good stuff =) I should append this by noting that I haven't ever come up with anything I would consider even vaguely conceptual art-like of my own. When I compose, it is largely in the style you are proposing, where one forgets about any rules he might know and just lets it happen. That being said, I'm glad that I know the ideas and rules that I do know, because I like using them to get out of ruts or generate new ideas when that black-box stream of creativity runs temporarily dry. jbl | |
| 7 -- 07/02/2004, 15:14:41 -- #5341 | |
| Actually my major at the university was Mathematics. I kinda got side-tracked though by going to Europe just before my senior year and not coming back for 15 years. You said "When I compose, it is largely in the style you are proposing, where one forgets about any rules he might know and just lets it happen." Actually I don't think I ever forget about the rules. Especially since Rule #1 is "It's got to sound good AND feel good" 7 | |
| tunde -- 08/18/2004, 02:26:23 -- #6574 | |
| help | |
| please i need your help on music.I do compose songs,and i've composed many songs but there is no one to make this vission real.My parents are very old ,and they cant't support me anymore.I need some money to some instruments like: computer; keyboard; guitar and so on.My prayer is that God almighty will bless tou aboundantly. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| Whacky -- 08/18/2004, 07:07:42 -- #6576 | |
| hmmm...how old are you? can you support yourself? if you're just starting out, don't expect composing to support you...most composers were poor...unless you write a hit song for a hot pop star or a theme for a hit movie or television show, composing will be a labor of love, not gold. the best way to make some quick cash is to get a job...if you are good enough to get a gig playing your instrument, you can definitely get some money that way...if you know what you're doing, you can teach... sorry if I seem too pessimistic regarding composing, but I think I speak the truth... good luck, and be sure to thank your parents for supporting you:) | |
| betarnau -- 08/22/2004, 13:37:09 -- #6641 | |
| Alberto | |
| Necesito la partitura de La Cumparsa de Lecuona mandamela a mb@naranjad.com Maus | |
| albetan -- 08/22/2004, 21:21:55 -- #6651 | |
| Hola Maus: LA COMPARSA es un clásico Afro-Cubano de Ernesto Lecuona. Hoy se escucha una versión de latin-jazz ejecutada por Paquito D'Rivera, cuya transcripción encuentras en la pág. 263 de Latin Real Book. Por unos días te pongo la partitura original de Lecuona en TRANSCRIPTIONS en pdf para que la bajes. | |
| albetan -- 08/23/2004, 09:50:10 -- #6660 | |
| LA COMPARSA is a classical Afro-Cuban composed by Ernesto Lecuona. Ther's a latin-jazz famous version by Paquito D'Rivera whose transcription is in Latin Real Book. I uploaded original piano score in "Transcriptions" room. It may be played as a Afro-Cuban in the first part (minor key) and as a bolero-chacha the second part (major key). Try to perform as it appears in score, and you will get a very latin flavor. | |
| Peteboypete -- 10/13/2004, 15:58:27 -- #8003 | |
| New Tune | |
| I have just uploaded a lead sheet and MIDI of a composition I wrote. The MIDI was made by Band-In-A-Box, hence the cheesy ending. I wrote the words so I could remember the tune, so I didn't put in a lot of thought. I would like some criticism. Thanks | |
| Scot -- 10/14/2004, 15:43:35 -- #8045 | |
| Hi Pete- Do you use sibelius? I just spent some time editing your song the same way I do one of mine or one of my composition students, but it would be easier to edit a file that already exists. I can use Sibelius or Finale files, so if you have one, please upload it. I don't want to talk about the piece until I upload "my" version, so I'll wait on the comments. Over all, though, I think it's a neat idea for a piece of music. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| Peteboypete -- 10/14/2004, 22:13:22 -- #8058 | |
| OK, I'm posting the Finale file. | |
| Scot -- 10/15/2004, 00:36:48 -- #8059 | |
| Ok, I uploaded a highly modified version of your tune. I'll explain why I did the things I did. One of the things I really liked was that the tune has a lot of possibilities so it was easy to get into it and make certain things happen. Disclaimer: I come right to the point when I'm doing this sort of thing. I tell it like I feel it- things that I write about your tune are only my opinion- not right or wrong. So let's start :) The first line I left untouched. 5: I changed the chord to Fm and put in a progression to Bbm to go with the new melody notes I put in. One of the things I noticed was that your melody note was also the root of the chord quite a bit. Since there are 11 other notes to use, I chose some other melody notes to add interest and tension- the tension is good because then when the melody is way "inside", it feels better. Tension release sort of thing. 7: Changed melody notes there too because there seemed to be a lot of Bb's hanging around, and this phrase also began on a Bb. I felt that it would be nice to spread out the sound and start a bit lower, and work our way up past the root melodic note and play the flat 9th instead. It's also a kind of fore-shadowing because in line 9 you use the b9 as a key melodic note. Remember: melodic, harmonic, and rhythmic material should have themes and ideas that become solid because of how you wrote the tune. Ok, in line 9 I didn't change too much except that I took out some 2-5 chord progressions and just left the 5 in. At the tempo you're playing it, there's no reason to clutter things up with extra chords that aren't really necessary. 13: You'll notice I left an entire line out of your song. I looked at the words, and I looked at the melody, and I just couldn't figure any really compelling reason why that line was even in there. The vocal aspect of it is sort of a cliche' (so why use it again?) plus, the way the song is written, you kind of get a feeling that the idea of being happier alone is sort of where the mindset of the lyricist is. Now, at the current measure 13 I've made a few changes, both melodically and harmonically. I left your general idea in there, but for rhythm, I thought it would be nice to think about reminding people of the line before by paraphrasing the earlier rhythm a little bit, same with the triplet for "love would be". Putting that triplet in there ties it in, makes it more legit, with the line before it. Using that triplet idea ties things together. At 21 I dramatically altered your harmony and to a certain extent, your melody. I kept your intervalic idea, but changed the notes to go with the new harmony better. Then at measure 23, I stretched out the words and melody. I figured it would be nice to add some humor to it, so I stretched out the last line and put the punch-line of the lyric at the end. I left out the original last line, there seemed to be absolutely no point in the melody or the lyrics. The changes I made in your tune were for specific reasons. First, I wanted the melody to be able to stand up on it's own a bit better. When you write a tune, try to make the melody be strong enough so that you don't need chords or a bass note. Just the melody alone should be good enough, and didn't feel like your original melody was as strong as it could have been in all areas of the tune. Another reason I made changes was that I wanted the tune to be more fun for me to play over. It's going at a nice medium up swing tempo and the chords were a bit bland for me, so I spiced things up while trying to stay within the original idea of the tune. At this point, I can sit here and play though the form as many times as I want and playing lines over it and such is quite a bit of fun. I think you should write as many songs as you can, as fast as you can pump them out. The more you write, the more experience you'll have. Not to say you don't have any now, just saying to keep up the tune writing. Writing tunes is also one of the best ways to stretch your own playing- as long as you try new things in yoru tunes. Ok, that was a lot :) | |
| Akram Maximos -- 10/19/2004, 05:16:58 -- #8167 | |
| Maybe this should be in the bugs report, but anyway that's it. I couldn't be able to upload my transcription, on a Finale file, in the Composition room. I followed the steps: clicked on upload a file, browse then upload it, but it did't. I cannot see it on the uploaded files and the system did not ask me for more info as it said it will do. I don't know the problem. Thanks, Akram | |
| Scot -- 10/19/2004, 06:22:00 -- #8168 | |
| Your file is in there as a Finale file... unfortunately that means most people can't view it. Can you make a PDF file or an image out of it instead? | |
| Akram Maximos -- 10/19/2004, 06:23:29 -- #8169 | |
| I will. Thanks. | |
| albetan -- 10/19/2004, 11:53:02 -- #8185 | |
| Mn´ thal¨ lathy | |
| Hi Akram: Good job. This is a composition with a deep religious feeling, music for relax. For those who have not Finale 2005 I recommend to download for free Finale note pad from: http://www.finalemusic.com/notepad/ So people may hear the score. I converted this .MUS file in two PDF. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| Akram Maximos -- 10/20/2004, 01:23:38 -- #8199 | |
| Mn' thal' lathy | |
| Hi Alebtan, Thanks much for your prompt response and kind concern. By the way, I cannot open both the pdf files that you uploaded for "Mn' thal' lathy". So, I've uploaded two other pdf files (each is < 157,000 bytes) but I have the same problem with opening them: Blank Screen! Did you try opening the files? Again, thanks for help, | |
| albetan -- 10/20/2004, 07:45:02 -- #8202 | |
| Mn´ thal¨ lathy | |
| Hi Akram: My files in pdf spend some seconds to open... while Acrobat opens. If you could not open them, please download for free Adobe reader from http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/main.html In order to convert your files in pdf, you may download for free: http://www.pdf995.com/ Save it in a folder and afterwards install it. The best for your .mus files is to download for free Finale Note Pad from: http://www.finalemusic.com/notepad/ As an example please see "Piel Canela" in Jazz en Español. I uploaded it in .mus and .pdf formats. Good luck | |
| albetan -- 10/20/2004, 09:28:15 -- #8205 | |
| Akram: I downloaded your pdf version, but i see a blank screen. Do you have Acrobat program?. Go to your Finale, open your composition, go to "print" , go to "setup", select "adobe pdf" or "pdf995", and O.K. Try it again, and delete your pdf actual version. | |
| albetan -- 10/20/2004, 15:39:15 -- #8213 | |
| Akram: Only a few people with finale 2005 may open yor .mus file. I suggest to delete it and upload again but noticing that is a Finale 2005 version. I have Finale 2004 and i could not open it. So i downloaded finale Note Pad to see and to hear your composition. | |
| Akram Maximos -- 10/21/2004, 01:40:40 -- #8225 | |
| Hi Albetan, Thanks for your advice. I followed the steps you have mentioned. I went to Finale, opened my file, then to "print", "setup", selected "adobe pdf" & O.K. That I didn't know before..thanks. So, I saved my file as .pdf on my system and uploaded a new .pdf file (78,000 bytes) into the LPJ after I deleted the 2 files that I have previously uploaded, but still gave me a blank screen. By the way, I have Acrobat reader v6.0 on my system and works fine and Finale 2005 as well. As you have said, people who does not have the Finale 2005 could download it for free from the link you gave. Presumably, they would be able to open all the .mus files. | |
| albetan -- 10/21/2004, 06:38:45 -- #8227 | |
| Akram: If screen is blank, please right-click on file's name and click on "save as"... As i have explained, i upload all my files. Good luck. | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| skatta -- 10/23/2004, 16:07:02 -- #8287 | |
| just a quick couple questions | |
| hi again, i am still currently practicing the things you proposed i should practice. but i just have a question to ask you. i realize that drilling scales helps to put the sound between intervals into the subcontious at the same time as putting how those intervals fit over a given chord or i guess key that a song is in or whatever. but really i'm just wondering why it is preferrable to learn scales which are named scale rather than just a bunch of licks which seem to me are also scales but just not named as basic scales, so long as you know all the chords of a song and the scale of the key it's in. also i was just wondering something about the site. i noticed that on the qwelcome page there are a bunch of stats about the site and one of them was private messages. are these my particular stats? or the sites stats, and if they're mine how do i go about checking those messages? thx for your time man talk to ya later. | |
| 7 -- 10/23/2004, 20:40:56 -- #8296 | |
| skatta, Learning a bunch of licks is a totally cool thing to do. Licks are generally defined as "tried and true musical statements". BUT! Make sure to analyze your "stolen" licks in order to deeply understand the PRINCIPLES underlying the licks - so that you can you use those principles to create an *infinite* number of YOUR OWN licks based on said principles. Otherwise you're just copying and not using them as a source of personal inspiration - IOW "tired and true" ... Learning scales is a necessity just as learning vocabulary items in a new language. But scales in themselves are not music anymore than stringing together words picked at random out of the dictionary are language. RE: "private messages" Those msgs addressed to you can be read by you. If you can't read it, it wasn't addressed to you. | |
| tejo -- 04/06/2005, 23:53:54 -- #12543 | |
| modifying a pop arangement into jazz | |
| hi , im trying to re-arrange apop song in to jazz, and i confuse abaout how to,. well i didn't play jazz before, and i curious to know much about jazz, then i start to learn about that, but then even how ever i try to play jazz, i guess that i play a pop still, actually i have the midi file of my project, the simple one, but i dunno how to up load that, | |
| Scot -- 04/08/2005, 00:22:43 -- #12581 | |
| Often times you can simply take some V I chords and turn them into 2-5-1 chords to start out with. Here's a hint on how to upload: click on the "upload a file" link above. | |
| Billy Miller -- 05/13/2005, 15:10:34 -- #13799 | |
| new composition | |
| Hello. Im working on a song, its sort of a Jazz funk fusion type thing, and im stuck and have no idea where to go with it. I was wondering if anyone could help me, i think i need work with the structure on it. I think that there should be a solo section in it somewhere, but i dont know how i should transition to it, and what i should do when i get there. Any advice or critiques of the song would be greatly appreciated. You can find it here: http://www.cmilldesign.com/billy/jazz2.mp3 thanks! Billy | |
| Whacky -- 05/13/2005, 16:27:39 -- #13801 | |
| Very cool! What are you using for the Hammond sound - it sounds real (maybe it is?) These tracks sound great. What I'm longing to hear on it is a great vocal or lead line - maybe alto sax? | |
| Search Ebay Auctions for Chick Corea | |
| Billy Miller -- 05/13/2005, 16:49:17 -- #13803 | |
| thanks whacky. The hammond sound is from nativeinstruments B4. Its one of the best b3 clones i've heard as far as software goes. Its not quite screecy enough in the high end though in my opinion. www.native-instruments.com Yeah, vocals would probly be cool, but i dont have the capabilities to make a vocal track, or even a singer to sing it for me. I do have an online acquantance who i think might be able to record a sax line for me though, ill have to ask him. Would you suggest that i make the lead line go over the current proggression, or make a new section to start the lead line? Im really bad at structuring a song, so i need help with this. | |
| Whacky -- 05/14/2005, 01:37:36 -- #13808 | |
| I've heard about B4 - it really sounds great on your recording! Yeah, I think a lead line over your current progression would be very cool:) | |
| Scot -- 05/15/2005, 01:06:48 -- #13840 | |
| I hear a lead trumpet (Maynard style) or a pumped up B3 sound doing a solo. As the soloist plays over the built up background a couple choruses, I can hear a transition to some breaks of some kind, some kind of pedal maybe, or just something that gives it more tension. You have created a very nice effect that begs for something more, maybe a big sound pyramid (up and down) that goes into a modern big band sound to play a melody over the backing, which would be reduced to maybe some saxes and bones. Keep it up, let us know whe you have more! | |
| Billy Miller -- 05/16/2005, 13:23:27 -- #13868 | |
| thanks scot, ill try that. | |
| Scot -- 11/27/2005, 23:53:30 -- #17757 | |
| test | |
| Copyright © 2005 by Scot Ranney. All rights reserved. | |
| Click Here for more information about performances and clinics. Click Here to sign up for Scot's music announcements. | |