melody writing
pennamacoor
melody writing (especially wrt song writing, but not just). I'm
thinking of buying 'Melody Writing and Analysis' by Annie O Warburton:
is this a good option?
thanks in advance
michaelP
ps: is there any way to stop the porn spam that seems to invade this
list?
Bohgosity BumaskiL
news:5123bc7f-6293-483a...@j39g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
(...)
> ps: is there any way to stop the porn spam that seems to invade this
> list?
You can either report it to google or realize that
http://news.individual.net and a few tens of thousands of other servers kill
porn spam and a lot of other stuff with a machine. Google ignores cancelbot
feed, apparently.
charles bash
cycles. As soon as posters here realize that these Spams promise more
than they deliver, and we ignore them, they will { hopefully}} go away.
Other NG"s have been far worse off than these tiny Spams. I have seen
continuous Spamming for OVER TWO HUNDRED consecutive entries! We lived
with it as best we could, until the Spammers gave up and went on to
greener pastures, elsewhere I guess.
The Nigerian Spammers plagued my eMail for 5 whole yearsl MSNWebtv
wouldn't do anything about it. Till they made a wholesale reduction in
Spam, for all customers, in 2007 at their Servers in Palo Alto,
California.
C. Bash
Jack Campin - bogus address
> melody writing (especially wrt song writing, but not just). I'm
> thinking of buying 'Melody Writing and Analysis' by Annie O Warburton:
> is this a good option?
It's a bit slanted towards classical art songs, but should give
anybody some ideas about cliche avoidance.
> ps: is there any way to stop the porn spam that seems to invade this
> list?
On the server I'm using, it doesn't. I can't remember ever seeing
any. Your problem is that you're reading via Google, which does no
filtering at all (as well as being the server most used by spammers
to post from). Any other server will do better, and there are lots
of free options.
==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === <http://www.campin.me.uk> ====
Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557
CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts
****** I killfile Google posts - email me if you want to be whitelisted ******
ttw...@att.net
http://books.google.com/books?id=HV4QAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=melody+writing&ei=CY2uSubeKoeSNbOT6cYN#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Goetschius: "Exercises in Melody Writing."
Danny Schorr
ttw6687, you read my mind. As soon as I saw the OP's post, old Percy was on
my mind. I recommend anything and everything by him, most of which is
available on Google Books.
Danny
Jon Slaughter
"Danny Schorr" <.@.> wrote in message
news:benta5hfkotvn9a28...@4ax.com...
I third that. All his books are great and I think all are available online.
You can get them cheap from amazon too and generally in good condition.
pennamacoor
Jack Campin - bogus address wrote:
> > Hi, I wonder if anyone here can recommend a book on the subject of
> > melody writing (especially wrt song writing, but not just). I'm
> > thinking of buying 'Melody Writing and Analysis' by Annie O Warburton:
> > is this a good option?
>
> It's a bit slanted towards classical art songs, but should give
> anybody some ideas about cliche avoidance.
>
>
> > ps: is there any way to stop the porn spam that seems to invade this
> > list?
>
> On the server I'm using, it doesn't. I can't remember ever seeing
> any. Your problem is that you're reading via Google, which does no
> filtering at all (as well as being the server most used by spammers
> to post from). Any other server will do better, and there are lots
> of free options.
Thanks Jack and others for the advice concerning the spam; generally,
I ignore the stuff, but sometimes it seems overwhelming; perhaps I'll
change the server... As for the suggestions vis-a-vis a good book on
melody writing, thanks again for the thumbs-up on Warburton and
Goetschius; I'll definitely get Warburton (since my tendencies are
towards art songs) and look further into Goetschius.
regards
michaelP
LJS
Just like Fux, Percy breaks things down into the simplest elements
possible and it covers a whole lot of music. It may be tedious but it
is the real deal for basic good writing. For 20th century, again like
Fux, it still is applicable although you may need to add some more
modern conventions and parameters. i.e. in his day, most everything
was written for a rather conservative vocal range. Modern instrumental
melodies will expand the leaps and skips and depending upon tonality
or non tonality, there would be some other changes of parameters that
would be appropriate in addition to what Percy has written.
On the whole, however, just reading and being aware of the types of
things that he talks about will but you in the right frame of mind to
make the adjustments to your particular stylistic preference.
Good luck and enjoy studying this (all too often) neglected aspect of
music! Its amazing how many can quote all the progressions imaginable
but have never bothered to study melodic writing to anywhere near the
same extent. Melody is the primal force in music yet is one of the
least studied.
LJS
Danny Schorr
>
>Just like Fux, Percy breaks things down into the simplest elements
>possible and it covers a whole lot of music. It may be tedious but it
>is the real deal for basic good writing. For 20th century, again like
>Fux, it still is applicable although you may need to add some more
>modern conventions and parameters. i.e. in his day, most everything
>was written for a rather conservative vocal range. Modern instrumental
>melodies will expand the leaps and skips and depending upon tonality
>or non tonality, there would be some other changes of parameters that
>would be appropriate in addition to what Percy has written.
>
>On the whole, however, just reading and being aware of the types of
>things that he talks about will but you in the right frame of mind to
>make the adjustments to your particular stylistic preference.
>
>Good luck and enjoy studying this (all too often) neglected aspect of
>music! Its amazing how many can quote all the progressions imaginable
>but have never bothered to study melodic writing to anywhere near the
>same extent. Melody is the primal force in music yet is one of the
>least studied.
>
>LJS
I found it instructive to use Beatles melodies as a starting point when
really getting into what he has to offer. The melodies of Lennon/McCartney
fit hand and glove into Percy's "rules". Anytime there is a violation of
rules, there is an immediate indication that something else is happening in
the music, either a move to a secondary dominant ("Hold Me Tight" from the
early days) or, say there is a case where the 7th degree doesn't move to
the 8va or the unison, it's an easy bet that the dominant chord is being
outlined. .^7, ^6,^5 would be ^3,2^,1^ over the dominant.
I never really fleshed out my ideas on paper for said rules, but I find it
happening without fail in Bach's organ works, too. One of these days I will
get disiplined enough to really lay this all out on paper. Until then, I
have no problem sitting in Starbucks and transcribing in my head ( on the
fly) anything piped thru the music system played there.
I find that, casually speaking, this doesn't always work for jazz.
Sometimes it does,say for a tune like "Satin Doll" where I hear a ^6-^5
resolution each time, clueing me into a modulation, but less so in ,let's
say, a Pat Metheny tune.
Sometimes in jazz, things seems to be a 4th away. Reharmonization? I am not
sure yet.
tl;dr (Too Long, Didn't read)
my ears are attuned to Goetschius's rules in the main, but some jazz
melodies don't always seem to follow the pattern. And I haven't as yet been
able to articulate a system for it, but I can hear much more clearly having
read Percy.
Danny
My ears are able to use G
tom_k
"Danny Schorr" <.@.> wrote in message
A consistent avoidance of traditional melodic "rules" can be found in Eric
Dolphy's jazz improvisations. But yet his melodic lines always seemed to me
to logically hang together quite well.
Tom
Danny Schorr
What do you think the 'unifying factors' were, considering that he avoided
traditional melodic rules?
Danny
tom_k
"Danny Schorr" <.@.> wrote in message
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:55:53 -0400, "tom_k" <tko...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Danny Schorr" <.@.> wrote in message
>>news:s932b5dbs42pan1p1...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 05:56:44 -0700 (PDT), LJS <ljsc...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> my ears are attuned to Goetschius's rules in the main, but some jazz
>>> melodies don't always seem to follow the pattern. And I haven't as yet
>>> been
>>> able to articulate a system for it, but I can hear much more clearly
>>> having
>>> read Percy.
>>
>>A consistent avoidance of traditional melodic "rules" can be found in Eric
>>Dolphy's jazz improvisations. But yet his melodic lines always
>>
>>Tom
>>
>
> What do you think the 'unifying factors' were, considering that he avoided
> traditional melodic rules?
>
> Danny
As I haven't having really picked apart his solos, I did hedge with "seemed
to me".
But if pressed, I'd say his stylistic consistency - even when using his
typical unexpected melodic leaps and rhythmic displacements (IMHO, an
extension of Bird). His melodic leaps are occasionally (like Bach) simply
octave displacements such as completing a descending ^4, ^3, ^2, ^1 with an
ascending 7th, but they are much more frequent and often more complex.
I'd love to be able to pin down why I hear Dolphy as a consummate improviser
but cannot hear the same in Ornette Coleman who was working in a somewhat
similar genre.
Hopefully, someone who has analyzed a few of Dolphy's transcribed solos can
better answer your question..
Tom
Joey Goldstein
Gordon Delamont's book on melody is pretty cool.
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT primus DOT ca
ttw...@att.net
harmony. He tends to get stuck in details and says little about
secondary dominants or augmented sixths and the like. He does
emphasize the relations of roots a fifth apart though. His books on
structure are pretty good too.
LJS
> "Danny Schorr" <.@.> wrote in message
>
> news:e372b5lf7cpgsbdlo...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:55:53 -0400, "tom_k" <tkor...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>"Danny Schorr" <.@.> wrote in message
> >>news:s932b5dbs42pan1p1...@4ax.com...
Hi Tom,
I know that it would not be like you to claim that he "broke all the
rules" if you didn't pick apart his solos. Did I miss your saying
where you heard or read this? It sounds like you read someone's
account of his breaking the rules and then listened for patterns as
you heard him play. So, who said this and do you know if he had any
examples of his breaking rules or any other information as to which
rules he broke?
I am only interested to the extent that just as Fux's rules can have
the definitions of Consonance and dissonance and dissonance changed
and they can fit just about any period of music. I am wondering if
Percy's rules will stand up to this same test. I am curious, then, to
see what was written about his breaking the rules so that I can see if
there are parameters that can be changed in some similar manner to
adjust Percy's rules to instrumental melodies with wide melodic
ranges; extended harmonic structure as well as different concepts of
harmonic structures; or any other global concepts that might transfer
from Percy's time to the music before (well of course before!) but to
allow them to be followed by more modern periods as well.
Just a concept that you sparked with your post.
LJS
LJS
Sounds like you are thinking along the same lines that I am with the
rules. The Fab4 had a public British education and that means that
they most likely sang a lot of older folk and traditional melodies,
the same sort of stuff that Percy would have used in his studies in
addition to the classics.
Have you discovered any patterns as to what kind of events leads to
the breaking of the rules when they occur in their music?
I enjoy the same thing you do with hearing the music different after
doing Percy. And the same for Fux. It sounds like you are able to
separate the concepts and the parameters by sound and that is a great
skill for composing (and improvisation). For those that understand the
difference, if you run out of ideas, all you have to do is choose a
different set of parameters to use or change which concepts to work
with and use your old ideas over again just as the various periods did
with Fux and counterpoint.
This is a good example of using one of the higher levels of Bloom's
Taxonomy. (for those that might be interested)
LJS
tom_k
"LJS" <ljsc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:097059c6-4521-4397...@p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 16, 12:45 pm, "tom_k" <tkor...@comcast.net> wrote:
Hi Tom,
I know that it would not be like you to claim that he "broke all the
rules" if you didn't pick apart his solos. Did I miss your saying
where you heard or read this? It sounds like you read someone's
account of his breaking the rules and then listened for patterns as
you heard him play. So, who said this and do you know if he had any
examples of his breaking rules or any other information as to which
rules he broke?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LJ, I was trying to chose my words carefully and didn't say "broke all the
rules" - I mentioned a "consistent avoidance of traditional melodic
'rules'". Perhaps "consistent" should be modified to "frequent". While
someone else may have written this back in the 60's, my impressions come
from hearing his playing - primarily on recordings and once in person.
IMHO (there's that qualification, again!) Dolphy represented both an
evolution from and a revolution against Charlie Parker. Among other things,
I hear this as a result of his use of very disjunct melodies, unexpected
registral shifts (especially on bass clarinet), rhythmically accented
non-scale tones, and implied harmonies unrelated to the given chords - all
this while still often soloing over bebop ii -V - I changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am only interested to the extent that just as Fux's rules can have
the definitions of Consonance and dissonance and dissonance changed
and they can fit just about any period of music. I am wondering if
Percy's rules will stand up to this same test. I am curious, then, to
see what was written about his breaking the rules so that I can see if
there are parameters that can be changed in some similar manner to
adjust Percy's rules to instrumental melodies with wide melodic
ranges; extended harmonic structure as well as different concepts of
harmonic structures; or any other global concepts that might transfer
from Percy's time to the music before (well of course before!) but to
allow them to be followed by more modern periods as well.
Just a concept that you sparked with your post.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's been a long, long time since I read ol' Percy, but I'd think that some,
but probably not all of his ideas re melody would apply to post-tonal music.
Tom
Danny Schorr
>Sounds like you are thinking along the same lines that I am with the
>rules. The Fab4 had a public British education and that means that
>they most likely sang a lot of older folk and traditional melodies,
>the same sort of stuff that Percy would have used in his studies in
>addition to the classics.
>
>Have you discovered any patterns as to what kind of events leads to
>the breaking of the rules when they occur in their music?
>
>I enjoy the same thing you do with hearing the music different after
>doing Percy. And the same for Fux. It sounds like you are able to
>separate the concepts and the parameters by sound and that is a great
>skill for composing (and improvisation). For those that understand the
>difference, if you run out of ideas, all you have to do is choose a
>different set of parameters to use or change which concepts to work
>with and use your old ideas over again just as the various periods did
>with Fux and counterpoint.
>
>This is a good example of using one of the higher levels of Bloom's
>Taxonomy. (for those that might be interested)
>
>LJS
well, first off, I find "Percys rules", or more accurately, the concept of
active and inactive tones, rather simple. It's basically ^7 goes to ^8, ^6
goes to 5, ^4 goes to ^3. Minor is similar, but a bit different. For
instance, ^5 up to ^1 -^2- b^3 is really common in minor . From this basic
sarting point, a few more rules and concepts come into play.
(see ttw6687's link)
As I stated, once I locate what scale degree is, based on supporting
evidence of where the tones move to, figuring out the melody in my head is
a cakewalk for most popular music.
Again, when something is happening that goes against the grain, it clues me
into the fact that a shift is happening in the music, such as modulation or
the outlining secondary dominants- and once I 'reset the vantage point' so
to speak, or reorient myself, as it were - it still makes melodic sense. My
most memorable experience after I sort of 'discovered' how to do this, was
listening to Schubert's unfinished symphony. As I recall, the tonal centers
were moving quite frequently, but once I became aware of the shift, I could
pinpoint scale degree ( and recreate it on an instrument) with an
impressive degree of accuracy.
But, all in all, I really don't know HOW I became able to do this, or how
to lay out a method I could communicate to a musician or student.
I guess I studied and absorbed the results thru osmosis, or learning, and
it got thru to me.
Not to compare myself to them AT ALL, but I guess John and Paul also did
the same, judging from the fact that their melodies follow the acknowledged
rules of active and inactive tones. We know they didn't study theory, so
your guess about the English education is probably on the money.
But as i said - and I cant recall any specific examples at the moment -
jazz melodies that I figured out ( heads, not improvs) tended to appear
harmonized by a chord a 4th away - i.e.if I thought the melody outlined
and F major chord, for example, it wpuld be harmonized by a BbMaj7, and so
on. I never really got to the heart of why that was.
Sorry I don't have any definitive answers. I'm not actually clear on any of
this myself, except that it works for me and I can transcribe a lot of
stuff in real time without an instrument.
I actually wish I COULD articulate a system and pass it along to others.
Maybe someday.
Danny
LJS
That is exactly what I am talking about. If the tendencies come from
active and inactive tones as you say (and I believe that you are
correct), then what will happen if you somehow change the criteria for
the active tones?
The Beatles and Percy are both using historically simple and time
proven melodies. they are mostly from the context of triads and
Dominant 7ths. Even inside this tonal set, the tones will have
different tendencies (re their melodic numbers in relation to tonic)
if you move to the various modes. In major, 4-3. 7-1, 6-5 etc but
using the white notes, this would be F-E, B-C, A,G. In Lyduab, that
unique case of the tritone would still be the B and F going to the C
and E, but it would no longer be the same 4-3. 7-1,but would be 2-1
and 5-6! This horse would have a different color.
By changing the context of this comcept from major to lydian, a
different result would occur. The theoretical question would be then,
does Percy's concept of active scale degrees work as well in the odes
as they do in major/minor.
The context could be changed by extending the harmony to 4 note chords
or 5 note chords and this would result in more active tones to choose
from giving you more possibilities for extending the parameters and
providing a wider range of possibilities for writing a good melody.
Then one could set up different parameters if one kept the concept and
changed the harmony to quartal harmony. or some other type of harmonic
scheme. The active and passive steps in that concept may or may not
work under Percy's "rules".
This is the type of relationship I see in Fux and I assume that it may
work for Percy, but I have not studied it in an organized way so I
can't say for sure, but in the same manner as you don't understand
how, but can still follow his rules in the Beatles, I tend to hear
things in more modern music in the same type of manner. \
This is the type of relationship that Bloom allows you to explore when
you are learning; First the facts then understanding and applying
these facts to the Beatles melodies, then Explaining the facts, and
eventually using the principles from Percy to explain the Beatles and
then understanding the concepts involved and speculating on what can
be done as you apply and modify parameters of the concepts. Of course,
I skipped some of the levels, but this is an example of how Bloom's
Taxonomy can be used to truly learn what is going on.
Percy, and Fux both wrote very broad based and complete analyses of
music that was popular and of interest to them. But I have seen that
the concepts Fux discovered were not specific ONLY to the period of
early counterpoint but instead were extremely mutably through the
evolution of music. I suspect that Percy's melodic rules will also fit
this criteria.
>
> As I stated, once I locate what scale degree is, based on supporting
> evidence of where the tones move to, figuring out the melody in my head is
> a cakewalk for most popular music.
>
> Again, when something is happening that goes against the grain, it clues me
> into the fact that a shift is happening in the music, such as modulation or
> the outlining secondary dominants- and once I 'reset the vantage point' so
> to speak, or reorient myself, as it were - it still makes melodic sense. My
> most memorable experience after I sort of 'discovered' how to do this, was
> listening to Schubert's unfinished symphony. As I recall, the tonal centers
> were moving quite frequently, but once I became aware of the shift, I could
> pinpoint scale degree ( and recreate it on an instrument) with an
> impressive degree of accuracy.
This is one of those Bloom's levels that I skipped above. You are
using the principle to analyze more complicated contexts. Here you are
using it in conjunction with the concept of temporary key centers and
it is, of course, showing that you indeed do understand Percy's
principle and you not only can remember it, explain it, but you can
also put it into use to demonstrate how his active and passive notes
will work in various keys even though they are temporary.
I think you have included at least 4 out of the 6 levels in this
example.
>
> But, all in all, I really don't know HOW I became able to do this, or how
> to lay out a method I could communicate to a musician or student.
> I guess I studied and absorbed the results thru osmosis, or learning, and
> it got thru to me.
This only shows a bit of a lack of self confidence as you clearly can
explain it. You have here at least in a general way. You can solidify
this level by asking yourself Bloom's questions and this is how you
would use it to strengthen you ability to communicate and explain the
concept to others.
>
> Not to compare myself to them AT ALL, but I guess John and Paul also did
> the same, judging from the fact that their melodies follow the acknowledged
> rules of active and inactive tones. We know they didn't study theory, so
> your guess about the English education is probably on the money.
Yes, except for a small detail. Everyone does not have to have a
formal education to study something. I think that they were prepared
by the English education by singing the melodies. (a technique used by
Kodaly where the student learns the simple songs by rote and then they
are led into discovering how to communicate what they have learned)
Then they used their natural ability (everyone does not have to be
taught Bloom's methods, it comes natural to some. Curiosity can lead
some to the same questions and conclusions) to take what they learned
in school and to experiment with how to construct the melody. They
could do this without having any clue as to how or why, only that they
wanted to know and they used what they had to accomplish what they
wanted. After all, if the end result did not "sound right" when they
heard it, they could simply keep experimenting until their end result
fit what their education taught their ear to be a good melody.
>
> But as i said - and I cant recall any specific examples at the moment -
> jazz melodies that I figured out ( heads, not improvs) tended to appear
> harmonized by a chord a 4th away - i.e.if I thought the melody outlined
> and F major chord, for example, it wpuld be harmonized by a BbMaj7, and so
> on. I never really got to the heart of why that was.
This is a simple context shift of things that you already know. For
example: F A C is really only an extension of Bb Maj triad to the
tonic 9th. put them together and you have a Bb D F A C chord.
Instead of writing the melody first (the F A C) and harmonizing it as
a Bbmaj9, the Bb came first and by adding the concept of extending the
harmony to create additional melodic possibilities. The C added to the
already expanded harmony of Bb Maj triad (already changing Percy's
context by one third on top to produce the Bbmaj7 which is accepted as
consonant in our modern jazz context) this added C to the mix is only
extending the melody one more third.
>
> Sorry I don't have any definitive answers. I'm not actually clear on any of
> this myself, except that it works for me and I can transcribe a lot of
> stuff in real time without an instrument.
>
> I actually wish I COULD articulate a system and pass it along to others.
> Maybe someday.
>
> Danny
If you want to pass it on, Bloom's is a good place to start. Read
about it some more and systematically go through the steps and your
answer will be found in your context and in your own way of looking at
things. You are describing all the symptoms that Bloom's Tax. will
cure. lol
You understand more than you think and I can see in your post a pretty
clear way that you are able to do this. If you want to expand the base
of the readers that will understand what you are saying, they Bloom's
will be a good tool to start with.
Later,
LJS
Orangeboxman
The Analysis and Cognition of Basic Melodic Structures
by
Eugene O. Narmour
But unless you can commit to reading thoroughly until it's actually
understood, don't bother.
Hint: good melodic writing is mostly about walking the line between
what the ear expects and what it does not expect.
But what does the ear expect?
You'll see.
LJS
It looks like an interesting book for a theorist. I don't know if it
would really help one to write a melody until a rather large amount of
time were to be spent learning the notation of his ideas and concepts.
From what I saw (I added it to my library and will read it sometime
when I have more time) and by your post, it seems to be a rather
complicated way of saying what Coker said (to the effect of) "your
audience will try to guess where your solo is going. If he guesses
right too often, then he is bored and will lose interest. If you
surprise him too often, he will get frustrated and find it too complex
for him to continue to listen". I think that he gave a ratio of 2
surprises: 1 correct guess (or the reverse of that, I never can
remember which he used) There is certainly merrit to this book, I just
wonder about its use as a way to learn to write as a first book.
Thanks for pointing it out though. Thing I dislike most about most
college theory books is that they are so concerned with the function,
and that is important, but they often give chapters 2 and/or 3 to
melody and these are often the shortest chapters in the book. Its good
to have another good study of simply melodic concepts available for
reference when needed.
LJS
Daniel Schorr
>
> It looks like an interesting book for a theorist. I don't know if it
> would really help one to write a melody until a rather large amount of
> time were to be spent learning the notation of his ideas and concepts.
> From what I saw (I added it to my library and will read it sometime
> when I have more time) and by your post, it seems to be a rather
> complicated way of saying what Coker said (to the effect of) "your
> audience will try to guess where your solo is going. If he guesses
> right too often, then he is bored and will lose interest. If you
> surprise him too often, he will get frustrated and find it too complex
> for him to continue to listen". I think that he gave a ratio of 2
> surprises: 1 correct guess (or the reverse of that, I never can
> remember which he used) There is certainly merrit to this book, I just
> wonder about its use as a way to learn to write as a first book.
I could swear he said "50%" but damn, I can't find it right now in the
book. I believe he said something like less than that, it was too easy
to play the game, and higher than that the game wasn't worth
playing...that's memory talking though, cant seem to find it, I
thought it was in the preface...
> Thanks for pointing it out though. Thing I dislike most about most
> college theory books is that they are so concerned with the function,
> and that is important, but they often give chapters 2 and/or 3 to
> melody and these are often the shortest chapters in the book. Its good
> to have another good study of simply melodic concepts available for
> reference when needed.
>
> LJS
Interestingly enough,Coker devotes at least two chapters to melody.
The firstis entitled, appropriately enough, an introduction to melody,
and the second is "analysis and devolpment of a melody" . Ooh, and a
chapter about functional (jazz) harmony, and chord superimposition,
too. Guess I now know what I'll be reading tomorrow...thanks guys for
the (re)suggestion....I love my musical library....life is good :-)
Orangeboxman
would really help one to write a melody until a rather large amount of
time were to be spent learning the notation of his ideas and
concepts.
Malcolm Gladwell says you should expect to spend 10,000 hours doing
anything before you become an expert.
You might as well go straight to the powerful medicine and stop spoon-
feeding yourself with sugar.
I just told another guy in another corner of cyberspace the same thing
about this book,
and I told him the Arabic story about the guy looking for his keys.
You know that story?
Orangeboxman
would really help one to write a melody until a rather large amount of
time were to be spent learning the notation of his ideas and
concepts.
Malcolm Gladwell says you should expect to spend 10,000 hours doing
Orangeboxman
Expectation-Realization Model" for a damn good reason.
It is designed to allow one to calculate, on a note-to note basis, how
much the average listener expects each possible next note. It is
supported by an ocean of earlier psychology research by many, many
qualified experts.
If you keep doing the same "unexpected" thing, that becomes expected,
sure. Narmour has the hard data on that, and
shows how MANY successful composers have worked around it, apparently
intuitively.
This book will kick your ass and make you beg for more.
I half wish Narmour would stop writing books and start writing music:
But then we'd probably have his melodies buzzing through our heads so
much we couldn't listen to anything else.
LJS
Yes, melody is where it is at. Especially in jazz improvisation.
Damn, I think I had that Coker book in mine at one time. It was a
rather small paperback that I remember. You could be right about the
50%. I seem to remember that it was a ratio of 3. My memory is older
than yours so I can't say for sure. lol. The point of course was that
he addressed it in a much simpler manner. Not that this other book was
not good or even better. Just more complicated.
LJS
LJS
Not that one by the "short" what is it?
I didn't mean to imply that there was anything wrong with the book.
Sorry if you took that impression. I just think it is a lot for a
beginner and if you can find someone that is willing to put 10K hours
at doing anything in today's world, I would like to talk to you about
some ocean front property down at the mouth of the Mississippi River.
(no mineral rights of of course) Its rather inexpensive! lol.
If I had the time I would get into it more. I think that melody is one
of the most important aspects of music yet is the most neglected in
practically all methods of theory. Chords, chords and chords. Chords
are fine and very useful, but you get much more interest with a good
melody than a naked chord progression. Without a good melody, the
progression will not generally be able to carry the weight but melody
can stand alone in practically every context.
LJS
LJS
sounds interesting. Does it have preview on Google?
LJS