Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
Buleriachk
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by Buleriachk » Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:29 pm

In the Blues context for E Major, B7 is resolving to E, not C to B7...

The tritone substitutes for the Dominant of E major, which is B7, so F7 is substituted for B7. The resulting progression is F7 -> E, as a substitution for B7 -> E.

Which is why jazz does not sound like blues (or Flamenco) if a tritone substitution is used ....

In Flamenco, F "resolves" to E (as the "Final" to E "Phrygian" mode G# substitute for G), but is not a tritone substitution, since the dominant 7th of E is not F, but B7.

Well, of course, Wiki may be wrong...

"For example, using C? (D?) major instead of G major in the key of C major (C? is a tritone away from G)". - Wikipedia

"For example, using F major instead of B major in the key of E major (F is a tritone away from B)".

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:41 pm

Buleriachk wrote:In the Blues context for E Major, B7 is resolving to E, not C to B7...

The tritone substitutes for the Dominant of E major, which is B7, so F7 is substituted for B7. The resulting progression is F7 -> E, as a substitution for B7 -> E.
Again, a tritone substitution can occur on any resolution down by perfect fifth. Even the ii of a ii-V-I can take a tritone sub. The ii is theoretically altered to become II7 (or V7/V) and substituted by the dominant whose root is a tritone away. So a ii-V-I in C major with such a tritone sub on the ii chord would be:

Ab7-G7-Cmaj7

Sometimes you get subs on both the ii and V:

Ab7-Db7-Cmaj7

Buleriachk wrote:Well, of course, Wiki may be wrong...

"For example, using C? (D?) major instead of G major in the key of C major (C? is a tritone away from G)".

"For example, using F major instead of B major in the key of E major (F is a tritone away from B)".
Both of those examples are correct… but again:

a tritone substitution can occur on any resolution down by perfect fifth.

Repeat it. Make it a mantra. Until you understand it.
Unsound Designer

Buleriachk
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by Buleriachk » Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:47 pm

I am talking about resolution in the different contexts of Jazz, Blues or Flamenco chord progressions, not the general definition of tritone which you already agree with ......

Repeating this "mantra" mindlessly as an interval definition of tritones outside of the harmonic progression contexts (Flamenco, Blues, Jazz) is just insanity (expecting that by repetition the results of the harmonic progression analysis will change), but, hey, I can give more examples in Rock and Roll, Greek Music, ......
stringtapper wrote:
Buleriachk wrote:Well, of course, Wiki may be wrong...

"For example, using C? (D?) major instead of G major in the key of C major (C? is a tritone away from G)".

"For example, using F major instead of B major in the key of E major (F is a tritone away from B)".
Both of those examples are correct… but again:

a tritone substitution can occur on any resolution down by perfect fifth.

Repeat it. Make it a mantra. Until you understand it.
Last edited by Buleriachk on Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:56 pm, edited 5 times in total.

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:48 pm

There you go! :lol:
Unsound Designer

Buleriachk
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by Buleriachk » Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:11 pm

I would encourage the reader to try the different progressions:

(C7->B7) -> E (Blues turnaround, NOT a tritone substitution)
---------------------------
(iim -> V7 -> I)
(Am -> B7) -> E (standard Jazz progression, NOT a tritone substitution
----------------------------------------------------------
Em -> D -> F -> E ("Andalusian Cadence", NOT a tritone substitution

Jazz substitution -
F7 -> E as a substitute for B7 -> E (Play one after the other - tritone substitution)
(F7 -> E -> B7 -> E) (similar to (Am -> B7) to C in this case Am substitutes for the F7 to mimic the tritone substitution

Play them and listen....

TomViolenz
Posts: 6854
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by TomViolenz » Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:44 pm

The Finn wrote:
sporkles wrote:I can't wait till they announce the winner of this discussion!

If we do this right, we can get Ableton_David to ban discussions of religion, politics and music theory. Then we'll be getting somewhere.
Puh, that would eliminate the last topic then I know nothing about 8O

TomViolenz
Posts: 6854
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by TomViolenz » Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:51 pm

I would encourage the OP not to take away from this discussion of two obviously very experienced musicians, that music theory starts out as complex as is depicted in this thread. You don't have to understand these two guys before learning music theory can bear fruit for you!

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:01 pm

Buleriachk wrote:I would encourage the reader to try the different progressions:

(C7->B7) -> E (Blues turnaround, NOT a tritone substitution)
The part in bold is the tritone substitution. But I already stated that very clearly. You either couldn't understand or chose to ignore it.


Buleriachk wrote:(iim -> V7 -> I)
(Am -> B7) -> E (standard Jazz progression, NOT a tritone substitution
No one in this thread ever said that such a progression was a tritone substitution. So why are you taking the time to point out that it isn't when no one here has made the claim otherwise?

Again, bizarre.

Buleriachk wrote:Em -> D -> F -> E ("Andalusian Cadence", NOT a tritone substitution
Again, where are you getting that anyone in this thread ever said such a progression had a tritone substitution?

The tritone sub was cited in the context of an altered blues turnaround (C7-B7 on the twelfth bar of a blues). Period. Anything else either is your imagination or senility setting in.
Unsound Designer

Buleriachk
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by Buleriachk » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:04 pm

(C7 -> B7) is not a tritone substitution unless it resolves to Bb major
(C7 -> B7) -> Bb (key of Bb major). Read the Wiki definition again.

(B7 -> F) -> E resolving to E major IS a triton substitution.

Sheesh!

(Mind you, I didn't bring up the subject of triton substitution, since it is irrelevant to Blues and Flamenco, and only one out of many basic substitutions in Jazz)

What makes it a tritone is the final resolution chord in the resolution (F -> E instead of B7 to E) (B,C,C#,D,D#,E) i.e., B to E.....
stringtapper wrote:
Buleriachk wrote:I would encourage the reader to try the different progressions:

(C7->B7) -> E (Blues turnaround, NOT a tritone substitution)
The part in bold is the tritone substitution. But I already stated that very clearly. You either couldn't understand or chose to ignore it.


Buleriachk wrote:(iim -> V7 -> I)
(Am -> B7) -> E (standard Jazz progression, NOT a tritone substitution
No one in this thread ever said that such a progression was a tritone substitution. So why are you taking the time to point out that it isn't when no one here has made the claim otherwise?

Again, bizarre.

Buleriachk wrote:Em -> D -> F -> E ("Andalusian Cadence", NOT a tritone substitution
Again, where are you getting that anyone in this thread ever said such a progression had a tritone substitution?

The tritone sub was cited in the context of an altered blues turnaround (C7-B7 on the twelfth bar of a blues). Period. Anything else either is your imagination or senility setting in.
Last edited by Buleriachk on Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:07 pm

TomViolenz wrote:I would encourage the OP not to take away from this discussion of two obviously very experienced musicians, that music theory starts out as complex as is depicted in this thread. You don't have to understand these two guys before learning music theory can bear fruit for you!
That's absolutely true. And exemplified by my insistence on calling what the OP is asking about "music fundamentals" rather than "music theory."

To my mind everything that's learned in four semesters of an undergraduate music theory program is just "music fundamentals." "Music theory" comes in graduate school. Just my opinion.

Learning music fundamentals shouldn't happen sitting with your feet up in front of a fire with a music theory textbook and nice red wine. It should happen with a book open on a piano or on a stand with an instrument in one's hands. That instrument might even be a DAW. The point is that the ears have to be involved. Learn what certain things sound like; learn how to play them or recreate them in some way (DAW); and learn how to conceptualize them intellectually so you can communicate them to others or at least be able to make connections among different musical concepts.
Unsound Designer

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:12 pm

Buleriachk wrote:
stringtapper wrote:
Buleriachk wrote:I would encourage the reader to try the different progressions:

(C7->B7) -> E (Blues turnaround, NOT a tritone substitution)
The part in bold is the tritone substitution. But I already stated that very clearly. You either couldn't understand or chose to ignore it.


Buleriachk wrote:(iim -> V7 -> I)
(Am -> B7) -> E (standard Jazz progression, NOT a tritone substitution
No one in this thread ever said that such a progression was a tritone substitution. So why are you taking the time to point out that it isn't when no one here has made the claim otherwise?

Again, bizarre.

Buleriachk wrote:Em -> D -> F -> E ("Andalusian Cadence", NOT a tritone substitution
Again, where are you getting that anyone in this thread ever said such a progression had a tritone substitution?

The tritone sub was cited in the context of an altered blues turnaround (C7-B7 on the twelfth bar of a blues). Period. Anything else either is your imagination or senility setting in.
Anyway I'm done trying to teach a 70-year-old music fundamentals as they act like they know better and then proceed to write things in ways that don't make logical sense. If we can't even agree on what has been said in this actual thread (i.e. things that can be reviewed and proven) then I don't know how to proceed. Communication has broken down.

It seems you probably have a lot of musical knowledge Chuck, but having learned it and absorbed it through one particular musical culture seems to have gotten left you behind when it comes to standard ways of understanding and explaining some basic musical concepts.
Unsound Designer

Buleriachk
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by Buleriachk » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:14 pm

This is just personal issues.

B -> E is the tritone (B,C,C#,D,D#,E,F).

B7 -> E is the Dominant 7th to tonic resolution, and F7 is the chord substituted for B7 in the tritone resolution.

C7 in the progression (C7 -> B7) -> E has nothing to do with the definition of tritone resolution as used in Jazz (which is the context of this part of the discussion).

You have a rigid definition of scale as used to define harmonic progressions that don't fit many common uses of chords in harmonic progressions.

I learned my art with the gypsies, and only later tried to fit classical analysis to it. (I had to look up "tritone" to see how it is used w.r.t jazz, but I didn't bring it up.)

I agree, communication has broken down. You might want to grab a guitar and try these progressions (which are easy on the guitar, but difficult on a keyboard....) It might begin to make sense to you then....

stringtapper wrote:
Anyway I'm done trying to teach a 70-year-old music fundamentals as they act like they know better and then proceed to write things in ways that don't make logical sense. If we can't even agree on what has been said in this actual thread (i.e. things that can be reviewed and proven) then I don't know how to proceed. Communication has broken down.

It seems you probably have a lot of musical knowledge Chuck, but having learned it and absorbed it through one particular musical culture seems to have gotten left you behind when it comes to standard ways of understanding and explaining some basic musical concepts.
Last edited by Buleriachk on Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.

TomViolenz
Posts: 6854
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by TomViolenz » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:17 pm

stringtapper wrote:
Anyway I'm done trying to teach a 70-year-old music fundamentals as they act like they know better and then proceed to write things in ways that don't make logical sense. If we can't even agree on what has been said in this actual thread (i.e. things that can be reviewed and proven) then I don't know how to proceed. Communication has broken down.

It seems you probably have a lot of musical knowledge Chuck, but having learned it and absorbed it through one particular musical culture seems to have gotten left you behind when it comes to standard ways of understanding and explaining some basic musical concepts.
Just an observer here, and I don't know if there is a story between you two: But your ageism in this thread (and your general tone) is quite rude. I know it's your field of research and all, but is this really necessary?!

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:32 pm

Buleriachk wrote:(C7 -> B7) is not a tritone substitution unless it resolves to Bb major
Incorrect. A tritone substitution can occur in any progression down by perfect fifth. It doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the chord being substituted for is V in the key, ii in the key or any other chord.

Period. You can keep saying it all day long but it won't make it any more true.

Buleriachk wrote:(C7 -> B7) -> Bb (key of Bb major). Read the Wiki definition again.
I just read it (not again, but for the first time, because I already knew what a tritone sub was before Wikipedia even existed) and here is the first sentence:
A tritone substitution is the substitution of one dominant seventh chord (possibly altered or extended) with another that is three whole steps (a tritone) from the original chord.
Full stop. That's all you need. No more information is necessary. And you cannot disagree that a C7->B7 progression substituting for a F#7->B7 progression (substituting for a F#m7->B7 progression, in case you're paying attention) conforms to the definition given by Wikipedia. It simply does. End of.


Buleriachk wrote:What makes it a tritone is the final resolution chord in the resolution (F -> E instead of B7 to E) (B,C,C#,D,D#,E) i.e., B to E.....
Completely incorrect once again. You could conceivably have an entire progression that consisted of tritone substitutions (it's a defining characteristic of Bird blues changes). Where the progression ends does not determine whether a tritone substitution occurs in the progression. I already demonstrated this with these examples:

Tritone sub between ii an V of a ii-V-I:

Dm7-G7-Cmaj7

becomes

D7-G7-Cmaj7

becomes

Ab7-G7-Cmaj7

The part in bold is the tritone substitution. The Cmaj7 (I) has nothing to do with whether the Ab7 is called a tritone sub.

Period.
Last edited by stringtapper on Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Unsound Designer

stringtapper
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Does musical theory is needed in electronic music ?

Post by stringtapper » Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:33 pm

TomViolenz wrote:
stringtapper wrote:
Anyway I'm done trying to teach a 70-year-old music fundamentals as they act like they know better and then proceed to write things in ways that don't make logical sense. If we can't even agree on what has been said in this actual thread (i.e. things that can be reviewed and proven) then I don't know how to proceed. Communication has broken down.

It seems you probably have a lot of musical knowledge Chuck, but having learned it and absorbed it through one particular musical culture seems to have gotten left you behind when it comes to standard ways of understanding and explaining some basic musical concepts.
Just an observer here, and I don't know if there is a story between you two: But your ageism in this thread (and your general tone) is quite rude. I know it's your field of research and all, but is this really necessary?!
You're right. I'll chill on that.

What someone accepting someone else might be right and changing their behavior on the internet?? 8O

Edit: And just to answer your wondering, yes there is a history where in another thread I criticized him on a theory mistake he made, staying very polite I might add, and he came back at me with insults. So there's that.
Unsound Designer

Post Reply