Okay here's the list. I spend some time on this. If you have any specific questions, let me know:)


***

On Composition:

Making Music: 74 Creative Strategies - Dennis DeSantis
Amazon Link
This is a fantastic book. Each page has a general idea on boosting creativity, workflow, and designing sounds and tracks. I recommend you read and digest one of the tips per day and really think about applying them.

Music Theory for Computer Musicians - Michael Hewitt
Amazon Link
Really easy to digest book on music theory, as it applies to your DAW. Each DAW is used in the examples, so it is not limited to a specific program. Highly recommend this for someone starting out with theory to improve their productions.

Secrets of Dance Music Production - David Felton
Amazon Link
This book I recently picked up and so far it's been quite good. It goes over all the different elements of what make's dance music, and get's quite detailed. More geared towards the beginner, but it was engaging nonetheless. It is the best 'EDM specific' production book I have read.

Ocean of Sound - David Troop
Amazon Link
Very well written and interesting book on ambient music. Not only does David go over the technical side and history of ambiance and musical atmospheres, he speaks very poetically about creating these soundscapes and how they relate to our interpersonal emotions.


***

On Audio Engineering:

Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio - Mike Senior
Amazon Link
In my opinion, this is the best mixing reference book for both beginners and intermediate producers. Very in-depth book that covers everything from how to set-up for accurate listening to the purpose of each mixing and mastering plug-in. Highly recommended.

Zen and the Art of Mixing - Mixerman
Amazon Link
Very interesting read in that it deals with the why's more than the how's. Mixerman, a professional audio engineer, goes in detail to talk about the mix engineer's mindset, how to approach projects, and how to make critical mixing decisions. Really fun read.

The Mixing Engineer's Handbook - Bobby Owinski
Amazon Link
This is a fantastic companion book to keep around. Not only does Owinski go into great technical detail, he includes interviews from various audio engineers that I personally found very helpful and inspiring.


***

On the Industry:

All You Need to Know About the Music Business - Donald S. Passman
Amazon Link
This book is simply a must read for anyone hoping to make a professional career out of music, anyone wanting to start their own record label, or anyone interested in how the industry works. It's a very informative book for any level of producer, and is kept up-to-date with the frequent revisions. Buy it.

Rick Rubin: In the Studio - Jake Brown
Amazon Link
Very interesting read that is a semi-biographical book on Rick Rubin. It is not so personal as it is talking about his life, experiences, and processes. It does get quite technical when referring to the recording process, but there are better books for technical info. This is a fun read on one of the most successful producers in history.

Behind the Glass - Howard Massey
Amazon Link
A collection of interviews from a diverse range of musicians who speak about creativity, workflows, and experiences in the music industry. Really light, easy to digest book.


***

On Creativity:

The War of Art - Steven Pressfield
Amazon Link
This is a must-read, in my opinion, for any creative individual. It is a very philosophical book on dealing with our own mental battles as an artist, and how to overcome them. Definitely pick this one up, all of you.

This is Your Brain on Music - Daniel S. Levitin
Amazon Link
A book written by a neurologist on the psychology of music and what makes us attached to it. It's a fairly scientific book but it is a very rewarding read with some great ideas.


***

On Personal Growth and Development:

How to Win Friends and Influence People - Dale Carnegie
Amazon Link
Although this seems like an odd book for a music producer, personally I think this is one of the most influential books I've ever read. Knowing how to be personable, effectively network, and form relationships is extremely important in our industry. Whether it be meeting and talking to labels, meeting other artists, or getting through to A&R, this book helps with all these areas and I suggest this book to all of you.

7 Habits of Highly Effective People - Stephen R. Covey
Amazon Link
Similar to the recommendation above, although not directly linked to music, I assure you reading this book will change your views on life. It is a very engaging and practical book, and gets you in the right mindset to be successful in your life and music career. Trust me on this one and give it a read.

Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience - Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
Amazon Link
You know the feeling when you're really in the groove of jamming out and all worries tend to slip away for those moments? That is the 'Optimal Experience' according to the author. This book will teach you about that experience, and how to encourage and find it in your work. This is a very challenging, immersive, and enlightening read, which deals with the bigger picture and finding happiness in your work and life. Very inspiring book that puts you in a good mindset when you're doing creative work.

The Art of Work - Jeff Goins
Amazon Link
A very fascinating book that looks at taking your passion (music in our case) and making the most of it. It guides you on how to be successful and turn your passion into your career. Some very interesting sections touching on dealing with failure, disappointment, and criticism, yet listening to your intuition and following your passion. Inspiring and uplifting book to say the least.


***


Phew. That was a lot of work. Hopefully you guys get some usefulness out of this list. This is put together after years of reading dozens upon dozens of books on these topics.


Enjoy!

I am hereby developing three steps to get started in future funk that I will gladly post on any thread where somebody is looking to begin. Here they are, in their first ever iteration. Comments welcome.


 


Step 0. Take your time. Be mentally prepared to throw out dozens of sketches of potential tracks representing hours of work for no other reason than that "they don't click" or you don't know where to take them next. Understand that future funk isn't a formula (and anybody who treats it as one is just asking to be ignored and forgotten). Just like ANY other form of music making, the good and the best take their time to really develop a craft. Be as holistic in your approach as your interest/life/ability allows (learn an instrument if you don't know one already, download ear training courses, basically be as adventurous as you can muster and look to, over time, learn things outside of just "future funk" skills).


 




 


Step 1. Learn to use some key tools. Pick and learn a DAW, anything will do as long as you learn it well (Ableton is popular for its flexibility and horsepower, but is more complicated than FL Studio which is an easy beginner's choice and is plenty legitimate as well). This will be your primary instrument, and over time using it will become second nature.

 

Step 1a. Learn about the tools for mixing- both generally, and the specific versions included in your DAW- this means basic knowledge of compressors, limiters, EQ, and reverbs at the very least to start with. Any audio mixing training will do, no need for it to be genre-specific. Eventually, start looking at mixing tools besides the built-in ones (browsing the Waves Plugin website will be equally exciting and overwhelming). Experiment over time and you'll gradually learn why certain tools/plugins are more powerful/preferred than others, and you'll develop your own preferences for what to use and how things should sound. Pay attention to the most subtle details. There's no shortage of great online tutorials on how to work with and listen to the tools of the trade in audio engineering.

>Recommended Resources: The Mixing Engineer's Handbook

>The Art of Mixing- old 80s tutorial video, very trippy, very educational


 

Step 1b. You'll also want to explore what instruments are built into your DAW, and what instrument plugins you may want to "acquire". Some good starting points for exploring instruments may be plugins that emulate classic synthesizers (CS-80, ARP1200, Korg legacy plugins, etc)- this kind of plays into point #2 as well, so I'll leave this point at that for now.


 




 


Step 2. LISTEN to other music. Your goal is to have a unique and varied and personal set of influences- see a great comment from Amherst here on why this is important.


Dig into your own iTunes library- what unique bits of your past may make interesting influences for your future funk music? My dad loved Dire Straits and Barry White and dad rock, my mom loved Deee-Lite and 80s hip hop. I've played on all of those elements before, plus the stuff I listened to at any point in my life (a lot of jazz in my teen years lol). Dig into the roots of future funk- disco, funk, boogie, smooth jazz, house, french house, 80s pop (feel free to ask for recommendations!). Go on your own digging adventures to find stuff that none of us have before. YouTube is your friend, Discogs is your friend (you can use other people's samples as starting points, but aim to get far away- both Amherst and I have playlists of samples we've used on different projects , just as examples of cool places to start).


You don't have to be looking for samples per say- you might just find some really cool sonic influences or ideas on song arrangement/elements (what synths are they using on that record you really dig? Try to find out!). But you need to spend a LOT of time listening to things that AREN'T future funk in order to make good FF. This is massively important, and one of the reasons future funk can often be seen as a stale genre is that many newcomers list their main influences as other, older FF producers and end up emulating the same old sounds instead of bringing something new to the table.


 



 


Step 3. At the end of the day, when you're looking at your project file and you think you have a groovin future funk tune ready to release, do a quick check that, if everyone did it, would solve 90% of complaints about this genre. "What is my unique contribution to this track?" Did you just take a j-funk song (because that's the type of music that so and so sampled!) and put drums over it at a certain tempo (because that's the tempo future funk is at!)? That fails the test. Did you chop up and rearrange a sample in a really unique way, did you combine 5 different songs to make something new and cool, did you add original instrumentation or harmony to old music? That passes the test.

> Side note: If something isn't very "original" and is just an edit of an existing track, or doesn't use much original material and should be considered a "remix"- be honest and label it as such. There's been a couple controversial FF "tracks" released lately where the artist in question became kinda shunned because they were attempting to pass off slight changes to an existing song as an "original track".

 

Try doing the same sort of self-check when thinking about how you represent yourself as an artist- your style and branding and vibe. Does the whole anime/kanji thing really represent you as an artist and your unique influences accurately? Or did you just default to that after seeing what other people are doing? Figure out something that's true to yourself. (For me, Camino is kinda a representation of me as a social being- upbeat, humorous, outgoing and partygoing- and that's why my music is meant for dancing and appreciating pop culture, and I often use recognizable music.)


 



 



Alright, hope that helps. Anybody starting out can always feel free to PM me, and I think I'll continually work on and update these guidelines/pieces of advice with the help of all mah good friends. There you have it- V1 of Camino's Guide to Starting in Future Funk

It seems to me that most people are very poor judges of what is too easy. I think most people would benefit from going much easier than they think they should. It just tends to hurt their ego and so they instead spend a ton of time on one really hard thing.

The thing is, in the same amount of time you could spend working on one really hard piece, you could've probably worked on a dozen or more simpler pieces. Those pieces might not be as individually challenging, but each probably has something that challenges you a little. And it likely exposes you to a much greater variety of challenges. More rhythms, more keys, more variety period. That is going to lead to much more lasting improvement than spending a month or more on a single piece of really hard music.

The accumulation of skill will eventually make harder music easier to learn. I always say if you can't sightread it flawlessly and effortlessly with good musicality, there is something to be learned from polishing it up. That might take a few days, or it might only take 30 minutes of practice, but it's infinitely more worth your time than throwing yourself inaccurately are very difficult music and hoping to get it right.

The thing is, it doesn't feel like you're making progress because you're making huge strides. And the better you get, the more incremental your improvement will be. It takes more and more small incremental improvement to even notice you've gotten better and at some point it's basically almost impossible to notice unless you record yourself and then look back in 6 months, or maybe read something difficult and then come back to it 6 months later to see how much easier it is. Early on you are making big leaps, but it just can't continue.


It's like an RPG

Honestly, it's a lot like an RPG. You want to gain a lot of XP, so you go fight the hardest monster possible that gives 500 XP. But your party wipes... over and over... for an hour. In that same hour you could've beaten dozens of monsters that only gave 50 XP. in that same amount of time you could've gotten 3 or 4 times as much XP if you hadn't wasted your time wiping to the really hard enemy. And now that 500 XP enemy is laughably easy because you've leveled up so much. It's just that 50 XP a pop doesn't feel as good even though it's much more efficient.

And likewise, the higher level you get in most RPGs, the longer it takes to level up. Early on you'd be leveling up every 10-30 minutes, but in the end, you're only leveling up every few hours.

Finding music

This one is going to be hard depending on your goals. It seems many people only want to play music that is very personally fun to them, but that's not always the most efficient path. It's an issue if you want to get better or if you want instant (but often frustrating) gratification. It's honestly very worth it to spend some time suffering through less fun stuff and building up the skills that will eventually let you just pick up a piece of music and quickly read it or learn it in a few days. So you have to decide if you want to play something you love right now but it takes you 1-3 months every time you want to learn something new...or if you to be able to constantly pick up music you like and learn stuff you enjoy within a week or days.

The additional benefit is that once you get to that point, you'll actually accelerate your learning because you'll be able to play so much more music that you'll just exponentially increase your exposure. It will still feel slow, but you'll actually be improving a lot more.

So if you want to actually work on improving, just find anything. Don't go looking for the perfect piece at the perfect level. Just go grab tons of stuff erring on the side of offensively simple and just learn a ton of it. I like to grab song books from used book stores to use as reading/learning material. It's very cheap and I get a ton of material. Once again, if I can't sightread it, it's probably worth practicing.

You could also get various method books and work through them. Can you read everything in all 3 levels of the Alfred adult books? You could get all sorts of graduated collections of works like this series and just work through them. You could get First Lessons in Bach. Just find, learn, and read tons of material. Err on the side of short and simple.

EDIT: I'll also add that only working on overly difficult music often leads to an increased risk of developing lots of bad habits and playing with lots of tension.

Hey! I can relate exactly to where your'e coming from. I, some years ago, decided I wanted to get into building synths. I ended up getting a job at a pedal company and have spent more time learning to build and repair pedals than synths. I don't work there anymore, but it gave me a lot of perspective into the field as we also made euro-rack modules.

First up: I don't want to scare you off from this, but just want to give you a realistic perspective so that you go into this knowing what you are getting into. Making synths is hard and it's expensive. As far as electronic projects go, making a synthesizer is up there on the list. I've repaired powerplant turbine controller circuitboards that were simpler than some of the synths I've owned. This isn't to say, "don't do it!" but, expect to learn a lot of fundamental and intermediate stuff before you ever have something like a fully-featured synth that you built in your hands.

It's also expensive. A cheap synth prototype is going to cost a couple hundred bucks, easy, while a more fully-featured prototype could cost into the thousands to produce, and that's just to build one working prototype. If you want to make a run of products you're going to need money up front, and not a small amount. So, just be prepared for that inevitability.

One final note is that my perspective is broad (digital and analog) but is rooted in analog electronics because that's where I started. This isn't the only path you can take to get to where you want to go but honestly in my opinion, even if you're going to go mostly digital later, you need to understand analog.

If you have never messed with electronics much before I highly recommend the Make: Electronics book. I'm a hands-on person and this was the most effective book I found that let me study electronics fundamentals the way I wanted to; by making stuff! No matter which direction you go on (digital, analog, hybrid, DSP, SID, etc) you're going to want to know how to pick the right resistor, or how to pop an LED into a circuit, and this book will teach you that.

Solid follow-up books from there are Make: More Electronics, Practical Electronics for Inventors, How To Diagnose and Fix Everything Electronic, and The Art of Electronics. All of these books are good books that touch on different concepts you will find useful, so I encourage you to look through them and decide for yourself which of these interests you.

Around this same time, I'd encourage you to start getting into kits. Honestly, before you build anything synth, I'm going to recommend you build some pedals. Effects pedals are fun and rewarding to build without being too hard. Start with a distortion circuit and work your way up from there. Once you can build a delay pedal without freaking out, move on to euro-rack kits, or other synth kits. While you're building these kits, don't just build them, play with the circuits! Try swapping components where you think you can, or adding features. One of my first kits was a distortion pedal with a single knob, but by the time I was done tweaking on it it had five knobs and two toggle switches!

Once you're feeling somewhat comfortable with electronics, then you can dive into the holy grail of analog synth design: Make: Analog Synthesizers this amazing book was written by the brilliant Ray Wilson who recently passed away. His life's goal was to bring the art of building analog synths into the hands of anyone who wanted to learn, and there is no better place to receive his great wisdom than this book. You should also check out his website Music From Outer Space along the way, but the book covers so much more than his website.

If you make through most or all of those resources you are going to be well-equipped to take on a career in synth-building! I'm personally still on that last step (trying to find the time to tackle Make: Analog Synthesizers) but hope within the next year or two to get that under my belt and start diving in deep myself. It's been a fun journey of learning and discovery and I wouldn't trade the skills I've gained in electronics for much.

Hope this helps, good luck!

Normally, I would try to (somewhat) annotate stuff I link/mention but I'm tired on all levels of my being so forgive me for making this reply less detailed than I'd like it to be. Keep in mind that I don't know sht and half the time, I'm talking out my ss.

Mostly I hope this, at least, helps you guide your search. Or the things I write here are so horribad that it prompts someone to viciously correct me, thus giving you the real info you need! :p

I might circle back after some time to add notes here and there. Maybe. Also, this first reply will be focused on quartal harmony but I should be able to muster up the spoons to write up a search guide for minimalism later.

First, there are some really neat proto examples of quartal/quintal harmony in Medieval music. The starting search term for this would be organum. There were/are more than a few kinds^A of organum but examples of parallel organum should be most interesting to you.

David Fenwick Wilson has a book on Early music called Music in the Middle Ages: Style and Structure. It's admittedly an older book but I mention it specifically because there's a lovely youtube video^B with examples from the related anthology. As always, I'm a sl*t for Norton's music history books^C so check those out as well, imo.

Outside of the realm of "classical" music, most of the quartal harmony you'll encounter will be in the form of quartal voicings^D for otherwise tertian chords. It's a favorite trick for more than a few jazz giants so naturally, there's an absolute glut^E of resources for this.

When we get to classical music though, we start to get some actual spicy stuff, like fully formed quartal harmonic systems and languages. Paul Hindemith was a BIG fan of quartal stuff. You can check out his own writings^F about his musical system in his book on composition. Arnold Schoenberg also devotes a section in his book on harmony^G to the newer quartal sounds cropping up (well "new" when he wrote it at any rate).

From there it's really a matter of doing the grunt work of either analyzing composers you find writing quartal harmony OR researching analyses of said composers. Sure, quartal harmony (and the related term "interval cycle") gets mentioned in more than a few books on 20th century harmony like Vincent Persichetti's^H or Richard Strauss's^I books; both might be good jumping off points on your journey.

Seemingly, every composer and their mother (Hindemith, Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Copland, Cowell, Ives) experimented with quartal writing in the 20th century. So while definitive guides might be hard to track down, specific examples aren't. I'll include an analysis or two that you might find helpful in the list below. Be on the look out for any edits I might sneak in!

Beyond that, perhaps the most concrete way we could help you would be to analyze specific pieces/instances of quartal language you find and walk you through any questions you had about the piece. When I'm not tired, I'm usually down to dig into some cool music. Drop a score, ask something, and let's analyze something together! Still, I hope this helps. Have fun on your compositional journey and take care!

A.) https://sophia.smith.edu/~rsherr/earlypol.htm

B.) https://youtu.be/SgHzH5iDcGQ

C.) https://wwnorton.com/books/9780393929157

D.) https://leadingtone.tumblr.com/post/8203279125/quartal-voicings-in-jazz-here-refers-to-an

E1.) https://www.jazzguitar.be/blog/quartal-chords-harmony-voicings-for-guitar/

E2.) https://www.thejazzpianosite.com/jazz-piano-lessons/jazz-chord-voicings/quartal-voicings/

E3.) http://greglui.com/blog/quartal-voicings/

F.) https://www.amazon.com/Craft-Musical-Composition-Theoretical-Part/dp/0901938300

G.) https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Harmony-ANNIVERSARY-Arnold-Schoenberg/dp/0520266080

H.) https://www.amazon.com/Twentieth-Century-Harmony-Creative-Aspects-Practice/dp/0393095398

I.) https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Post-Tonal-Theory-Fourth-Joseph/dp/0393938832

J.) Berg's Lyric Suite has plenty of quintal yumminess. Check out Perle's analysis of its interval cycles: https://www.jstor.org/stable/741747?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

I'm not too familiar with Handel's works, but progressing through Baroque music can be fairly straightforward and programmatic. This is especially true when it comes to Bach, who happens to be excellent for developing hand independence! I would recommend going starting with this book, then his Little Preludes, then his two- and three-part inventions, and then WTC I and II. The progression in difficulty isn't completely linear, as you'll find there will be a couple of pieces here and there (like the WTC I Prelude in C you learned) that are easier than the pieces from the book before. For the most part though, the pieces do get progressively harder. You probably won't find a lot of hand independence exercises until you get to the inventions, but there's plenty of great material to start with from the first two books alone that will prepare you. The inventions require you to voice multiple independent melodies, which can be pretty difficult for any beginner pianist.

I also agree with the other poster, keep practicing your scales! There's a lot of different ways to improve your technique from playing scales alone. Learn all your major and harmonic/melodic minor scales. Learn to play them across multiple octaves, in parallel and contrary motion, starting from any key, in thirds, sixths, and tenths. Mix them up and play different scales in each hand at the same time. Play one scale in one hand at half the speed of the other hand. Play them at different dynamics, play them legato/staccato. The variety of ways you can improve your technique from just scales is staggering, not to mention it will be of immense benefit for improving your music theory and will help you run through scales much more quickly when you encounter them in a piece later on :)

I think every theory book I've ever read has opened up my mind in some way - while always being unsatisfactory in other ways (incomplete, too dense, too little on some forms of music, etc). My experience and interest is largely in popular music of all kinds, less in classical, so that has biased my reading somewhat; but I can recommend all the following (not 100%, but worth reading):

Eric Taylor: The AB Guide to Music Theory, pts I and II - good review of the basics, aimed at pupils studying for grades. Not deep in any way but good if you're just starting out. Solidly classical, which could be a downside for some. The concepts up to grade 5 are shrunk to useful pocket size in [this] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/First-Steps-Music-Theory-Grades/dp/1860960901/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466150641&sr=1-1&keywords=theory+of+music+grades+1-5) - 100% recommended for any absolute beginner.

George Heussenstamm : [Harmony and Theory, pts 1 & 2 (Hal Leonard)] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hal-Leonard-Harmony-Theory-Diatonic/dp/1423498879/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466150878&sr=1-2&keywords=Hal+Leonard+Harmony+%26+Theory) Usefully split into Diatonic and Chromatic. I've read a few texts on standard classical theory, and this is the most approachable, IMO.

William Russo: [Jazz Composition and Orchestration] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jazz-Composition-Orchestration-William-Russo/dp/0226732150/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466151290&sr=1-1&keywords=russo+jazz+composition) Taught me more than I thought I wanted to know about counterpoint. Most of which I've now forgotten (not much call for it in the bands I played in...). But if you're not into big band jazz (at all), maybe not worth it.

William Russo: [Composing for the Jazz Orchestra] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Composing-Jazz-Orchestra-William-Russo-ebook/dp/B01EZ8OKQW/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466149432&sr=1-1&keywords=william+russo) Neat little guide book on jazz arranging (NOT composition).

Mark Levine: [The Jazz Theory Book] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jazz-Theory-Book-Mark-Levine/dp/1883217040/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466151006&sr=1-1&keywords=levine+jazz+theory) 50% recommended. Well written and presented, eye-opening in many ways, but beware - chord-scale theory! (controversial stuff, in ways he doesn't admit.)

Robert Rawlins and Nor Eddine Bahha: [Jazzology] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jazzology-Encyclopedia-Jazz-Theory-Musicians/dp/0634086782/ref=pd_sim_14_5?ie=UTF8&dpID=41YkvVcCfEL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR120%2C160_&refRID=ZR730GKYPSZYA2THNXGT) The somewhat dry antidote to the above. 50% recommended. Should have been good, but somehow hard to read, easy to put down. Unlike Levine, no quotes from jazz standards or recordings - all music examples are written by the authors.

Dominic Pedler: [The Songwriting Secrets of the Beatles] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Songwriting-Secrets-%2522Beatles%2522-Dominic-Pedler/dp/0711981671/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466151087&sr=1-1&keywords=pedler+beatles) Outlines the vast number of theoretical concepts that the fab four would be astonished to learn they employed. Includes a useful appendix on basic concepts of tonal harmony. If you like pop and rock (and theory) but don't like the Beatles, still worth reading.

But then if you like the Beatles AND theory... [Alan Pollack's site] (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-alphabet.shtml) is essential reading. (Pedler is deep, but doesn't examine EVERY song. Pollack is briefer, but does.

Allan F Moore: [Song Means: Analysing and Interpreting Popular Song] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Song-Means-Analysing-Interpreting-Recorded/dp/1409438023/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466151140&sr=1-1&keywords=allan+moore+song+means) Does what it says in the title - and goes deep! (way beyond the plain old superficial harmony concepts peddled - sorry - by Pedler :-))

Walter Everett: [Rock's Tonal Systems] (http://www.mtosmt.org/issues/mto.04.10.4/mto.04.10.4.w_everett.html) More stuff to raise the eyebrows of any rock musician. "Wow - we really do all that?"

Paul F Berliner: [Thinking in Jazz] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Thinking-Jazz-Infinite-Improvisation-Ethnomusicology/dp/0226043819/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466151218&sr=1-1&keywords=thinking+in+jazz) Not a music theory book in the usual sense, but discusses how jazz musicians think about improvisation.

IV. Voice-Leading Parsimony

("Parsimony" means "thriftiness, frugality; unwillingness to spend money.")

One interesting fact about P, L, and R: they leave 2 notes untouched, and the voice that does move only moves by a step. P and L only move one note by a half step, and R is a little more extravagant by moving a voice by a whole step. So these transformations are "parsimonious" (frugal) in the sense that they can get you new chords for very little effort (motion). It turns out that the triad is pretty cool for being able to do this: very few other chord types in the world can. (For example, you can't get from one French 6th chord or fully diminished 7th to another just by moving one voice a tiny amount.)

The next thing that Neo-Riemannian theory asks is "What happens if I chain a bunch of transformations together?" For example, what happens if I make a sequence by alternating P's and L's? Each step along the way changes only 1 half-step, but how many different notes does it use total? How long before I get back to my starting chord? (Will I go through all 12 major and all 12 minor triads? Or do I only use a fraction of the total?) Neo-Riemannian theory maps out the possibilities and describes them using a concept from modern algebra known as an algebraic "group." The transformations P, L, and R form a "group" of things that you can combine to make new things (e.g. imagine considering L-then-R to be a single transformation of its own). Group theory is used to explore the structure of the possibilities there.

V. Enharmonic Equivalence

(That is, the assumption that there are only 12 notes and that spelling doesn't matter, so G# = Ab.)

This doesn't sound very exciting, because we're pretty used to it by now. But it was a radical notion early in the Romantic period, and composers like Schubert got some cool effects out of exploiting it.

Earlier I asked "What happens if I make a sequence out of alternating P's and L's?" Well, it turns out that I go through 6 different chords, like this: CM - Cm - AbM - Abm - EM - Em (then back to CM). Every L takes me to a chord with a root a M3 lower, so that after 6 steps I've gone down by 3 major thirds and end up back where I started. This needs enharmonic equivalence to work, because without it I'd go C - Ab - Fb - Dbb... so that, in some weird conceptual world I'm actually not where I started. We're used to making that enharmonic shift, but it was relatively unfamiliar at the time. Partially that had to do with tuning, but also it had to do with the fundamental role of the diatonic scale at the time. Every interval had a meaning within a major or minor scale, and there were some combinations of intervals (like 3 M3's in a row) that couldn't be accomplished in any single scale. So shoving them all together like that, and forcing enharmonic equivalence on you, came very close to being a moment of atonality within tonal music!

This, again, is why the Neo-Riemannian approach of ignoring tonality and diatonic scales is useful: because there are pieces that do just that, in order to combine triads in weird ways (like the P-L sequence) that require enharmonic equivalence to make sense.

VI. The Tonnetz

In order to visualize the universe of possibilities that we've opened up with all this theorizing, Neo-Riemannian theory likes to create visual maps of the chord layouts that are possible. This kind of map is called a Tonnetz (German for "tone network"). Here's an example of a Tonnetz. Each letter represents a note (not a chord). Horizontal lines connect notes by perfect 5ths; diagonals that go up-right (or down-left) connect minor thirds; diagonals that go up-left (or down-right) connect major thirds.

The triangles that are formed in this picture represent triads: triangles pointing up are minor triads and triangles pointing down are major triads. So you can see the triangle framed by C, Eb, and G bolded in the picture, which of course is a C minor triad. Below it is the C,E,G of C major.

The nice thing about a Tonnetz like this is that it can also show our transformations. Consider the C major triad (just below the bolded triangle). Now look for the triangles that share a side with C major: they turn out to be exactly the 3 triangles that I can transform C major into via P, L, or R. So we can imagine those transformations as ways of flipping one triangle onto another inside the Tonnetz; we can make analyses of pieces by tracing out their chord progressions as if on a map.

---

That's pretty much all I've got stamina for, tonight. I've left a bunch out, so I'd be happy to get corrections/additions (or questions!), but I hope this has been a plausible overview of the basics of Neo-Riemannian theory.

If this stuff piques your interest, here are two books that are very much worth taking a look at:

Audacious Euphony by Richard Cohn, who is one of the founders of the theory, and who explores its possibilities through many nice analyses in this book.

A Geometry of Music by Dmitri Tymoczko, who is critical of standard Neo-Riemannian theory in many ways. His book (which builds two articles he helped write for Science in, I think, 2006 and 2008) offers another perspective on some of the same issues, drawing on geometry rather than algebra for his underlying mathematics.

Because you have an issue of constantly writing in the same key, I feel like your issue won’t be solved by just learning about modal interchange. I believe that thinking about harmony and phrase structure Functionally would be of more use to your process.


Every chord in a harmonic progression serves a function that can be broken down into 3 basic categories:

1. Tonic Function (Major: I, vi, iii) (Minor: i, bIII, bVI)
   
   
   
2. Subdominant Function (Major: ii, IV) (Minor: ii^o , iv)
   
   
   
3. Dominant Function (Major: V, vii^o ) (Minor: V, #vii^o )
   
   
   Each chord flows to the next, so a progression from:
   
   
   Tonic -> Subdominant -> Dominant -> Tonic
   
   
   Is atypical. It’s important to note that Tonics can come after a subdominant (T - SD - T), and the subdominant can be skipped and a tonic can lead directly to a dominant (T - D - T). Tonic chords can also lead to other Tonic chords (T - T), the same goes for subdominants and Dominants (S - S; D - D) so our new chart would look like this:
   
   
   Tonic -><- Subdominant -> Dominant -><- Tonic
   
   
   
   Harmonic progressions serve functions as well, and you can reduce almost every harmonic progression can into 3 basic categories (some would say there are only 2, but I prefer to think about it in terms of 3):
   
   
   
   

1. Prolongation (when you prolong any harmony by skipping or omitting a harmonic Function between 2 chords, or simply repeating the same harmonic function back to back) to for example:
   
   I - V - I
   
   
   I - IV - I
   
   
   i - ii^o - i
   
   
   V - I - V
   
   
   iv - i - iv
   
   
   I - vi
   
   
   IV - ii
   
   
   ii - ii^6
   
   
   I - vii^6/5ø - I^6
   
   Etc etc
   
   
   
2. Cadential function (when the sequence of chords flows from T - SD - D - T) ex:
   
   
   vi - ii - V - I, iv - V - VI, ii - vii^o - V - I, ii - I6/4 - V^7 - I
   
   
   Etc etc
   
   
   
3. Sequential function: when harmonic root movement moves in a fixed pattern. this can, and often, defies normal “chord logic” of a T - SD - D progression. You escape sequential movement by using a Cadential Function set of harmonies. Sequences are really good ways to migrate from one key center to another, or to just provide a continuation before a cadence in the home key. Diatonically, there are 6 kinds of sequences: ascending and descending 2nds, 3rds, and 4ths
   
   Ex
   
   (by ascending 4th) vii - iii - vi - (ii - V - I)
   
   
   (By descending 2nd) V - IV - iii - iii - (ii - V - I)
   
   
   (Descending 4th) I - V - ii - vi - (V/V - V - I)
   
   
   Etc etc etc etc
   
   
   You can interject prolongation and cadential functions in between each sequential chord: I (V - I) - ii - (vi - ii) - iii - (vii - ii) etc. you can also tonicize each chord in the sequence: I - vii^o / ii - ii - vii^o /iii - iii etc etc etc
   
   
   Phrase functions are also a thing, and these are strongly linked to Harmonic Progression Functions this is where both the theory behind natural chord progressions and sets of harmonic progressions come together. Understanding and being comfortable with phrase functions is extremely important.
   
   
   
   

1. Presentation (Prolongation; a small basic idea (b.i.) That repeats twice)
   
   
   
2. Continuation Function (Sequential, Cadential; a fragmented (smaller, incomplete) interpretation of the previous material that repeats, can lead into a cadential progression)
   
   
   
3. Cadential Function (Cadential)
   
   
   
4. Antecedent Function (Prolongation -> Cadential) (basic idea, b.i., followed by a contrasting idea, c.i. that leads to a half cadence)
   
   
   
5. Consequent Function (the same basic idea followed by a varied version of the contrasting idea into a Perfect Authentic Cadence)
   
   
   In a typical musical sentence, you would have phrase structure that looks like this:
   
   
   Presentation -> continuation -> cadential
   
   
   A typical musical period looks like this:
   
   
   Antecedent -> Consequent
   
   
   You can mix and match functions to your pleasure, (one b.i. followed by a continuation function; antecedent -> continuation; antecedent -> continuation -> consequent; presentation -> cadential; etc)
   
   
   Because you write rock music, adhering to Classical Formal structures is not gonna happen. However, each function and it’s interior components (b.i. , c.i., continuation, fragmentation, etc) are used in an altered way very very frequently.
   
   
   I did not cover modulation is this post, but I will link an article below.
   
   
   I hope this helps, bellow I will link some sites and books that could help with understanding these concepts beyond this post:
   
   
   Links:
   http://musictheory.pugetsound.edu/mt21c/HarmonicFunction.html
   
   
   http://openmusictheory.com/sentence.html
   
   
   http://openmusictheory.com/period.html
   
   
   http://openmusictheory.com/hybridThemes.html
   
   
   http://openmusictheory.com/themeFunctions.html
   
   
   http://openmusictheory.com/popRockForm-functions
   
   
   http://openmusictheory.com/Modulation.html
   
   
   Books:
   
   
   https://www.amazon.co.uk/Analyzing-Classical-Form-Approach-Classroom/dp/0199987297
   
   
   https://www.amazon.co.uk/Melody-Songwriting-Berklee-Guide-Perricone/dp/063400638X
   
   
   https://www.amazon.co.uk/Twentieth-Century-Harmony-Creative-Aspects-Practice/dp/0393095398

Note: All the books I recommend are expensive and I suggest you torrent them before buying them to make sure you like their style. Then if you decide to use them buy them of course. The vocabulary used in the book can be a real bitch too, but if you stick with it and google the words you don't know, it'll be worth it.

I've self studied classical and pop music, even composed a few rondos and sonatas in my time. The easiest book you can read is Harmony for Computer Musician http://www.amazon.ca/Harmony-Computer-Musicians-Michael-Hewitt/dp/1435456726

It explains everything in piano roll. It's one of the first book I read and the only thing I didn't like about it is that it left me with so many unanswered questions. It will teach you how to form and use all chords.

It takes probably about 20 hours to go through the book with no prior knowledge. I don't recommend this book unless the only time you want to invest is 20 hours. Knowing only 50% of theory can really restrict and fuck with your mind.

The other books I'll recommend are written in music notation, but the thing with music theory books is that you don't need to know music notation, just look at the examples you want, and slowly transcribe them into pianoroll. It takes me like 5 minutes to read an 8 bars music notation (slow as fuck) and it didnt prevent me form learning all my classical knowledge from theory textbooks with music notation.

So if you want a real and full unrestricted understanding of western music, from classical to pop to EDM, I'd recommend this book http://www.amazon.ca/Harmony-Voice-Leading-Edward-Aldwell/dp/0495189758/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381010907&sr=1-1&keywords=harmony+and+voice+leading

The difference with this books and the other one, is that it goes through all exceptions you will see in western music, so you see that almost anything is possible in music, and after you've finished the book you won't really have any questions per say regarding theory. Looking at a midi from a beatles song or a mozart's song won't really puzzle you.

The book probably takes about 200 hours to go through from start to end with no prior knowledge. I highly recommend it. Even if you start now and it takes you 10 years to finish it.

Now that you know everything about harmony, you might want to end your learning here, and that would be fine. This would allow you to create your own style.

But you also might to be able to analyze and imitate a composer or style that you like. You might still be confused about why a composer decided to use which harmony in the verse and which harmony in the chorus, and which harmony in the bridge, and which harmony before the chorus, etc. You might also be confused about how to create your melodic motives, how long should they be? how many times should they repeat? Why should my bridge be 12 bars or 8 bars? Why should my chorus be in a different key? Why did he use the same melodic motif (pattern) twice and then then the harmonic rhytmn accelerated before the chorus?

For this I recommend this book http://www.amazon.ca/Classical-Form-Functions-Instrumental-Beethoven/dp/019514399X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381011568&sr=1-2&keywords=classical+form+caplin

It also takes about 200 hours to go through (and that is if you have prior knowledge of harmony). After that composition of classical music won't have much secret to you. You'll know how to write a sonata and rondo, which most pop music is a simplified version of. I highly recommend this if you really want to be able to compose highly musical pieces, maybe something similar to video game music, or film score. I highly recommend reading at least the few chapters, where they talk about how to form 8 bars sections and ABA' sections (which most pop is based on).

Keep in mind that those 2 books are timeless and their information takes you from complete beginner to advanced. They are like bibles. So even if you buy them are read 1 chapter per month for 10 years, it will be invaluable to your musicianship. Like I'm sure you all know, music is an endless learning experience, so don't be intimiated with their size and complexity.

Now after reading that you want to get back to pop music but your brain is all about classical now (which is like western pop but on steroids). Don't worry, now that you know how to analyze classical, you will be able to understand and analyze most type of music. I would go with the classics and read those analysis of the beatles songs to come back full circle and write pop/EDM music with simple form. http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml

You can try reading the beatles analysis without prior knowledge, but a lot of the vocabulary you won't understand. You could also skip the Classical Form book and skip strait to the beatles analysis but then again, you might not fully understand what you're reading.

If anyone is interested I've made some video tutorial on the topic (it doesn't go in depth like the books) http://www.youtube.com/user/DaveCoutureMusic

And here's some examples of classical pieces I've composed (I dont play any instrument and learned everything from books by myself):

https://soundcloud.com/dave-couture/rondo-for-strings

https://soundcloud.com/dave-couture/creepy-piano-piece

Also anyone that wants to PM for tips or get me on facebook if you have questions, I'm always glad to help.

I do NOT want to discourage you - but I don't think there is a quick way to learn music thory. It takes time and practice and experience. But it is definitely possible! Just think of it as a language : the written dot on the staff corresponds to a pitch - just like an a corresponds to the sound a. It must become natural. So I guess my advice is to read a LOT of music. Every day, if possible, and of different styles (classical, modern etc.) If you want your pieces to really sound original, you have to know what others have written before you - and learn from their craft.
That being said, I think there is a good deal of great books about harmony that you can read to guide your development, I will list a few here :

• Arnold Schoenberg : Theory of Harmony (A bit tedious to read, but with great many examples)
  
• Arnold Schoenberg : Fundamentals of Musical Composition This one is great but a bit advanced; I suggest you read it when you master the harmony basics.
  
• Carl Schroeder & Keith Wyatt : Harmony and Theory: A Comprehensive Source for All Musicians This one is recommended, but I didn't read it myself.
  
• Barbara Wharram : Elementary Rudiments of Music. This one I grew up with. Very straightforward and clear.
  
  Might I suggest that you play all the examples and excercies at the piano so that you train your ear to hear what you see.
  
  Also, you might want to contact a piano teacher and take lessons for a year... or two. Technique is a great part of playing, and is very difficult to learn on his own.
  
  Sorry for the long post, but I love music and want to help a fellow player. Also, sorry for potentialy awkward sentences, english is not my first language.
  
  Hope this helps!

This is a wide array of questions for which you're going to get as many different answers as you get responses. Here's one set, though, I suppose.

I will preface everything by saying that, yes, time, practice, and listening to others are the three main things that will make you better. But it helps to listen to the right things and practice things the right way. I've played for about 21 years now (seriously for the last 10) and, as with any field, you never really close the gap between things you know and things you don't know: you just watch it widen and resign yourself to the fact that you can only improve in so many things at one time.

1. It's hard to recommend anything other than the standard music theory textbook Tonal Harmony (6th Ed., 5th Ed.). I used the fifth edition, and I can't imagine theory has changed too much in the last ten years, so you probably can't justify dropping over $100 on the sixth edition.
   
   
2. If you weren't gifted with perfect pitch, do interval ear training (there are probably better resources out there, but that was the first thing Google came up with). Recognizing intervals is the most important part of being able to play by ear.
   
   
3. I doubt everyone will agree with me, but I'd say to focus on one or two at once. That way you don't get overwhelmed by having to deal with seven different styles at the same time, and you can build strong foundations in just a couple of them.
   
   
4. What do you mean by "How do I get out of the 4/4 mentality?" Do you mean performing or composing? If performing, there's no trick it, honestly; you literally just count to a different number each bar. If composing, well...yeah, practice, I guess. Try to write some simple things in 3/4 or 5/4 or 6/8 or 7/8 or something. Think about how to expand or contract a melodic line so that it fits into a certain meter.
   
   
5. I use an M-Audio Oxygen 88 for composing/recording. It's definitely not the same as a real piano, but it's pretty solid. Don't pay the price on their site: I got mine for substantially less on Amazon and would wager that you can find a good deal, too. I'll warn you that it's a MIDI controller and not a digital piano/synthesizer, meaning that it doesn't have speakers and can't make sounds on its own: it has to go through software. If you want a digital piano, this link in the sidebar may help.
   
   
6. I use REAPER. It's wildly inexpensive, and if that's too expensive, the free trial is full-featured and lasts forever. It's got a pretty steep learning curve, but it's an extremely powerful piece of software.
   
   
7. Sergei Rachmaninoff, Nikolai Medtner, Sergei Prokofiev, Nikolai Kapustin (evidently anyone named Sergei or Nikolai =P), and, more recently, Avishai Cohen (the bassist) and Hiromi Uehara. I'll likely forever acknowledge Beethoven as the greatest composer ever to live, however.
   
   
8. Yes. Write them down. If nothing else, write down at least the chord progressions and the melody and the bits that never seem to change. For improvised parts, I don't know if there's a standard notation: if I'm writing by hand, I just draw squiggly lines that follow the general shape of what I usually improvise.
   
   
9. I'm incredibly new to improvisation, being classically trained and just now finding myself very interested in jazz, but I'd say: know the style, know your theory, and listen, listen, listen. He talks about jazz in particular, but Mulgrew Miller has a series of several YouTube videos in which he discusses improvisation, and I'd wager much of it can be applied across many genres: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyRGB_x7VSg#.

I get where you're coming from because I started in a very similar place, but what you want is really not compatible with the study of music theory. Music theory attempts to break down the structure of music to explain why it works by using other works as an example. It's not really about explaining cause and effect relationships or mathematics. (though there's certainly some of that)

Music theory has much more to do with pointing out similarities between pieces of music so you can say, "Well, these pieces of music are effective because they share these things in common, and you can use these techniques to similar effect."

It also has to do with auditory perception and psychology. "These notes are harmonically similar, so they will mask each other." "The change in harmonic relationships between these notes over time imply that something is going to change." Etc... It sounds like those are concepts you are already familiar with.

It's not that these things aren't science-adjacent, but it's not a formal science. It just integrates bits and pieces of science, history, convention, etc... Trying to reduce anything but specific subsections of music theory down to something adequately explainable by science or mathematics is not going to be helpful or satisfying.

The best recommendation I could give you is to find a good music history text that starts out somewhere around 570BCE or earlier and leads into modern day. I've found that for myself, the only satisfying way to understand modern music terminology and convention is to observe how it evolved. I think that's the most scientific approach you could take.

There are also a few extremely talented polymaths that have attempted to represent musical relationships in novel and useful ways using mathematics/geometry. Dmitri Tymoczko immediately comes to mind.

I also think you would enjoy reading this book and this book, as one explores some really fascinating and practical mathematical representations of musical ideas, and the other explores the tension/release mechanics that dictate/relate to much of the theory surrounding modern musical structure, rhythm, and harmonic progression.

Other than that, if you see a term that you don't understand, look it up. If you see a term in that term's definition that you don't understand, look that up. Follow that rabbit hole to the bottom. Draw a graph if you have to.

Diving down hierarchies of terms I don't understand in order to gradually pick apart texts is a skill I've had to develop as a software developer and DIYer, and training that muscle has been invaluable. It's the reason I don't kill plants anymore, how I was able to write a raycasting engine without prior 3D graphics experience, and how I taught myself music theory.

I'm going to teach you all the mistakes I made in hopes that you won't make them yourself, if you aren't getting a teacher. A teacher is easily the best route, no comparison, without one, you're going to have to work your ass off.

1. Make use of every piano teacher on youtube, the best ones being Lypur,and Josh Wright. Their may be others, but those are essential.
   
   
2. Watch ALL Lypur's videos on the "Learn How To Play Piano (NEW) " playlist and "LEARN FREE MUSIC THEORY". I say start with watching the first 5 of each in a week, and then 1 a week as they get more complicated. And take good notes, just like in school.
   
   3)You need to buy books. I would say to start off with Josh Thompson's first grade one and then buying other ones such as Hanon, which is a MUST, and some like this one.
   
   4)Eventually after about a few months of practice, you can buy introductory books to certain composers, such as these: Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven. I wouldn't recommend the Chopin one, since his most easiest pieces can be quiet hard until you have a good 2 years of practice and playing in. And eventually Schumann's or Tchaikovsky's Album for the young, I don't know which would be better.
   
   5)This site is very good, and gives a nice breakdown of how you should spend your time practicing.
   
   6)And possibly most importantly, you have to find pieces that you like outside of books that you can learn. It's nice to learn little pieces that are in books, but the most satisfying feeling is playing a piece that you love.
   
   
   

tl;dr Ball bearings tossed in a bowl will behave exactly pretty much the same. The shape of the magnets may be particularly suited to trap the bearings in a flat plane, but nothing crazy is going on, it's just how numbers and geometry work.

edit: after checking the source video, I see they're resting on a sheet of acrylic, but hopefully the rest of this comment still helps to simplify the topic and make sense of the often misleading conjecture.
_

Clap along!

"I didn't do anything fancy to make these balloons take this shape, I just tied them together at the base; they naturally form this shape because they can't overlap with each other." - I linked to that part because it captures the essence of the topic: nothing fancy or mysterious is happening with the ball bearings, geometry is simply how numbers as forces manifest in space.

People who like to mystify these phenomena are missing the forest for the trees. They are right to observe that certain structures are recurring in the universe and that it has everything to do with numbers in space, but I get the impression that many new age types like to anthropomorphize everything and make it about numerology or interpret it as the result of an intentional design... Nope, it's all just cold numbers. Two points make a line regardless of whether anyone is there to witness it or invent a word to describe it.

The structure of the universe simply emerges from the fact that competing forces in 3D space inherently balance out in a way that produces certain shapes.

So yes, in fact these ball bearings are reflecting the fundamental mechanism of the cosmos... but it's a rather straightforward explanation and we've already expanded on it's foundation into entire fields of study like quantum mechanics and chemistry.


Emergence is a key part of understanding everything. Complex forms and behavior emerge from the repetition of simple rules.

Reaction-Diffusion equations (aka Turing patterns) and diffusion-limited aggregation and cellular growth all share similar emergent properties based on randomness, probability, reaching equilibrium, etc.

Others in this thread suggest this is related to cymatics... This is what I mean by missing the forest for the trees. Much like geometry is about the patterns of numbers balanced in space, cymatics is about the patterns that emerge from the inherent harmonic resonance of a medium given its dimensions. They're only related in the sense that the inherent rules of numbers are the basis of all physics and reality.

If a square of metal is vibrated at such a frequency that its wave length divides evenly into the length of the square, then that frequency is said to be a resonant frequency of that material. It's the same at every other harmonic (the colored nodes). In physical terms, this means the nodes of a standing wave are the places where the plate is not moving as is nicely illustrated here. This is why Chladni patterns (LOUD AUDIO!) appear to "snap" into place; the particles only accumulate during standing waves so the frequency has to reach the next harmonic for that to occur.

The patterns are a result of the edge shape of the resonating material because the vibration emanates in ripples from edge to edge to edge until the energy is completely dissipated. The frequency determines the resonant points along the edge, and everything just keeps overlapping harmoniously. This is why liquid cymatics tends to appear more dynamic, essentially representing the reaction-diffusion equations from earlier-- because the medium enables you to see the flux of the harmony patterns that arises from the interfering reflections of the partially cycled waves between resonant points.

In other words, if you travel along the edge of that circle a quarter of the way towards the next resonant point, a wave is hitting that point a quarter of the way through it's cycle, and thus is reflected back out at a quarter offset. And there's one an 8th of the way with an 8th offset, and a 16th, etc, contiguously in all directions. The interaction of these offsets creates a harmony field that appears to move because the medium is constantly renegotiating it's shape between infinitely intersecting phases of waves.
__

Here's more cool emergent shit.

Also, /u/Novusod, /u/The_Prize, and /u/Darth_Venath, this comment was partially in response to your exchange. I don't mean to shit on anyone who chooses to emphasize the interconnectedness of everything, but I'm constantly bothered when people taint something simple with unnecessary mysticism.

For everyone who read this whole comment, you should seriously order yourself a copy of Quadrivium! It may indulge in a bit of mysticism, but it's more in the sense of it being an anthology of the history of this knowledge. Pretty much every book they publish is chock full of the beautiful simplicity of the big picture- would highly recommend.

When I was first starting out, way back in the last century, there were few places to go to learn this type of thing. And those that had the knowledge were usually less then excited at the thought of sharing their knowledge with you, so that you could become their competition.

But times have changed, and we have this Internet thing, and everybody is sharing everything. Maybe it isn't the Info Age, as much as it is the Era of Sharing, and sharing means a lot of crappy stuff gets thrown in the mix.

So choose your trusted sources carefully, and see who their trusted sources are.

For a good primer in guitar electronics, I recommend reading this book. It's dated, but it's basic info is good, and it's free to read in your browser (takes some time to load):

https://www.scribd.com/doc/2154081/Craig-Anderton-Guitar-Electronics-for-Musicians

I'm anticipating another book on guitar electronics from a source who's previous work I like:

https://hazeguitars.com/completeguitarwiring

This is a good video to understand shock hazards associated with play the electric guitar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS_5K5YEYv8&feature=youtu.be

When it comes to other aspects of guitar adjustment, Dan Erlewine has been the go-to source for decades. His books on guitar repair and maintenance are the gold standard. This first book I've linked is more for the guitar repair professional, and might be a bit much. But the second book I've linked should be must-reading for anyone curious about adjusting their guitar to play it's best:

https://www.amazon.com/Guitar-Player-Repair-Guide-3rd/dp/0879309210

https://www.amazon.com/Make-Your-Electric-Guitar-Great/dp/0879309989

Although I haven't actually read any of the books by John Carruthers, I studied under him and on the basis of that experience I would recommend anything he's involved in:

https://www.musiciansfriend.com/books-sheet-music-media/alfred-teach-yourself-guitar-repair-and-maintenance-book?src=3soswxxa

There are a bunch of John Carruther's videos on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9C05D39374BFA9B1

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB7631EF18F62E16D

I like this book because it's illustrated so well:

https://www.amazon.com/Players-Guide-Guitar-Maintenance/dp/0879305495

Dan Erlewine is a consultant at the guitar tools and supplies seller Stewart-MacDonald. They are a good resource for not just tools and supplies, but they have educational videos, some of which you can get via email, and some of which can be seen on YouTube:

https://www.stewmac.com/

Many of the boutique pickup makers have blogs on their sites, where they talk about pickup design and characteristics.

Just learning good practices on installing strings on various types of guitars is an important starting place:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfK8lQZaq_8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW0d9bBzUao

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvTFtHLOQvk

And if you can master the secrets of floating tremolo set-up, you can impress your friends and strike fear into the heart of your enemies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYcGmMJnX0M&feature=youtu.be&t=213

There are so many more good sources, but that should give you a start.

Hi there!

I've been producing Electronic Music as a hobby for almost 10 years.

Here's a quick guide to help you get started:

1.
you will need a DAW (Digita Audio Workstation), this is your tool and work environment in which you will create and mix your beats.

Depending on if you are on Windows or Mac you have a few different options.

FL Studio - This is the DAW I started producing in, back in version 8.something. It is widely considered one of the best starter DAW's because of the very intuitive user interface and HUGE library of native samples and plugins. FL Studio is sometimes looked down upon by some producers, who don't seem to take it seriously as a professional DAW. In my experience these producers often lack experience themselves, FL is a great DAW and in the end it is what you do with the tool that matters ;).

• some famous producers that use FL: Avicii (rip), Martin Garrix, Camo and Krooked, Benga, Spor/Feed Me, ...
  
  Ableton Live - This is the DAW I currently use, I switched from FL to Ableton for the simple reason that it was easier to collaborate with a friend of mine who also used Ableton at the time. I feel that FL Studio's native plugins and instruments are a bit better than Ableton's, but I personally like Ableton's interface and workflow better than FL's.
  
  What is very specific about Ableton is the "Live Session mode", where you can arrange your sounds and loops in groups that you can trigger live with a midi controller, which is very handy for live performances (obviously) but also often used as a song writing tool, especially in hip-hop and futurebeat genres. - famous artists that use Ableton: Skrillex, Flume, Netsky, Dada Life, ...
  
  These are the two DAW's I have personal experience with, but there are other options as well: Steinberg Cubase, PreSonus Studio One, Apple Logic Pro, and many more. Best to do your own research and download a few trial versions to see which one you like best.
  
  2. After you decided on a DAW and "legally" obtained one, it's time to start making music. By that I mean "time to start making very shit music that you will look back on with huge cringe a few years from now" because that's exactly what it is like.
  
  I don't mean this in a discouraging way, on the contrary! It takes loads of time and effort before you'll start noticing you're improving. One of the most important things to keep in mind is to be self-critical and open to criticism. Don't assume you know better when you're just starting out, be an empty cup because it's impossible to fill one that's already full.
  
  Here's a very inspiring monologue on the subject by Ira Glass
  
  3. Tutorials and books. Here are some books and tutorials that helped me out a lot, and hopefully will help you too!
  
  books:
  Mastering Audio: The Art and Science - Bob Katz widely considered to be the producer's bible.
  
  The Mixing Engineers Handbook - Bobby Owsinski
  
  tutorials:
  
  Sadowick's ultimate Ableton Guide a full beginner to intermediate guide of Ableton Live, purely for this tutorial series alone I'd reccommend using Ableton. It's very comprehensive. Sadowick also has lots of other very useful tutorials on his channel, but is currently on hiatus because of his battle with cancer :(
  
  SeamlessR this entire channel is gold. Seamless uses FL Studio but what he teaches is applicable to most DAW's. Lots of great tutorials on synthesis, mostly Drum and Bass focused but very interesting.
  
  ADSR Tutorials very informative tutorials ranging from mixing to synthesis. Often about House and Techno, but most techniques are really applicable to every genre.
  
  ____
  
  -
  if you start with these you'll come a long way, if you have any questions; pm me.
  -
  
  EDIT here are some subreddits you might be interested in as well:
  
  /r/makinghiphop
  
  /r/WeAreTheMusicMakers
  
  /r/edmproduction
  
  
  
  

If I may, I'll throw in my somewhat-learned 2 cents. I have read a fair number of books on the subject and am currently studying music at the undergrad level--I'm by no means an expert.

If you're interested in the neurological understanding of music, I would recommend the book Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy. Pretty good read that goes into some detail without requiring an MD to understand. Basically, we respond to tension and resolution because of tendencies in our brain to seek out new and variant stimuli.

You mentioned major sounding happy and minor sounding sad. It would be interesting for you to know that this was not always the case. If you're playing in an orchestra or wind ensemble, chances are most of the music you're being exposed to in that setting is from the Classical and Romantic periods of the so-called Western Music Tradition: Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, Haydn. Maybe some more modern music as well, but probably nothing too "out there". Also bear in mind, most of the music you hear on the radio, pretty much since the 1970s is very closely related harmonically to classical music from the Classical and Romantic periods.

All this is to say that if you look at Baroque music and earlier, or more modern Western music, as well as music from any other cultural tradition, you'll find very different understandings of harmony, melody, and rhythm. There are few universally enjoyable traits in music across various cultures and types of listener. /u/Bears_in_Blue_Houses has some good points: repetition is usually favored, and people usually like music they can understand and relate to. Beyond that, it really depends on 1. why you're listening to music and 2. what music you're used to. Some people desire intellectual stimulation, and find more complex harmonies, rhythms, structures, and sounds to be enjoyable; others look for simple beats to dance or relax to. Most people look for different things at different times.

Hey, everyone starts somewhere. I hope I can point you in a decent direction here:


I started with hardware via guitar pedals and Nicolas Collins' "Handmade Electronic Music: The Art of Hardware Hacking" and have now moved into things like modular analog synthesis, Max/MSP (or Pure Data), and Supercollider. Of course there are many paths to go about understanding how to synthesize sounds, and why certain sound tools like biquad filters are necessary or convenient, but it is best for you to figure out how and why you would want to use those ideas for yourself.


One thing you have to understand is timbre. I'm not going to go into detail about it, because you seem motivated enough to lead your own path, but timbre is probably the most important reason sound synthesis exists. Think about it, the people who created synthesizers (E-mu, Moog, Bell Labs, etc.) wanted to make it easier to make "full" music without having to use a huge orchestra of people, so they figured out how to recreate the sounds of the instruments, the "timbres." At this point the timbres of synthesizers are their own, rather than trying to simulate others, and are what make synthesizers such an interesting part of musical instrument history.


Once you understand why timbre is so important, then you can look into what "voices" in synthesizers are. A simple "voice" in a synthesizer consists of three main components: An oscillator (or noise generator), a filter, and an voltage controlled amplifier that is usually controlled by an envelope generator. That is a really crude description of what a voice is, but that is why there are very expensive synthesizers with capabilities of their "voices" that are versatile and desirable depending on their design and components. And that is the main reason why things like a biquad filter are useful in certain situations.


I'm not going to go on too much longer here, but I will say one last thing about sound synthesis that will prove useful. That is that in sound theory, or the scientific analysis of sound (physics, acoustics, even psychoacoustics), it is theorized that every single timbre can be analyzed resolutely down to its constituents; every sound can be represented by a given number of sinusoidal frequencies (the more frequencies, the greater accuracy of the sound). That is a big one to bite into, and has a lot to do with "additive synthesis," but I feel that it is very important to understand this about sound theory in order to be proficient in sound synthesis.


Just for fun, a quote from one of my instructors, the one that taught the analog synthesis class I took: "Trying to filter a sine wave is the definition of futility."


Good luck out there, sound synthesis is a wide world of weird nerdy stuff.

Lol we should get coffee, I'm like the opposite-- ok with hardware synthesis but me trying to understand microcontrollers is comical.

​

Anyway I exported one of my earlier folders from when I was first reading and learning to HTML, its pretty disorganized but is a ton of random builds and info. Heres the html! https://file.io/DxE4uG ( if thats not working try https://gofile.io/?c=R3nHUN )

​

I'm a noob myself, but I recommend breadboarding and aiming for guitar pedals and effect stuff before jumping into other stuff. stuff like distortion is easy to make while tuned oscilators are... well, simple, but a lot of moving parts. There are a lot of cool youtube channels that have tutorials, one well known one (while a bit hectic) is sam at look mum no computer. For general hardware electronic understanding with some entertainment value I also like Electroboom's channel, and Diysynthguy is another good one to find cool kits through

​

If you are in the US, good sites to buy kits from are synthcube and modularaddict. outside of the US thonk is great and a lot of the synth companies in DIY modular are in europe so you can buy direct too, like from befaco.

​

Here are a good read on the topic too:

https://www.amazon.com/Handmade-Electronic-Music-Hardware-Hacking/dp/0415998735/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1537984669&sr=8-1&keywords=hardware+electronic+music+book

​

if you live in seattle, lets get a beer! Because I've been working with microcontrollers lately and it makes me want to blow my brains out.

For anything that involves advanced music theory, or more technical elements of music, your best bet (IMHO) is to stay clear from jazz/rock books or anything "popular" and read from traditional academic/classical composers. That is, if you're looking to understand music from a more historic point of view of how is was used, and how it worked for hundreds of years and how it still works today.

There are tons of good books out there, but off the top of my head I reccomend:

Regarding the art of counterpoint:


Preliminary exercises in Counterpoint - Schoenberg

Also, you could check out the traditional Fux's Study of Counterpoint, but I think Schoenberg's book is far more complete and incentive.

Regarding the art of Harmony:


For a long time I've always thought that books could educate you in any way, until I met my harmony teacher. After studying with her for a couple years I find it hard to believe how much information, technique, and art is missing from almost every book on the subject, some are exceptions, obviously, but my recommendation is that there is no better way of learning this but with personal intruction. Also, the teacher needs to be someone who has had a strong education in music from well-known masters of the past, as was my teacher.

Anyways, regarding harmony in the more poetical and theoretical sense I reccomend :

Rameau's Treatise on Harmony

and of course, Schoenberg's Theory of Harmony

For a more technical approach to harmony I haven't found any books I'm really fond of, but I do think that Paul Hindemith's book is a very good option.

For something in the middle I recommend this

Regarding form and structure in music:


Once again, I have never seen information and instruction similar to that which I received with my professors, however here are a few good picks...

Schoenberg's Fundamentals of musical composition

and 2 books that I found very useful were...
(these I didn't find on amazon.com)

from German composer Clemens Kuhn: "Formenlehre der Musik" (this is only in German)

and from Spanish composer Joaquin Zamacois: "Curso de Formas Musicales" (this is only in Spanish I believe)

Well, surely there are more books, but I think these are good options for you to start. However, always with a grain of salt

CONT:

The idea of heavenly spheres being an authentic feature of the world is evident in the universality of the idea of the seven planetary (Luna and Sol, the sun and moon, are included in this classical definition of a planet- it's not a "wrong" definition- just a different classification system) heavens throughout the world's cultures. They even tend to be associated with the same days of the week and interrelated in intriguing ways with the musical concept of tuning by fifths.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/leithart/2012/06/tuned-cosmos/

Moreover, there are very interesting mathematical relations ordering the seven heavenly spheres (and yes, I do believe NASA is real, I am not a flat earther- I am saying that a "symbol" is an intrinsic aspect of the world and that the ancients and medievals understood this) in their classical associations. Luna and Saturn are the first and last of the seven heavenly spheres. Luna has a 29 day cycle. Saturn has a 29 year cycle in its revolution around the sun. The correspondence, day to year, is actually 99.5%. Yes, we've had a closer look at the moon, the sun, and Saturn. So? I don't think that we have discovered anything which would actually undermine the classical world-picture. It's like seeing a picture in 144k vs 4k. We see a great deal more in ultra-HD than we would in old-style SD. We notice lots of new things. But it's perfectly recognizable as what it is. For more on these mathematically ordered relations among the spheres, see this excellent book, especially the last section:

https://www.amazon.com/Quadrivium-Classical-Liberal-Geometry-Cosmology/dp/0802778135

Unfortunately, most of the people talking about the beauty and symbolic craftsmanship in the Heavens are associated with the occult. But the Bible and tradition speak about these subjects. It's not magic. It's part of the world-design God made through the Logos. "The Heavens declare the Glory of God, the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Day to day they pour out speech, night to night they speak knowledge." (Ps. 19:1-2) For more on the reality undergirding classical and medieval cosmology, see Wolfgang Smith's excellent The Wisdom of Ancient Cosmology:

He is a professional physicist and possesses immense philosophical and metaphysical skill. An excellent thinker if you want to rework your conceptual world.

https://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-Ancient-Cosmology-Contemporary-Tradition/dp/6602883925/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Wisdom+of+Ancient+cosmology&qid=1557417059&s=books&sr=1-1

work through the original Aaron Shearer books (I linked book 1, there are 3, you should at least go through the first two and maybe some of the supplemental ones) . If your classical technique is decent then you will breeze through them pretty quickly but you might pick up a few subtle things like playing rest-stroke with your thumb at the same time as free-stroke with your fingers and vice-versa. Once you are good there there are two books you should buy: Pumping Nylon for the various exercises it has. They are very good if you play them regularly. Then buy The Library of Guitar Classics. It is a big spiral bound book of repertoire that looks like a lot of those piano-rep books. It has music ranging from easy to very hard and from the renaissance period all the way through the romantic era with pieces by Tarrega and Albeniz. There is a lot of really good rep in there. There is also a second volume of the book that is almost as good. When it comes to more modern music buy the Villa-Lobos book and work through some of that stuff. It is a great book that was edited by - if I remember correctly - Frederick Noad. There are also some really good books with the complete Bach cello/lute suites (although some of that can be found in the books I already mentioned).

If you REALLY want to kick your ass, see if you can dig up a copy of the Abel Carlevaro right hand book. It is like the Giuliani 120 studies on steroids. I have never struggled that hard to play an arpeggio in my life! I think it is this book but I am not sure. I had a really old photo-copy of it and I don't know where it came from.

I don't have any answers to any questions, but my two contributions are this book here, called "The Geometry of Music," and this, the wikipedia page on the isomorphic keyboard here. My hope is you'll like them both :)

>There are a million ways to approach this and its fun to consider different ways to try it.. Just wondering if anyone has attempted something like this?

I think the answer is very definitely yes! But beyond that, I can't offer much help :( haha Anyway, thanks for teaching me just by asking that question! lol. Peace, -Martin

>i modeled the notes like this: C, Cd, D, De, E, F, Fg, G, Ga, A, Ab, B;

Actually, most digital audio workstations like Logic do the opposite, and name everything in sharps. So, you might try doing that instead, if only because that's the convention. That is, C, C#, D, D#, etc. Just an FYI, although as I think other people have pointed out here, pitch classes are more popular now too...or whatever they call using a number for each note (C = 1, C# = 2, D = 3, etc.)

Yes, counterpoint assumes that you have a foundation in 18th century harmonic practice, also known as "common period" practices, e.g. voice leading as practiced by Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, etc.

Harmony by Walter Piston is very thorough, but it's a serious treatment and perhaps not for the faint of heart. Also, you may want to get an edition before the fifth as it's substantially different from a pedagogical standpoint than the earlier editions. I can also recommend Kostka's Tonal Harmony very highly, but also a serious treatment. In fact, it may be best just to start with the Kostka and pick up the Piston later if the fancy strikes you.

These two books teach harmony in very structured way, and in many ways that's the best for learning counterpoint. Eventually, depending on how serious you want to get about composition, you may want to read Schoenberg's book Theory of Harmony. It covers the same material as most harmony books, but it does so from the perspective of the composer. It's even a little philosophical (and dense). It's not unusual for graduate students to re-learn harmony using the Schoenberg text as it forces you to think like a composer. Of course it's a more difficult read, but only if you're unprepared.

If you'd like something a little more easy, there's no shame in getting the Dummies series book on harmony. It does the job with a minimum of depth. Frankly, though, it's in your best interest to start with a solid, university level textbook like the first two I mentioned if you want to tackle counterpoint. Eventually, it's a good idea to read more than one book on tonal theory anyway, so it can't hurt to start with the Kostka and just put it down and use the "Dummies" book. You can always just come back to it later.

Regarding speakers for your studio, you don't need the huge hi-fi speakers that big studios have, they use those mainly to flatter artists and industry reps. For mixing, you should get a set of speakers with a relatively flat frequency response that spotlights the midrange and has low distortion. The Avatone Mix Cube is good for this. You only really need one because a lot of mixing is in mono. The Yamaha NS10s are also good (these are more expensive and are pretty standard in most studios. The thing about these speakers is not that they sound good, but that, on first listen, you'd probably think they sound bad; they highlight problems in your mix.

I imagine if you're doing hip-hop a lot of your listeners will listen on headphones so it's useful to do some mixing on headphones (you might do mono mixing on your nearfield and work out panning and stereo stuff on headphones, for example), so get two good pairs of studio headphones-one for you, and one for people you record (unless you're building this to record yourself, although if people know you have this cool studio they might want to get in on the action and it'd be good to be prepared for that if it does happen-you might also want to record a feature on your track or something).

Get a DAW and know it back and forth. I would say for your purposes, unless you're already well-versed in Pro Tools or already have a copy of it, don't get Pro Tools-there's a huge learning curve and it's by far the most expensive. Reaper has a free demo that you can use indefinitely and FL Studio and Audacity are free. Ableton is what most producers use but it's not really made for tracking or mixing, so what some people do is they produce in Ableton and bounce the track to another DAW to mix.

Microphone-wise, ideally for vocals you want a large-diaphragm condenser. A small-diaphragm will work too but LDCs are standard. You can record on a dynamic mic but they usually need a lot more gain which might mean more noise and you'll need to be handy at mixing to get the sound you want out of a dynamic mic.

If you're investing in a big project like this, read a lot and know what you're doing. This book will get you started on mixing techniques and the basics. This one is a must, it starts out with some chapters on how to acoustically treat the room you're working in which even though it isn't glamorous or fun is totally vital to a good studio.

I'll comment on the tools. I do my own setups and have for years. I don't have any professional luthier tools. I do not do setups for others to receive payment.

I view tools like those linked as great resources for professional techs who are looking to do a lot of setups quickly and to a very high degree of technical accuracy. Having high quality tools makes the job easy and efficient.

But I don't think that level of tools is required. You could fashion your own from some basic stuff you could get at any hardware store or use some other 'tricks' that don't require tools. Also, realize that the idea of 'setting up' a guitar is not a black / white binary situation. Getting a guitar setup to a place that it plays well to your preferences is very doable with a screwdriver and some practice.

For example, the basic setup kit has some great tools - but you can accomplish a similar job much cheaper with some research. The string action gauge could be made by printing those radius' on a piece of thick poster board. Dan's book 'How to Make a Guitar Play Great' has this exact tool as a punch out in the back. A precision straight edge could be replaced with a decent ruler or wood or metal that is confirmed straight elsewhere.

Again, with the tune-o-medic kit you can service a Tune-O-Matic bridge very successfully with a typical screwdriver. The specialized tools would be helpful if you're doing a lot of setups each day - possibly on valuable or vintage guitars where a greater level of care is needed.

A truss rod wrench could be replaced with a screwdriver and a set of hex heads available at a hardware store.

So if it were me, I'd buy a copy of that book (linked above) and go through it. Some basic screwdrivers and allen wrenches should be able to get you through almost all basic setup procedures. If you get to more advanced things like fretwork, finish repair, or are doing lots of setup for paying customers - then look into specialized tools.

>I'm trying to put together a plan of materials to go through with the intention of becoming an "expert" (very adept, lets say graduate level) in theory over the next several years.

So, at minimum, you'll need to know tonal (Schenkerian) analysis and post-tonal analysis. The fourth edition of Joseph Straus' Introduction to Post-Tonal Theory is good for post-tonal. My Schenkerian class didn't use a text, but Cadwallader and Gagne seems to be a thing now.

At the graduate level, studies are motivated by the student's research interests. It sounds like you are interested in what Dmitri Tymoczko calls "the extended common practice."

For breadth, read journals and publications. MTO is free, Spectrum is a big one, and so it JMT. Here are the last five recipients of the Wallace Berry Award (and you can read more here):

Steven Vande Mooretele - The Romantic Overture and Musical Form from Rossini to Wagner

Daniel Harrison - Pieces of Tradition: An Analysis of Contemporary Tonal Music

Ruth DeFord - Tactus, Mensuration, and Rhythm in Renaissance Music

Jack Boss - Schoenberg's Twelve-Tone Music: Symmetry and the Musical Idea

Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis - On Repeat: How Music Plays the Mind

Given your interests, I'd definitely read the Daniel Harrison book.

/u/Jay13232 mentioned Persichetti. If you're going to read it, do so after you get a handle on set theory (from Straus). It's a good book, but our modern methodology is better for describing that repertoire in my opinion. Persichetti and Hindemith are like whacking nails into a board with a wrench (using ideas appropriated from tonality to describe music that doesn't follow those principles). Allen Forte, John Rahn, Robert Morris, and Howard Hanson gave us a proper set of hammers.

If you have the budget for it, there's always grabbing one of the many theory/aural skills textbooks and doing some of their self-tests. This is one of the textbooks we used for my aural training class, and it comes with a CD that has a ton of listening examples; I think all of them except the quizzes have an answer key in the book, so that can be good for self-testing.

The Kostka textbook also has a workbook with some exercises - see this review for some critiques of that textbook series, but if you're using it for self-practice as opposed to first-time learning, I think it would be okay and it does cover a pretty broad base of topics for studying.

Of course, as someone else pointed out, musictheory.net and teoria.com are also good online resources for a lot of this stuff as well, so check out those self-tests. I also agree that grabbing music on IMSLP can be really good practice that's easy to access. In addition to Bach, try looking at some of Mozart's piano works, since those tend to be fairly straightforward but offer a slightly different texture for identifying harmonies.

Otherwise, I mean - I think most of these topics are things that fall into "the more you do it, the better you'll get" category, so I would just encourage you to immerse yourself in whatever music you're participating in, and focus on these topics. When you have downtime in a rehearsal - analyze. When you're waiting for a bus/picking up your kid/dinner to finish cooking - analyze. Listening to music on the radio - analyze. You get the idea. :) The more you build it into your life and the music you're actually doing, the more relevant it feels and the better you'll learn it.

I've been playing and practicing for 2 years 4 months at this point. For the entire first year of practice I utilized the Seinfeld Method of Productivity. My goal was to practice guitar for at least 30 minutes a day.




This helped me get to the point where I felt comfortable handling the instrument and was actually able to start to get some more creative enjoyment from it.




The important thing here is deliberate practice. Meaning, don't lose focus, figure out what you're going to be working on for that 1/2 hour and stick to it. This could be theory, chords, alternate tunings, etc. Just make sure to cover the basics somewhere in there. I bought a great book to help me with the fundamentals, Pumping Nylon. This book is for folks getting into classical guitar. Though, in my opinion, all guitarists ought to start with classical if you'd like to develop the best/most efficient techniques in your right and left-hands.



Beyond that- I'd say the most important component is passion. Ask yourself why you're willing to put in so many hours into something. Come up with reasons that keep you excited for the next thing!



For me, my passion comes from the fact that, in this lame world we live in, magic doesn't exist. I'll never be able to pursue my childhood fantasy of becoming a Wizard. However- Music does exist, and, in my opinion, music has many of the same qualities of magic. You can transport a listener into an emotional landscape of your making. You can create a world of sound where you get to call all of the shots. You can ease someones pain, create excitement, wax-poetic about love, you can even create unease and a sense of creeping dread. It's all up to you and how you handle your instruments of sound.



This is what keeps me pursuing the guitar and music. The rest of the world fades away while I'm playing. I suppose it's almost like having a day dream that other people can hear.



I'm not sure if I answered your questions or not :P

tl;dr - Deliberate daily practice and passion seem to be working for me.

I've seen a few posts recently saying that A&R 'doesn't really exist anymore'. I have no idea where that comes from. A&R is THE main component of any record label, independent or major label. Not even sure how to address this sentiment, it's so incorrect.

Most people do not go to school for anything related to music. I did and I know maybe a handful of people who did but 80-90% of the industry went to school for something generic and unrelated (or didn't go at all).

There's two paths to getting into the music industry, one is DYI. Become an artist manager. You don't need a degree or experience or even connections early on (these come with time and work). Find bands you believe in and approach them - be real - and explain you're interested in helping them grow and build. Figure it out as you go along. Be prepared for their egos; every artist thinks they're bigger than they are. Other DYI routes are promoting parties (just putting on events), freelance marketing/PR, etc. MOST people starting out in this lane have NO experience and just pick it up as they go, build a portfolio (for lack of a better word) and snowball experience until it's substantial. This route is hard, there's little money in it for the foreseeable future, but if you're aggressive pursuing it and strategic with your trajectory then it can work. This is how some of the biggest figures in music have started.

The other route is more formal, closer to a normal job route. Get an internship or assistant position at one of the 4 traditional sub-industries: label, publisher, management, booking agency. These aren't hard to get you just have to have a nice clean resume - they don't expect a ton of experience - and present yourself well, have a savage work ethic, have thick skin and great attention to detail. I can tell you from looking at tons of resumes for entry level that having a music related education/major is a very small component of the process. If I see some kid who has been promoting parties in college, shows a proclivity to pursuing music, with or without my help, and seems like he's ripe to learn and grow then they often get a shot. Having a "music business" degree, for example, will do the same thing - it just gets you in the door. My point is it's not necessary. This path is long and the money sucks, just like the DYI path, but there's some structure in it and a path towards progressing. My colleagues at my current job all started as assistants and interns and are now running major parts of the company. My point here is that hiring managers want to see people who are already TRYING to do things on their own and seem to be the kind of person who will continue to make progress with our without the position in question.

The moving around a lot will be a huge hurdle. Unless you're in LA or NYC (or Nashville and Austin to a lesser extent) it's going to be VERY hard to make progress, I'm sorry to say. But now that you know that, perhaps you can work around it. Perhaps your path is a DYI one in the digital space where you build artist platforms, manage their social media and digital marketing, etc. Stuff you can do remotely. It'll still be hard as people really work with people they've personal relationships with but a quick productive trip to NYC or LA and you can shake enough hands to leave with a client or two hopefully. Just a thought. Or perhaps you work in local venues as marketing and talent buying.

Get Donald Passman's book: http://www.amazon.com/Need-Know-About-Music-Business/dp/1451682468

edit: new mix! please take a look at this one: https://soundcloud.com/pali_m/candied-sprites-1 (electronic dream pop)

• For the main synth I sidechained the reverb to the original track (bring closer to front of soundstage, not as lost when listening back on mobile)
  
  
• Bussed and compressed the drums separately
  
  
• Sub bass
  
  
• Other msc. automation.
  
  Most importantly though is I figured out I've been sitting too close to my monitors! I've been super frustrated trying to figure out why when I bounce the track the low end is SO much more prevalent and muddy, and it's because I haven't been hearing it properly at all. Standing outside your door to listen to your mix is also really helpful. Bought "The Mixing Engineer's Handbook" and have been learning tons. Very nice to finally have a single resource to work from.
  
  Still not totally up to par but would love your guys' thoughts on how to make it better.
  
  __.
  
  
  Hey fam, would love your thoughts on this guy: https://soundcloud.com/pali_m/candied-sprites
  
  Electronic dream pop, saccharine dancey refrain to sate your sweet tooth. Just an exercise to work on structure and comp techniques sorta, but I'd really appreciate some input on how to make it better, especially the mix.
  
  Will do my best to return feedback in kind.

I have a similar background, and just recently started again. I started out with some more basic songs.
There are tons of theories out there on practicing and playing. Hanon is good to get your fingers trained again, but musically it's not as much fun.
I would suggest finding some easier pieces and work on playing those well. That way you can build up your confidence, enjoy yourself, and work your way up to trickier compositions.

Personally I started with 'first lessons in Bach':
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1423421922/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

And album for the young by Schumann. These pieces are really fun and quite varied as well:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0793529948/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Then for some great advice which I picked up on the pianoworld forums:

• Don't try to rush through a song and make the same mistakes every time. This way you're training yourself to play the wrong notes, and it becomes harder each time to unlearn it.
  
• Instead, start playing very slow and make sure to get the fingers and notes correct from the beginning. Once you play it right at the slow tempo, start playing faster.
  
• Instead of playing through a piece from beginning to end and glossing over the few hard sections, mark those... and then practice them until they're easy. Break down in very small sections and practice until you get it right!
  
  This has really proven beneficial for me, and allowed me to learn pieces quicker! Currently I'm working on Schubert Impromptu Op 90 No 3. It's so beautiful.
  Good luck in your learning. You'll most likely get frustrated, which is normal. Learning the piano is a marathon, not a sprint. There will be days where you can't hit a right note, but other days where you surprise yourself.

Don Passman's All You Need To Know About The Music Business has the answers to pretty much all of your questions and it's very well written and funny. Link: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1451682468

That said, it's extremely hard to get signed by a major unless you have a big following or very good connections in the industry - and it might not be wise either since they're most likely gonna fuck you over when negotiating the contract since you will have little or no bargaining power.

For example, Porter Robinson only recently signed to a major (Astralwerks). All in all a lot of big name producers are delaying signing as long as possible to build up their name to get clout that can get the best possible deal. All the majors are looking for is money, and the more you and your brand can (seemingly) offer them, the better off you will be when negotiating.

So it might be best to concentrate on building up your name, because when you have good music, proper branding and a decent following, industry people will get interested. Personally, I'd first look into getting a manager that can get you remix jobs at majors and at the same time get your stuff released at the right places. The best way to find one is either to know somebody or - surprise - being a big enough deal so that somebody wants to work with you.

Hope this helps! I have a couple of years of experience with the industry so please let me know if there's anything in particular I can help you with.

Edit: thought I'd add a little personal story too - a friend of mine had been sending stuff to a big EDM-centric branch of a major label. He sent them things three times and never even got a response (and the music was absolutely amazing). Then, he puts out an EP on a small label and all of a sudden gets a message from the head of the major saying that he loves the EP and would like to sign him. So I guess moral of the story is, keep on both sending and releasing good stuff and something will happen eventually.

If you are planning on teaching yourself (which it sounds like you are) I would highly recommend working through the Elementary Music Rudiments series. I would recommend the all incluisive one as it is more economical and allows you to advance to where you need to be. http://www.frederickharrismusic.com/FHMCsite/capricorn?para=showPage&docId=catShowProd&section=**&prodCode=TSCR&fromCatCode=CATHEORY3&actionType=show&treePath=Theory >&categoryDesc=Theory Publications by Mark Sarnecki&fromTree=Y&pageNum=&level=2&code=CATHEORY3
This book can also be found on amazon and at many local music stores.
If you're not on a super tight budget another great theory resource is Tonal Harmony by Stefan Kostka
http://www.amazon.ca/Tonal-Harmony-Stefan-Kostka/dp/0073401358/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1376420694&sr=1-1&keywords=Tonal+Harmony
This was my university text book for my first two years of theory classes. It explains everything from basic rudiments (it covers it slightly) and goes through the harmony methods used into the 21st century.
If you are serious about writing music and learning about the different compositional methods I would recommend going through and doing the exercises in each of these books as they will allow you to devlop a much better understanding and you may find it allows you more creative room.
The benefit of a book is that you don't get lost in duscissions and work sheets that are way over your head as you do online (I know I got into this situation a few times).
It is very important to be very confident in your rudiments before moving on to more complex harmony study so my recommendation would be to first go through Elementary Rudiments and then move on to Tonal Harmony. That's my two-cents, hope it helps!

You can't buy a factory made classical guitar that is truly high quality. Yamaha makes great beginning classical guitars. I wouldn't pay over $500 for anything with a "brand name," if you're looking for a nice classical then start looking for luthiers or a dealer in your area that sells luthier guitars(either should let you try their guitars before you buy).


D'addario Pro-Arte strings are generally regarded as the all-around best classical guitar strings, and fortunately they're also the cheapest. Go with normal or hard tension if you like more resistance.


The book Pumping Nylon is a great technical resource for classical guitarists at any level.
http://www.amazon.com/Pumping-Nylon-Scott-Tennant/dp/088284721X

http://www.amazon.com/Library-Guitar-Classics-willard-Series/dp/0825614759/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_y

^ Volume 1 and 2 of that guitar classics book are great for finding rep out of, they have great music from different eras, composers, and difficulties.


More specifically, studies by Sor, Carcassi, or Brouwer are great for beginning pieces. You can move from there to pieces by Tarrega, Villalobos, possibly some easier Bach like BWV999 or Cello Suite#1. Really anything you want. For best results, seek our recordings and videos of well-renowned(not just some shmuck on youtube) guitarists. Use these to make sure you're not playing wrong notes, inspire your own interpretation, and possibly steal their fingerings if it's a video.

Honestly, you could just be a freelancer, so you can have a lot of free time to work on music when you want to. I freelanced about 25-30 hours a week at peak "work" (still leaves a lot of free time for music) and these days I rarely take on clients now that the music side is paying off. :)

Also, if you're 17, and music is your first love, you should really consider a career in the industry. It's not a pipe dream like so many would have you believe. If you like pop music, especially. Get out to LA, learn to produce, write, or sing (ideally all 3) and, if you're good, you'll get hired. 6-7 digit salaries aren't uncommon in the music industry out here. Publishers will put a good composer/producer on salary, and royalties on a major hit pay very well (if you have a decent deal in place).

Also, outside of production & writing, you can get a job in the industry doing a whole lot of other stuff: A&R, management, publishing. Passman's book is a good starting place for learning about that stuff. Max Martin can be one inspiration on how to completely dominate the pop scene.

Also in the intersection of music + tech is Techstars Music Accelerator, a startup incubator for music industry ideas.

Seriously, don't discount how much money is in the music industry. Behind every rich artist is a huuuuge mass of songwriters, producers, managers, engineers, and publishers also getting pretty rich.

My two cents - love that piano sound, haha. Wish I had a grand to play on. I'm an amateur myself, but I think you can benefit from more of a focus on varying dynamics during your improv and the use of some modes or dissonance to add more atmosphere and color. /u/AtherisElectro makes the case well, but varying dynamics helps tell your story more - just like if you were telling someone a story in real life. You employ this well here in the beginning. If it is all turned up to 11 the entire time, the listener may start to tune out a bit because they are becoming used to the pattern. For example, modulating to a different key with a different atmosphere (more lydian, softer dynamics, etc.) can give you a second section and more of a journey for the listener. Of course, it depends on the story you are looking to tell. An excellent book for learning some ways to add color to your improvisation is "Jazzology: The Encyclopedia of Jazz Theory for All Musicians". Chick Corea is a master at this and listening to any of his innumerable albums should give you plenty of great ideas. Now I just have to start doing any of this for my own improv ; ).

I'd recommend Jazz Guitar: Complete Edition by Jody Fisher. It covers all the important topics in a fairly straightforward way and comes with a CD of examples and backing tracks. It's aimed at intermediate guitarists, but your experience should be sufficient.

The old standard was Mickey Baker's Jazz Guitar, but I'm not a huge fan. The learning curve is extremely steep and there's not a great deal of theory or explanation. It'd be a really useful companion to lessons with a teacher, but I think that most beginners would really struggle with it.

A good alternative to the Jody Fisher book is A Modern Method For Guitar by William Leavitt. The learning curve is fairly gradual, but it's tough going - everything is written in standard notation and there's no real instruction as such. It seems to be inspired by the Suzuki method. Everything is taught through progressively more demanding examples. You probably won't get stuck on anything, but you will need to do a bit of thinking to figure stuff out for yourself.

If you want to learn jazz theory in depth, I'd strongly recommend Jazzology by Rawlins and Bahha. It's the clearest, most elegant explanation of how everything fits together in jazz. It's not specifically written for guitar, but the theory is universal. The Jody Fisher book covers all the theory that you really need to know, but Jazzology would be a really good supplement if you like to understand things in detail.

In your jazz guitar journey, you'll probably come across The Real Book. It's an essential reference text, containing lead sheets for hundreds of the most popular jazz tunes. It's how most of us learned our repertoire and most of us still have a copy in our gig bag pocket. Today, you have a huge advantage in learning tunes because of the fabulous iReal Pro. It's an app version of The Real Book, but it can also play backing tracks for any tune in any key and at any tempo. It's an absolute boon when you're learning to play solos.

Finally, I'd suggest just listening to a whole bunch of jazz, not just jazz guitar. You should know Joe Pass, Ted Greene and Wes Montgomery, but you should also know Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Dizzy Gillespie.

Not that bad for a beginner. Some of your instruments/sounds are a bit cheesy and it adds a hollow/amateur feel to your music. What you're missing is a bit of depth. This is normal!

Your bass is way too high in the frequency spectrum - you need to add some sub bass. Your lead sounds/pianos are too crisp/clear which ads to the tinny/cheap sound.

I recommend a few things:

0. Read this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Making-Music-Strategies-Electronic-Producers-ebook/dp/B00WHXYZG8

2. Take one of your favorite songs and try to reproduce it, one part at a time.

3. Learn how to use filters. This was huge for me - once I started understanding how the filter shaped the sound, I felt like a 10x improvement in my sound.

4. Use a limiter on your master and read up a bit on mixing/mastering

5. Add a bit of grit to your sound (if you'd like) or a low volume, subtle pad sound throughout your tracks - this was a secret I recently learned and it helped a lot, it should be barely noticeable but makes your track feel much richer.

6. Use subtle distortion on your kicks

7. Try out the transient shaper if you have it on your drums.

8. More reverb and delays, give you sounds some space

9. Layer your sounds - double up your kicks and leads.

10. Keep trying! You just started out, you WON'T make memorable and amazing music early on. Be okay with that. If everyone could make hit music, it wouldn't be special. It takes years to get decent, even more years to get good, and can take a lifetime to be great.

11. Make sure you are enjoying yourself. Have fun, get lost in sound and the experience.

12. Don't give up.

The first thing I’d try to impress the most on you is the practice of GOOD practice. That in itself will make this whole new process less difficult for you to overcome:

— 30 minutes to an hour, 6 days a week (your brain as well as your body needs to rest). This step is really important.
Don’t practice for like, 3 days and then a month later come back. You’ll lose all of what you practiced and basically have to start over again. You want to be as consistent as possible so that you train your brain to be efficient — not your fingers.

— Keep a journal of what you practiced and how long.
Going back and looking at your progress after a month of doing so will help you to see how far you’ve come in such a short period of time and will help you gain confidence that you don’t, in fact, suck.

— Don’t play anything above your means. If you haven’t managed something like Bach’s Minuet in G than don’t try to play Flight of the Bumblebee by Korsakov. You’ll only hurt yourself and your technique and discourage yourself in the process. The later is the most dangerous.

— Learn some of your favorite pop songs. Classical music is cool and all but, you can also learn a lot from non traditional teachings of chords, harmonies and technique. Plus, you’ll look cooler at parties if you can, in fact, play Flight of the Bumblebee and then follow it up with Bohemian Rhapsody.

Here’s some books and websites that I started out with.
They’ll help to propel you in the right direction with everything that I’ve taught you thus far:

For challenging yourself/learning new pieces: https://www.amazon.com/First-Lessons-Bach-Complete-Schirmers/dp/1423421922

For sight reading practice: https://www.amazon.com/4S01-Royal-Conservatory-Sight-Reading/dp/1554407427/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1543250017&sr=1-1&keywords=Four+star+sight+reading+book+1

For free scores of almost anything classically written: https://imslp.org

Here’s also a link to one of my favorite piano channel’s that talks about technique, progressing in skill and a plethora of other details that I didn’t cover: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz0PmHG0RvQHazlEsFU-4uQ

I wish you nothing but the best in your journey.
Fight against the current and make your dream a reality.


A. B. Martin
Live Alive With A. B. Martin — https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyPSSMyYUS_KT8xcg7OsbBQ

If you're new to guitar, don't worry about a 'routine'. Buy a classical guitar songbook, or better yet, a classical guitar lesson book. A really good one is by Noad, and has good classical pieces to learn: http://www.amazon.com/Solo-Guitar-Playing-Frederick-Noad/dp/0825636795/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317996077&sr=8-1

Rather than focus on scales (which are very uninteresting), try working through a book, or pick a few classical guitar pieces to work on. I think this is the best way to hone your chops, but also keep your interest. You want to be motivated to practice, and scales just don't do that for me.

Classical guitar, if you work at it enough, will naturally build your finger dexterity. In contrast to scales/fingerboard exercises, you are able to see improvement in very definable ways--that is, from one piece to the next. That's where the excitement and drive to play comes from for me.

Good luck!

Do you have any background knowledge in electronics? Because I would seriously start there.

I realize you are an adult, but Make: Electronics (Learning by Discovery) was a really great book for me (an adult). It gives you a good foundations in electronics and has fun projects as well.

Make: Analog Synthesizers was particularly fun for me.

Any interest in either of those books? They're both great starting points.

The Lynda training helped me a lot as it was short and thought a lot of keyboard shortcuts early on. But I'm sure the free YouTube training playlists would also work. The good thing about Lynda was it was really concise and more professional in not wasting any time, which can be crucial to help keep focus in initial learning.
The manual is good, but I don't find it to be the most straightforward manual. It's still a tremendous reference.

I would suggest to just follow a basic training and start producing whatever you want, watching YouTube tutorials on whatever gets you stuck and keeping this sub close-by to randomly check and say "WTF are these people talking about?" until it becomes more and more familiar or to ask any questions (people are usually very noob-friendly here).

For tips on production and getting stuck, Dennis DeSantis has this amazing book. Really helps open up your mind.

Good luck and don't forget to continuously show up, discipline is the single most valuable skill in my opinion :)

PS: You need to listen to this quote as well.

Edit: About gear, I agree with others. Don't buy anything more than a measly small midi keyboard until you learn the DAW better. Then you'll know if you need anything or what you need.

Hello

When you have things going on in your life it's hard to pursue your creativeness and craft your ideas. This book here has a lot of ideas that help you look at things another way and it's an easy read, look through the chapters there is a few things that can help you. It's called 74 creative music strategies for Electronic Music Producers. You don't need to produce electronic music to read it. It covers stuff that is just about music too. I read a couple chapters over the week on my phone on the way to university or if I'm on the train.

https://www.amazon.com/Making-Music-Strategies-Electronic-Producers-ebook/dp/B00WHXYZG8

(you can get it on kindle and there is an app for PC and Mac that you can get off Amazon)

Edit: There is a lot of information posted below which is helpful I forgot to mention that sometimes change is good I like to break the loop. The best way for me to produce is spend a session just making ideas; maybe just create a loop in the DAW sequencer or use Live View (if you use ableton) and build up ideas upon each other maybe another session you can focus on editing and resist the urge to create and see what you can salvage from your creative session. Set limits for yourself a long the way as well, maybe have a time limit or only use one synth or restrict yourself to 2 or 3 samples. That book covers a lot of this stuff I've mentioned; I've only read a few pages and it's already helped me.


Hope everything is well!

Almost. There are other differences between "classical" nylon string guitars and steel string. Neck width (I mentioned space between the strings, which it's related to) is one, for sure.

Another "family" difference is modern steel strings tend to have the neck intersect the body at the 14th fret. Classical guitar necks join the body at the 12th fret. This matters somewhat if you sit and play "classical style" with the guitar balanced across your left leg (if you're playing typically right handed), neck inclined at more than 45 degrees, with the headstock level with your chin. See here for examples A steel string neck will be a bit longer than the classical neck, and the guitar will balance differently. Not a huge deal (I play my steel string in a classical position), but another difference.

Here's a huge difference - the sound. The steel string guitar was engineered with steel strings in mind. The tension exerted by steel strings on the bridge is about twice that of nylon strings. The bracing, thickness of the sound board, etc., are all designed with that in mind. Lower tension nylon strings just won't drive as much sound out of your guitar as they would a classical guitar (with much lighter bracing and thinner top). Also, you'll run into a technical problem with where/how to tie off nylon strings on your bridge. Unlike steel strings that terminate in a little round thingy that is trapped under the bridge pin, nylon strings just... end. On a classical bridge they're looped around and tied off in a fancy knot.

So my original advice stands, I think. Play your guitar just as it is. If you really like playing the classical pieces, consider getting a used classical guitar.

Now, as far as your complaint re: damping strings near the top of the neck. I hate to say this but that's your technique, not the guitar itself. Yeah, it's a bit easier to not interfere with strings on a wider classical neck, but there are plenty of steel string players that need to play clean chords without any thumping or buzzing. One thing classical lessons are good for is learning efficient techniques with left and right hands - practicing from the get-go on getting your left hand fingers pressing down vertically on the strings with the tips of the fingers, not slanting the fingers, keeping the thumb low behind the back of the neck, the curve of the hand, keeping it all relaxed and ergonomically sound... There really is a reason the "classical posture" evolved to what it is - it's about as ergonomically neutral (i.e., not holding lots of unnecessary strain or twisting) as you can get playing a guitar.

I started learning on a steel string guitar, too, using Noad's Solo Guitar Playing. I played on a steel string for a couple of years in high school before getting my first classical guitar, so it's possible!

Edit: fixed link.

Alright. Well, whenever you're ready, just PM me, and I'll get you my cell number and Skype info. This theory text has made the most sense to me — http://www.amazon.com/Tonal-Harmony-Introduction-Twentieth-Century/dp/0073401358/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1450929787&sr=8-2&keywords=tonal+harmony. It'll get you through all of the basics and some of the advanced stuff as well!


As far as jumping into playing stuff like CHON, depending on your technical ability, it's not that big of a leap. But understanding what's happening theoretically is the tricky part. Most people don't understand what's happening in the music that they play. What many of those people don't realize is that having a sound understanding of the theory can help articulate the music that they make more efficiently.


Do you understand how to construct chords and determine the quality of chords? If not, I would recommend checking out /r/musictheory for now. The sidebar has some great resources for a basic understanding of chords / harmony. I would check that out; play through the major scale w/ triad chords and identify the chord qualities (Major, minor, diminished etc); then, do the same thing and identify all of the seventh chords and their qualities. That'll get you off to a good start!

bad advice so far imo. You shouldn't try to learn something by randomly messing about until you eventual 'learn' it. Learn theory by reading books written on theory. Start with the basic conceptual stuff like what melody and harmony is and why it works the way it does. Learn your ABCs: major and minor scales, modes. How to build chords, Scale degrees and intervals. the cycle of fifths. The consonant < > Dissonant spectrum and how it relates to melody and harmony e.t.c.

THEN you can 'mess about', but in a structured way and explore the stuff you're learning as you learn it. Simply knowing scales is the equivalent of being able to say "hello" "yes" "no" "my name is" e.t.c. You've really got to get into the underlying relationships of intervals and harmony to begin getting a grasp of how to apply meaning (emotion/rhetoric/feeling) to your music.

the books by Michael Hewitt are a decent start as they apply this stuff in a computer music context. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Theory-Computer-Musicians-Michael-Hewitt/dp/1598635034

later down the line you can get into more complicated stuff like diatonic harmony, classical form, post tonal theory e.t.c.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Classical-Form-Functions-Instrumental-Beethoven/dp/019514399X

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195336674/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=masschairevio-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399369&creativeASIN=0195336674

It all depends on how far you want to go with it and ultimately how much control and scope you want to have. A lot of EDM producers are relatively theoretically mute. But it doesn't stop them from making decent music within the practice/genre they're versed in (but that's a different conversation a little outside the scope of your question ;) )

Also, study your favorite tracks, use what knowledge you have to deconstruct music you like, copy the chord progressions, arrangements, mimic timbre, vibe and theme e.t.c. Get familiar with the nuts and bolts of what makes the music you like sound so good to you, and then apply that general orientation in a creative manner to your own workflow.

Hope this helped!

It is SUPER interesting. And the publisher did a GORGEOUS job of printing it and absolutely the kind of thing this community would like - each of the six sections are printed in different colors of ink.

It is basically a very interesting and enjoyable summary of "The Quadrivium" which forms the basic foundation of knowledge that someone with a good education would have learned in antiquity - the renaissance.

I bought it because I kind of wanted to expand beyond my modern mindset as I continued work on my novel and I really have enjoyed it.

https://www.amazon.com/Quadrivium-Classical-Liberal-Geometry-Cosmology/dp/0802778135/ref=pd_bxgy_14_img_2/143-9757225-2246932?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0802778135&pd_rd_r=3efa8e5b-2de1-11e9-9c23-7dae46bfe87d&pd_rd_w=fERSt&pd_rd_wg=chOqa&pf_rd_p=6725dbd6-9917-451d-beba-16af7874e407&pf_rd_r=QDSH5R8ZXEP4MWC6RW87&psc=1&refRID=QDSH5R8ZXEP4MWC6RW87

Writing short little concentrated pieces is a very good idea. Try creating as much material out of the smallest idea you can. I like to pick a small little theme/motif and just run with it.

The piano music I've been listening to includes; Scriabin (I have a book of his Piano Sonatas on my desk right now), Bartok, Prokofiev, Roslavets, Mosolov, Bach, and Beethoven. If you like Scriabin then I suggest going on youtube and listening to Roslavets and Mosolov, they write in a very Scriabin-esque fashion.

Books, I personally love reading about music. I do a lot of reading about composers and about harmonies and stuff. Wikipedia is a good place to start, but it's certainly not a definitive source. Persichetti's book on harmony is a good book for harmony, it certainly helped me think about harmony in different ways. And Modernism in Russian Piano Music is very good if you're looking to mimic Scriabin/Prokofiev and other composers of that musical language.

It's tough and I'm still there often.

One thing that has helped is looking at the arrangement of a reference track. Import a good reference track in the style you want to produce in your DAW as audio. Then go through every ~16 bar section or so and write down notes on what is happening. Not specifics but more like: "White noise intro" or "start of kicks" or "bridge", "chorus", "drop", etc.

If your DAW supports it try to write the notes directly on the timeline, many DAWs now a days support that by tagging tracks or sections and applying a label.

Then remove the reference track. You now have a 'template' with notes. Try to fill it in as best as possible from those notes.

I also recommend this book, it's pretty good: https://smile.amazon.com/Making-Music-Strategies-Electronic-Producers-ebook/dp/B00WHXYZG8/

This is a great book which goes in depth with the tools and approach needed, along with the main circuits in every modular setup/ synth. It comes from this site which has tons and tons of circuits. They are not really beginner stuff but filled with inspiration and is great to go back to once you have some experience and components to use.

Book: https://www.amazon.com/Make-Analog-Synthesizers-Ray-Wilson/dp/1449345220/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1367955744&sr=8-1&keywords=make+analog+synthesizers

Site: http://musicfromouterspace.com/

​

Here is a good blog to read through and watch the videos for some basic circuitry. Some really interesting stuff here! There are 12 posts on different things. He is quite knowledgeable indeed...

https://hackaday.com/2015/02/04/logic-noise-sweet-sweet-oscillator-sounds/

​

And if you really want to learn about electronics in depth (or any other field) check out https://www.khanacademy.org/ which offers lessons for free.

I've been a drummer since I was 8. Quite rusty right now as a lot of things have kept me from practicing (moving to apartments for years, etc.). Honestly, it's never too late to start. Are you going to be playing Carnegie Hall in a year? Wildly unlikely. But as long as your expectations are grounded in reality, that learning anything takes time and practice, you should be good.

As for practice and sense of tempo/timing: it is imperative that you buy a good metronome and practice with it regularly. You don't necessarily need a Dr. Beat, though I have one, and it is useful at times. But you do need some kind of click to play off of.

Can you read music? If so, there are some really good technique books out there that I'd recommend that are classics. Most people hate grinding technique, but I find it oddly relaxing. Here's some good books:

• Stick Control
  
• Syncopation
  
• Master Studies - (Do wait on this one a bit and start slow. It is possible to injure yourself if you get too carried away. Stone Killer exercises are no joke)
  
• New Breed - This one's actually a full drum set book. Quite challenging. May want to wait on this one a bit or try to just play one or two of the lines together (eg. right and and right foot).
  
  The first two books are probably where you should start. With all of these, start the metronome at molasses level slow - like 60 bpm or maybe even slower if you're not accurate at that speed. Get comfortable with that speed - maybe 15-30 mins at that speed without any mistakes. Then bump the timing up slightly 2-4 bpm and repeat. At no point should you be tensing up. If you are, you need to stop immediately, shake out your arms, and back down the tempo a bit.
  
  Make sure that you're making more use of your fingers than your wrists. Wrists can be good to start the stroke, but your fingers should be doing a lot of the work.
  
  There's a lot of other technique stuff that you can do, but the above alone could take you 5-10 years of solid daily practice if you're being thorough.
  
  Good luck!

Learning to read music is probably most important. While there is more and more classical repertoire available in tab, the tendency is to get stuck in someone else's fingerings. People talk about classical as being very rigid and set in its ways but the freedom to play a note wherever it works best for you is one of the great strengths of the guitar. This is something that tab can take away from you. The "correct" position that is variously so lauded and derided is - at least today - a compromise of ergonomics and technical requirements. The guitar is not a very ergonomic instrument so apparatus usually needs to be brought in to play in order to get it in the right position but this position varies considerably from player to player. The main concern is that the music is playable; much of it would not be without full control of technique. "Proper" position is something that takes years, even decades, to figure out, I know players in their 60's who will tell me "I found this new support that works with my footstool, now my height is nearly perfect!"

Resist the temptation to attempt pieces that are too advanced too soon. You're going to do it, every player is, but the frustration of moving so slowly with little to no results is dangerous. I've heard so many students come in and play Asturias or Bouree (or any of the other "standards") without any concept of the pieces in a musical sense. They play the right notes mostly but there is no division of melody and harmony, no concept of counterpoint, dynamics or anything else that makes this music brilliant. These students often become completely dejected when they are told by a teacher, jury or audition panel that they are not nearly as good as think they are, in so many words. The problem usually comes from a poorly structured education, either from themselves or teacher(s), and jumping into material they don't yet understand.

I would strongly recommend finding a good teacher because any one book is not enough (there are a few good ones like Aaron Shearer's Learning the Classic Guitar and Pumping Nylon) but none of them cover everything you need and there will be some contradictions. In order to learn most effectively, you must do so without confusion and error. If you learn a mistake or bad habit, it will be more difficult to fix later on than if you never learned it wrong in the first place. If you don't understand what you're doing or why, you won't get very far with it. In the absence of a good teacher, I would get as many reputable instruction/method books as you can and read them all thoroughly.

You could practice just tapping out rhythms with your fingers on the desk to start with, in time to a metronome or drum beat. Accent the first beat, then practice accenting different beats. Obviously, you have to continuously listen to the metronome, and correct your tapping if you get out of time. Being able to get back into time is something you need to practice and improve.

Don't worry about forgetting pieces you've learnt - it's a fact of life. Once you have a piece as good as it'll get, make a recording for posterity and move on. You can keep pieces as part of your "repertoire" if you want, but you'll still need to work on them from time to time, and to be honest it gets boring keeping pieces you've already learnt in maintenance mode. So learn new stuff.

It's hard to recommend pieces since I don't really know your level, I started a long time ago, and I'm not a teacher. Like I mentioned, Hanon Part I is good as an exercise (kind of alternative to scales - use for warming up). Something like First Lessons in Bach seems to have good reviews. If you just want an individual piece, try "Prelude in C Major" - you should recognize it. Good luck.

Mods, this shit should be on the sidebar. I've personally explained it here like 10 times over the years and I've read it explained by others in great detail dozens and dozens of other times and I'm not even on here that often.

If you give your own music away for free no one cares what you do.

If you sell your own music you are talking about two things: ownership of the recording and ownership of the composition. This is called publishing rights. You can be your own publisher (composition) and your own label (recording). It's smart to start thinking of it this way now to get your head around it. Start thinking like a business.

Labels sell the recordings they own. Publishers collect publishing royalties and they split them with the artists. The composition royalties get split between the publisher and the artist. The recording royalties get split between the publisher and the label, and then the label may further split that shit out to the artist if the artist is smart when they sign.

Back in the day there were publishers and there were labels and very rarely were they merged into the same company, but nowadays the idea of an indie label that acts as both, or a licensing company that does a little of both here and there, or an artist who does it all for his/herself is very common because lots of cool people and technology dudes and dudettes have made it so easy.

When you are in your situation, you can self-release to an aggrigator like CDbaby or TunrCore who distributes for you and collects a fee for offering this service. THIS IS WHAT I SUGGEST DOING. It's been a while since I've done this but back in the day you had to have a whole album to do it because it makes financial sense for them. That may be different now. There are other aggrigators that allow you to just release singles, but I don't know which ones are still around.

You can also self-release directly to iTunes but I think that's silly because using an aggrigator is so fucking amazing.

To bottom-line this, lets discuss business. In business, when you own something, you can do WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT WITH SOMETHING YOU OWN. So it doesn't matter what you do as long as you aren't under contract with someone else. If you self-release and then somehow get picked up by a label (yes, labels have their own distribution who sometimes are just aggrigators like CDbaby) then they'll make you write up a contract with them and who cares? They certainly won't. You just pull your shit off iTunes and relist with them. Of course you'll want to read all the shit you sign with iTunes, etc. to make sure that that's possible to do before you self-release. I can't keep up with it.

Starting a label is easy. Getting attention is hard.

Read this like 5 times:

https://www.amazon.com/Need-Know-About-Music-Business/dp/1451682468

You mentioned you like jazz, feel free to hang out with us /r/Jazz

Internet is great, and there is a lot for good free ressources. You'll have to go through a bunch of crap though, it can be confusing for a beginner and takes valuable time away to an already time consuming hobby.

So here are a few books I personally recommand.

Jazzology, an encyclopedia of theory centered around jazz that you can use with any genre. It's really good.

The real book, a good way to learn jazz standards with sheets that aren't so painful, using solfège for melody and letters for chords. This is the format I use with students.

The Jazz Theory book, or anything from mark levine.

The Complete Musician is good if you can find it for cheap, which is no easy task.

The definition of perfect pitch includes knowing the names of the notes. Without this knowledge, it's just "having a good ear". A good way to practice it is picking random notes and visualizing what the chord will sound like before playing it. That vizualisation aspect is the amazing thing about absolute pitch and helps with composing. The tuning or knowing what key you're in things are cute but fairly irrelevant.

Anyway, have fun.

Root For The Villain: Rap, Bull$hit, and a Celebration of Failure by J-Zone (who, if you're familiar with his music, is equally funny in his book)

Hip Hop Family Tree by Ed Piskor (it's a graphic novel focusing on the early days of hip hop done in the style of 90s Image comics)

How to Rap: The Art and Science of the Hip-Hop MC by Paul Edwards (this is full of interviews with some of the greatest of all time discussing every single aspect of rapping)

The Big Payback: The History of the Business of Hip-Hop by Dan Charnas (haven't read this one yet, but I've heard great things about it.)

Also, if you're interested in books on specific albums, the 33 1/3 series has quite a few: Illmatic, Paul's Boutique, Donuts, People's Instinctive Travels And the Paths of Rhythm, It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back and My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. If you're a Nas fan you may enjoy Born to Use Mics: Reading Nas's Illmatic, which is a more scholarly approach to Illmatic

Rapper here: yes, for many reasons.

• The lyrics will often follow the mood of the instrumental (or directly contrast it). Dark beat? Brooding subject matter. Does the beat sample the Beach Boys? You'll probably rap about a day on the beach.
  
• BPM. Beats Per Minute is very important to your flow - take a rap song at 78 BPM and try to rap it along to a track that's 90. Some of your more intricate flows might not translate very well. Naughty By Nature's rap style wouldn't go well over a slow beat, and likewise Gucci Mane probably wouldn't do well over a sped-up boom bap production.
  
• You're not just "reading" poetry. You're creating rap, literally "rhythm and poetry." It's a performance, much like singing, and you need to be able to follow the instrumental and work with it, build off it, or choose not to (but have it work in the song). That'll only happen to its fullest potential if you write something to a certain beat (though, like I said, BPM is the most important to begin with).
  
  If you're literally just beginning to start out with rap, don't worry about finding original beats just yet. Grab some of your favorite instrumentals, write to them and record them into Garageband. See how you sound, and work on what you don't like. Practice, practice, practice. It'll take years to begin to get comfortable with your own voice in hip hop, but if it's something you love, you'll find it.
  
  edit: I also recommend reading "How to Rap", you can get a cheap copy there. It's the perfect book to explain the basics.

Lessons are always a good thing, so definitely do that. You can always go bargain hunting for an 88-key weighted keyboard and get something cheap and used for the time being, then really invest in a nice keyboard/piano once you're further along. Check out the sidebar for more info.

It sounds like you're fairly interested in learning pop tunes, so getting some basic knowledge of theory will be very handy for reading and understanding charts. You can do all sorts of research into music theory on your own online or you can pick up a formal textbook to really dig in. Here's the book I used to learn theory for example. There are music theory subreddits too where you can ask any questions that may pop up for you.

Piano, like any instrument, is what you make of it. If you give yourself some clear goals, you can then carve yourself a path. Having at least a general idea of how good you want to be and which types of music you want to play will help you select an appropriate teacher for the job as well. If you're unsure of your own interest, talk to more musicians, watch videos online, and keep plucking away until something clicks.

If you want to learn piano, go to amazon and get these 4 books:

1.The Musician’s Way

2.First Lessons in Bach

3. Two and Three Part Inventions

And finally

4. The Well-Tempered Clavier

These books will teach you all you need to know about music. This is how I personally started playing piano. Work through the books in order, as each one builds on top of the other. Once you can play counterpoint excellently you can play pretty much anything else.

In the words of Brahms: “Study Bach. There you will find everything.”

As far as a keyboard goes, I have a Yamaha P-60 and it gets the job done. Just make sure you have weighted keys and 88 and you’re good. Bach’s music doesn’t require a pedal, so you don’t even really need that.

Good luck on your musical journey! To work through all these books will take a life time.

I see a lot of answers regarding marketing classical as relaxing- and thus the promotion those pieces that fit that description (think lullabies, fugues, and love themes).

I've not seen the more scientific answer about pattern recognition and the mathematical structure of the music itself. The traditional symphony, for example, has a very specific harmonic and melodic structure that is made to repeat throughout at different musical intervals in various patterns. Your brain doesn't get bored since there isn't a ton of wrote repetition, you get the serotonin boost from recognizing those patterns, and (unless you're going for Wagner or some aggressive Operatic pieces) the physics of the reverberations of the instruments themselves match well to the physiognomy of our inner and outer ear. Basically, the vibrations of the strings can make you physically comfortable or uncomfortable depending on the tuning and note played.

If anyone is interested I cannot recommend enough, "Music, the Brain and the Ecstacy" by Robert Jourdain. https://www.amazon.com/Music-Brain-Ecstasy-Captures-Imagination/dp/038078209X

I made it to Harmony III in college before moving my major from Music to Philosophy, but welcome any questions you might have. I plan on doing a PhD and my dream research would be on how the quantum structure of our brain's SSRI re-uptake inhibitors as they are influenced by the psychedelic drug class compared to other non-chemical methods of neuromechanical stimulation (like music, meditation and prayer/fellowship). My long term dream is to help ween Americans off the psychotropics like Prozac, Zoloft, etc. that must be taken daily, don't last in the system for long and come with a battery of side effects for more substantial cultural changes that actually solve, instead of masking, the mental dissonance our lifestyles only seem to aggravate.

> Did you build many easier circuits before you built this?

I modded my volca beats, and built a guitar pedal from a kit, but otherwise I prepped for this project by reading Ray's awesome book on the subject, which I feel was paramount to my success (so far), having only had a few small issues that required troubleshooting.

> How do you like the 2 pole LPF on the Ultimate?

I LOVE the sound of this filter. My only slight beef is the fact that the expander design also has a 12db/octave circuit, and I'm debating on doing the legwork and research to modify the circuit on that state variable filter to run at 24db/octave, to provide a bit more filter diversity over the whole unit. I'm still unsure on how involved that effort would be.

I think theory as a whole has reached a very comfortable spot. Sure, we might still not have a tuning with perfect ratios of its harmonics on the octave, perfect fifth, mayor third, etc etc. But humanity knew how to adapt to what was already available and theory has gone beyond music to blend itself with non-functional sounds very useful for movies, video games or theater.

​

I think the guinea pigs are the people themselves: we collectively decide what we like and the people who write for the big names take note.

​

With that said there's a lot of experimentation with microtonality in both music (king gizzard & jacob collier are the first to come to my mind) and we have books that look to implement math into theory and expand whats possible:

​

a geometry of music: a study in counterpoint: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195336674/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1

​

The geometry of rhythm

https://www.amazon.com/Geometry-Musical-Rhythm-Godfried-Toussaint/dp/1466512024/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_es_US=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=geometry+of+rhythm&qid=1563542715&s=books&sr=1-1

Just want to echo that 30 minutes a day is more than enough. Of that time, I would spend 10 minutes on rudiments and the rest on whatever you want.

>What all will I need to get started? Practice pad, sticks, kit, metronome?

If you buy an electronic kit, I wouldn't worry about practice pads. I'd recommend picking up Stick Control, learning the rudiments, and an introductory book such as Fast Track or Tommy Igoe's beginner DVD. Once you feel more comfortable, I'd recommend picking up Groove Essentials and New Breed.

For stick, I generally recommend starting with Vic Firth 5B hickory sticks. Of all the sticks I've tried, those are the most absolutely average. Weight, balance, size, etc. From there you can move into thinner (5A, 7A) or thicker (2B) as you want, but 5B is a good starting place, hickory is the best wood to learn with (and play with forever, imo, but that's debatable), and Vic Firth is fairly consistent.

Vic Firth's stick size comparisons. The standard sizes used by the majority of drummers, from smallest to largest, are 7A, 5A, 5B, 2B. Everything else is just incredibly minor tweaking that some people like.

I've removed this thread as this is all pretty broad, easy to find, hard to answer in a comment, or covered here plenty of times before.

> What loop/sample sites offer free samples/loops

You can find this with search

> What is the best way to fill in the buildup?

Listen to tracks you like and do what they do

> Anything to take into account with vocoders and vocaloids?

Learn how they work and where vocals sit in a mix

> Is there anything I should know about mixing&plastering as well?

There are entire books about this, such as this and this and this ;)

You're welcome to post all of these in our regular "there are no stupid questions" threads; there should be a new one today. Best of luck and don't be afraid to research and just try things!

Nice work! I’d recommend an Atari Punk Console next if you want a noise box that can accept CV.

Alternatively take a look at CMOS noise makers, there’s a nice hex inverter chip that will give you 6 square wave oscillators. These types of CMOS/Logic devices are often called Lunettas.

If you want to step up do LMNC’s CEM3340 VCO’s. They work great, I just built 3. Doing his filter and envelope next.

Lastly, shell out the money for the 2nd edition of Nic Collins excellent book Handmade Electronic Music.

https://www.amazon.com/Handmade-Electronic-Music-Hardware-Hacking/dp/0415998735

Yes, it’s worth the money. Especially if you’re coming in to this with zero knowledge of electronics. This book will show you how to do the CMOS stuff, circuit bend, make a 10 step sequencer, plus all kinds of rad “experimental” stuff. It’s money well spent.

Fundamental components of music like working memory and pattern recognition are directly link with neurological development.
Here some literature better explaining it:

https://www.amazon.com/Music-Brain-Ecstasy-Captures-Imagination/dp/038078209X

https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1196/annals.1360.015

From my experience, playing an instrument was always a net positive; it allowed me to deal with stress; socialize with other friends by means of playing together or talking about music; I learned how to read and compose; and self-improvement.

I'm not a professional, no one pays me money. I love music, I love playing it alone or in a group. It's therapeutic - it allows me to enjoy life even more.

I think that era of sound engineering being a black art that is passed down from master to apprentice is pretty much gone, at least reserved for a very small elite.

As much as you and I will never get the chance to learn from a master in a big studio, we now have very similar technology to them, at least to the point of just making a decent sounding recording.

There are definitely a lot of young producers emerging from their bedrooms now and challenging the establishment.

Checkout Flume for instance, he produced his debut on a laptop, and he just got a Grammy. So that whole professional industry is in the middle of a major disruption, just like the whole music industry.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert, but my mixes have a basic level of cohesion, competitive loudness, and they sound OK on different speakers.

If you don't feel like your mixes are cutting it, I'd definitely recommend working through a book (the other one that comes up a lot is The Mixing Engineers Handbook I've worked through that one too ) or go YouTube if you prefer, just make sure that you are working through a start to finish introduction. That is key to me, that you learn all the basic techniques as a whole set of tools, and apply them together. I thought I had worked out as much as I could from the internet too, but I had a lot to learn, and still do.

Also make sure you are constantly comparing your mixes to commercial mixes you like, on your system. Get a set of reference tracks, and run them alongside your mix and A/B them. That is one technique everyone recommends and you learn so much that way.

Great that you know what you want to do with the webapp. As said, break into small chunks and conquer. Even to the point of 'sit at desk', 'open computer'... so small that it's impossible not to do them. On the days where that's too much, just imagine yourself doing it. This will create cognitive dissonance and make you want to do it. This video shows you how.

Yeah work your way up to jamming. Play along CD's like Aebersold are great to start with.

First step is to learn the Cmaj scale fingering. Once you have that, move up a string and you have the Fmaj fingering. As said, practice around the circle of 5ths.

I'm living abroad too ha ha. I know exactly how you feel. I recommend reading this book.

Yes it does, but you would have to study harmony a bit more first. Take lessons or read the excellent 'Harmony and Voice Leading' by Aldwell and Schachter: https://www.amazon.com/Harmony-Voice-Leading-Edward-Aldwell/dp/0495189758

Good luck!

Hi Audio_Byte,

I posted this in the "I cringe at my own lyrics" thread, but it seems like you might benefit from it as well:

I'm actually working on a web app to help people with this very problem: Rhymecraft. It isn't ready yet but in the meantime my #1 tip for you is to read How to Rap Volume 1 and Volume 2. If you want me to email you when my app is done, send me a private message with your email address or just let me know you want me to send you a PM on Reddit.

What I've learned from studying lyrics is that usually there isn't one thing that makes lyrics good or bad; it's a collection of lots of different things, and your job as a lyricist is to understand what all of those factors are and make sure they're all working in your favor. Reading "How to Rap" will give you a good intro to what some of those factors are.

Firstly, I never recommend going to GC for a setup...GC is the WalMart of guitars. Instead, I highly recommend going to your local guitar shop where there are people dedicated to setting up guitars, and do so on a daily basis.

Knobs are usually just 'push on, pull off' toppers, so it is very possible the plastic 'head' of the control knob simply wasnt tight, or the threading on the pot itself was stripped, therefore not gripping that knob as well. If you bought it at GC, it is possible it was a recurring problem since before you bought it.

Note that there is a difference between 'acoustic' buzz (unplugged) and 'electric' buzz (plugged in). It is okay for a little bit of fret buzz on an unplugged electric guitar...this doesn't necessarily mean that the action is poor. However, if that fret buzzing passes through to your amplifier, you need to adjust your action.

Alternatively, if you are getting very terrible buzz, you may need to adjust the bridge itself (where the 'thumbscrews' you mentioned are) and raise the action. It is not very difficult, but if you don't feel confident take it to a guitar tech.

Here is an article going through a setup (albeit slightly more advanced) of a Les Paul guitar.

Here is a basic YouTube video discussing various pieces and how they affect action on a Les Paul.

In this video, Joe Walsh does a pretty decent job explaining the basics of a setup on a Les Paul.

Also keep in mind that thicker strings on a guitar = more tension on the neck.

Don't be afraid of your guitar! You only learn from adjusting it yourself. It can be intimidating at first, but once you do it several times you will feel much more confident. Like I said, don't be shy about taking it to a trained technician at a local guitar store.

I hope this information was helpful.

EDIT
Also, for some quality reading material, check out Dan Erlewine's 'How To Make Your Electric Guitar Play Great'....very useful to have sitting around

In my opinion if you truly are a beginner Bach's inventions wouldn't likely suit your skill level just yet. ^(I'd call myself intermediate level and they still stump me.)

I like Burgmüller's Op. 100 that has 25 easy etudes and start from roughly (ABRMS) grade 2 level and go up to grade 4-5 level (generally regarded as the level of easiest Bach inventions). They're all short pieces but simple enough to learn in one or just a few sittings. I recommend this Edition Peters scan, it has good fingering.

If you want to go with Bach there are a plenty of easier pieces. One good starting place could be First lessons in Bach book that's been recommended in this subreddit before.

Music exists to be made and that's all there is to it.

You missed 2-8 years of constant exposure, performance opportunities and lots of cool classes, but if music is something you love just do it as much as you can. Ear training, sight singing, transcription, these are very important tools but it takes the repeated application of them to make you "better." I have a BM, it was 4.5 years of immersion. I can tell you that most of the things I "learned" I could point out to you in a few minutes each. Lots of little tricks and tips, neat combinations and things like that. Figuring out how to really apply them is what's so difficult.

If you want a good introduction to harmony and tonality, Tonal Harmony is very thorough.

Make what you want. Fuck everybody who says you can't.
Edit: phrasing

I don't even know where to begin with you.

There's no way you've studied theory if you then go on to say that music has to be "complex" to be "good". And is that to say, then, that the higher the level of complexity, the better the music? Because there is plenty of crazy shit out there that's just nutso on technicality, but is God-awful to listen to.

I'm mostly unfamiliar with Bieber's work, so I can't comment on it. But if you've ever actually listened to a Taylor Swift song, you'd know it's not "objectively simple". What about it is so simple? The form and chord structures may be, but that's true for nearly all music (and not even just pop music!). Going beyond that, however, into instrumentation, melodic progression, and vocal harmony will typically yield far more pleasing and "complex" results.

Not only that, but repeated studies on humans and how they both interpret and retain audio information has shown that simplicity is actually pretty key. Music in and of itself is damn complex, and too much information at once throws our brains off. On top of it all, our brains will hone in on pattern recognition (both in terms of structure and harmonic build) and repetition to further the consonant experience of music.

Related reading on the topic - Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy.

Learn harmony. Study all you can about it.
Don't just learn the chord shapes. Understand them.
Once you get a sold harmony base, start soloing THINKING about the chord tones. Always be conscient about EACH note you are playing.


For example. You have a classic Dm7-G7-CMaj7 thing going. When playing over the Dm7 chord be conscient about the role of each note and how the roles changes when the chord changes.
Start with just the chord tones and try to connect them in such a way that your phrases make sense. Then add some more notes.
Also play with linking the notes with some chromatic ideas.


Harmony, harmony, harmony.

Get this book, it's really really helpful http://www.amazon.com/Jazzology-Encyclopedia-Jazz-Theory-Musicians/dp/0634086782

If you're serious about fingerstyle playing, enough to spend some money, I recommend picking up Solo Guitar Playing Vol. 1 by Noad. I haven't come across a more comprehensive analysis of technique, down to hand placement and individual movement of the fingers. I picked the book up after 8 years of playing and was learning fundamental techniques described within the first few pages. It's also a great introduction into reading sheet music, not quite as fast paced as Modern Method for Guitar, the other commonly recommended book.

I second the JustinGuitar recommendations. His Practical Music Theory and Chord Construction Guide eBooks are great introductions to music theory.

I recommend Noad. There are two volumes. This is a classical guitar book, but covers almost everything.

You'll also need a dedicated fingerstyle blues/folk book. These tend to be more fast and loose, and hence they can be light on actual instruction. Best is probably the Tommy Emmanuel technique book.

I also really like Pumping Nylon by Scott Tenant.

The all-time best right-hand exercises are by Mauro Giuliani and Fernando Sor. Some of these are included in PN.

For orchestration, the Adler book is definitely the modern day definitive book, but as a high schooler, paying for the Adler is probably not on your to-do list. Instead, I recommend the Rimsky-Korsakov because it's free on IMSLP.

http://imslp.org/wiki/Principles_of_Orchestration_(Rimsky-Korsakov,_Nikolay)

For composition, I recommend Persechetti's book, Twentieth Century Harmony. It's not really about telling you how to compose, it's more like an encyclopedia of possibilities and descriptions of what those possibilities sound like.

There are entire fields of study in this area. I've done a fair bit of work looking at harmonic theory, where the main focus point is in coming up with mathematical abstractions, i.e. structures, that capture various things we care about in harmonic theory.

For example, the set of integers is a mathematical structure, and the traditional thing we get taught is to put scale notes in correspondence with ordered integers. All this really does is capture our intuition that notes come in a particular order (low to high).

In practice, we don't just play notes in order of low to high, instead our melodies tend to jump around between notes, tending to prefer certain intervals. So a more elaborate example would be to use a graph structure that connects each note to other notes that are fundamentally related, by an octave, or a fifth, or a third, and so on.

Yet another example would be to connect chords to other chords that differ by only a single changed semi-tone. In this case, the act of moving a note to form a new chord could be described as a group operation. In fact, most mathematical approaches to music tend to rely on group theory, and other areas of abstract algebra.

Structures like these definitely can be used as tools for composition, or even can be used to build programmed composers. The core idea is to formalise our discovered or intuited knowledge of what makes good music sound good.

See:

• The Haskell School of Music - http://haskell.cs.yale.edu/euterpea/haskell-school-of-music/
  
  
• The Geometry of Music by Dmitri Tymoczko -http://www.amazon.com/Geometry-Music-Counterpoint-Extended-Practice/dp/0195336674

If you have the patience, Harmony & Voice Leading by Aldwell & Schachter, hands down.

It depends on how much of a "Beginner" you are. I went through Music Theory for Dummies before I moved on to the above monster of a textbook. The Shaping of Musical Elements and its second volume are also some recommendations. However, they also require a deal of patience (and possibly a knowledgeable friend/teacher if you'd like your work examined). The aforementioned Laitz book is also a great text worth of perusal.

I wish you the best of luck in your learning ventures!

I got one. It's kind of gimmicky, you'd definitely have to write around the effect. The (intentionally bad?) pitch-tracking will only work semi-reliably on leads. Everything else sounds like glorious glitchy noise. Don't get me wrong, if you want to sound like Lightning Bolt, this thing is right up your alley. As a more traditional effect it sounds like someone spilled beer on your MXR Blue Box.

One of my buddies told me that it's just a pedal version of one of the basic projects from the book Handmade Electronic Music by Nicolas Collins. I never confirmed this.

I have the older version, construction wasn't so good. I let someone borrow it and they fried it (no reverse polarity protection or some shit). I cracked the thing open, and the components were soldered to a hobby breadboard. I never fixed it, it lives in a desk drawer now.

I'm happy to answer any other questions you might have. Keep in mind that I am a synth-player, not a guitar player.

I recommend looking into some books on production. There is so much more information crammed into the better books than you will find in a week's of searching forums and youtube tutorials. For books on mixing, I say you can't go wrong with Bobby Owinski's The Mixing Engineer's Handbook or Mike Senior's Mixing Secrets for the Small Studioand for general production I recommend Rick Snoman's Dance Music Manual just be sure to get the latest edition, it includes chapters that cover everything from basic theory the popular genres (trance, dubstep, DnB, Techno, House, and Ambient/Chillout), it covers the electronics and science of acoustics, MIDI, DAW's and everything that come's along with them (instruments, effects, samplers, etc) and promoting and distributing your music. I can't say enough about this book and what a great way it was for me to see the "big picture" of what was ahead of me when I was starting out.

Ditto to this...learning Schenkerian analysis is more like learning to play an instrument than learning to use Roman numerals, for example. It's nearly impossible to get good at it without a Jedi master holding your hand, as it were. Most of the noted Schenkerians working today can trace a direct line back to Schenker himself, and it's rare to find someone doing really good Schenkerian analysis today that didn't learn from one of the 2nd-generation Schenkerians. The C&G text is the best out there, but there are very few hard and fast rules with Schenkerian analysis, so it's exceedingly difficult to learn from a book (do, however, avoid the Forte & Gilbert textbook, and absolutely do not attempt to learn Schenkerian analysis by reading Free Composition).

Incidentally, what textbook did you (OP) learn from originally? I'd recommend getting a copy of the Aldwell/Schachter harmony text. Carl Schachter is the most important Schenkerian alive today (he learned from Felix Salzer, who was a student of Schenker's), and this harmony textbook, while not actually Schenkerian, will help a lot in grasping some basic concepts. You might also take a look at Robert Gauldin's textbook, which includes some basic Schenker instruction (if I remember correctly...I don't have a copy handy). There are plenty of us Schenkerians hanging around here in the wings, so we can probably help a lot (and I haven't gotten into a good Schenker argument in a while!).

OK, I've recommended this book on this subreddit before and will continue to. This book is amazing. Advanced Modern Rock Guitar Improvisation by Jon Finn is pretty spectacular. I took the class that he wrote the book around and it's pretty eye opening. I can't rep a single book harder when it comes to just straight ahead practical rock playing with a solid theoretical background.

After that, Chord Chemistry by Ted Greene is a classic and every guitar player should have a copy.

Sure, you can basically go as simple or as complex as you'd like. The most basic "synth" You could make would probably be a tone generator based on the 555 timer, something like the Atari Punk Console. Music From Outer Space is a good resource for more involved synth projects and the book Make: Analog Synthesizers is a pretty popular resource (you can find pdf versions online). Finally, r/synthDIY has some good resources too.

Alright, ideally my dream job would be a music supervisor, but those are few and far between. I wouldn't mind doing some sort of analytics or PR, and I realize all my options are pretty different. I've got two book recommendations for you. Cool Jobs in the Music Business and All You Need to Know About the Music Business. All of my mentor type figures have recommended these to me, and It really helps to clarify the different careers and definitely helped me get a hold of the language of the music industry.

Knowing theory won't really help you create better songs. It will help you understand what's going on in a song and can help you solve many compositional problems for arrangements. But that's not the same thing.

I'm not trying to dissuade you, I'm a theory geek myself. But I do want to convey what theory will and won't do for you. Having a good ear for melody and a sense of song structure is far more important for making a great song than theory is.

If you want some great theory books, I can heartily recommend the text Tonal Harmony, by Kostka and Payne as well as Harmony and Voice Leading, by Aldwell, Schacter and Cadwallader

While pricey because of their academic audience, these texts avoid much of the confusion rigorous texts demonstrate, particularly with regard to the importance of modes to understanding the relationship between melody and harmony.

For really expanding your understanding of harmony on the guitar, and if you like Jazz, Johnny Smith's "Mel Bay's Complete Johnny Smith Approach to Guitar" is an amazing book, but requires a lot of hard work on the part of the student (not least of which due to Smith's insistance of writing the music in actual pitch using bass and treble cleffs.

It's true that there's a ton of great information online, but books present the info in an organized, trustworthy fashion. Online learning should be fine for more introductory music theory and common practice period harmony, but once you're looking into more advanced stuff, check out these books:

-20th Century Harmony by Vincent Persichetti

-Contemporary Harmony by Ludmila Ulehla

Hi, I hope your day is going well! Thanks for connecting. Related to these topics, I would recommend the book Quadrivium, an article about the 'Octave of Energy', a collection of experiences by Stan Grof, titled "When the Impossible Happens" , and for online material you can tune into /r/holofractal, which has aggregated lots of material relevant to the quantum nature of reality.

This is the 'dry' approach. A stylistic and heartfelt seed can be sprouted by planting your attention in the gardens of Sufi mystic poetry, or say, by reading the stories of the Vedas and Upanishads.

Stephen Mitchell has done amazing work translating the Tao te Ching and the Bhagavad Gita.


"Deluded by identification with the ego, a person
thinks, 'I am the doer.'"

Krishna; Chapter 3, verse 27

hey buddy, a couple years ago i took a whole bunch of LSA and then couldnt eat or sleep for 3 days ( lsa in the form of morning glory seeds which i did not properly clean :( ).

during the night into the second day, while i tried to sleep, i went into my minds eye, passing dots that turned to shapes that turned to fractals that turned to galaxies and then constellations. i just kept on going and going and going.

So I put on a Deep Sleep binaural beat, to try and help me sleep. It didn't. It woke me up. or my soul or whatever you'd like to call it (i'm not very good with human words lol)

Every thing came rushing back to me. All those "weird" experiences during a trip. all those "coincidences". everything just seemed to click. the universe started spiraling, or so it felt. it felt like a cosmic or spiritual baton was being passed to me, and then i passed it back to whoever, and then so on until the end of time lol (or whatever. again, bad with words lol).

then i went outside. there was snow on the porch, and i was feeling like a weirdo. so I made a triangle, and made a circle touching the points of the triangle. i then went into the triangle and meditated, and i had the most wild feeling. whether it was in my head or not, i don't know. but it felt like i was doing something i shouldnt be doing. the universe was getting mad or concerned or something lol. (ps i might have gotten inspired somehow by the book "quadrivium" https://www.amazon.com/Quadrivium-Classical-Liberal-Geometry-Cosmology/dp/0802778135 )

I dont exactly remember the thoughts I was having. It was more of this feeling of pure light/energy/whatever the universe is made of.

Before I say more, what exactly is it that you need help with? or is it just a strange feeling and thought process so you're kinda freaking out?

OH yeah the predictions. On the second day, I was with my girlfriend, who was sober, and she started getting annoyed and freaked out because i was saying and doing weird things that had to do with what was going to happen next. whatever that might have been.

I thought I had this prediction that there is this world/universe wide conspiracy meant to keep people/souls in the dark about certain things that would benefit them. and only certain people can notice. or perhaps everyone can, but they're blind for some reason.

but yes to calm down just remember you're human and everything that is going on in your head is a human thing. heavy foods and meat can bring you back down to earth if you're done chilling up there lol

but i may or may not know what im talking about at all. this is all from experience

There is no one size fits all bible of music theory. To be extremely well rounded you need to look at a few different books:

For just starting out in the sense that you don't know how to build chords or intervals, Carl Fischer's grimoire books are excellent.

For classical harmony this is the book I used in my classes:
http://www.amazon.com/Tonal-Harmony-Introduction-Twentieth-Century/dp/0073401358/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1465247193&sr=8-2&keywords=tonal+harmony

For jazz harmony:
http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Theory-Book-Mark-Levine/dp/1883217040/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1465247235&sr=8-1&keywords=jazz+theory

For deeper classical/counterpoint:
http://www.amazon.com/Counterpoint-4th-Kent-Kennan/dp/013080746X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1465247274&sr=8-3&keywords=counterpoint


Also, try to get lessons with a university teacher because none of these books are comprehensive or perfect.
I remember in one of my beginning classes we went over the omnibus, and the deepest the book went was "this is an omnibus".
It wouldn't be until college where a professor ACTUALLY explained to me what the omnibus is and how to make one.

Also, the mark levine book can probably be condensed into 20 pages of meaningful material. He uses a lot of filler/examples...

Silk and steel strings may help you achieve your technical goals. You don't need a nylon string guitar to learn the method. The most significant gain of going that route is the generally larger string spacing.

If you do go for a classical guitar, a pro setup on the least expensive solid top guitar you can find, with some really good strings should hold you over for a long while. Just make sure it has an adjustable truss rod. Upgrading to a bone saddle/nut will improve the tone of the best or worst guitars for a very low price.

This book: Solo Guitar Playing - Book 1, 4th Edition https://www.amazon.com/dp/0825636795/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_6XrmDbNG3FF0H

Probably the most commonly(successfully) taught/learned classical method book ever to have existed and is geared towards a total beginner.

Rock on dude. \m/

You'll hear "Get a teacher." on this sub a lot. This is great advice, but not always possible. That being said, check the FAQs for some really great resources for sheet music, online learning tools, and general tips and tricks.

I'd recommend getting a method book, such as Alfred's, a classical composer's 'beginner's' collections or notebooks, such as Bartok's Mikrokosmos or First Lessons in Bach, and then grab a book of scales such as this.

For future reference, if you do get a chance, please get a teacher, especially if you can swing it sometime in your first year, even if just for a few months. They can help prevent poor technique that may come up and can save time in the long run.

Edit: For poor hyperlinking on mobile.

Based on the description of your Strat, it sounds like it has the vintage 7.25" fretboard radius. String bending, especially in the higher registers, is know to be problematic on that fretboard radius for exactly the reasons you describe.

Essentially, you need to do a proper setup to try and lessen the problems you're describing. If you're unfamiliar, doing a setup on a Strat involves adjusting things like the truss rod for neck relief, the bridge/claws to determine how you want your tremolo setup, the action, the intonation, and the nut. In essence, everything that your strings touch that can affect how they function mechanically.

You can learn how to do this yourself even if you have no experience. Dan Erlewine has a great book to tackle just this sort of stuff called How to Make Your Electric Guitar Play Great and you can snag a used copy on Amazon for the price of a new set of strings, practically. StewMac, the company where he works and that sells supplies for guitar building, has also started releasing some very helpful YouTube videos on different aspects of the setup. You can also poke around r/Luthier for any tips you can find there (though there's a lot of shorthand that would be tough for a beginner to get into).

My advice to you would be to buy the book, read it over a weekend (it doesn't take long to get from cover to cover), buy a few tools to get the job done and learn how to setup your own guitars so you'll always be able to make sure they're in perfect playing condition and won't have to rely on your local Guitar Center.

Basic tools you'd need include either a pre-assemlbed kit if you want to go the expensive route or a few of the individual components from elsewhere:

• My advice would be to get the StewMac String Action Gauge (it's worth it going for this specific brand name here since it's higher quality and has better makrings than the ones you'll find on Amazon),
  
• Some small screwdrivers and wrenches that'll fit what you need (again, this set from StewMac is pricey but it's very good for its purposes, you can certianly find all the hex wrenches, etc elsewhere for less) if you don't have them,
  
• Some radius gauges (here's the set I have)
  
• A straightedge (not necessary, since you can use a string on the guitar and calipers or even an old guitar string to measure relief--but the straightedge does make things a lot easier)
  
  If you can install a stereo, hang a picture and put together a puzzle, you can set up your own guitar.

Read this or anything else you can get your hands on that explains the creative process some professional rappers use to write lyrics. It would probably be especially helpful for you to find interviews of your favorite artists where they discuss their inspirations.

Also, you don't have to write with a beat in mind or while listening to an instrumental. The lyrics can come first and then you'll find or make a beat that fits them.

Lastly, don't let your dreams be dreams. Stay focused and work hard for what you want and don't let anyone discourage you with their negativity. At the same time, don't let compliments get to your head and tell you you're the greatest and then get complacent with your work. Always be your own worst critic.

Lastly lastly... Enjoy yourself! If you're not enjoying it, it'll show in your lyrics and delivery and then nobody else will enjoy it either

It's really hard to explain, but basically it's a book with a lot of really cool ideas and patterns found in numbers and nature. It talks about Sacred Geometry and alternative music theory. I like to have it because it's a good table piece and starts conversations. Found it on Amazon, it's called The Quadrivium :)

You're going to have a hard time finding someone to explain the biology of it in laymen's terms. There's a good book called "Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy" that spends the first third explaining the biology of it.

Sound waves are produced by vibrations (guitar string, vocal chords, etc.) These vibrations start at a fundamental frequency (what you called "pitch") but they also vibrate at higher frequencies relative to the fundamental--these are called overtones. These higher frequencies aren't perceived as readily as the fundamental but they will color the tone of sound (timbre).

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

http://www.amazon.com/Music-The-Brain-And-Ecstasy/dp/038078209X

EDIT: I guess, in an overly simplistic way, you could say that the overtones do excite the nerves in the ear dedicated to those frequencies and the brain decodes them in pretty much the same way it does the fundamental. So, since the two sound sources emit different overtones the brain can tell them apart.

Yes to all of that.

You will want this Dan Erlewine book.

And this Dan Erlewine book.

You can make DIY fret files using a feeler gauges, like this.

A strobe tuner for best results.

A nice steel ruler.

Assorted screw drivers and mini-screw drivers.

Powdered graphite or "nut sauce" lubricant.

Clear nail polish and super glue.

Appropriately sized deep sockets and a "thumb wheel" socket driver.

Fret refinishing is the only place, IMO, that requires actual dedicated tools, but there are guys who DIY that as well.

I got the StewMac 3-in-1 fret file for crowning.

I still haven't decided if I will DIY or purchase something like the Nut Seating Files for when I make bone nuts for everything.

I use a set of diamond sharpening plates from HF to touch up flatten and a HF 19" Flooring Level (sorry no HF link, they don't seem to carry it any longer)and some strips of 220 sandpaper sticky glued to that straight edge to do fret leveling.

You could check out some autobiographies such as Timbalands, Zaytovens, Jay-Z's & the Beastie Boys book. Those are good for specific artists and producers experiences. But there are plenty of music production books that can inspire you as well. Check out Making Music: 74 Creative Strategies. The ebook is a good value:

https://www.amazon.com/Making-Music-Strategies-Electronic-Producers-ebook/dp/B00WHXYZG8

Chord Chemistry is a great book. It's my guitar bible. I'm always coming back to it. It was written by one of the best guitar players ever, Ted Greene.

I've heard The Advancing Guitarist is quite good but I've not read it.
One last suggestion. If you can find a book called SuperChops by another legendary player (Howard Roberts) you'll be set. It's a great 20 week course that'll take your playing to new levels. Howard was one heck of a jazz player, teacher and nice fella. It's out of print (now) so it may be a struggle to get a copy but once you do...hold onto it.

Great points. For radius, I got a set of stewmac metal under-string ones as a gift; an even better idea for most would be picking up this great book, which actually has a set of plastic radius gauges included.

For tuners, also true. Biggest protip there is probably checking your hole measurements before you buy replacements, I'll never make that mistake. Again. :/

It would help if we knew more about your own level of knowledge too. For instance I could recommend Schoenberg's Theory of Harmony or Levine's Jazz Piano Book but those books expect a lot out of their readers, so you may be better off with simpler books.

One book I liked a lot was Carl Humphries The Piano Handbook. It doesn't assume you know much and goes over a lot of material without a lot of depth. It might be a good starting point. It has something to say about pretty much every musical style from 1400 to today.

EDIT: I just reread your post and see you already have the piano handbook.

As a six-month player you probably need to work on physical technique more than anything. And you'll need a teacher for that. :( Can you find one to even meet once a month for 30 minutes?

Well, my best advice (if possible) is just to pick up any book that has a combination of scales and basic chord progressions (like this one: http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Scales-Chords-Arpeggios-Cadences/dp/0739003682/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343850716&sr=8-1&keywords=piano+chords+scales) and spend a few months working everyday learning them on piano or a keyboard. When you're making a song if you know ahead of time what key you want to write it in and then limit yourself to the notes available in that scale you'll find that you feel a lot more in control. If that's not possible you could try to pick up a music theory textbook, but in general those tend to be geared almost exclusively towards people that are going to be composing with pencil and paper (AKA Sibelius) in the Western Classical tradition so a lot of the rules they impose early on (avoidance of parallel/hidden fifths and octaves, some of the rules dealing minor scales) won't really apply what so ever to the stuff you're trying to do, but if you're interested in doing modulations (fancy smancey word for key changes) or utilizing weird scales like the half diminished you're probably gonna want to pick up a music theory textbook eventually.

NOW if you wanna go really deep down the rabbit hole, I'd pick up this book: http://www.amazon.com/Theory-Harmony-100th-Anniversary-Edition/dp/0520266080/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1343851092&sr=8-3&keywords=schoenberg

It's partially a music theory textbook but it's more an investigation into why harmonic structures work the way they do. Schoenberg's theory relating bass notes to chords completely changed the way I make music.

Hopefully that wasn't too confusing.

The whole major=happy/minor=sad is too simplistic and too black & white in my opinion. I think it's just an easy way to describe it when your starting out with music. Of course minor has more dissonance since the third is closer to the (unstable) 2nd/super tonic and the major third neighbours the perfect fourth, which gives the feeling of moving towards a stable sound. But there are still plenty of happy songs in minor and vice versa.

I found the book Harmony and Voice Leading to have some interesting info about this discussion.

IANAL, but you might want to check out Section 3 and Section 6 of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Public License legal code.

A music industry attorney by the name of Donald Passman has an outstanding book that covers the complexities of music licensing, publishing, and practically everything else related to the business. It's really geared towards keeping artists protected.

To be quite honest, that's what makes it so appealing to me.

The fact that he tells "a pretty generic hood story" as you put it but manages to make it sound so god damn smooth.

Imagine any other artist, writing this song without the rewind concept. It would be the most boring-ass, generic rap song. Nas turned that into a classic.

This song was even talked about in How to Rap: The Art and Science of the Hip-Hop MC. It's a pretty interesting read btw, I recommend it to anyone on /r/hiphopheads/

Thanks! The most robust book I can think of off the top of my head is Pumping Nylon. It's a great publication with loads of exercises.

Having said that, if you have the patience the most enjoyable way is to learn classical pieces. I understand that sheet music is hurdle (or deterrent) for lots of folks. I used to sit down with a legend for standard notation and mostly rely on the ear!

I have no single favorite chord. But if I shared my whole list of favorites, I would be giving away all my compositional secrets!

Here's one though. I like this monster:

B♭2 A♭3 C4 E4 G4 B5 D5 F#5 B6

Those doubled B♮ notes over the B♭ bass ought to sound like a train wreck -- but they don't, thanks to the other supporting notes.

As to how to hear it or parse it, you can treat it as a polychord: in slash notation, perhaps Bm / B♭13#11? That's how you are likely to play it at a keyboard.

Alternately, read composer Enrique Ubieta's thoughts on the idea of augmented 15th chords, which Vincent Persichetti also considers in his Twentieth-Century Harmony. I think the notes in this stack mesh well enough that you are less likely to hear it as a polychord, and more likely to hear it as a dominant 13#11 with a #15.

​

Find a good book, well reviewed by the community. A good reference text will have all the concepts you need to know, on at least a high level, all right there within the pages. Once you build a foundation from that, learning more complex topics will be easier.

E.G. I know nothing about making music hardware, and I read a random comment of someone recommending this book (http://www.amazon.com/Handmade-Electronic-Music-Hardware-Hacking/dp/0415998735). I saw that the book had great reviews, so I bought it.

It's just easier to read a damn book than google stuff sometimes, especially when you dont even know what you should be googling!

No good comes from waiting. I take classical guitar lessons at a university and wish I had started sooner. The only thing I'd be wary of is developing poor technique early on, which can be killer to fix later. Just watch out for your left and right hands. Make sure the thumb of your left hand is always on the back of the fingerboard (not curved around) and that your right hand is not perpendicular to the strings but in line with your wrist; like this. I know you said not to name books, but this book is the one that has been teaching me classical guitar and it's great. Now as for spanish/flamenco style guitar, I play a little and am learning, mostly from this video.

Sorry, I know you said not to post anything, but I got excited.

I haven't read it so I can't really speak to it's contents but A Geometry of Music: Harmony and Counterpoint in the Extended Common Practice seems like it would fit the mathematics + music theory bit nicely.

Never did this book, but the one I always recommend and should be a part of any kit player's canon is The New Breed by Gary Chester. It's the best way to learn true 4-limb independence.

http://www.amazon.com/New-Breed-Systems-Development-Creativity/dp/1423418123/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317505773&sr=8-1

It'll be difficult to schlep your instrument unless you are otherwise travelling very light (and you have a light and compact case), especially if you will be flying a lot, since the violin would take the place of your carry-on bag (and I don't know your baggage situation).

If you would like to self-study music theory, I would strongly recommend either of these textbooks:

• Aldwell and Schachter, Harmony and Voice Leading
  
  
• Steve Laitz, The Complete Musician
  
  The Schachter book is the old standard that is still in use at many conservatories; it was especially prevalent in east-coast conservatories, where Schenkerian analysis was in vogue. Many schools seem to be switching to the Laitz textbook (it's spreading from my alma mater, the Eastman School of Music Theory), I'm not altogether sure as to why, but they are both fantastic resources.
  
  I would also suggest considering self-study in music history, the textbook by Grout would be a great starting point.

hey man
first thing is, practice. Start small and build up. use single syllable rhymes and try to get a feel for what a "bar is". then from there get more complex.

 


Start with a simple flow and rhyme scheme

 


just walked in the crib 1

look at my Asian chick 2

she hella thick, do a split, 3

she don't take no shit" 4

 


this is a simple rhyme scheme with all single syllable rhymes. You will notice. the rhyme does not always end on the end of the line. If we were to continue this. my rule is to change the flow every four bars but I tend to change it up a lot more than other people. My first indication would be to change the flow right after

 


I ain't seen her in a min-ute 1

I miss her...this love 2

really ain't a gimmick 3

..I fall to pieces when i'm in-it* 4

 


This is an example where the rhyme scheme becomes more complex and the rhymes can increase to more than one syllable.
There are plenty of resources online about how to rap. there's even a book! [How to Rap!] (https://www.amazon.com/How-Rap-Art-Science-Hip-Hop/dp/1556528167/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1480085264&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+rap)
Best of luck to you little homie. holler if you got any questions

I double majored in Physics and Music simply because those were my interests, they didn't really directly apply to my job pursuit. I think as far as getting a foot in the door internships are paramount. Look up some artists you like and see who manages them or who their record label is. If they have an internship application great: apply. If they don't, send an email to whoever you can get a hold of there asking about internships.

Your marketing degree definitely makes you more qualified! I'd advise doing some research on the fields that specifically interest you. For example, if you're looking to get into music, read Donald Passman's All You Need To Know About The Music Business.

Ted Greene's Chord Chemistry

For chordal stuff, he is one of the absolute greats and I cannot recommend him enough. This book contains pages and pages of shapes for every type of chord you can think of, but also goes on to teach you how you can apply them and reharmonise from a guitar point of view.

His website with lots of free lessons and chord melody tunes. You can get the gist of his stuff here. The book has also got all hand written chord boxes like the stuff on his site.

Example of his playing

Tommy Emmanuel talking about the book Bitches love Tommy Emmanuel.

U/Insolace is correct and his reply futher explains, correctly, why terms are so. We've pretty much nailed down the language at this point. It's more a matter of if a musician is educated in the language or has only learned from ear and coined or invetned their own terms for the same communicatio , which is perfectly understandable and plenty of high end musicians, and drummers, do not read music or have much of a formal education in music theory.

I would recommend Gary Chaffee's Rhythm & Meter Patterns and Time Functioning Patterns for an indepth study into this area of drumming and music in particular.

https://www.amazon.com/Rhythm-Meter-Patterns-Book-CD/dp/0769234690

If you want to get into Danny's style, he is a huge propenent of Gary Chesters 'New Breed'. Highly recommend studying out of this book as well.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Breed-Development-Creativity-recording/dp/1423418123/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1468607035&sr=1-2&keywords=The+new+breed

There are a lot of courses. Any specific topics you're interested in?

Edit: I'll just list a few anyway that I've used in classes (this may not reflect all professors' choices for the same subjects).

Tonal Harmony: Kostka-Payne - Tonal Harmony

Counterpoint 1: A Berklee book by the late professor Rick Applin. Some also use this Fux translation/adaptation

Counterpoint 2: Bach Inventions & Sinfonias (any edition, really)

"Advanced" Counterpoint: The Well-Tempered Clavier (again, any edition)

Early Twentieth-Century Harmony: Persichetti - Twentieth-Century Harmony

Post-Tonal Theory/Analysis: Straus - Intro to Post-Tonal Theory

Instrumentation/Orchestration: Adler - The Study of Orchestration &
Casella/Mortari - The Technique of Contemporary Orchestration

Western Music History - Burkholder/Paiisca - A History of Western Music (8th or 9th edition)

Conducting 1 - Notion Conducting

Conducting 2 Notion + Stravinsky's Petrushka

Berklee's own (jazz-based) core harmony and ear-training curricula use Berklee textbooks written by professors which, as someone else mentioned, come unbound and shrink-wrapped at the bookstore. You can find older (PDF) versions of the Berklee harmony textbooks here. Of course this list only represents explicit book choices - there are a lot of excerpt-readings, and there's a lot of instruction that isn't found in these books even in the associated courses.

BTW - sight reading is when you attempt to play a piece of sheet music you have never seen before. Thats different from learning to play a piece and reading through it several times.

I had played guitar for a while before taking high school concert band. While I didn't like playing the french horn, the class was rewarding enough that I stuck with it for 3 years. I learned music theory and how to read music notation, and I can't stress useful it is. However, it is a slow, frustrating process.

My suggestion is to buy a beginner theory book, and then something like Jazzology. A teacher would probably be a huge help. You won't believe how fast you improve with a teacher.

For mixing: The Mixing Engineer's Handbook is my favourite resource for learning the mix engineer's craft. Also many people recommend Mixing With Your Mind, but I can't claim to have read it.

For tracking: The same author of the Mixing Engineer's Handbook has one on tracking which is also quite good. I learned tracking as an apprentice, so I have read very little in the way of published books on this topic, but for guitars specifically some person archived the posts of a person named Slipperman here which I've found to be a valuable resource for information and entertainment(!).

In general: Get yourself a copy of the Yamaha Sound Reinforcement Handbook, and read it cover to cover, twice. It is an absolute building block of audio engineering and probably the best single resource I can suggest for the theory and practice of audio engineering and sound reinforcement.

This is the best book on the subject and really got me far in creating original circuits: My copy is as dog-eared and bookmarked as could be.

Nicolas Collins
Handmade Electronic Music: The Art of Hardware Hacking

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0415998735/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_57MCAbAZ0WC52

More than hacking and mods, really gets into playing with ICs and such.

Have fun.

2 of the books which helped me a lot, both great for beginners (but also pros):

This ones focuses more on the right mindest towards learning the skills (hugely important imo): https://www.amazon.de/Music-Habits-Electronic-Production-Procrastination-ebook/dp/B00ZJG398U

And this one is more about concrete techniques: https://www.amazon.de/Making-Music-Strategies-Electronic-Producers-ebook/dp/B00WHXYZG8

And this one is what iam reading right now, it's more for experienced practicioners who want to understand how to make the step from being "solid" to "great".

It's also very much about developing a healthy mindset to learning and playing / producing. It's written by a classical music / piano guy, but most of what he says translates 1-1 to electronic music production.

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B005OUHOLY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

When i look at my own progress, i really feel "mindset" is the key word - in short, you need to accept your current level, and that learning takes time - but you also need to feel that your potential is only limited by the time and effort you are willing to put into your craft.

And: when you wanna learn a certain technique, try to find a youtube video about it! That can really speed things up.

Pure theory alone will not improve your technique on any instrument, but will enable you to understand the mechanics of the music being played, and communicate it to another musician. You might consider applying your knowledge to extended chords and harmonies available in Jazz. Books by the following would be useful:

• Mickey Baker - Book 1 and Book 2;
  
  
• Ted Greene;
  
  
• Mick Goodrick;
  
  
• Frank Gambale - Book 1 and Book 2
  
  ---
  An answer with useful music theory resources that I gave recently:
  
  https://www.reddit.com/r/Guitar/comments/4h5i2y/question_which_book_should_i_read_to_understand/d2njtxs

Well that was far too nice and now I feel kinda bad. Honestly, I love when people analyze hip hop and rapping specifically, so this was just me being kind of contradictory for the sake of it. Who are some of your favorites, or people who encompass most/all of these aspects to you?

Edit: Also, the guy that recommended How to Rap (https://www.amazon.com/How-Rap-Art-Science-Hip-Hop/dp/1556528167) is definitely right in the fact that I think you'd enjoy the read.

Couldn't agree more. Gaining independance with the left foot on the hats is an excellent first step in double kick drumming. Think about it like you were working on your hands. You don't just hammer out single stroke rolls, you play paradiddles, doubles, flams. Your left foot is a limb that can be as workable and useful as your hands.

As boredop mentioned, dropping the hats on the 2 and 4 gives a really cool groove to a steady ride beat, and in a lot of folk it's almost expected. Same applies to jazz. But that's really just the tip of the iceberg with regards to what you can do with your left peg. [See: The New Breed] (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chester-Breed-Revised-Edition-Drums/dp/1423418123/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1371779559&sr=8-2&keywords=the+new+breed+drummer)

Furthermore, every drummer worth his salt has at least one ostinato based rhythm in their repertoire (edit: repertoire). Look at Steve Gadd's Samba, and go from there. The work you do in separating the feet from the hands is something Mario Duplantier, Danny Carey and many other heavy drummers have mastered.

My standard advice for this matter is to avoid any guitar-specific theory books. They tend to focus on the wrong things, teach everything in a confusing manner, and overemphasize modes in a nonsensical way.

This is a great general introduction to tonal harmony, which is where you want to start. It might seem a little stuffy and tangential to guitar, but learning a solid foundation from this point will help you have a great understanding of music.

If you like TIYBOM, Robert Jourdain's Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy: How Music Captures Our Imagination is right up there. Awkward title to explain in public but a fantastic read. I liked it a lot more than TIYBOM but in fairness read TIYBOM second.

I always recommend dropping $25 on this book.

It's an easy read, and gives you a great understanding of intonation, string height, truss rod adjustments, etc. The more you know about your instrument, the better you can make it suit your needs.

Make: Analog Synthesizers is a great introduction. It even details an example project, the Noise Toaster. But I think its strongest section might be the appendix, which is a good reference for various utility circuits you need in an analog synth, especially the LM13700 OTA, which you can use to build VCOs, VCFs, and VCAs.

The only glaring omission in the Make book is the lack of voltage-controlled exponential current source circuits that drive the OTA's current bias inputs. You can find more about those by digging through the textbook Musical Applications of Microprocessors (beware, much of the content regarding embedded systems is a bit outdated, but there is a surprising amount of analog material in there) and this Electronotes newsletter. In fact, this collection of Electronotes newsletters is a gold mine in itself.

Happy tinkering.

It's quite possible to teach yourself, of course. The question is really how quickly do you want to progress? A teacher is your single best resource as they can give you feedback that a book or video just can't. So, if you can find a teacher in your area that teaches the style you want to learn, I would definitely go that route.

With that being said, as far as books are concerned, anything by Fredrick Noad will be helpful - especially his 2 book series on solo guitar playing.

Here's the Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Solo-Guitar-Playing-Book-4th/dp/0825636795

As for playing the classical guitar using an acoustic guitar approach, keep in mind you're conflating a couple of different things. A "classical" guitar is the instrument - nylon strings, wider neck, lighter body. Classical guitar is a style of music (and differs from Spanish guitar, but that's another conversation practically).

So, yes, you can learn to play folk, blues, jazz and any other sort of genre on a classical guitar. And you can learn classical guitar music on an accoustic (or even electric) guitar, though it won't sound the same and might be a bit more difficult.

http://www.amazon.com/Solo-Guitar-Playing-Volume-1/dp/0825636795/ref=pd_sim_b_1

I've been playing classical for about ten years, and I'm currently studying it at a conservatory. This is what I learned out of, and I think its a great method. There are plenty of methods out there if you don't like this one: Shearer, Duncan, Tennant, and others. If you want something older look at the methods by Sor, Giuliani, or Carcassi. There are tons more, just look around for what you like. All of these require being able to read music, if you want to really do classical guitar, you have to start reading it. Don't let that discourage you, though, classical guitar is well worth the effort.

Buy this book and start working through it. By the time you get to the end, you'll be at least decent! Bach is an amazing place for beginners to start.

Also, get a teacher if you can. At least for a few lessons to make sure you don't develop any bad habits. As a self-taught guitarist of many years, I understand the feeling that you can teach yourself without any help. I made this mistake of playing for about a month before seeking a teacher, and although I made a large amount of progress, I also ingrained a few very bad habits that were hard to shake.

Good luck!

I came up learning before the internet was big (like pre high speed where video wasn't a super viable option, and content wasn't so much in regular people's hands) and spent a lot of time reading books, articles, and message boards.

Dan Erlewine became my biggest teacher in books and This book was my bible for a while.

I originally started getting into it after getting the third degree by a mom-and-pop shop when I brought a bass in for repair that I didn't buy there, but when my friends in school would see the things I was doing, they'd ask me to work on their stuff too.

Been a while since I've actually had to wrench on anything guitar wise, but I still keep up with some of the new stuff coming out and browse new catalogs when I get them in the mail.

Edit: I also had the first edition of this book and it seemed to be more related to guys who play and are just getting into working on their own stuff.

This is definitely not a rule for how to write music now, just a rule for how to write music in the style of Bach/Mozart/Beethoven/Haydn etc. If you're interested in Tonal (read: Common Practice) Harmony, here are a few good theory books used in Freshman/Sophomore college music curriculums (in my order of preference):

The Complete Musician


Techniques and Materials of Music


Harmony and Voice Leading


Tonal Harmony

I'm also a composer, and I tend to write more modally (and sometimes without a strict tonality), so I just teach these, I don't necessarily follow them in my own writing.

Just to act as devil's advocate here - I would recommend at least balancing this guy's work out with some of the more standard texts on mixing (listed below). I checked out this video a while back and was a little weirded out by his approach, which often steps into pseudoscientific territory. If you go to the author's company website, you'll see some dubious claims and suggestions about mixing techniques:

-"There are archetypal frequencies that have been used since the beginning of time to affect us."

-"As shown by the research of Alfred Tomatis, every frequency is a nutrient."

-"Tuning A to 432 hertz vs. 440 has been proven to resonate better with the resonant frequency of our cells - Tuning concert pitch to more auspicious frequencies makes the music go deeper."

-"High Frequencies activate the mind; Low Frequencies calm the body."

-"When you relate to frequencies based on ancient Chakra energies, the way you "feel" the balance of frequencies in a mix in a whole different way that goes through your whole body instead of just your mind. "

I'm sure the guy's mixes sound great - and he seems to have been a successful mixing engineer - but I personally wanted nothing to do with this guy. There are other "holistic" approaches to mixing (like Mike Stavrou's Mixing with your Mind) that work without having as much of a "snake oil" flavor to them. But as always, if this guy's approach works for you and you can look past his quirks, then I suppose it's a good resource.


Other resources: Mike Senior's Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio, Roey Izhaki's Mixing Audio, Bobby Owsinski's The Mixing Engineer's Handbook

If you really have your basic chords and scale theory down, I would recommend a book that was recommended by my teachers : Arnold Schoenberg's Theory of Harmony. It is a very deep theory book that challenges a lot of the preconceptions that existed (and still exist) before its realease around 1910. I started reading it and it is a great book indead, though I lack some elementary knowledge to get the best out of it.

Pumping Nylon is a terrific finger exercise book for left hand and right hand, which I think translates well to all guitar styles.

Buy and study this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Mixing-Engineers-Handbook-Bobby-Owsinski/dp/128542087X

It is WELL worth the money and you will continually use it as a reference. The information will take your recordings to a totally new level. All of Owsinski's books are great, but this one is specifically for what you are looking to do.

There is so much that goes into getting great sounds and recordings that is far beyond would I could type out in a single day.

I have to strongly reccommend Music, The Brain, And Ecstasy: How Music Captures Our Imagination by Robert Jourdain!

Best book I've read so far concerning this matter.