# Essential Theory for Modern Metal?



## TeeWX (Jun 16, 2014)

Hey everyone,

I'm curious as to what people would suggest as being the "must know" theory for a modern metal guitarist. I'm mostly focused here on writing and improvisation, which I think go hand in hand. I understand the minor and harmonic minor scales and I know them and all of their modes across the entire fretboard. I don't think I've checked out a band I liked and noticed that they were playing in anything other than the minor key of whatever the low string pedal point note of the main riff was. So right now I just kind of navigate around the fretboard using all of the note that encompass the C minor or harmonic minor scale, since that's what my guitar is tuned to.

Often times when I study songs that I like I find that a lot of it doesn't make any sense to me. I can always identify that they are in the minor scale, and I can attempt to put sections of riffs together into "chords" but it doesn't usually ever make any sense. One example is the chords; there aren't really any traditional chords in metal, they are usually just diad 5ths and 4ths and 3rds. So how do I justify the reasoning? What do I need to learn to make sense of the songs I'm analyzing? What should I know for writing in general?

Thanks!


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Jun 16, 2014)

If you're interested in taking a theoretical approach to theory, I would suggest starting from the beginning and getting a fuller idea of the basics instead of trying to learn fragmented bits and bobs related to one genre and trying to puzzle the bigger picture out - it will give you countless headaches.

musictheory.net is a fantastic site to start with!


----------



## TeeWX (Jun 16, 2014)

jarvncaredoc said:


> If you're interested in taking a theoretical approach to theory, I would suggest starting from the beginning and getting a fuller idea of the basics instead of trying to learn fragmented bits and bobs related to one genre and trying to puzzle the bigger picture out - it will give you countless headaches.
> 
> musictheory.net is a fantastic site to start with!



I have gone through everything on musictheory.net and read several theory books. I have a fairly good understanding of the basics.


----------



## cwhitey2 (Jun 16, 2014)

When write anything metal I tend to throw anything I know about theory out the window.


I just play what sounds good even if theory wise it doesn't make any sense.

I feel like your are restricting your thought process if you feel you have to fit some kind of mold/model for writing.

Also don't "justify" anything. Its there because it SOUNDS good. I don't care what my songs look like on paper as long musically everything meshes and I'm happy with what I have created.

Music is art, there are no rule.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Jun 16, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> I have gone through everything on musictheory.net and read several theory books. I have a fairly good understanding of the basics.



Then you should know that the vast majority of chords in metal are traditional, and that just because you're not playing cowboy chords does not mean that the harmony is any different.


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Jun 16, 2014)

In that case, it's just a case of applying the basics to metal songs. For example with the chords, you can't always take exactly what you see and say "oh those are power chords so there aren't any traditional chords". You have to look at the implied harmony - that is to say, if the song is in the key of D major and there's an F#5 chord, you can say with 90% certainty that the chord has an implied minor quality - even though there is no minor third present in the chord - because in the key of D F# is iii.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Jun 16, 2014)

^ What I said, but elaborated. Listen to this guy.


----------



## TeeWX (Jun 16, 2014)

cwhitey2 said:


> When write anything metal I tend to throw anything I know about theory out the window.
> 
> 
> I just play what sounds good even if theory wise it doesn't make any sense.
> ...



I totally get that, and I often try to just play chromatically a lot or make up my own scale based on the power chords that I want to use. But when you see these songs and they're all practically exclusively using scale notes to the minor scale, you have to conclude that there must be "some" theory behind it. Are they really all just playing around trial-and-error in the minor scale and sampling around different pedal points and such?



jarvncaredoc said:


> In that case, it's just a case of applying the basics to metal songs. For example with the chords, you can't always take exactly what you see and say "oh those are power chords so there aren't any traditional chords". You have to look at the implied harmony - that is to say, if the song is in the key of D major and there's an F#5 chord, you can say with 90% certainty that the chord has an implied minor quality - even though there is no minor third present in the chord - because in the key of D F# is iii.



I get that to some extent. During a chorus or intro or something where they either strum the chords or let them ring behind a melody, I can very clearly see that they're being used as the chord of that scale, because the melody will include all of the notes, or have an added 9th or something too. But when you see a riff that's all power chords and quickly changing, sometimes the "non-root" note isn't even part of the scale, so I just more or less associate it as a different way of phrasing the root note as if it were being played on it's own?


----------



## cwhitey2 (Jun 16, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> I totally get that, and I often try to just play chromatically a lot or make up my own scale based on the power chords that I want to use. But when you see these songs and they're all practically exclusively using scale notes to the minor scale, you have to conclude that there must be "some" theory behind it. Are they really all just playing around trial-and-error in the minor scale and sampling around different pedal points and such?



I'm by no means say there is no theory behind....but _I_ take the trial and error route more often then not.


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Jun 16, 2014)

Generally yeah. It helps to see the power chord as an interval rather than a chord by itself, and the added fifth as more of an expansion upon the root note. When you're referring to the "non-root note" as not part of the scale, I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about. Generally if you take a note from a scale built upon the tonic of the key and add a perfect fifth to it, that fifth will also be part of the scale - else it wouldn't sound completely consonant as perfect fifths are basically designed to do. If you're talking about the root note not belonging to the scale (i.e. accidentals or whatnot) then you may be looking at a mode or altered scale. For example, if the song's in C major and you see an F#5 chord creep in, that's likely a chord built upon the Lydian mode that sharpens the fourth note of the scale - in this case the F#.


----------



## TeeWX (Jun 16, 2014)

jarvncaredoc said:


> Generally yeah. It helps to see the power chord as an interval rather than a chord by itself, and the added fifth as more of an expansion upon the root note. When you're referring to the "non-root note" as not part of the scale, I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about. Generally if you take a note from a scale built upon the tonic of the key and add a perfect fifth to it, that fifth will also be part of the scale - else it wouldn't sound completely consonant as perfect fifths are basically designed to do. If you're talking about the root note not belonging to the scale (i.e. accidentals or whatnot) then you may be looking at a mode or altered scale. For example, if the song's in C major and you see an F#5 chord creep in, that's likely a chord built upon the Lydian mode that sharpens the fourth note of the scale - in this case the F#.



Generally what I meant was, say you have the key of C Minor. If you make a 5th powerchord out of the second note, D, you're adding an A, which doesn't belong in the scale. Sometimes during a song they will play power chords like this, so that everything is a perfect 5th power chord so when they slide a shape around or whatever it's symmetrical. More often than not I see that the root is in the scale, and the perfect 5th that's added is not in the scale if this occurs. I've also seen it the other way where the "non-root" note is in the scale but the root isn't.


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Jun 16, 2014)

That's an isolated case, because in the C minor scale D actually forms a diminished chord. Diatonically a flattened fifth should be added rather than a perfect fifth, though if the chords are moving very quickly as you say it would likely just be an artistic decision to keep the major dissonance of the tritone out and preserve the fluid motion of the chords. In every key there will be one note that forms a diminished chord that should diatonically form a tritone interval, but may be omitted in favour of a more natural power chord.

Try and visualise power chords as intervals, as I mentioned before. It's more a case of what the root note is doing rather than the harmonic equivalent - if you're hell bent on sticking with theory and adding that diminished fifth every time you jump on that particular note you'll end up with a shit ton of dissonance for no real reason. With distorted guitar the power chord is basically a way of "beefing up" a root note, rather than adding harmonic value (also why parallel perfect consonances are avoided in counterpoint), so unless you're working with full chords or really drawing attention to the implied harmony I wouldn't worry about it too much.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 16, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> One example is the chords; there aren't really any traditional chords in metal, they are usually just diad 5ths and 4ths and 3rds. So how do I justify the reasoning? What do I need to learn to make sense of the songs I'm analyzing? What should I know for writing in general?



Triads, sevenths, etc. are often avoided in metal because the notes they contain clash when distorted. So as others have noted, we usually look at the root of the power chord or interval as the root of the chord and any extra chord intervals are usually implied (save the fifth, which is just there to fatten up the tonic, like an octave would be).

Also, don't forget the performance aspect of things, too: some players will often run with a shape (especially in faster parts) rather than stay diatonic to the key simply because it's easier for them to play. This is sometimes the case with the fifth being substituted for the flat fifth like mentioned above. And sometimes people just hate the dissonance of the flat fifth.


----------



## AlejoV (Jun 16, 2014)

0-1-0-0-1-1-1-0-0-djeent-djeent-djent-0-0-1-1-bend

Repeat.


----------



## TeeWX (Jun 16, 2014)

AlejoV said:


> 0-1-0-0-1-1-1-0-0-djeent-djeent-djent-0-0-1-1-bend
> 
> Repeat.



You had me going there until you stuck that bend in at the end. Way too advanced for anyone on this forum.


----------



## TedEH (Jun 16, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> "must know" theory for a modern metal guitarist.



Just a personal opinion but I don't think any theory is a "must know" in that sense. Like some have suggested, writing by 'trial and error' or just by feel is sometimes enough. I can appreciate that you could use music theory to explain why a song works even if it was written without that theory in mind, or that a lot of "by feel" playing is really following some concepts of theory without acknowledging it (calling it instinct or something instead), but I think you could easily get away with not being aware of any of the theory and still write stuff that's "theoretically good".

Sorry if that contributes nothing of value to the conversation.


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Jun 16, 2014)

Theory isn't taking the stance of turning art into maths or taking the feel away from music as a lot of narrow-minded ignorant people would suggest, it simply helps you understand why certain things work, and how to analyse and replicate the music of others that you enjoy. It's a fascinating subject that not only gives letters, numbers and numerals to things but also lets you understand the function of certain sounds, how sounds work together, and why certain things just sound like dragging your scrotum across broken glass. 

Point is, it's all well and good taking the approach of writing by sound - and there's no denying it brings some fantastic results to the table - but it's quicker, more exciting and a damn sight more interesting to know exactly what you want and head straight for it, and if you want to experiment with something then hell you've got about 20 different things to experiment with because you have a good idea that they're going to work or produce something interesting, instead of having to wade through 12 different notes and a humongously expansive list of chords to try and find the one sound that you're looking for.

I guess basically the thing would be that if you don't know theory, then taking the approach of writing by sound is a little bit of a cop out. If you do know theory, you can make the choice to either approach it theoretically and plan it, or wing it but have an educated idea of the ballpark you're shooting in. Better to know it and choose not to use it than not know it at all and be backed into a corner.


----------



## wizbit81 (Jun 16, 2014)

If you want proper theory then you need to read The Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levine. That is the only source you need to understand Western Harmony.
Applying to metal, well there's some good answers on here already.
As to what other people do? Most get an instinctive feel for writing music by playing so much of other people's stuff. You get form and common chord sequences by Osmosis. Above all though, use your ears and trust what they tell you. It's not trial and error if you are playing something you can hear in your head first. As Yng says, if it sounds good, it is good.


----------



## AugmentedFourth (Jun 16, 2014)

@jarvncaredoc
It kind of sounds like you guys are unnecessarily limiting yourselves.

1) I would disagree that playing a diminished fifth would add "a shit ton of dissonance for no reason". I have noticed that in metal it's actually pretty common so it probably wouldn't be out of character.

2) More importantly, you guys seem to be limiting yourselves to a single key. If you are working in an environment where there are a lot of power chords, and you are in the key of C minor, a D5 chord/dyad might be a great way to modulate.



at about the 3:06 mark, you can hear what I mean. Tool generally plays it safe and roams around D minor using power chords, but for this little section they introduce E5. Basically it's not really a modulation because the tonic is kinda still D (arguably, as they could get away with resolving to Am or similar) but it's now D dorian. So there is a little "harmonic variation" and also some new material for melodies that Maynard had already sung earlier.

P.s., I actually started writing this many hours ago, and got massively distracted so it may or may not still be relevant.


----------



## fantom (Jun 17, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> Generally what I meant was, say you have the key of C Minor. If you make a 5th powerchord out of the second note, D, you're adding an A, which doesn't belong in the scale. Sometimes during a song they will play power chords like this, so that everything is a perfect 5th power chord so when they slide a shape around or whatever it's symmetrical. More often than not I see that the root is in the scale, and the perfect 5th that's added is not in the scale if this occurs. I've also seen it the other way where the "non-root" note is in the scale but the root isn't.



Let's use this as an example: playing D+A as a D5 (likely a ii chord with the implied F) power chord in the key of Cm. Why does it work?

First thing, your are playing in Cm, but you are not playing the tonic. This chord is likely being used as a predominant (or maybe even a dominant, but less likely). Try not to look at it as "I'm playing an A in Cm, something is out, I must be a Dorian pro." You are not playing a chord that substitutes with the Cm, aka the tonic. You are not using the A to "color" the song. The fact the the A even comes to discussion slightly saddens me. Think about what the A is doing for the harmonic content of the D chord!!!

Why the D chord? It is the 5 of a D. Pretty much, for ANY chord, adding a 5 is just adding overtones to the root and strengthening the sound of the chord. Why? Look at the frequency analysis..

Say a root is a perfect sine wave at X hz. You play the 5 of the root (Aka, play the A of the D). The original note has wavelength 1/X. Using 12-TET (I sadly must say this because one guy on this forum will probably argue that not all music uses 12-TET ), the 5th is going to have 1/(X * 2^(7/12)) wavelength, which has frequency X*2^(7/12) (about X*1.49830...). Let's be lazy and call this 3/2 (notice that 2/3 the length of a guitar string coincides with the 7th and 19th fret harmonics are on your guitar... yay frequency and wavelength making sense!).

If you were to draw these 2 sine waves with the same phase, you'd hopefully notice that the overlap with the 2nd iteration of the root and the 3rd iteration of the 5th. This strongly emphasizes the root note. Also, look at the peaks, very pattern heavy with emphasis on the octave during the "lower points". Really, most of the peaks are super convenient for the root note.

Try graphing these equations on a graphic calculator:

Root:
sin(X)

5th:
sin(X*2^(7/12))

Root+5
sin(X) + sin(X*2^(7/12))

And for fun, try a diminished 5:
sin(X) + sin(X*2^(6/12))

Notice the root+5th is a nice wave with strong peaks in predictable places.

The diminished 5 with the root is a disaster. The harmonics are not predictable (And change every repetition).

Well what about, "At the same phase?!" That's cheating! or is it? We hear frequencies (our ear drums vibrate differently for different frequencies), which makes my graph drawing exercise above "add" a phase in that our ears don't really care about.


----------



## Solodini (Jun 17, 2014)

RHYTHMIC THEORY 
RHYTHMIC THEORY 
RHYTHMIC THEORY!

Metal or otherwise, rhythm is pretty much the core of music, in my opinion. Learn to count rhythms properly and have your hands follow what your brain is deciding to play, instead of just having your hands go with muscle memory and leaving your ears and brain with no say. The same principle goes for pitch but rhythm is more often overlooked.

I consider articulation to be theoretical, as well. In something abrasive and percussive, like metal, I feel stacatto markings, marcato et al. are important contributors to giving metal any sense of necessary aggression. The importance of these isn't just from the attack, but also any spaces inbetween. Sustained firm contact with the hands is a massage; a short firm contact with the hands is a slap or a punch.

Harmonically, I think a good understanding of intervals is all you really need for metal. Metal can be approached on a very note-by-note basis. It's meant to be abbrasive so dissonance is cool. I'm sure I saw an interview with Mikael Akerfeldt a few albums back where he was talking about one of the songs being all major chords. Slam the "wrong" major chords together and suddenly they don't sound as typically "major" as you expect.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 17, 2014)

Who said metal is only about Fifths?

Fifths are Fourth inversions.
You can play Thirds, Sixths, Octaves...whatever, even Sevens if you have good taste...unless you play Motorhead


----------



## 80H (Jun 17, 2014)

Solodini said:


> RHYTHMIC THEORY
> RHYTHMIC THEORY
> RHYTHMIC THEORY!
> 
> ...





Definitely, came to say a lot of this in other ways. For example, you could just chug with the lowest open string and play in any mode with the next lowest string. If the rhythm and tonality are there, it will sound metal. Most people listening to metal want the effect, and most of that work is done by the rhythm and the tonic/3/5. Most people don't give a shit about a #4 tastefully added for contrast towards the end of the song, they just want energy and cadence. 



When it comes to breaking out of the box I just described, anyone could probably figure out everything they need to know by incremental deviation, or just going from point a to point b in a logical sequence. Using A Minor for the whole song in 4/4? Try for cathartic vibe and transition to C major as a bridge to the solo as it returns to A minor. Syncopate it a little instead of playing on the beat. Try 5's, 7's, 11's instead of evenly distributing the notes. Throw in a key change. Etc, and that process continues on to points beyond where any modern musical act is centering themselves. 



But at the end of the day, you can't escape tonality and rhythm. John Mayer cannot play metal with a lute while singing about parakeets. It's just intuitive.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 17, 2014)

Learn everything these two books have to offer: 
Patterns, Scales and Modes for Jazz Guitar
Improvising Jazz Guitar

Then you know what you do?

Know what you do?

Throw it all away and go with what sounds good. Those two books will help you with learning how to do it, but building tension and relieving it makes the playing more exciting. If you are listening to something, and because of the division [for instance if it's a part in 16ths or triplet 8ths], do something other than what the ear wants to hear. If the ear wants the next note to be an A, play and A# first, then the A. Basically you want to play tricks on the ear but not make it sound like a dissonant mess. What will really help you is examining what Marty Friedman does and how he does it.


----------



## rockskate4x (Jun 17, 2014)

I think that extreme music does not need to have rhythmic, harmonic, or dynamic limitations. I say learn everything you want to learn, and play everything you want to play.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 17, 2014)

Also...Ihsahn and Emperor say that you don't have to play only Fifth chords to be metal.


----------



## AugmentedFourth (Jun 17, 2014)

fantom said:


> Let's use this as an example: playing D+A as a D5 (likely a ii chord with the implied F) power chord in the key of Cm. Why does it work?
> 
> First thing, your are playing in Cm, but you are not playing the tonic. This chord is likely being used as a predominant (or maybe even a dominant, but less likely). Try not to look at it as "I'm playing an A in Cm, something is out, I must be a Dorian pro." You are not playing a chord that substitutes with the Cm, aka the tonic. You are not using the A to "color" the song. The fact the the A even comes to discussion slightly saddens me. Think about what the A is doing for the harmonic content of the D chord!!!
> 
> ...



While I really like that you broke down for us why fifths are so important (physically), I'm going to have to say that you are being overly vertical (which may come across as being hypocritical since I was being quite vertical as well).

While you're right that just having that 'A' in the D5 dyad doesn't necessarily mean that all of a sudden you are in dorian land, it really depends how it's done. Like in my Tool example, there is definitely a dorian feel there.

And just because diminished fifths don't make that almost-nice beat frequency in 12TET that perfect ones do, doesn't mean that they do nothing in their relation to the root (or even just bass note) of a chord.

In conventional music theory, we like to treat all intervals with equal respect. They all have their place. Plenty of chords have a diminished fifth instead of a perfect one.

D° (D F Ab)
Dm7b5 (D F Ab C [E])
Dø7 (D F Ab C [Eb])
D°7 (D F Ab Cb)
DFr6 [enharmonic with D7b5] (D F# G# B#) Technically an augmented fourth when in a Fr6, but a diminished fifth when used as a 7b5.

etc., etc.

Or for example:



@0:51
I'm sure lots of metal bands do it, but in my experience BTBAM looooves their "diminished power chords," as I like to (colloquially) call them.

They also have some good examples in there of using somewhat complex chords with distorted guitars @1:58 @2:47 @3:30, etc. etc.

Also I forgot this song had a genuine example of counterpoint in metal. People on this forum seem to be pretty into that stuff. 

Honestly with metal my real advice is to go through songs you like and look at moments, like the ones I listed above, and see if you can pick apart the riff(s). Try to pick out the rhythmic choices they are making, chords they may be using, how they are playing the chords (arps., all at once, what pattern, palm muted root notes in between, etc.), what kind of contours the melodic bits take, etc.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 17, 2014)

Loads of Japanese bands (Versailles/Jupiter, D, Galneyrus to mention) use diminished power chords as technical death metal bands (Obscura, Gorod, Spawn Of Possession, Cynic)

While you can find the use of Thirds in lots of Gothenburg style metal.

You can hear variation between thirds/fourths and fifths even in early Motley Crue


Must say that those kind of Motley Crue riffs HIGHLY influenced my songwriting when I was a teen and still composed music.


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Jun 17, 2014)

Going to agree with this second page advice and say don't completely discount diminished fifths, in reality they have more harmonic value than the power chords themselves. They're just more bloody interesting to hear.

I will however highlight that I was simply explaining for the benefit of the OP why the passage of quick power chords he couldn't understand included a D5 instead of a tritone, rather than telling him diminished fifths were the realm of Satan and being all medieval about it.


----------



## TeeWX (Jun 17, 2014)

Solodini said:


> RHYTHMIC THEORY
> RHYTHMIC THEORY
> RHYTHMIC THEORY!
> 
> ...



What would be a good resource to start with "rhythmic theory"? I understand all the divisions and note values. I can look at a piece of music and instantly know how it flows by the note values. When I am trying to write however, it's just kind of random and I generally end up using solid 8th notes with gallops. 



rockskate4x said:


> I think that extreme music does not need to have rhythmic, harmonic, or dynamic limitations. I say learn everything you want to learn, and play everything you want to play.



I am not looking for a set of limitations. I am looking for advice on what to learn to further expand my knowledge. From what's been said in here so far I'm noticing that I don't completely understand how to apply modulation and how to break out of steady 8th note rhythms when improvising. These are things I will need to work on for sure.



AugmentedFourth said:


> @jarvncaredoc
> It kind of sounds like you guys are unnecessarily limiting yourselves.
> 
> 1) I would disagree that playing a diminished fifth would add "a shit ton of dissonance for no reason". I have noticed that in metal it's actually pretty common so it probably wouldn't be out of character.
> ...




Reading into modulation/key changing, I'm interested in how to go about it. I was reading up about the circle of 5ths and how you can find scales that are very closely related in terms of chords. This makes sense but I'm not sure where to start exactly. Since I'm in C minor a lot, would I write one section in C minor, and then the next in G minor, and then D minor, and then back to G, and then C? Or is there any real limitations on order or by how many 5ths you can move? C minor and D minor have two notes that are different, is that too much?

---

Something I've always noticed, that doesn't really make sense after reading the responses to this thread is that when when in the key of C Harmonic minor, a very common pedalpoint I see in the bands that I like other than the root, C, are Eb and Ab. For whatever reason these seem to work out really well. The melody notes underneath generally stay very similar and still use the same notes of C Harmonic minor. I would have thought that G and F would be more prevalent pedalpoints since they are a 5th away in either direction.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 17, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> Reading into modulation/key changing, I'm interested in how to go about it.



You can modulate from any key to any other key, it just sounds "smoother" to go to keys that are more closely related (e.g., those that have more notes in common with one another). As for how to go about transitioning, one of the most common means is through the use of secondary dominants. This is just setting up the new key by playing the V or V7 chord (often preceded by a ii or IV chord) before it so that the out of key dominant will resolve smoothly to the new key's tonic chord. Since you have theory books and web resources at hand, I'll recommend you look into secondary dominants and the cycle of fifths/fourths rather than drone on about them in depth here.




TeeWX said:


> Something I've always noticed, that doesn't really make sense after reading the responses to this thread is that when when in the key of C Harmonic minor, a very common pedalpoint I see in the bands that I like other than the root, C, are Eb and Ab. For whatever reason these seem to work out really well. The melody notes underneath generally stay very similar and still use the same notes of C Harmonic minor. I would have thought that G and F would be more prevalent pedalpoints since they are a 5th away in either direction.



F and G would be common in C minor because they are the fourth and fifth degrees of C minor. But a lot of times people will use modes and altered scales in such a way as to emphasize the unique notes in those scales. This brings out their character. If you look at C harmonic minor, you'll notice that the third degree is Eb, but rather than being a major chord like in C natural minor, it is an augmented chord in harmonic minor. And that Ab is the VI chord, which is a commonly used chord. I can't say without a specific example, but the harmony is likely changing to Eb+ (during the parts with the Eb pedal) or Ab (during the parts with the Ab pedal) rather than staying on the tonic Cm. So think in terms of harmonic movement and how the melody relates to the underlying chord as well as how it relates to the key's tonic. (Hopefully I said that clearly enough that it makes sense).


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 17, 2014)

Try this little thing I though in 3 seconds maybe.
3 seconds means a lot because I'm an idiot and not a theory master 

It's with 2 shapes but you can extend the idea a lot from here.
First shape is 5th fret on A and 4th fret on the D string, the second is 7th fret on A string, 9th fret on the D string.

That's the stuff that we usually call "D3 power chord" and an E5 power chord in 7th position.

Now play this stuff and pay attention to the tone.
It's on 1/8 notes

D-4-4-4-4-4---4-------------9---9------------4---4-9-9-9-9-9---9--
A------------5---5-7-7-7-7-7--7---5-5-5-5-5----5-------------7---7

You have 2 elementary chords, less than a punk song, but you can give them a lot of texture, not to mention what you can do with the arrangement of a second guitar on top of that, either with simple open chords or with a lead.


----------



## AugmentedFourth (Jun 17, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> What would be a good resource to start with "rhythmic theory"? I understand all the divisions and note values. I can look at a piece of music and instantly know how it flows by the note values. When I am trying to write however, it's just kind of random and I generally end up using solid 8th notes with gallops.



One thing that I would highly suggest is that when you write your riffs and melodies, try to cross bar lines.

Crossing bar lines in interesting ways instead of always emphasizing and having cadences on the "1" can do *wonders* for your rhythmic content.

I would recommend just looking for examples. For me, I learned a lot of what I know about melody writing in terms of skipping bar lines and adding syncopation in general from jazz.







Listen here.

Just looking at songs like this and songs that you like can be really useful.
As you can see, in this piece Carisi starts on the "2", and several times starts either an eighth note early or late. He also makes use of triplets in a few critical places.

There's stuff like in bar 7, you can see how he shifts around the beats that he emphasizes.

*+* (from the last measure)
1 + 2 + 3 *+* *4* *+* 
1 + 2 *+* 3 + *4* + ...

etc.



TeeWX said:


> ...
> 
> Reading into modulation/key changing, I'm interested in how to go about it. I was reading up about the circle of 5ths and how you can find scales that are very closely related in terms of chords. This makes sense but I'm not sure where to start exactly. Since I'm in C minor a lot, would I write one section in C minor, and then the next in G minor, and then D minor, and then back to G, and then C? Or is there any real limitations on order or by how many 5ths you can move? C minor and D minor have two notes that are different, is that too much?
> 
> ...



Well, I guess it's time for some more examples. 


```
| Cm | Cm | Eb | Fm     |
| Cm | Cm | Eb | Dm, Bb |
| F  | F  ||
```

Here's one that goes from Cm to F. Next to each other on the circle of 5ths, but it's kinda cool since it switches from minor to major, so there are two non-common tones instead of one.

Basically all I did is borrow that Dm chord from somewhere... could be C major (parallel major), Bb major (adjacent on circle of 5ths), and made it the "vi" in my vi - IV - I "amen" cadence. The F can also be thought of as being "borrowed" from the parallel major.

Let's take one from AAL.






This one just does to show that you don't have to use overt sections which have different keys to have key changes.

Where the "key change" is is unclear, Tosin is using clear modal mixture in this progression. Basically it's somewhere between C# major and C# minor.

I have the key signature as C# major because throughout the melody, he avoids using the 3rd or 6th tones, so as to leave it ambiguous, with two exceptions. Over the A5 chord he plays an A, implying C# minor, and over the C#sus2 (when it finally semi-resolves), he plays an F, implying C# major.

| I - V6/3 - bIII - V - bVI - bVII - Isus :||

Not a single minor chord to be seen.

I would recommend trying some of this yourself, see how far you can get.


----------



## Solodini (Jun 18, 2014)

TeeWX said:


> What would be a good resource to start with "rhythmic theory"? I understand all the divisions and note values. I can look at a piece of music and instantly know how it flows by the note values. When I am trying to write however, it's just kind of random and I generally end up using solid 8th notes with gallops.


 
As Aug4 suggested, pushes, writing across the barlines and syncopation are really handy. Having something come in hard before or after where you expect the beat to be can be really cool for impressing the aggression in the music.
When writing, I'd say to build the rhythm up layer by layer. If you have power chord stabs, start with them just on beat *1 *and *3* then move some of them around by half a beat at a time and see how that varies the sound before adding one or two more stabs to each bar and moving them around. Do it over a drum part so you can see how that interacts with the feel of the track. You don't always need to be adding things in, you can take beats out to make use of space, if it sounds good. A simple contrast between playing on *1* in one bar and 1_*+*_ can be supereffective. Also try starting with beats *1* and *2* or beats 1 and *4 *and moving them around. The proximity and function of each beat will likely make their interactions sound a bit different. 

You don't need to to make the rhythm of each bar the same. Again, as Aug4 suggested, write with sheet music and a PENCIL in front of you, so you can write down changes and additions bar-by-bar. As with chords, intervals and phrases you like, over time your rhythmic vocabulary develops and you discover small rhythmic fragments you can employ in different ways. 

Rests and sustaining notes for different times should definitely not be overlooked. Just because a rest is silent, doesn't mean it's not doing anything. Sustaining notes differently keeps things moving without ending up sounding like someone just doing roadworks outside your house for hours. Steady, even, unchanging rhythm for 6 mins gets pretty boring, IMO. Even just the difference between full beats, half beats and quarter beats gives lots of scope. You don't necessarily need to contrast blast-beat sections with 4 bar sustained chords or anything that stark.





TeeWX said:


> I am not looking for a set of limitations. I am looking for advice on what to learn to further expand my knowledge. From what's been said in here so far I'm noticing that I don't completely understand how to apply modulation and how to break out of steady 8th note rhythms when improvising. These are things I will need to work on for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Reading into modulation/key changing, I'm interested in how to go about it. I was reading up about the circle of 5ths and how you can find scales that are very closely related in terms of chords. This makes sense but I'm not sure where to start exactly. Since I'm in C minor a lot, would I write one section in C minor, and then the next in G minor, and then D minor, and then back to G, and then C? Or is there any real limitations on order or by how many 5ths you can move? C minor and D minor have two notes that are different, is that too much?


 
You can move to whatever you like, if you think it sounds good. Try out as many possibilities as you can think of and see what you think of them. Write it down. Write down info on the ones which sound bad, too. You might discover a situation down the line where they're perfect.





TeeWX said:


> Something I've always noticed, that doesn't really make sense after reading the responses to this thread is that when when in the key of C Harmonic minor, a very common pedalpoint I see in the bands that I like other than the root, C, are Eb and Ab. For whatever reason these seem to work out really well. The melody notes underneath generally stay very similar and still use the same notes of C Harmonic minor. I would have thought that G and F would be more prevalent pedalpoints since they are a 5th away in either direction.


 
As mentioned, the 4th and 5th sound very stable and lack much emphasis beyond the tonic. If you want to colour your piece and emphasise its character, emphasise the bits which are different and stand out, rather than burying them under too much root. There's a point at which it could lose structure or sense of direction but again, in the right setting, that could be good, as another method of contrast.

I really think you should play about with placing things (chords, key changes, stabs) almost at random, within bars, and work on linking them. See how little you can do to make it fit but also try to stretch out the transition and see how well you can suspend animation of the piece and then continue back on from your musical aside. Approach music more freely, without worry of it having to sound good at first, so you can stumble across things your knowlege and aural experience wouldn't normally lead you to. If you're going to employ choice, choose things which you think are wrong and find ways to make them fit. Key tools are playing with different inversions, suspensions, viewing chords as steps toward a destination (not necessarily the destination itself. A weird chord could be the wobbly stepping stone that makes reaching the other side more exciting).


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Jun 18, 2014)

I dunno but 9th chords are cool. Whether they be add9 or full 9th chords. Penis.


----------



## chopeth (Jun 18, 2014)

This thread is gold


----------



## Andless (Jun 27, 2014)

Just going to drop this link http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/4084365-post14.html as a lot of the stuff I though of in the clip I posted in this post came from this thread actually, but don't want to cross post.


----------

