'by generating the chords that sound nice' - connecting one to the next is in the realm of having an idea. So you may not want to have your own idea, and simply receive ideas from someone's notion of what to build an algorithm to perform for you, then you have a multiple choice question on the test rather than writing your idea of the material up.
That is the difference you're looking at. As to cheating, you don't owe anybody else anything. You may be cheating yourself of a rich experience.
This is the whole Producer trip, be productive, have a result and quickie gratification ASAP rather than enjoy the journey. Get on a plane and go to a tourist trap and get your vacation all packaged for you rather than anything memorable to take back with you to your cubicle, yeah?
Music Theory vs Chord VST
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Where's the melody? Where's the music? What's the idea? Now, there are musics which are predominantly or primarily chord progression-oriented.
They may be strictly from convention, too. But do you understand the thought?
Some understand it without being able to specify it in the terms availed, through the lingua franca; I mean by ear and through internalizing the shape and form; particularly via modeling the conventions... and may wind up capable of creativity.
That's an area of talent which can't be taught or shown, though. And if one is this creature, one isn't reliant on an algorithm for the multiple choice question, I wouldn't think.
They may be strictly from convention, too. But do you understand the thought?
Some understand it without being able to specify it in the terms availed, through the lingua franca; I mean by ear and through internalizing the shape and form; particularly via modeling the conventions... and may wind up capable of creativity.
That's an area of talent which can't be taught or shown, though. And if one is this creature, one isn't reliant on an algorithm for the multiple choice question, I wouldn't think.
-
- KVRAF
- 4507 posts since 3 Oct, 2013 from Budapest
all the chords can be played into millions different way so not worth to use generators they kills the fun part, IMO try to learn all the chords in a scale (triads, seventh, suspended ones etc.) at first using piano , in this case they can be played back in different inversions etc. quite freely so you get back the fun part
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIlOSyuETXs
(last two examples shows sometimes proper chords just a starting points)
but a chord detector plugin like Scaler is very handy during the learning phase it gives feedback what you played
so I would start with this one : https://www.udemy.com/piano-chords/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIlOSyuETXs
(last two examples shows sometimes proper chords just a starting points)
but a chord detector plugin like Scaler is very handy during the learning phase it gives feedback what you played
so I would start with this one : https://www.udemy.com/piano-chords/
"Where we're workarounding, we don't NEED features." - powermat
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Then there's voicing chords, including distributing it to instruments (which could affect the choice in the first place) and voice-leading.
But if you're going to choose genre to trump all and the choices are the same as everybody's, ie., there's not a lot of optional involved you don't need to know except to replicate as the cookie cutter demands.
Where the fun lies in that, I don't know other than it's people who like conforming and do things for validation.
But if you're going to choose genre to trump all and the choices are the same as everybody's, ie., there's not a lot of optional involved you don't need to know except to replicate as the cookie cutter demands.
Where the fun lies in that, I don't know other than it's people who like conforming and do things for validation.
-
- KVRAF
- 4507 posts since 3 Oct, 2013 from Budapest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEQMkzjcLEA
( https://chordify.net/chords/deadmau5-so ... trarecords chordify contains quite lot trance songs valuable one if u are in that genre )
Last edited by xbitz on Wed Feb 06, 2019 4:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Where we're workarounding, we don't NEED features." - powermat
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
It really isn't. It's a way to codify things which can be shown to work a certain way. It's the mechanics.
So you just stick to the cookie cutter in favor of intellectual curiosity or a richer experience than that dull box already provided for you, then. You have no idea, clearly. 'Never forget that Buffalo Wings are just wings of the buffalo, after all.'
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
"90% of music" - which takes your received, particular awareness of music, from what is popular to begin with as 'music', like a definition.
You stick with that. What you're doing is anti-knowledge and an argument to conformity, so since that's you, you do that and find your spot in that. It's not very responsive to someone with a question of whether or not they should know more.
You stick with that. What you're doing is anti-knowledge and an argument to conformity, so since that's you, you do that and find your spot in that. It's not very responsive to someone with a question of whether or not they should know more.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 105875 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
What are these couple of progressions which rule all of music for "the last three decades" anyway? How do they work? Why are they so prevalent?
Or is it simply that you take it as received they must be something. If you understand how they work you're in this realm of Music Theory.
Which is a misnomer. If one of these is I IV and V, we f**king know the relationship. We know this is strong root movement, and that V to I is a drive to home, to the I via two things: its rising fourth, strong root movement and the 'leading tone' of proper V to I. We know that IV to I is falling fourth, a strong root movement, and we additionally know its nature as occurs in certain music. Amen Cadence, aka Plagal Cadence in church music, and in Gospel. We know IV to V works a certain way pretty much through itself.
Literally none of this is theoretical. It being the same effect, it being consistently those progressions (whatever they are, which you didn't even bring to this vapid post), this is just a theory because all you need is the label to be dismissive?
Or is it simply that you take it as received they must be something. If you understand how they work you're in this realm of Music Theory.
Which is a misnomer. If one of these is I IV and V, we f**king know the relationship. We know this is strong root movement, and that V to I is a drive to home, to the I via two things: its rising fourth, strong root movement and the 'leading tone' of proper V to I. We know that IV to I is falling fourth, a strong root movement, and we additionally know its nature as occurs in certain music. Amen Cadence, aka Plagal Cadence in church music, and in Gospel. We know IV to V works a certain way pretty much through itself.
Literally none of this is theoretical. It being the same effect, it being consistently those progressions (whatever they are, which you didn't even bring to this vapid post), this is just a theory because all you need is the label to be dismissive?
-
- KVRAF
- 4507 posts since 3 Oct, 2013 from Budapest
"Where we're workarounding, we don't NEED features." - powermat
-
- KVRist
- 361 posts since 6 Feb, 2017
i learned a lot from using captain plugins chord generator : most commons chords, most common chord rythms, and how to adjust bass and key to chord...
now i can write chord by myself but i learned from using the plugin.
now i can write chord by myself but i learned from using the plugin.
-
- KVRAF
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities
Yes.jancivil wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 8:33 pm Some understand it without being able to specify it in the terms availed, through the lingua franca; I mean by ear and through internalizing the shape and form; particularly via modeling the conventions... and may wind up capable of creativity.
That's an area of talent which can't be taught or shown, though. And if one is this creature, one isn't reliant on an algorithm for the multiple choice question, I wouldn't think.
It's a horrible thought: the idea that you either have it or you don't. It's undemocratic and it seems unfair. It's the sort of thing that college students would protest if they knew that people believed it.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Well, when I transcribed Beatles, and Hendrix I got the drift by ear. Once I wanted more, I had to know some things.
It doesn't take a genius to understand harmonic principles. It may take a certain predisposition which some don't have.
There was a guy in my home town, George Shaw (he and his musical partner John Wilhelm died young in a car accident) who had a very advanced jazz vocabulary, harmonically and what-to-do in the very hip sense, who knew NOTHING book-wise, didn't read, I mean nada. I am not that.
It doesn't take a genius to understand harmonic principles. It may take a certain predisposition which some don't have.
There was a guy in my home town, George Shaw (he and his musical partner John Wilhelm died young in a car accident) who had a very advanced jazz vocabulary, harmonically and what-to-do in the very hip sense, who knew NOTHING book-wise, didn't read, I mean nada. I am not that.
-
- KVRAF
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities
I, too, have always liked notation as a way of working. I don't write out scores for whole pieces the way I once did, but it is still my go-to method when working out complex inter-related parts, whether the issue is harmonic or rhythmic. It just makes sense to me.jancivil wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:16 pm Well, when I transcribed Beatles, and Hendrix I got the drift by ear. Once I wanted more, I had to know some things.
It doesn't take a genius to understand harmonic principles. It may take a certain predisposition which some don't have.
There was a guy in my home town, George Shaw (he and his musical partner John Wilhelm died young in a car accident) who had a very advanced jazz vocabulary, harmonically and what-to-do in the very hip sense, who knew NOTHING book-wise, didn't read, I mean nada. I am not that.
But all of my long-term musical co-workers have had trouble with notation. And none of them seemed to suffer from it. They had talent and wide ranging listening habits, and that seemed to be enough for them. And when I say they listened I mean that they didn't talk when they were listening. I still remember the looks one of us used to give to any hapless visitor who would start talking while we were listening to something. If they didn't get the hint from the daggers being stared at them, he would resort to and old fashioned librarian's shush.
It still blows my mind when I write a song that uses some obscure symmetrical mode, and my friend Charles can adapt and play an appropriate solo against it without even knowing that he is doing so. In the meantime, I have worked with thoroughly trained sight reading performers, who couldn't play an appropriate solo over anything.
Of course I have also met trained musicians who could adapt just fine, along with the sad majority who could neither read nor listen. Like I said, you either have it or you don't.
