Music Theory Online Free Tuition

[lebouche]

Havent explored this greatly yet but it appears to be a useful tool.

http://www.musictheory.net/

[lebouche]

p.s

after some exploring have decided the cooless things are the ear trainers...no not shoes for your ears but aural aids to learn to recognise scales, chords, etc.

Also has a print your own score sheet page which could save some folks some mula.

[lebouche]

p.p.s. this is linked to the sire in the help section... who writes music like this??

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

[Fulcrum]

p.p.s. this is linked to the sire in the help section... who writes music like this??

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


Oh, I dunno.. Arnold Schoenberg, Alban Berg, Alfred Reed... even Aaron Copland tried his hand at dodecaphonic toward the end of his composing life. 'Cause (as he explained to Leonard Bernstein) he "ran out of chords".

It can be a handy discipline if you follow the rules-- and even handier when you start to break them and apply them to non-12-tone stuff.

[Grapestomper]

p.p.s. this is linked to the sire in the help section... who writes music like this??

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

Zappa messed about with 12-tone also. There's a 12-tone section in the song called "Brown shoes don't make it".

[Jason Phair]

Webern wrote some great stuff using 12-tone techniques.

[5down1up]

nice site :Thumbsup:

cool place to practice !
explain the 12 tone approach a lil more. i am interrested :grin:

[Fulcrum]

I completely forgot about Webern... knew there was at least one other guy. Stravinsky embraced the technique in his later years as well.

No, Bill Evans' Twelve Tone Tune is not dodecaphonic, at least not strictly so.

12-tone, or dodecaphonic, composition, relies on a few rules, which Schoenberg insisted were immutable:

The basic unit is the tone row-- a series of all twelve pitches of the chromatic scale arranged in such a way that it does not suggest a diatonic (or even a tonal) harmony. All material in the composition consists of that row and its compositional permutations-- original, retrograde, strict inversion, and retrograde inversion. Once the row starts, it needs to finish. Different rows may sound simultaneously. Notes may appear in any octave.

A hallmark of this type of composition is wilfully obfuscated rhythm, i.e., the listener is not easily able to tell where the bar line is.

As usual, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve-tone_technique) has more to say on the subject.

[fizbin]

12 tone is a ridiculous set of compositional rules. It's attempt at breaking the rules, so to speak, is largely amusical without having to actually think. Ornette Coleman or McCoy Tyner broke the rules with so much more panache. That is, they used their heart, mind, ears, soul rather than artificially preconceived anti-musical connect-the-dots composition-for-the-sake-of-composition. 12 tone music is basically only useful for horror movie soundtracks. Worst idea ever. Possibly a precursor to math rock. Not sure. Go fish.

Apologies, but I felt I had to speak on this one.

P.S. My fingernails on the chalkboard improvisations will be made available in 32 kbps mp3 format soon. Keep your ears peeeeeeled.

[amopae]

12 tone is a ridiculous set of compositional rules. It's attempt at breaking the rules, so to speak, is largely amusical without having to actually think. Ornette Coleman or McCoy Tyner broke the rules with so much more panache. That is, they used their heart, mind, ears, soul rather than artificially preconceived anti-musical connect-the-dots composition-for-the-sake-of-composition. 12 tone music is basically only useful for horror movie soundtracks. Worst idea ever. Possibly a precursor to math rock. Not sure. Go fish.

Apologies, but I felt I had to speak on this one.

P.S. My fingernails on the chalkboard improvisations will be made available in 32 kbps mp3 format soon. Keep your ears peeeeeeled.


Well, actually that set of rules might come handy to some composers that use it and take advantage to it. There are some works by Schoenberg, Alban Berg, Webern that are totally devoid of your "artificially preconceived anti-musical connect-the-dots composition-for-the-sake-of-composition".
Even Stravinsky used it in a very effective way.

It's just a technique, if you use almost ANY writing technique without good musical ideas then you'll have nothing, but if you have good musical ideas, you can treat them any way you like it and they might still be VERY interesting.

Sorry for the hijacking of the thread :Redface:

[5down1up]

as usual ... if you have no clue it all sounds a lil confusing ?
ive read through the explantations that can be found on the net, i heard some 12tone music, i had a lil time speaking to composers who are doing it ... still

i dont get the idea for real behind the concept :grin:

its chromatic approach, every note has to be in there, no note should be repeated etc. please give me a real basic example that makes my tiny brain go " BINGO ". :Thumbsup:

[Johnny]

It's an interesting exercise. For me, twelve-tone arises from two concepts to which I don't hold: subjective standards of beauty and the need to be original. Neither interests me very much.

But like I say, it's an interesting exercise. Some of it sounds neato.

[Fulcrum]

Well, actually that set of rules might come handy to some composers that use it and take advantage to it. There are some works by Schoenberg, Alban Berg, Webern that are totally devoid of your "artificially preconceived anti-musical connect-the-dots composition-for-the-sake-of-composition".
Even Stravinsky used it in a very effective way.

It's just a technique, if you use almost ANY writing technique without good musical ideas then you'll have nothing, but if you have good musical ideas, you can treat them any way you like it and they might still be VERY interesting.

Sorry for the hijacking of the thread :Redface:

Nicely put.

Schoenberg et al. opted to use the technique in an atonal context but that doesn't mean it can't be adapted to a tonal one. For example you could get some additional mileage just by relaxing the edict of structuring the row so as not to suggest tonality. (I know, I've done that.)

Hell, you don't need to use 12 tones either to use these techniques.. then of course it's not dodecaphonic but probably closer to a form of pandiatonicism (provided you are using a diatonic scale or mode as your source material).

[fizbin]

To me, this approach very much feels and sounds like an attempt at being different just to be different without a real sonic reason. Why should I use every tone once and only once? Ridiculous. I want to use A# twice and G not at all. There. Bite me Schoenborg.

[Fulcrum]

OK, so it's not for everybody.

If you prefer to think of it as a challenge, to see if you've got anything to say using some set or subset of rules, then it could work. If you prefer not to use it at all, that's fine too.

All this is, is a set of options, and perhaps one of its intentions is to get one to think a little bit differently about the compositional process. I don't write this way as a matter of course, but it's just one more tool in my arsenal in case I ever run my composition down a blind alley or up a tree and can't get back down.

[Oberlehrer]

Actually 12 tone composition is often handled a bit more "relaxed". There are some more different rules.

For example, you can repeat single notes directly after another; and you can group notes together to chords. Now add the fact that you can have more than one 12-tone row going at once.

One idea behind the whole principle was to avoid any semblances to traditional harmony; by using all 12 notes one most likely would avoid "favouring" certain notes and hence creating an "imbalance" toward them (and by this possibly creating a "tonal" feel for a certain piece).

A 12-tone row in itself doesn't have to sound atonal or non-harmonic; a famous example would be the row for Alban Berg's violin concerto.

One really basic and comparatively easy to understand example for a 12-tone composition would be Schoenberg's "Suite for piano op.25"; especially the "Praeludium" and the "Trio".

[fizbin]

Actually 12 tone composition is often handled a bit more "relaxed". There are some more different rules.


My personal favorite extra rule would be:

You may use any of the 12 tones as often or as little as you like.

Whattya think? Am I on to something?

fizbin

[dwoz]

My personal favorite extra rule would be:

You may use any of the 12 tones as often or as little as you like.

Whattya think? Am I on to something?

fizbin


yeah, you're onto something....tonic center.


:lol:

dwoz

[omikl]

My personal favorite extra rule would be:

You may use any of the 12 tones as often or as little as you like.

Whattya think? Am I on to something?

fizbin

There's an EVH quote in there, just hiding to get out...

[fizbin]

There's an EVH quote in there, just hiding to get out...

I should hope to be as much as half as talented and at them same time a quarter as self-assured.

[lebouche]

Heres another link for lessons of all sorts including songwriting:Thumbsup:

http://www.berkleeshares.com

If you didnt get the chance to go to Berklee...

[John Suitcase]

I agree that the 12tone methodology seems arbitrary, but the imposition of any set of rules, without allowing for exceptions, can be a great benefit to the artist.

I think of it like painting versus collage. It's a lot easier to do collage, but it's much harder to create a collage that has any artistic value. Limit yourself to one medium (paint and canvas) and the artistic possibilities get larger, and more impactful. Reduce your options to only a few colors, only a particular way of working, with a limited set of subjects and bang, you're Picasso.

It's the same with anything. Imposing restrictions on yourself is a step towards creating something truly interesting and impactful. Allowing yourself to just do whatever you feel is a sure road to bad art.

Guiding principles are what make most activities worthwhile (you can stretch this philosophy forever), whether it be sports, love, cooking, whatever. Changing the guiding principles changes the game, and allows for new results. If you get frustrated and say 'screw it' then you create something that isn't new, most of the time, you'll just fall back on what you know.

Try to make a record with no guitars and no kick drum, let's say. A punk record.

Now you're going to learn something new, I think. (The resultant art may not be good, you still have to be able to create something worthwhile; the rules are just going to help you look outside your comfort zone.)

[fizbin]

I agree that the 12tone methodology seems arbitrary, but the imposition of any set of rules, without allowing for exceptions, can be a great benefit to the artist.
...or it can be stifling and just generally sucky.


I think of it like painting versus collage. It's a lot easier to do collage, but it's much harder to create a collage that has any artistic value. Limit yourself to one medium (paint and canvas) and the artistic possibilities get larger, and more impactful.

I would argue that the reverse is more often true. Also, in the comparison of 12 tone to more standard methods of composition you could argue that we are talking about the same medium - i.e. sound. A more appropriate analogy between music and painting would be comparing the notes to the colors.

Reduce your options to only a few colors, only a particular way of working, with a limited set of subjects and bang, you're Picasso.
I'm sure you know this is utter bullshit. Why did you say it?


It's the same with anything. Imposing restrictions on yourself is a step towards creating something truly interesting and impactful.
...or it can lead to absolute rubbish, depending on who's driving.

Allowing yourself to just do whatever you feel is a sure road to bad art.
Certainly in composition there are rules to be followed and broken as necessary, though 12 tone composition does not allow us to break the really crappy rule. Its main "rule" is flawed, synthetic, unnatural. It just doesn't sound very good as-is. I have nothing against atonality necessarily and certainly breaking out of the diatonic chains is great, but 12 tone takes the wrong approach.

[John Suitcase]

I wasn't suggesting that Picasso's genius could be reduced to a simple algorithm, but that a large part of his genius was in creating his own unique set of rules. He was a fully capable traditional illustrator, as evidenced by the work he did as a young man. But, he didn't become a great artist until he restricted himself to a much smaller subset of methods and techniques.

The whole point of an arbitrary set of restrictions is to force oneself to be more creative, and to break through the conventions of traditional composition. Music created this way is often challenging to listen to, and sometimes fails to appeal to our basic aesthetic sense.

I think of it like abstract art, too. There is a purpose, and whether the artist achieves his purpose or not, it expands the vocabulary, and forces both the artist and the patron to look at the work on another level.

I think that if the composer's purpose is to sell toothpaste, using something like 12 tone methodology is probably wrong-headed. But as a challenging way to expand the pallet of the composer, it's legitimate. And creating a work that succeeds aesthetically within such a construct is a true achievement.

[fizbin]

I wasn't suggesting that Picasso's genius could be reduced to a simple algorithm, but that a large part of his genius was in creating his own unique set of rules. He was a fully capable traditional illustrator, as evidenced by the work he did as a young man. But, he didn't become a great artist until he restricted himself to a much smaller subset of methods and techniques.
IMO your comparison of Picasso in this case greatly short changes Picasso himself. Picasso developed a style of his own. He did not do so by following strict rules laid out by someone else, where the rules themselves were flawed. That is my contention. The rules of 12 tone music nearly always result in something that is fit for little more than a horror show soundtrack. How then do you convey an emotion through 12 tone music? Well, if you want to be "scary" then you're set. You barely have to think at all. Just throw together a tone row. Bang you're a "composer".


The whole point of an arbitrary set of restrictions is to force oneself to be more creative, and to break through the conventions of traditional composition. Music created this way is often challenging to listen to, and sometimes fails to appeal to our basic aesthetic sense.
If you have to force yourself to be creative through some sort of compositional etude, you are doomed before you begin. Just because it's hard to listen to doesn't lend it any more artistic credentials than Brittany Spears. In fact, Brittany's writer probably spent more time on her crappy songs than Schoenborg did once he had his set of compositional rules defined. (OK, I am probably exaggerating for effect here)


I think of it like abstract art, too. There is a purpose, and whether the artist achieves his purpose or not, it expands the vocabulary, and forces both the artist and the patron to look at the work on another level.
I enjoy a lot of abstract art. I enjoy much modern poetry. However, only Jackson Pollack was Jackson Pollack. The next guy that came along and splattered paint against a canvas convinced of his own genius was just a guy who soullessly splattered paint against a canvas. I hesitate to use the painting analogy because it does not translate to music. One art form is very difficult to compare to another. That is, for instance, you can declare abstract art to be like 12 tone music, or you can compare it to free jazz, or the "Dead Space" jam at a Grateful Dead concert, or Phillip Glass, or one can many times attempt to compare it to anything really that suits an argument. I would contend that 12 tone music is much less like abstract art than many would have it be. IMO it is much more rigidly defined, and not in a good way.


I think that if the composer's purpose is to sell toothpaste, using something like 12 tone methodology is probably wrong-headed. But as a challenging way to expand the pallet of the composer, it's legitimate. And creating a work that succeeds aesthetically within such a construct is a true achievement.
Again, declaring 12 tone music as something that is anti-commercial doesn't automatically make it good. Any compositional method is "legitimate" (short of outright plagiarism, what is an illegitimate compositional method?). My argument is that the entire theory behind 12 tone composition is flawed.

Here it is in a nutshell - it's someone saying, "be anti-establishment", "be different", "but do it my way, here are my rules"

[fizbin]

If you have to force yourself to be creative through some sort of compositional etude, you are doomed before you begin.

Allow me to slap myself and say that I should not judge others' methods of inspiration. I only know what works for me.

Normally I don't judge other people's music that critically, but as you can tell I do have some issues with the 12 tone method. That's really about it. :Thumbsup:

[John Suitcase]

I think we all have some baggage when it comes to creativity.

I've spent a lot of time thinking about things like rule sets in creative endeavours, and my 'defense' of 12 tone is really just about that.

I think that it's a two-sided coin. On the one hand, establishing a creative context for your work (establishing a set of working rules, 'no samples, no drum machines, no strings, no backing vocals, live takes only, etc) can be useful. Of course, in most cases the artist doesn't actually think these rules through and make them explicit.

But when you release an album that has any degree of success, you have established a set of rules, implicitly. By that I mean that if you come out with a second album that changes the rules, your fans may be turned off. Adding strings to your punk record may not be accepted.

That doesn't mean that the artist should be boxed in by their prior work, but I think that knowing the boundaries can help the artist work within them more effectively, and expand them consciously, in a way that maintains their identity with the audience.

It's a complicated subject, and one that I think a lot of artists never even think about in these terms. Everyone who's ever been in a band has had the situation where you drop a song because it 'doesn't sound like us'. But they don't take the next step and think about why.


Oh, and I agree that most 12 tone stuff sounds pretty awful!

Bach worked within a pretty explicit rule set, too, though, and I think his music is listenable, if not my favorite...

[lebouche]

I always thought Bach sounded a little mathmatical...maybe thats why.
I used to play the Toccata and Fuge in d minor.
[QUOTE]Bach worked within a pretty explicit rule set, too, though, and I think his music is listenable, if not my favorite...
[QUOTE]
Just wondering....
Did you read this or work it out for yourself through a good knowledge of theory.

[John Suitcase]

I've read a few things referrring to this, there's a good book called Godel, Escher, Bach, that talks about math and self-referencial things. There's also a lot of analysis on this on the web, if you search for 'mathematical and bach' on Google.

Basically, he used certain mathematical approaches to 'balance' his compositions, both harmonically and structurally.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that he had an algorythm that he could just feed a melody into, but his beliefs about numbers and math strongly influenced his decisions.

Here's one such analysis of the 'Musical Offering':

http://www.ams.org/featurecolumn/archive/canons.html

It basically shows the ways in which Bach would take his initial melody and rework it using several math-like devices (inversion, changing the note lengths, playing in reverse, etc)

Interesting stuff!

[Spock]

I've read a few things referrring to this, there's a good book called Godel, Escher, Bach, that talks about math and self-referencial things.

I think you need some rep points for bringing up that book.

[Grapestomper]

I think you need some rep points for bringing up that book.

It's interesting that it's come up twice in the last week in completely different contexts.

http://womb.mixerman.net/showpost.php?p=29392&postcount=83


Strange attractor?


Oops, thats "Chaos"!
M