Yet another ignorant question - Keys

[Scarpia]

I'll defer to the actual composers here, but I believe theory also helps one generate music. You might come up with a good-sounding chord progression at random, but it might be easier if you understand the accepted "rules" of harmony and work from there.

I don't find that opinion to conflict with what I said.  Theory of harmony allows gives you a conceptual framework for describing music that has been written, which is certainly is the basis for writing something new. 

[Grazioso]

I don't find that opinion to conflict with what I said.  Theory of harmony allows gives you a conceptual framework for describing music that has been written, which is certainly is the basis for writing something new.

True. I suppose it's analogous to linguistic grammar, which is both descriptive and prescriptive.

[Palmetto]

Start a melody on C, move up D, then to E, you get two whole steps, implying major. Start on A, move up to B, then to C, you get a whole then half step, which implies minor.

That was informative.  Now if I could hear the difference between whole and half steps...

[eyeresist]

I'll defer to the actual composers here, but I believe theory also helps one generate music. You might come up with a good-sounding chord progression at random, but it might be easier if you understand the accepted "rules" of harmony and work from there.

Heh. I used to think composers who wrote music by reusing thematic ideas in variation were lazy. "Why can't they just come up with something new?"

[jochanaan]

I'll defer to the actual composers here, but I believe theory also helps one generate music. You might come up with a good-sounding chord progression at random, but it might be easier if you understand the accepted "rules" of harmony and work from there.

That's backwards.  Theory helps you understand why what you've written sounds good--or doesn't.  And if what you've written isn't covered by the theory you know--well, you either have to learn more theory or come up with new theories. Now, it is possible to build a good composition around a theoretically interesting chord progression, but letting "theory" define the music you write results in uninteresting music.

Palmetto, you could do a lot worse than to check out J.S. Bach's Two- and Three-Part Inventions; they're simple enough yet interesting enough to give you a good foundation for continued ear training.

[Palmetto]

Palmetto, you could do a lot worse than to check out J.S. Bach's Two- and Three-Part Inventions; they're simple enough yet interesting enough to give you a good foundation for continued ear training.

Those were easy to find; the Wikipedia page is one that includes embedded MIDIs.  For anyone else interested,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventions_and_Sinfonias

But what exactly am I attempting to hear in these?  I hear notes go up and down.  I can differentiate between higher pitched melodies and intermittent lower pitched (harmonies?).  I can pick up some repeated phrases.  As a listening exercise, what should I alert to?

[Grazioso]

That's backwards.  Theory helps you understand why what you've written sounds good--or doesn't.  And if what you've written isn't covered by the theory you know--well, you either have to learn more theory or come up with new theories. Now, it is possible to build a good composition around a theoretically interesting chord progression, but letting "theory" define the music you write results in uninteresting music.

I wonder to what extent that attitude held sway over classical composers historically. To what extent did composers of the Baroque and Classical eras see theory as descriptive versus the academic codification of accepted norms to be honored more in the observance than in the breach? Or later, E.g., Bruckner, at age 30 deciding it was worth spending six years studying formal counterpoint. I doubt he did that merely to learn to describe what he was writing, but rather to fuel new work. Any Bruckner experts know?

N.B. I didn't say letting theory define or limit what you write, but rather suggesting routes.

[karlhenning]

Heh. I used to think composers who wrote music by reusing thematic ideas in variation were lazy. "Why can't they just come up with something new?"

OTOH, maybe it's the coming up with something new that is the lazy way out. ("What, you don't know how to work the material you've got? . . .")

[karlhenning]

N.B. I didn't say letting theory define or limit what you write . . . .

Well, but as long as the composer is possessed of his craft, who's to deny the value of Elective Limitation? . . .

[karlhenning]

. . . As a listening exercise, what should I alert to?

Do you mean, e.g., the difference between a whole-step and a half-step?

[Palmetto]

Heh. I used to think composers who wrote music by reusing thematic ideas in variation were lazy. "Why can't they just come up with something new?"

I can't speak for composers, but as a programmer I used to reuse code whenever possible.  Why reinvent (and debug) the wheel?  On the other hand, I wasn't attempting to make an artistic statement.

[Grazioso]

That was informative.  Now if I could hear the difference between whole and half steps...

Try this virtual keyboard: http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks2/music/piano/index.htm

Try, for example C, D, E, F, G, A, B, C and then back down for major. Then try A, B, C, D, E, F and back down for part of C's relative minor scale, A minor (relative minor means same notes, different starting point and therefore a different specific step pattern between all the notes).

That let's you hear the different step patterns between major and minor. Half steps are from any key up or down to the adjacent one. E.g. C to C#. A whole step is two keys up or down. E.g. C to D.

You can also hit the "chord mode" button at the left, depress the various keys you want, and then hit "play chord" to hear it.

Try C, E, G for a C major chord. Then C, D#, G for C minor. Notice how the middle note moved down one half step, changing the intervals to the notes on either side. It's this "3rd" that defines tonality as either major or minor. Removing it or replacing it, as in a power chord or suspended chord, can create an unsettled, floating, or ambivalent feel.

Try C and G alone for a C power chord (or dyad if you want to be picky ).

Try C, D, and G for a Csus2 chord (C without the third, with a suspended 2, i.e., second note of the scale).

C, F, G for Csus4

C, E, G, B for C major 7 (C major plus the 7th note of the scale, B)

Etc.

[karlhenning]

I can't speak for composers, but as a programmer I used to reuse code whenever possible.  Why reinvent (and debug) the wheel?  On the other hand, I wasn't attempting to make an artistic statement.

It's all in how you use (or elect not to use) the material . . . .

[Palmetto]

Do you mean, e.g., the difference between a whole-step and a half-step?

Oh, right; that question is what prompted the suggestion, wasn't it?

The notes in these examples come so fast I can't tell the relationship (interval?) between them beyond simply up and down.  Say the second note is higher than the first, and the third lower than the second.  I can't tell if the third is higher or lower than the first.  The first note doesn't last long enough for me to really get it locked in memory, and the second and third ones go by too quickly for me to analyze.

Try this virtual keyboard: http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks2/music/piano/index.htm

Try, for example C, D, E, F, G, A, B, C and then back down for major. Then try A, B, C, D, E, F and back down for part of C's relative minor scale, A minor (relative minor means same notes, different starting point and therefore a different specific step pattern between all the notes).

That let's you hear the different step patterns between major and minor. Half steps are from any key up or down to the adjacent one. E.g. C to C#. A whole step is two keys up or down. E.g. C to D.

A-ha!  Is this what y'all were aiming at when recommending a simple instrument?  I couldn't make the connection as to what I was supposed to getting from the exercise.  Obviously something like that will allow me to pace the notes to my own satisfaction.

[Grazioso]

A-ha!  Is this what y'all were aiming at when recommending a simple instrument?  I couldn't make the connection as to what I was supposed to getting from the exercise.  Obviously something like that will allow me to pace the notes to my own satisfaction.

Yes, a keyboard or guitar is particularly good for learning this material since you have everything laid out in front of you in linear or grid fashion and can hear chords to learn harmony.

[Palmetto]

One thing that might help with recognizing key changes is recognizing chord changes, which is, from the perspective of perception, not much different in that a new set of notes gets emphasized. Try it with an rock/pop song you know well. Here's an example:

http://www.youtube.com/v/tkJNyQfAprY

Starts out minor (gloomy, melancholy), repeating a chord sequence of Bm (i.e. B minor) to A through a quick descent to Em.
At 0:53, switches to major (more positive, happy sounding), going D A D A
1:08 stays in major, going C G C G
1:23 goes D A D A
1:38 C G C G again
1:54 (final line of the chorus) A C G D
2:46 after first solo, returns to the initial minor chord sequence

This might be helpful, too:

http://www.chordbook.com/guitarchords.php

It'll let you hear different types of chords. It's one thing to say a G7 chord (versus a plain G chord ) has a strong pull to a C chord. But hearing it makes it more obvious.

First, my apologies for being so slow to respond to this post.  Frankly, I was put off by the link to Pink Floyd, a group I don't get.  (That's probably because my sister liked them when we were teens and I developed the typical sibling disdain for anything the other liked.)  Regardless, when I played it I had a hard time separating what you were pointing out from the vocals and solo instruments.  (I assume vocals and lead were what the band was emphasizing when they recorded the track; they weren't cutting it for our purposes.)  Were you specifically referring to the (organ?) in the background?  Besides that, drums and (bass?) were the only instruments I could discern.

I'm not sure what you mean by a pull.  To me they all feel like independent chords (so many!); G7 doesn't sound any 'closer' to Cm than Gm does.  Part of it may be the choice of a guitar; when strummed the individual strings sound as separate notes to me; I don't hear a unified sound like I do with the keyboard simulator in chord mode. I'll play with that one some more.

[Grazioso]

First, my apologies for being so slow to respond to this post.  Frankly, I was put off by the link to Pink Floyd, a group I don't get.  (That's probably because my sister liked them when we were teens and I developed the typical sibling disdain for anything the other liked.)  Regardless, when I played it I had a hard time separating what you were pointing out from the vocals and solo instruments.  (I assume vocals and lead were what the band was emphasizing when they recorded the track; they weren't cutting it for our purposes.)  Were you specifically referring to the (organ?) in the background?  Besides that, drums and (bass?) were the only instruments I could discern.

I'm not sure what you mean by a pull.  To me they all feel like independent chords (so many!); G7 doesn't sound any 'closer' to Cm than Gm does.  Part of it may be the choice of a guitar; when strummed the individual strings sound as separate notes to me; I don't hear a unified sound like I do with the keyboard simulator in chord mode. I'll play with that one some more.

With the keyboard, try going from G to C and then try G7 to C. I.e.,  GBD to CEG then GBDF to CEG. With the guitar simulator, set the strum speed to fast up top, then save a sequence of C, F, G, C and play it in the "My chords" window. Then try C, F, G7, C. (Just the single letter alone in this context means major chord, btw.)

In a C major chord sequence, the G chord (V chord in the series created from the C major scale) wants to resolve to the I chord, C major. The G7 in an even more exaggerated way. One of the intervals in that chord is dissonant and sounds much more pleasant once it goes away and resolves to the "pretty" major chord Note too the notes in the G or G7 chord shifting just short distance to the notes CEG.

[Grazioso]

First, my apologies for being so slow to respond to this post.  Frankly, I was put off by the link to Pink Floyd, a group I don't get.  (That's probably because my sister liked them when we were teens and I developed the typical sibling disdain for anything the other liked.)  Regardless, when I played it I had a hard time separating what you were pointing out from the vocals and solo instruments.  (I assume vocals and lead were what the band was emphasizing when they recorded the track; they weren't cutting it for our purposes.)  Were you specifically referring to the (organ?) in the background?  Besides that, drums and (bass?) were the only instruments I could discern.

Sorry if Floyd is offputting  The chords of a piece can played by one instrument, like a guitar or keyboard, or built or implied by various instruments/vocals playing independent lines that mesh together and spell out parts or all of chords. Either way, hopefully you perceive the shifts in the overall "sonic picture".

Here's some more classic rock that might make it easier since the chords are strummed by the rhythm guitar and emphasized by the bass loud in the mix (dum, da-dum, dum). These are mostly plain-jane basic folk-rock chords used in a trillion familiar songs:

http://www.youtube.com/v/Gu2pVPWGYMQ

Intro sequence of Am F C G C C
0:14 vocals begin, 4 measures of C (song is in moderate 4/4 rhythm, each measure is 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and)
0:22 "I know..." 2 measures of G
0:27 "for some time" 6 measures of C
0:39 "I know" 2 measures of G
0:44 "like water" 2 measures of C

Chorus

0:49 "I wanna know" F to G
"have you ever seen the rain" C through 2 connecting chords with a descending bass line in their lowest tones to Am7/G (Am7 with a G bass note)--at least that's how I learned the chorus, others interpret it a little differently, but you should hear a downward movement working in tandem with the vocal melody.

repeat, etc.

[71 dB]

Intro sequence of Am F C G C C
0:14 vocals begin, 4 measures of C (song is in moderate 4/4 rhythm, each measure is 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and)
0:22 "I know..." 2 measures of G
0:27 "for some time" 6 measures of C
0:39 "I know" 2 measures of G
0:44 "like water" 2 measures of C

I can't "hear" the connection between the music and this listing. I think I need something very simple to connect chords with what I hear. I feel like I can tell the color is "reddish" while you can tell the exact RGB code "C53512" 

[Palmetto]

I can't "hear" the connection between the music and this listing. I think I need something very simple to connect chords with what I hear. I feel like I can tell the color is "reddish" while you can tell the exact RGB code "C53512" 

I'm afraid I have the same problem.  Am I listening for these chords from a specific instrument?