Song writing tip

[shufflebeat]

...probably more thorough than your research into which airlines fly to New York before your last trip.

I don't understand.

But this I do know. There are more songs in heaven and earth, Uncovered Pitch, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

[Uncovered Pitch]

According to my research at least 90% of pop songs do NOT contain a non-scale chord. Therefore when you do include one, it instantly dates the song. Now of course if you want to evoke a nostalgic feeling, this may be just the ticket!

That sounds completely credible to me! I assume you’re talking about modern pop, though.

Yes, exactly. I'm not talking about Queen, Elton John or Billy Joel here. If I wanted my song to have this kind of vibe though, I'd stuff my song with non-scale chords. This year's all-conquering UK Eurovision entry would be a good example of this!

[merlyn]

So where is this nostalgia barrier in the space-time continuum? What period did you look at where the harmony is 90% diatonic (sticks to the scale)?

[GilesAnt]

.......not to mention what exactly do you mean by pop music? Would that include blues for example - a fertile ground for non scale harmonies

[OneWorld]

I wish I knew more about the theory... I have no clue. People seem to enjoy my stuff but I'm oblivious to the science and mathematics of it.

There's a small easy to read book, I think it's called the Rudiments and Theory of Music. I don't know about now, but it used to be the standard text for those studying music formally. OK it's not jazzed up presentation but that doesn't matter, it gets straight top the point in explaining harmony, and once you get the hang of it, basic harmony is quite easy, it's logical. And harmony isn't necessarily prescriptive, a writer doesn't have to include/exclude this that or the other, the basic notes/chords are just the colours in the palette.

A painter friend of mine was eager to expand his artistic reach by playing bass in a band. He came into the band proclaiming he was going to tear up the rules of music and produce a 'new' music based entirely on emotion. Well OK I said, but before you can break the rules of anything you have to know the rules, otherwise how would you know you're breaking anything?

Building a house needs a foundation, thereafter you plonk on top whatever you want . I really do recommend the book I suggest but to learn harmony it helps a
great deal if you know your way around a keyboard. When I was at music college it was expected that you learn piano, whether you wanted to or not, I am so glad there was that condition placed on us.

[OneWorld]

I wish I knew more about the theory... I have no clue. People seem to enjoy my stuff but I'm oblivious to the science and mathematics of it.

There's a small easy to read book, I think it's called the Rudiments and Theory of Music. I don't know about now, but it used to be the standard text for those studying music formally. OK it's not jazzed up presentation but that doesn't matter, it gets straight top the point in explaining harmony, and once you get the hang of it, basic harmony is quite easy, it's logical. And harmony isn't necessarily prescriptive, a writer doesn't have to include/exclude this that or the other, the basic notes/chords are just the colours in the palette.

A painter friend of mine was eager to expand his artistic reach by playing bass in a band. He came into the band proclaiming he was going to tear up the rules of music and produce a 'new' music based entirely on emotion. Well OK I said, but before you can break the rules of anything you have to know the rules, otherwise how would you know you're breaking anything? And secondly, supposed the band is in a different mood than you? He didn't last long

Building a house needs a foundation, thereafter you plonk on top whatever you want . I really do recommend the book I suggest but to learn harmony it helps a great deal if you know your way around a keyboard. When I was at music college it was expected that you learn piano, whether you wanted to or not, I am so glad there was that condition placed on us.

[shufflebeat]

Those edit and quote buttons are so close together. At some point someone's going to say something in a fit of self-righteousness, look at it, think better of it and take it out but leave both versions up.

Don't ask.

I wish I knew more about the theory... I have no clue. People seem to enjoy my stuff but I'm oblivious to the science and mathematics of it.

This illustrates really well the "rules vs theory" question.

It would be difficult to be successful at cricket without knowing the rules, one would immediately fall foul of some "leg before tea" rule within the first half.

On the other hand the laws of physics are regularly upended as we observe at smaller and larger scales than Newton was technically able to.

Cricket is, of course, subject to rules disruption, there is still no clarity on hand ball that I can work out, but it is still defined by it's rules.

Physics is different, as new theories emerge so do novel methods of exploration and eventually old theories are shown to be incorrect, or at least incomplete.

But even early wo/man could use the "laws" of physics without codifying them, if only to beat each other with sticks.

[Folderol]

Some years ago I read an article (sorry no idea where it was) that described ways in which much of music is sort of built-in to us. One quite amazing example is the childhood na-nah taunt. It's the same across multiple cultures some of which have had millennia long separation from the rest of us, and while sung at different pitches, is always the same interval.
Music that evokes certain moods often parallels natural sounds. The ones I remember are thunder-danger/aggression, 'rippling' arpeggios-water.
There is also a direct relationship between heart rate, musical tempo and mood.

[Albatross]

All that type of good stuff is in this 'must listen' for musos ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/b01sk5xs The Science of Music by Robert Winston, absolutely fascinating.

[Drew Stephenson]

All that type of good stuff is in this 'must listen' for musos ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/b01sk5xs The Science of Music by Robert Winston, absolutely fascinating.

::: adds to ever-growing list of interesting, open browser tabs :::

[N i g e l]

..... The Science of Music by Robert Winston....

great stuff, thanks for the link.

[OneWorld]

..... The Science of Music by Robert Winston....

great stuff, thanks for the link.

It does make for an interesting list, but there are the puzzling claims such as "A lot of teachers tell a lot of kids not to sing because they are not good enough" In these sort of programmes you always get someone making a controversial claim, goodness knows why. I have never come across any teacher of any discipline, that discourages participation. OK yes, there will be the exception to the rule, but they do not represent the norm

[Drew Stephenson]

I suspect there has been a fair change in teaching approaches between when some of these authorities were in school and how things are done today.

[Folderol]

I suspect there has been a fair change in teaching approaches between when some of these authorities were in school and how things are done today.

Exactly.
The impression I get is teachers are pretty open these days, but when I was a kid it was very much a case of:
"Just do what you're told."
"What makes you think you know better than the experts?"
"Play exactly what's on the music. Not what you think should be there."

And the absolute killer:
"Lets face it you've got a really boring voice. OK for filling out the choir but you'll never be a singer".

[RichardT]

I suspect there has been a fair change in teaching approaches between when some of these authorities were in school and how things are done today.

Exactly.
The impression I get is teachers are pretty open these days, but when I was a kid it was very much a case of:
"Just do what you're told."
"What makes you think you know better than the experts?"
"Play exactly what's on the music. Not what you think should be there."

And the absolute killer:
"Lets face it you've got a really boring voice. OK for filling out the choir but you'll never be a singer".

Not related to music, but a friend’s essay at secondary school got the teacher’s comment ‘attempts at humour depressing’.

[MaestroMikeT]

... it's something I've noticed in many great songs.

I've noticed those chords in songs.

E major in C -- Space Oddity It's the first chord change of the verse

F minor in C -- also Space Oddity There is a change | F / / / | Fm / / /| This is also in Nowhere Man and Creep in G.

Anyone got examples of the other chords?

These are very far from arbitrary “non-scale” chords! The F-Fm is a very old, very beaten route to returning to the tonic chord, being IV maj - IV minor - I maj (or eventually the III minor en route to the sub dominant group, then dominant and release to I.
Also the E maj in C is essentially raising the III from minor to dominant seventh to guide to VI minor, also a very characteristic harmonic path.
The same can be said about turning the II from minor (in a major scale) to dominant - it is called double dominant, cause it became a the… dominant of the dominant . I’m sorry if this sounds condescending, that is surely not my intention, but these are very very beaten roads, with very explicit and typical harmonic pathways. I guess it really puts a shine on one’s need to get to grips with the fundamentals of harmony. Even if you stray to reharmonizing in a jazzy fashion, you’re still using substitution pieces of the puzzle, not inventing a new one - like the Lydian chord substituting the I major, or the alt9 for the V.
The true inventiveness comes from creating a cohesive whole, in which no chord sounds out of place but rather the one you can’t imagine a different solution without. If you pick pop or rock from the 70s through to the 90s you’ll have lots and lots of examples, and more so if you go to fusion, singer-songwriter stuff, pop-jazz, etc. Harmony if a wonderful, wonderful land!

Enviado do meu iPhone usando o Tapatalk

[Exalted Wombat]

This is all sounding like 'theory for guitarists (or computer-based 'producers') who don't read music'. An obsession with the diatonic chords of a key, and a feeling that doing something non-diatonic is remarkable, requiring special justification.

Read music, play music. From simple early Classical ('Minuet in G') to 'Golden age' Hollywood scores, Jazz standards, John Williams, even the Beatles... and that's leaving out the way-out stuff! All pretty tonal, we generally know what key we're in. But WAY more choice of chords than just the diatonic ones.

Yes, in Harmony #101 we learn the Primary Triads, I, IV and V. And we write simple exercises using just them. But at the same time our PLAYING studies are introducing us to music that does far more interesting things! Don't worry, the theory will catch up.

[MaestroMikeT]

exactly, the actual great music you devour from others will provide a copious amount of knowledge to go hand in hand with harmony studies. Learn, learn, learn. Know the rules, then consciently break them.

[Uncovered Pitch]

So where is this nostalgia barrier in the space-time continuum? What period did you look at where the harmony is 90% diatonic (sticks to the scale)?

.......not to mention what exactly do you mean by pop music? Would that include blues for example - a fertile ground for non scale harmonies

With pop music I mean recent top 40 hits in the UK and US charts. Of course there are blues influences in many pop hits, but that's not what blues enthusiasts would recognise as "their" music.

Really liking the concept of a "nostalgia barrier". I'd place it from around 2009/10 onwards when Electronic Dance Music (EDM) was starting to infiltrate the pop charts in a big way. Everything in EDM is much simpler: melodies, harmonies and lyrics. What's more sophisticated is the sound design aspect which is obviously not the subject of this discussion.

[merlyn]

These are very far from arbitrary “non-scale” chords! The F-Fm is a very old, very beaten route to returning to the tonic chord, being IV maj - IV minor - I maj (or eventually the III minor en route to the sub dominant group, then dominant and release to I.
Also the E maj in C is essentially raising the III from minor to dominant seventh to guide to VI minor, also a very characteristic harmonic path.

Sure, yes. I thought using examples from well known songs would be more accessible. With E in C and Fm in C it's the same note that's been changed. G# in E which is the same note, although spelled as Ab in Fm.

If we keep all the notes from C and change G to G# we have A harmonic minor, which is closely related to C. E and Fm then come from A harmonic minor.