^ Sure thing. And as you probably have seen it is very "classical oriented," but that's another thing with music. She doesn't discriminate! Everybody gets to use the same seven letters. (And well, progressions. Maybe that's why the gazillion songs sound alike! lol)

^ I use that, too, but in a consonant nature. I'm sure, there were some rules used for creating that dissonant piece. 

And it's not at all dissonant. I can still pick out consonant elements! There is a "Key" (Ab - the tri-tone's frequent use) within this song. 

Dissonant is not the same thing as distorted. It's still music and most often music is consonant even amongst the dissonance.

Like I said, the more you try to "break the rules" or "run from them", you realize it's not easy. You really have to forced yourself to do that and please be gentle.

It also depends on how you look at it (and the same goes true regarding production - especially that) Some things work and some things don't, but it's all about context.

 The Primus piece was pretty consonant (to me) even if the individual pieces were not.

Composition sees the same technique. How does this chord/note fit in context with everything else? It's not so much, does it sound good as it is: Why does this particular piece fit and how did/does it or didn't it?

AK oh, ya!

Beepster


Well anything can be broken right down into it's elements even if it takes using wave spectrum analyzers and the like but the point was more about the notes between the notes that no machine could duplicate on it's own. For the jury I present exhibit B... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5dpp2iCRwM

You mean like "blue-notes"? I'm not arguing that DAWs come close to the real deal, but I don't think you can argue that there isn't feeling when those same sounds come from a box.


The thing is though, what's emotion?


Some ear players take this the wrong way and convey this so it comes across as showing-off. (This is the audience's thought - not mine) You want to stay away from that.


To veer into the classical realm, I've heard period pieces where it's only piano, but what I'm hearing isn't simple. However, those pieces are considered great by many, but who says they wrote or played with or without emotion? If it shows up in a song somewhere than the composer obvious had it.


Now, compare it to the DAW age: too many get hung up on this very fact. "I need to get my dynamics/expression, etc. correct for this piece to be "alive." This I don't disagree with, but so many other things go unnoticed.


The sounds used, the rhythm, the melodic and harmonic structure. Isn't that part of a song's life (and rhythm =/= just a drumbeat). All of these things help to shape the life of a piece, but it isn't dead even if it never touches an actual performer. (From head to instrument to performer)


Is a painting more real because it was done with a paintbrush on canvas vs. a spray can on asphalt or concrete? No, it is not. At the end of the day, it's still art, isn't it?


The person on the street put as much effort and emotion into his/her creation as did the traditional artist. No better no worse (matter of opinion), but both put effort into it.


It's this misconception that ear players always throw everything out the window and theorists are by the "manuscript" (pardon the pun)

About emotion though. No physical instrument is needed to show it. What's the music doing and how is it doing it? That should be the emotion! That's akin to a live player who doesn't even think about saying the first lyric in a song. The music should set the mood while the lyrics enhance it. Of course, you then get into contrasting ideas from both parts which makes songs all the better.

Breakup lyrics sung to Let's Get Together music. What do you think this song will be like?

Music is all about ideas and why not since its all in the creativity. What emotion do you want to convey? Okay. Well, how am I gonna write this to convey it? Also, while it's be nice to the author intentions were revealed to the audience, that takes the fun out of conjuring up what they think may be right themselves because even if you have one main ideas, the 99 others they come up with may fit, too. 

I brought this up in a similar thread, but Tchaikovsky's "Waltz of the Flowers." I thought that piece was happy because I knew what was happening musically. Yes, it has some sad moments and the music makes this clear.  However, someone had said that maybe there was always a sadness to it - despite sounding so happy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26YEuktTNCw

He probably just wrote with a feather pen and paper and yes musicians are playing his piece, but you can feel his emotion regardless. 

My arrangement comes from a DAW (hopefully, getting to live musicians), but it's not any more or less void of emotion.

I didn't start the derailment. Don't put this on me. I do hope the OP has found the replies (revelant to the topic) somewhat helpful.

^ So, I did help, eh? And I supposed you were tired then. Happens to all of us.

The verse is in E major, but he made the IV chord, (normally an A major chord), into a minor chord (A minor).  It's an extremely common device.  

Note that the melody that he sings on the A minor chord, you could indeed play the IV major chord (A major).  You could also try some other "A chords as well; A7, A7sus4, A sus4.  The technique is called "modal interchange".  Other substitute chords you can try in that spot are D7, F#mi7b5, F major7, D minor9, Bb maj7b5 (those were worked out through the overtone series...check out my buddy Helmholtz). The bridge is a ii-V-I progression in the key of G major (Ami-D7-G).  Eventually he throws in the E7 chord, which is a fifth above the following chord which starts the verse (A minor); so he's set up a "secondary dominant" into the Ami chord, a type of V7-i progression.