Atta boy Pedro.

craigb
From a friend of mine:
Some simple rules for functional harmony:
...

I wanted to get into that, since the history of western music, is intrinsically tied to the christian religion and its rise through out Europe and they dominated and selected the things they liked and did not like. Like literature and art, a lot of folks were hidden and done away with because of the religion.
 
It would make an impossible topic to go through, and only tell us how industrialized we have become for the last 1500 years, to the point that we have to find out from someone else that something is "good", because we have no centering point to define it otherwise! At that point, most people default to "ideas" and "concepts" in these boards and then do not realize how much of it all we really don't know! Or are subliminally doing/copying because that is the way "things are done".

sharke
For instance, a character in the movie might experience a moment of intense loss, and the music reflects this. But really, that same piece of music could probably embellish a scene which portrayed intense longing just as well. 
...

 
Careful. Bernard Herrmann can blow this out of the water. You don't need to see the movies to love his music, and you can always check all the science fiction stuff he did on CD. Start with "Jason and the Argonauts".
 
Vangelis is in the same boat. So is Riuychi Sakamoto. 

 

I'm English.
 
52% of our days are overcast.
 
This imbues us with a wistful melancholy, and makes us prone to binge-drinking and casual violence.
 
On the plus side, we do have Nectar Points.
 
I try and get all that across in my instrumentals.

Go back to where I posted some info from a friend.  Different keys/modes can illicit different emotions.  
 
For example, here's "Don't Worry, Be Happy" redone in a minor key as "Be Worry, Don't Happy."  Completely changes the emotion of the song doesn't it?
 

This group does a bunch of covers changing sad to happy and vice-versa.  Excellent examples.
 

 

MoshkiaeIf you have these "in your head" you will remember them forever, and you have time to learn an instrument or two so you can figure out how to bring these down from your head! My guess is that you do NOT have the musical ability, and you are hoping that something can be done to get around it, because you do not have the patience to study an instrument and learn its subtleties.

I actually have all the patience and will necessary to learn all that is needed to translate what's in my head.  When I was talking about music psychology, I wasn't looking for another way out--I was just looking for an added addition that would be ideal for really helping me out.  But, of course, it doesn't exist.
 
Now in terms of translating what I hear in my head, there is also another major problem which is that when I do attempt in creating the notes, I cannot even tell if the notes I've created match with what's in my head as I do not have a means of direct comparison between the notes in my head and the notes I've created.  Therefore, I cannot tell if the song I created has the same feel as the one in my head or if it's a completely different song with a completely different feel.  Therefore, I would have to rely on a trial and error process in which I present the song I've created to the audience and see if they agree that it portrays the feelings that I've described (the feelings I've described for the real song in my head).
 
If they don't agree, then I would go through the same process over again.  But even if they did agree, that still doesn't tell me if I have successfully managed to make a perfect replication of the real song in my head or if it's still a completely different song (but with a similar emotion).  Since I do not have a means of direct comparison as I just stated, would this mean I would never be able to find out the answer?
 
I, again, understand that everyone feels differently about music.  But there are, in fact, songs that do successfully portray emotion across to the audience.  For example, a song that is epic (a song with an epic singing choir such as a song in a movie trailer) is something that practically everyone will interpret as epic.  This generalized feeling of epic may be different for everyone, but the song's generalized feeling of epic has successfully gotten through to the audience.
 
This is the same thing for the songs in my head.  I completely feel that the songs in my head have generalized feelings to them that will get through to the audience and that how I feel about these songs in my head are not just my own interpretations.  But again, even if people agree with a certain song I've made in how I've described how it should feel, that still does not tell me if I have successfully managed to make a perfect replication of the real song in my head or if it's still a completely different song (but with a similar emotion).  I wish to make a perfect replication of the songs in my head (if possible.  If not possible, then I wish to get as close to this goal as possible).
 

MoshkiaeI do the same thing in writing. WITH ONE EXCEPTION. I do not "tell" my characters where to go and what to do, and sometimes the story goes in its own way, and it is just fine as it is. I'm not a mental person, in the sense that it all has to be done EXACTLY like it is in my mind. The chances, that you will succeed and be able to get that done, is ridiculously and stupidly low and almost impossible.

But weren't famous composers such as Mozart and Beethoven successful at doing this?  Considering how complex and well-crafted their songs are, if they are perfect replicas of what they heard in their heads, then these composers were obviously VERY successful at replicating what they heard in their heads into real life.  Of course, it took them a lot of musical training in order to do so.  But considering that my songs in my head are not extremely complicated, then with training as well, wouldn't I also be able to make perfect replications of songs I hear in my head?
 
Also, I wish to make songs exactly as I hear them in my head because I feel that songs I create in my head are perfect and that if I were to not make them how I hear them in my head and instead "just let everything go on its own," then it won't be nearly as good.  If it does turn out to be just as good (or even better), then these would be very rare moments.  I feel that the songs I create in my head are perfect because they were created with pure emotion (I have channeled my emotions into making them).  Therefore, if I were to go about a means of creating music that is not so accurate in terms of channeling emotion (such as experimenting and playing around), then it won't turn out nearly as good.  For me, creating songs in my head is the best way of composing good music.
 
 

slartabartfast
"And when you have no knowledge and no explanation of how to use that knowledge, you cannot achieve anything."
 
You have a very limited view of knowledge. And you confuse explanation with understanding. This is not just a music thing, if you believe what you have said, you are deeply confused about life.
 
We might think that music expresses emotion because of a cognitive link with language, and that is true. But one can also experience emotion from an entirely language free stimulus. A painting can evoke a strong emotion, and it has very little at all to do with color theory or perspective. And the emotive language of poetry does not derive from the rules of grammar, rhyme or meter.
 
If you do not feel any emotional response to music (some people do not) then you are at a great disadvantage. If you do, then you have all of the knowledge you need to evaluate your own music, and if you can evaluate it you can shape it. Music psychology is an interesting study, but again you are confusing an explanatory model with the thing itself. You can have a PhD in the psychology of love, but it is neither necessary nor particularly helpful if you are falling in love. The emotional ear is what you need to listen to, and practice listening to your feelings is helpful, but you do not need perfect pitch.

Very well said.

Moshkiae
Hi,
(long and detailed)
NOTE: This might be way too far, and thought of as not helpful. Essentially, an artist has to decide if he/she is going to be an artist or a copy of something else. END OF STORY!
 
If, otherwise, then press on. If you study the lives and history of the artists, in any discipline, you will learn quickly that many of them fought way too hard to be able to do what they did ... and this is something that you have to define for yourself.
 

When it comes to music, emotion and getting that emotion across to the audience is the most important thing to me...

 
This is good to a point. By the time you catch Iggy Pop and others, who are basically insane on stage, it makes you wonder where emotion ends and insanity starts. Then you can hear a Peter Hammill crying and screaming in his material and you ask yourself ... if he is really hurt ... and he is ... that's the way he does it, though he is older now.
 
There is a good side to that and a bad side to that. The good side, is that (usually) that person is a fairly good student of expression, or they are not capable of doing any of this. However, there is a more recent development of things, in the "metal", progressive and otherwise area, where I seriously think that this is about the cookie factory and not the ability or the talent behind it.
 

...  I feel that if practically no one interprets any music I create the way I do and it just comes out as something that is either completely different to anyone else (has a different feel to everyone else than what I feel from it), and/or has no emotion to anyone else but me, then I will be all alone with my own interpretations.

 
YOU ARE all alone with your interpretation!
 
I DO NOT see the same thing that you do, and vice versa!
 
See?
 
And you, or me, expecting the audience to understand and "know" what you are doing and thinking, is pretentious and will get you thrown out a few times before you find out that in the end, this is called "the fourth wall", and that is something that you have to learn to let go.
 
Concentrate on your work! Forget what is outside the wall, because if you don't you will LOSE everything that you want to do, and I guarantee you that you will quit!
 

... music theory just involves you learning about scales, note lengths, etc. and does explain the emotional (psychological aspects) of music to a certain degree. But it does not fully explain the psychological aspects. ...

 
The "idea", which no teacher I have ever met tells you, is that you can bend, shape, turn, those scales, notes and other details to express yourself better.
 
But this is not "simple", and should NEVER be put into a generic bullmerde type of thing like major is happy and minor is sad, which Bach showed is not true at all! It is an illusion that has a tendency to make you conform to something that is not there ... that you are supposed to feel this, when in fact you got an erection instead! It's important you see that rather neanderthal way of defining music is for the dogs, cats and monkees of the world, not you or I!
 
But remember that DAW's are making this harder to define, by using sound effects instead of "expression". The effects themselves become an expression because it might give you a feeling that you can not define or understand.
 
In general, this confuses the issue a lot more than it helps, specially if the music is a bunch of confusion anyway, and no one does anything except play around with another toy! Which is supposed to define something for you?
 
Right!
 

... This is obviously where music psychology would come in handy. It would be a book/teaching that explains the psychology behind knowing what combinations of notes/rests/instruments to use, etc. in order to portray the exact feeling that you want. ...

 
Incorrect. (In my book!)
 
This is where you want to define yourself and your expression better!
 
You need to get off pop/classical/anything music to do this, because the best expression is not on the air/tv, and it looks like it is buried and hidden and occult (old day's expression!), but it is not. It's out there, but because it is so individualistic, most people, tend to stay away from it, because they get somewhat scared that someone takes things this far! AND they can't, for whatever reason!
 
When you come to grips with those expressions, it will take a little time, but you can bring out yours. You might already have it, but because you are comparing things so much to scales, notes and professors, there is no way that you will EVER find yourself in there. Because it is in YOU, not them!
 
Remember that!
 

... It would be interesting to know if my musical interpretations are illogical and false and don't follow any given musical logic according to music theory and music psychology ...

 
It is (All), way too subjective to be discussed, and things like this tend to come off a bit like ... therapy ... because you will find way too many moments where you think/feel that you have to look in the mirror again and figure out things again.
 
It's not, EVER, about figuring out anything.
 
Take a hint from your dreams ... and how wild and off kilter they can be, and that should give you a hint. However, society thinks that it is all about "control" of those "primitive" ideas, and this is where the majority of "emotion" and the details that you are looking for reside. NOT, necessarily, in your ideas! For it to be effective, it has to come from the soul. If you just want pop music, then any words will do and no one will give a damn about it's meaning but they will walk around like a zombie! And make sure you pay your $100 bux to go see your favorite star!
 
Again, this is about "you", not music. When you arrive at that conclusion, the rest will be a piece of cake, and you will enjoy it, too!
 
Hope this helps ... I had more to say, but I had to trim it down as it was already way too long.

Excellent post!

I've got that course.  Both actually (Perfect Pitch and Relative Pitch).  Someday I may actually finish them! 

Mozart Link
Expressing yourself and communicating is your personality.  So to me, composing music (expressing and communicating emotion) is a superior personality.  And plus, I just really want to share the music I hear in my head.

I see no separation, no fractured self. It's all integrated. I see no superior or inferior. It's just a vibration when I actually stop the judgment and evaluation of self.
That suspension of judgment is essential to me getting anything done that is satisfying.

Everything you've experienced and learned in life is "in your head".
 
In the conscious state of mind much of that information is not thought about but it's there.
 
As a musician one creates from their experience and knowledge of music but the issue of
awareness from the conscious and subconscious state of mind is still there.
 
IMO the conscious state of mind can and does get in the way of creating music to a very large degree.
It's when a musician "draws" not only from the conscious but doesn't let it "get in the way" of letting
them create from the "well" of feelings and information about music they may have.
 
If that makes sense- then the musicians abilities to create and express the music they may hear in their
head may happen without "thinking" getting the way and it also explains why one that can achieve that is
all the better having been exposed to music training.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Hi,
 

I actually have all the patience and will necessary to learn all that is needed to translate what's in my head.  When I was talking about music psychology, I wasn't looking for another way out--I was just looking for an added addition that would be ideal for really helping me out.  But, of course, it doesn't exist.

 
It could exist. I never doubted it. The problem is that I hear things in my dreams that are likely to be instruments that will be created and played 200 years from now, if a synthesizer effect does not come up with the sound before then!
Translating what is in your head, FOR ME, is not hard, but the more you do the better it feels and the strogner it gets, until one day you put together a set of notes, lines, or words, that clicks big time. When this comes is not an issue, but if it comes really early, it is harder to learn backwards in my experience.
 

Now in terms of translating what I hear in my head, there is also another major problem which is that when I do attempt in creating the notes, I cannot even tell if the notes I've created match with what's in my head as I do not have a means of direct comparison between the notes in my head and the notes I've created....

 
I don't think this is as much about the "note" (or chord) as it is the context that it is placed in, and the notes/chords around it. This has been my experience in writing, and the main reason why I make sure I keep the movie going and write as fast as possible and worry about little details later. One interruption has the unffortunate effect of stopping it all completely, or simply change the course of events.
 
But, as is the case in poetry with "pregnant pauses", or what I call "thinking pauses", I tend to space things out, but some folks think that my use of ... (dotdotdot) is stupid and does not help their reading and comprehension. But it is the only thing I know to use at that moment ... basically we need to take a deep breath ... a sort of Pinter pause without the smoke rings, you could say!
 

Therefore, I cannot tell if the song I created has the same feel as the one in my head or if it's a completely different song with a completely different feel.

 
In my experience, this means there was an interruption in the process that broke the stream of consciousness.
 

Therefore, I would have to rely on a trial and error process in which I present the song I've created to the audience and see if they agree that it portrays the feelings that I've described (the feelings I've described for the real song in my head).

 
I don't. I go back to the "source", and try to define it better. The only issue/problem here is that these inner seconds can be VERY fleeting and it is too late for you to go back and try to make them come alive again. Usually, they only have one optimum time span for it to happen, and when the thinking mind gets involved, some of it loses its freshness and what appealed to you in the first place!
 
I go back to the "source" and "moment" if I can. If not, that is not exactly a moment that is ready to "come down the stairs" as I like to say. If not, then we start somewhere else and it is a new experience.
 

I, again, understand that everyone feels differently about music.  But there are, in fact, songs that do successfully portray emotion across to the audience.

 
I would suggest that you not compare what you are trying to learn to anyone else. It's good to "know" and "appreciate" these emotions when you find and see them, but comparing yourself to them is too confusing and will stop/destroy your ability to define your own.
 
It's a similar thing in spiritual exercises like meditation, which I would suggest to you to help define/work the inner vision better, when you finally get to the point where you can see and feel the light and there is a massive moment in there ... do you just want to observe it, or do you want to try it and be "in it". Most folks are too self-conscious to try something this difficult and deep. The funny thing is that it is one of the finest experiences, that teaches you so much more about artistry than any word ever will in your life.
 
Once "inside", you no longer need explanations and definitions. And your hands accidentally find the right notes, and you will surprise yourself.
 

... I completely feel that the songs in my head have generalized feelings to them that will get through to the audience and that how I feel about these songs in my head are not just my own interpretations. 

 
I try not to judge whether Mick Jaeger or Madonna or Rhianna are true with their words or not. ANYONE's expression is anyone's expression and that's that. I tend to not spend time in a lot of this, because there is too much out there, that can distort the whole thing badly.
 
The only thing that comes to my mind is that I can see some nifty colors when I hear some folks sing, or play. In other cases, there is no "color" for me, and I tend to think that their playing is way too mechanical for it to flow, although there are some folks that absolutely magical with their mechanics. Guitarist Jon McGlothlen is one such excellent example. At this point things blur a bit, but one has to appreciate the musicianship involved.
 

... But weren't famous composers such as Mozart and Beethoven successful at doing this?

 
I don't know, and sometimes I doubt it. I don't think that they had as much appreciation in their time as we do a lot of popular artists. Remember that there was no "media" to carry the music across the oceans, and most of it that did would be off a manuscript of some sort, as long as the Catholic Church in Europe did not get their hands on it.
The history of music, and any art, has been about people that CHANGED things, and did something different. It could/should be stated that they were capable of seeing something else and they learned how to translate their own vision into music. But we have to be careful with this ... as understanding the inner side of these things is not about "understanding" as it is about our own feelings and emotions, and that is way too subjective to put down as a "process", and we need to accept that we're all different.
 
Btw, I do not consider, progressive and experimental music as "songs". To me it is all MUSIC, and deserves the credit and consideration. There is far better rock music and jazz music these days, than there is contemporary classical music, that is not yet being accepted because we're stuck on old academic models.
 
The mind is not a "model". It is a person. And it does not fit a "mold".
 
So you either study your own abilities and forget the others, or you will end up confused in the semantics of it all. It does not mean, however, that these other folks can not be appreciated. There are a lot of very good folks out there, that do things in a very interesting way.