# Whats the coolest piece of theory you've ever used?



## lnname (Aug 17, 2009)

We all like learning theory, and we all like applying it to the diverse genres we play.

So here's a cool opportunity to wax lyrical about the little ingenious things you've done that your band mates and fans don't quite grasp. 

What is the coolest piece of theory you've ever used in a song? What was its significance? And if you've recorded it can we hear it?

(p.s. if I've tagged you and you don't know me its cause i think your music is worth understanding and I'd like to hear what you have to say on this subject)


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

Hmmm... I'd say I've made some pretty interesting compositions involving heavy use of Minor 3rd modulation (the process where you transpose melodic phrases or motifs upwards in minor thirds over the same chordal accompaniment). When done right - and it took me a while to really get a handle on the approach - it can produce some very 'out' sounding, yet somehow appropriate harmonies. It's somewhat commonplace in jazz improvisations, but I used it in a prog/tech death composition and ended up with some VERY interesting and unique sounding riffs and harmonies.

Unfortunately, I haven't recorded any of these riffs, though I intend to use them to write a complete piece. Will post it here for sure, if and when I actually get around to doing that! :-D


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

TheSyncopath said:


> Hmmm... I'd say I've made some pretty interesting compositions involving heavy use of Minor 3rd modulation (the process where you transpose melodic phrases or motifs upwards in minor thirds over the same chordal accompaniment). When done right - and it took me a while to really get a handle on the approach - it can produce some very 'out' sounding, yet somehow appropriate harmonies. It's somewhat commonplace in jazz improvisations, but I used it in a prog/tech death composition and ended up with some VERY interesting and unique sounding riffs and harmonies.
> 
> Unfortunately, I haven't recorded any of these riffs, though I intend to use them to write a complete piece. Will post it here for sure, if and when I actually get around to doing that! :-D



what exactly do you mean transpose melodic phrases upwards in minor thirds? do you mean play the same lick or phrase but up a minor third each time over a chord progression or do you mean something else?

i'm still learning theory so i'll be in here asking some questions. hopefully you guys don't mind? :-D


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

Why should anyone mind, a guitar forum is meant to be a platform to help other musicians and share ideas!

On a very basic level, the concept of minor third modulation involves taking a phrase or 'lick' as you refer to it, playing it over a chord, and transposing or shifting it up a minor third each time. The chord accompaniment can stay static, or change to reflect the shifting melody that the solo voice is playing.

If you've heard any of John Coltrane's music, especially 'Central Park West', you'll notice that this is a cornerstone of his improvisation style. I recommend you get your hands on a transcription of some of Coltrane's stuff. It shouldn't be too hard to find it online. Coltrane's feared and revered composition, Giant Steps, also employs modulation heavily. Central Park West uses minor third modulation as a compositional device, while Giant Steps uses major thirds instead.

I have an issue of Guitar Player that has an entire lesson on understanding and learning Giant Steps, and that's where I picked up the modulation concept and really learned how to apply it to my playing. Here's the online version of that lesson: Conquering Giant Steps

Here's a youtube video that plays the song and shows a transcription simultaneously. I haven't checked out the video myself, so I don't know exactly how accurate the transcription is, but it should definitely help.



The basic principles of modulation are the same, whether it's in minor thirds or major thirds, so studying Giant Steps will definitely get you well-versed with modulation. You can then apply those ideas to minor thirds and check out Central Park West to study minor third modulation.

Hope this helps!

Daniel.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

^ ok that kind of makes sense. i hear him do that alot. and i think that's what confuses me about jazz is that it'll sound like it's switched keys for like half a second and then go right back and i have a hard time keeping up.

and you'd be surprised how many times i've been yelled at in other forums for asking questions in "someone else's thread"


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

Haha no worries, mate. The very subject of this thread screams 'QUESTIONS!'.

Yeah, modulation is a very common technique in jazz improvisation, you'll hear it all over the place, and until you get a decent level of understanding of the concept, it's bound to throw you off and make you go 'Wha?!'. But it's worth studying and mastering, it's one of the most exciting and useful pieces of theory I've learnt.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

TheSyncopath said:


> Haha no worries, mate. The very subject of this thread screams 'QUESTIONS!'.
> 
> Yeah, modulation is a very common technique in jazz improvisation, you'll hear it all over the place, and until you get a decent level of understanding of the concept, it's bound to throw you off and make you go 'Wha?!'. But it's worth studying and mastering, it's one of the most exciting and useful pieces of theory I've learnt.



the funniest thing about all of this is i got a brief telephone lesson on modulation just yesterday from a friend of mine who decided to start teaching and is now like a theory encyclopedia. and then BAM here's a thread about theory and the first freakin' thing i see is modulation. 

i'm really looking forward to incorporating this into my playing. i need something new to play around with. i'll be checking out some more coltrane and stuff, though.

usually i try to solo along to coltrane, miles davis or bela fleck and the flecktones and i think i'll be a little more successful now.


----------



## lnname (Aug 18, 2009)

actually my band has a song that does that! TheSyncopath how do you get around 7ths? when I play it, it puts the accident in accidental. 

For Konfyouzd the easiest approach is this play a riff in a scale - lets say C, (on the white notes of the piano) then move the whole riff up three notes so all your Cs become Es etc. that's your first move, it'll sound nice if played together with the original, iron maiden do this a lot, or you could reuse your original backing chord progression. You can do the same again and now the C's that you were originally playing become G's, so the riff will still probably sound good if played over what you started with. if you had to many Bs to start off with they will all now be Fs and those two notes don't sound that nice together- so you could start playing them as an F# instead and it will almost undoubtedly sound awesome.


----------



## JakeRI (Aug 18, 2009)

dominant seventh chord subs.

for example

A7=C7=Eb7=F#7

it includes the tritone sub. there are 3 other subs too for any dominant 7 chord


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

lnname said:


> actually my band has a song that does that! TheSyncopath how do you get around 7ths? when I play it, it puts the accident in accidental.
> 
> For Konfyouzd the easiest approach is this play a riff in a scale - lets say C, (on the white notes of the piano) then move the whole riff up three notes so all your Cs become Es etc. that's your first move, it'll sound nice if played together with the original - iron maiden do this a lot, or over a nice backing chord progression. You can do the same again and now the C's that you were originally playing become G's, so the riff will still probably sound good if played over what you started with. if you had to many Bs to start off with they will all now be Fs and those two notes don't sound that nice together- so you could start playing them as an F# instead and it will almost undoubtedly sound awesome.



so from c major to e major? or c major to c# minor or some such jazz...?

you may lose me very soon. just warnin' ya.


----------



## sPliNtEr_777 (Aug 18, 2009)

Hmmm, I remember last year me and my teacher formulated a tapped solo around a bangra scale, and I think the overall conglomeration of scales/arpeggios ended up technically being called the "consumated contrapuntal east indian purvi in A minor"

That was cool... cant remember how to play it tho


----------



## lnname (Aug 18, 2009)

wait, are you doing that in metal? do you keep the thirds? can i hear this?


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

@splinter that sounds like a dimmu borgir album title


----------



## lnname (Aug 18, 2009)

no no no!(does an impression of an enraged piano teacher)

from c major to c major

we stay on the white keys (although we might want to use an F# in an emergency)

we use different bits of the scale, things called modes. So if your riff is in the Ionian(tons of c's), i'm suggesting you move all the notes up by three white keys C2E D2F E2G F2A etc so your in the phyrgian (tons of E's but still on white notes)


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

oh so you're just switching modes. i get the concept of modes and all. i was confused as to whether or not you were just switching to the new mode or to a new key completely. so when you say transpose the lick you mean hit the corresponding sequence of notes in the that mode? basically like playing the harmony but consecutively rather than simultaneously?


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

Inname, what you seem to be talking about is harmonizing a melody in diatonic thirds, which is what all those classic metal bands like Iron Maiden do, that twin guitar harmony thing.

The minor third modulation which I was referring to, is, though related, a different concept. Here, the diatonic concept is thrown out the window, instead you transpose, not harmonise, the lines in strict minor thirds, creating a more dissonant, 'off-sounding' or 'jazzy', if you will, harmonic implication against the backing chord accompaniment.

So say your root chord is A dom7 (A - C# - E - G), and, for the sake of simplicity of illustration, your solo phrase is a A dom7 arpeggio, if you were to apply minor third modulation in its most rudimentary form here, you'd be playing C - E - G - Bb, or a C dom7 arpeggio, creating that dissonant substitution sound that will sound great if used appropriately and in the right context. After hitting the last note of the C dom7th arpeggio - Bb, you could slide down a semitone back to A, which is the root note of the backing A dom7 chord, and continue an A dom7 arpeggio from there, thus resolving the harmonic tension created by the minor third substitution and making the entire phrase sound complete and resolved.

This is the most rudimentary example conceivable, and probably doesn't do enough justice to the concept, though.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

now that sounds like what i said the first time.


----------



## lnname (Aug 18, 2009)

oh cool! i'm sorry if i was konfyousing you! the irony ie that your question and my answer have helped me rather than you

now i _really _ want to hear this piece


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

^ Try the basic example I described and play around with it for some time, until you get the idea under your fingers. That should clear the Konfyouzion.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

ha i shall. i hate the fact that i have to be at work. i always hang out on here and learn some cool shit that i can't immediately apply. makes it very difficult to concentrate here.


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

lnname, I haven't recorded the piece I was talking about earlier yet, but I've still got the riffs floating about in my head, so when I get the time, I'll turn them into a proper composition and upload it. Till then, play around with the example and see what you come up with!

@ Konfyouzd: You don't need a guitar for this! Just hum out the arpeggio for the backing chord several times out loud until it establishes its tonal center, and then hum out the ideas and it should work. Or maybe not. Lol.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Aug 18, 2009)

Since you were talking about modulation, I'll give my input. There's a few ways to modulate. Here are the methods I've learned:

&#8226; *Direct modulation*, which is simply going to the new key without preparation. This is sometimes called phrase modulation, because it is common to have a phrase in one key, and have the next in a new key.



&#8226; *Common chord modulation*, which involves two keys which share chords. Take C and D, for example.
C major: C Dm Em F G Am B°
D major: D Em F#m G A Bm C#°
Between these two keys, the common chords are Em and G. The idea is to write a progression in one key, and when the chord you want to use to modulate pops up, you finish the progression in the new key. For example:
C G7 C Dm G A7 D

The common chords are called "pivot chords", because they act as a pivot point between the two keys. I can't do the fancy bracket for analysis of the modulation, but the progression in C is I V7 I ii V, and the G is also the IV in the key of D, so, from G, it's D: IV V7 I. This is the best mockup I can do, notice that V from C and IV from D line up, as they are the same chord:
I V7 I ii V
____D: IV V7 I


--------

Before I go on to the next one, I'm going to talk about *secondary functions*. Big word, I know, but it's really pretty easy. The idea is to take a normal progression, say ii V7 I (or Dm G7 C in the key of C), and extend the it by inserting chords that act like each chord belongs to a new key. Thus, if we take our ii V7 I, and act like ii (Dm) is its own key, we can have something like V7/ii ii V7 I (A7 Dm G7 C). V7/ii is pronounced "five-seven of two". This can be repeated again on the V chord, so our progression looks like V7/ii ii V7/V V7 I (A7 Dm D7 G7 C). In classical music, this is most frequently practiced with dominant chords and diminished chords, but there are examples in jazz where ii V I progressions are used as secondary functions, as such:
iiø7/ii V7/ii ii V7 I.

--------


&#8226; *Altered chord modulation*, or *chromatic modulation*, chromatically alters the harmony of one key to cadence into another. This is most frequently and most convincingly done by making the altered chord a dominant seventh or fully diminished chord.
C Dm G7 C C7 Fm Bbm C7 Fm

In these modulations, the altered chord is analyzed as a secondary function in the original key.
I ii V7 I V7/IV
_____Fm: V7 i iv V7 i



&#8226; *Sequential modulations* aren't so much harmonic as they are melodic. They use motivic unity to create a flow, and can happen quite rapidly. If we take a I IV I V I progression and create a sequence from it, it might look something like this:
G C G D G F Bb F C F Eb Ab Eb Bb Eb
It's the same progression, but descending by major seconds.



&#8226; *Common tone modulations* are like the common chord modulations, but instead of using a whole chord, they employ a single tone in the key. Thus, distant modulations are possible. If we took the key of C and the key of Db, we have these chords:
C: C Dm Em F G Am B°
Db: Db Ebm Fm Gb Ab Bbm C°
As you can see, there are no chords in common. However, the scales themselves have a couple of tones:
C: C D E F G A B
Db: Db Eb F Gb Ab Bb C
F and C are common tones between the two scales, so they can be used to pivot between the keys. Common tone modulations frequently result in chromatic mediant relationships, which I will cover next.



&#8226; *Chromatic mediant relationships* operate on a similar principal as the common tone modulation. The requirement is that it is between two chords of the same (major or minor) quality, and that their roots are a third apart. This results in one common tone between them. Take Dm and F#m: DFA and F#AC#. Notice that C# is a minor second away from D, and that F# is a minor second away from F, hence the "chromatic" mediant.

TheSyncopath, this is what you were talking about.

From this idea stems the doubly chromatic mediant, which involves two chords a third apart, but with different chord qualities. For example, Dm and F#: DFA and F#A#C#. Notice that there are no common tones this time. Supposedly, they're always supposed to end up with no common tones, but it you take Dm and F, they have two tones in common. Then again, they're in the same key, so they're not related by chromatic mediant, I guess.

Coltrane changes utilize root movement by descending major thirds, which makes them related to the chromatic mediant concept, as I recently pointed out in another thread.



&#8226; *Enharmonic modulation* takes tones from a chord that are enharmonic (sound the same but are spelled differently) in a different key and uses them to pivot between keys. The most frequently encountered substitutions involve the tritone. Take, for example, B and F. These can be spelled Cb and F, or B and E#. The dominant chords built around them can be G7 (GBDF), Db7 (Db F Ab Cb), or C#7 (C# E# G# B, enharmonic to Db7). G7 resolves to C (or Cm), Db7 resolves to Gb (or Gbm), and C#7 resolves to F# (or F#m). Note that both Gb and F# are a tritone away from C.

Fully diminished chords are more ambiguous than dominant chords, and contain two tritones, which doubles their possibilities of resolution. BDFAb (B°7) can be spelled in a large variety of ways. The important thing to consider is that any tone in a fully diminished chord can act as a root, as each tone is a minor third away from the next tone in the chord. Thus, B can be the root, and resolve to C (or Cm), D can be the root and resolve to Eb (or Ebm), F can be the root and resolve to Gb (or Gbm), or Ab can be the root and resolve to Bb (or Bbm).

Uh, I think that's all of them, unless you consider monophonic modulation, which just incorporates those techniques in a melody.



EDIT: There's also change of mode, but that's not really a modulation, as the tonal center remains the same. An example would be going from the key of C major to the key of C minor. Something like C Dm G7 Cm Fm G7 Cm G7 Cm

One could use this as a step in modulation, though, as the relative major of C minor is Eb, and the chords of C minor present more possibilities of modulation. There are many clever things one can do with key relationships.


----------



## xtrustisyoursx (Aug 18, 2009)

i didn't do this with my band, but i've done some twelve tone composition that was a blast.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 18, 2009)

TheSyncopath said:


> lnname, I haven't recorded the piece I was talking about earlier yet, but I've still got the riffs floating about in my head, so when I get the time, I'll turn them into a proper composition and upload it. Till then, play around with the example and see what you come up with!
> 
> @ Konfyouzd: You don't need a guitar for this! Just hum out the arpeggio for the backing chord several times out loud until it establishes its tonal center, and then hum out the ideas and it should work. Or maybe not. Lol.



i think you may have over-estimated my ear. 

and no one at work wants to hear me sing.


----------



## AvantGuardian (Aug 18, 2009)

I've dabbled in some serialist and atonal composition on my own, but the most I think I ever got away with in a band was opening a solo with a lick that was an arpeggiation of a DminMaj7 chord. I've always liked the way a minor major 7 sounds, but its pretty difficult to work it subtley into a rock context.


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 18, 2009)

SchecterWhore, right you are. That's the full story on modulation for everyone! :-D

sPliNtEr_777, Indian Bhangra scales? Haha. It's funny, we Indians have to hear that stuff all day (I personally can't stand Bhangra music), so we generally pay little attention to that kinda stuff. But it's interesting that you and your teacher messed around with it enough to create something cool


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 19, 2009)

another quetion:

someone mentioned atonal... time for you guys to konfyouz the fuck outa me again. 

are there actual atonal scales? because it always sounds so random but somehow organized. hard to explain. but when i listen to buckethead when he does all that atonal stuff i'm almost certain i can pick out specific licks that he reuses from time to time. maybe i'm just REALLY baked.


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 19, 2009)

@ Konfyouzd - The nature of atonal means that you disregard the concept of scales. I suppose the only 'scale' you could possibly use would be the chromatic scale.

Listen to some early death metal like Deicide or Morbid Angel for good examples of atonal soloing. The riffs are quite often atonal too.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 19, 2009)

so does that mean that you can hit literally any note you want? that sounds too easy.


----------



## TheSyncopath (Aug 19, 2009)

Well the real difficulty is in picking the right 'any note' at the right time. Atonal playing can sound great if done well, ie. the right notes are chosen, and can sound like complete random bullshit if you're just shooting in the dark.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Aug 19, 2009)

Konfyouzd said:


> another quetion:
> 
> someone mentioned atonal... time for you guys to konfyouz the fuck outa me again.
> 
> are there actual atonal scales? because it always sounds so random but somehow organized. hard to explain. but when i listen to buckethead when he does all that atonal stuff i'm almost certain i can pick out specific licks that he reuses from time to time. maybe i'm just REALLY baked.



Eh... Yes, and no. I say that because atonality is not achieved so much through the use of a scale as it is through avoidance of a cadence or patterns that establish a tonic. There are two schools: serial and nonserial atonalism. Serial atonality is probably what you'll hear more of. It's the twelve-tone business, with tone rows, and, depending on whose model you follow, tons and tons of rules. Any understanding of dodecaphonic (twelve-tone) atonality begins with the tone row. A tone row is formed from all twelve chromatic pitches, and no pitch within the row can repeat until each pitch has sounded. So, if you take a chromatic scale, E F F# G G# A A# B C C# D D#, and build a row, it might look something like this:
G A# C# F D A F# G# E C B D#
It's not the best row, I know, but it illustrates the basic concept.
The tone row can be transposed, inverted (for example, instead of ascending a major third, you descend a major third), played in retrograde (backwards), or put in retrograde inversion. You can make matrices for all of the transpositions and manipulations of a row at this site, it's kind of cool:
Matrix Generator

It may seem that this is a limited system, and once you've heard one row, you've heard them all (or, rather, there are a finite number of rows, and once you've heard all of them, that's it), but this is not the case. Anton Webern, one of the students of Arnold Schoenberg, did some particularly interesting composition with rows, employing simultaneities (pitches occuring at the same time that you can't quite call a chord) which he would derive from having the tone row playing at the same time as a transposition of the row, orchestrate like crazy, having the row split up among instruments so that it sounds like hell, and had a knack for making rows that were structured with multiple symmetries. Really complex shit.

Some atonalists take this to the next step and serialize rhythm and all sorts of other stuff, but I won't get into that.

Nonserial atonality basically means that you do whatever to avoid a tonal center. I'm even less acquainted with this than serial atonality. There's usually (Ha!) a lot of chromaticism, and a lack of tonal center means that you have to analyze the music in terms of referential pitches and pitch classes. I think "free atonality" goes under nonserial atonalism. There are volumes written on both serial and nonserial atonality, and I don't understand it very well at all. Tonal music is so much easier, even if it's ridiculously chromatic.

So, on one hand, the chromatic scale is the pitch source for serial atonality, but on the other hand, it's not about the scale at all, but the way in which the pitches are organized. A whole tone scale has no tonal center, nor does a diminished scale, but they are not strictly "atonal". Schemes utilizing whole tone scales and diminished scales can be used in atonality, nonetheless. There is also microtonal music that can be classified as atonal, like this:


The Care Bears version is funny, but I can't embed it. This scared the shit out of my friends when I was driving them around at night. 9:08 rocks; this is what the sheet music looks like there:


----------



## AvantGuardian (Aug 19, 2009)

Konfyouzd said:


> another quetion:
> 
> someone mentioned atonal... time for you guys to konfyouz the fuck outa me again.
> 
> are there actual atonal scales? because it always sounds so random but somehow organized. hard to explain. but when i listen to buckethead when he does all that atonal stuff i'm almost certain i can pick out specific licks that he reuses from time to time. maybe i'm just REALLY baked.


 
When I write atonal music, I tend to come up with some sort of melodic fragment or arpeggio or little synthetic scale that I work around. For example, say I am noodling around and come up with a melody or fragment that uses C#, D#, G, and Ab. From there I might try to focus my composition around these notes and my melodic idea, but I will freely use any other notes to connect or alter my ideas that are based around that initial "scale." That gives me a little more direction and cohesiveness in an atonal piece. I don't think of any of the notes as a "root" or anything, but I have kind of a scale with some specific intervals that characterize the piece.


----------



## Ryan-ZenGtr- (Oct 29, 2009)

I'm going to hijack this serialism debate with boasts and a plug... HAHA! 

*Waves a pirate flag with pride*

I wrote a meaty metal breakdown in one of my songs, called "Concrete Concept" with legato diminshed intervals, ending with a whole tone run... And made it sound "Normal".

I also got a optimistic outro on an epic metal ballad, "ICE" about the world banking cartels with an ascending whole tone sequence, that also sounds "Normal", with 3/4's of that song being 7/8, the outro in 4/4.

My thoughts on the idea of outrageous theory being applied in music intended to entertain are... If an audiences entrusts their evening at your show, there is no need to crush their minds with unabashed thrusts towards the outer edge of the musical envelope. Unless that is what you're into, of course... 

I think the skill is; throwing cunning composition into the mix, then seeing how many guitarists in the audience notice... 

Instrumental Demo's are available online, whilst I complete the album before the new year, finalising the vocals etc. etc. etc....

You can hear some of my work at:

The Metal Band on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads

Or alternatively

Nocturnal Playground on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads

Check it out, I'm sure you'll enjoy!


----------



## scottro202 (Nov 3, 2009)

Well, thanks to a local musician named Barry Richman, I have had an obsession with Maj7 chords. I play int he praise band at my church, and it's fun to throw Maj7's in there over the regular minors and majors used in praise music 

Also, modes. If you play guitar, you should learn modes IMO. Makes your playing so much more melodically interesting


----------



## guitarplayerone (Nov 3, 2009)

definitely i guess the harmonization using diatonic triads. But also, classical musical theory has definitely helped me write much more cohesive sounding songs, because the progressions are very natural for the ear to follow (and then you get into doing some modulations, and they REALLY stick out 

and sorry to all atonalists, but I can't stand atonal music after hanging out with this one girl for a few months.

_and_ she liked blotted science

i couldn't stand the atonal shit though. plus was allergic to cats. (man i figured a girl who liked blotted science would be perfect for me) 

/end rant


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Nov 4, 2009)

There's also the definition of atonality in that the music doesn't easily fit into a key in any sense, but may have a tonic. Various death metal bands, Meshuggah and Slayer would fit into this odd category.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 4, 2009)

All_¥our_Bass;1725055 said:


> There's also the definition of atonality in that the music doesn't easily fit into a key in any sense, but may have a tonic. Various death metal bands, Meshuggah and Slayer would fit into this odd category.



"Tonic" and "atonal" don't go together. Meshuggah and Slayer are certainly atonal (for the most part), but what you perceive as a tonic may in fact be the central motif. This melodic idea (i.e.: riff) is stated throughout the piece, and thus creates musical cohesiveness. This idea has been used in many atonal works. Check it:



Listen to the music up to 1:30. While arguments arise over the tonality (or lack thereof) of this introduction, this is a classic example of a sequence being used to avoid a tonal center. The ambiguity of the harmony also refuses to define a tonic. Obviously, Meshuggah, Slayer, and most death metal bands out there aren't utilizing melodic and harmonic sequences, but the idea of basing music around a motif rather than a system of resolutions puts an emphasis on intervallic relationships rather than harmonic relationships. The musical unit is that motif.


----------



## JohnIce (Nov 4, 2009)

I'm looking forward to reading through this topic at a later date with some coffee at hand!

I think anything involving key changes is really cool, especially the less obvious ones. I tend to go a bit crazy with that stuff in bridges or other short bursts, the key is to use it sparingly and not lose the tonal centre. I've got tons of inspiration for that stuff by listening to, ironically, Kumi Koda (kind of the japanese version of Britney ).


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Nov 5, 2009)

But repeated motifs can have tonics, especially if a note is repeated often and/or played on strong beats.
But not all motifs have a tonic.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 6, 2009)

All_¥our_Bass;1727558 said:


> But repeated motifs can have tonics, especially if a note is repeated often and/or played on strong beats.
> But not all motifs have a tonic.



True, motifs often do have a tonic, which lends them to a great amount of flexibility in sonata form compositions and fugues, where the motif can be perceived in different keys, particularly if there is a sequence involved. And, as you mentioned, a motif does not necessarily have to have a tonic: the melodic content is preserved, and the harmonic reference point is omitted. Also, there are tonal approaches to atonality, which is what was occurring in the classical music of the middle to late romantic period: key centres were shifting so rapidly, it was sometimes difficult to determine a tonic.

I wish I still had this thing I composed last year; there was a sequence in it that sounded completely atonal, but, in reality, was just a circle of fifths. This isn't it, but it was something like this:

```
e---------------------------------------------12-13
b------------------------------7-8-6-12-13-11----13
G-----------------------6-7-5--------------------14
D-----------------6-7-5--------------------------15
A-----------6-7-5
E-----6-7-5
B-7-5
```

What's happening there is that I'm starting on the root of a dominant seventh chord, moving down to the seventh, leaping up to the third, and resolving it into the root of the next chord, which is also a dominant seventh. At the end there, I resolve the third (E) of the C7 chord to the root of an F major triad, which we hear as a tonic chord.

It sounds really funky with the seventh resolving:

```
e-12
b---13-11-10
G------------10-8-7
D-------------------8-6-5-----------------2
A-------------------------6-4-3-----------3
E-------------------------------4-2-1-----3
B-------------------------------------2-0-1
```

That resolution at the end is sort of a tritone substitution deal, but I think it sounds better than if that low B resolved to the third of an F# chord, which I cannot access due to the limited number of strings I have to work with. I suppose ending it in a figure like this would result in a better dominant to tonic relationship:

```
D------2
A------3
E-1--3-3
B---0--1
```


----------



## Prydogga (Nov 6, 2009)

Mine is very simple (To me and anyone who knows anything about theory) it is just figuring out inversions of a chord and figuring out chords in general by using the notes of the scale which are used for that chord, like I said, it's one of the most basic things I know but I find it to be one of those things that amazed me when I learned it. I still learn theory everyday but none of it is ever as interesting as back in the day when I picked up the basics.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Nov 8, 2009)

For me it's whenever I do my best to think about chords and voice leading in a Holdsworthian way-as several melodies as once instead of just "Aminor then Fmajor then Bdiminished..."


----------



## lcsper (Nov 9, 2009)

To me theres no single piece of theory which is coolest, theory as a whole is just a means to an end. Once you know enough to the point where you don't even think about it, that is when it really becomes interesting.


----------



## stubhead (Nov 9, 2009)

SchecterWhore, that was a great post on modulation. 

One of the neat things about whole-tone riffs is that they have a "need" to resolve, and they will resolve - right to the next major chord! If you work up some rhythmic riff in the E whole-tone scale, on the next beat after a A#, just ease it up to an B major. After 38 years of playing, I've got the major/minor/pentatonic stuff internalized, but I still have to set my mind into whole-tone or diminished writing, sometimes I'll just lock on one of those for a few days and not play diatonic. 

A few years back, I learned a neat scale from the Holdsworth re-issue video. It's the "other" symmetric scale - half-step, half-step, whole-step; half-step, half-step, whole-step; half-step, half-step, whole-step; etc. 

Call it Eb-E-F, G-G#-A, B-C-C#, Eb-E-F.... If you view E as the center, you get a major and a minor 3rd, plus a 4th, 5th, flat 6th and flat 9th - it'll relate to the double harmonic minor or Locrian mode happily. However, if you view F as the center, you get kind of a nice dumb boogie scale in F, and you can toggle between the two. Throw in some 4th & 5th modulations (Bb + C chords), you get Martian rockabilly.... I'd never seen it before, but I've since seen it called the nine-note augmented scale, or the leading-tone augmented scale, because it's just an augmented chord and the notes above and below the chord tones. When I start working up tunes on this kind of thing, I could probably put a "real" theorist in the insane asylum... spend hours a day writing songs that no one can stand to listen to.... yay!

ADDENDUM:

I'm going to add something hairy here:

http://www.patmartino.com/Articles/GuitarPlayer_April_2004.pdf

This is a link to a PDF file, written about jazz guitarist's Pat Martino's system of organizing the fretboard. He basically uses the augmented and diminished chords as his starting points, rather than the conventional major/minor/dominant chords. In listening to his playing, he doesn't _play_ like some kind of atonal madman - I think this is really more of a fingering issue, and certainly a way to generate melodic ideas that sound fresh, as far away from the pentatonic boxes as can be. I have never really delved into this very far, but I am expecting to soon - I take a long-range view these days, and sometimes concentrate my spare practice time for a year or more on a single issue. I have declared 2010 to be my "Diminished Year" and I'm accumulating material to work on, including this. Real fluency in jazz improv is a major hole in my technique.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 9, 2009)

stubhead said:


> SchecterWhore, that was a great post on modulation.
> 
> One of the neat things about whole-tone riffs is that they have a "need" to resolve, and they will resolve - right to the next major chord! If you work up some rhythmic riff in the E whole-tone scale, on the next beat after a A#, just ease it up to an B major. After 38 years of playing, I've got the major/minor/pentatonic stuff internalized, but I still have to set my mind into whole-tone or diminished writing, sometimes I'll just lock on one of those for a few days and not play diatonic.
> 
> ...



Thanks, I forgot I wrote that bit. There is a lot more to say about modulations, but what it boils down to is that you can use any functional chord or tone in any way you damn well please, and that there are some methods that are more convincing than others. Then, there are nonfunctional sonorities that may or may not be reinterpreted as functional sonorities at some point. Fun stuff.

I liked the article, by the way. Making chromatic alterations to chords to create harmonic motion is nifty. I've used it to make it sound like I know what I'm doing on piano, mostly, but it makes for awesome tapping licks on guitar.

Symmetrical chords and scales are cool because any tone in them can be interpreted as a leading tone, and you can always work with common tones to achieve some very interesting chromaticism and modulations.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Nov 10, 2009)

lcsper said:


> To me theres no single piece of theory which is coolest, theory as a whole is just a means to an end. Once you know enough to the point where you don't even think about it, that is when it really becomes interesting.


I think the OP meant was "What do YOU think was the coolest thing that YOU'VE done with a piece of music theory?"

For me it's whenever I make use of twelve tone.
It's so completely alien and artificial sounding, which is why I love it.


----------

