Meter/Key View: No Minor Keys?

Bash von Gitfiddle
The "relative" minor key you refer to is also know as the Aeolian mode which is one of the modes of the Ionian Scale.
 
There are 5 other "relative modes", all of which have powerful uses but share a key signature. 
 
So, where will your list stop? Will each of the twelve Ionian Scale listings be accompanied by all seven well known modes for a total of 84 choices as related to the 12 actual key signatures?
 
How about the rest of the *non-western* world and the other hundred or so scales out there being used by musicians? Some of the so called "exotic" scales do, and some do not, have key signatures.
 
Furthermore, the snap to scale tools in Piano Roll View can be handy without regard for the signature if the list of scales is comprehensive enough to recognize the variety of subdivisions that exist.
 
 

soens
Fortunately 4 me there's much bigger fish to fry in the world.
 
Anyone for giant goldfish fillet?

 

slartabartfast
....On the other hand, it would seem to be a relatively trivial piece of programming to teach the robot to understand/display the natural minor key. 

msmcleod

slartabartfast
....On the other hand, it would seem to be a relatively trivial piece of programming to teach the robot to understand/display the natural minor key. 

I'd like to see that algorithm. I think it's far from trivial.

mkerl

michael diemer

mkerl
To be honest - I would highly recommend to learn the fundamentals of Music Theory. It doesn't hurt. Everything to gain, nothing to lose. No need to stumble around to finally express your ideas by accident. 
Jm2C
 
Cheers :)

I actually did work through a music theory book back in the 70's. I'm fairly literate that way. However, like many I am primarily an "ear" guy. I think you learn a lot more by listening than by plowing through textbooks.

 
Back in the days with my teachers I didn't just read textbooks. I had to play chords, scales, changes, modes and classical pieces with my instrument - so I listened and tried to memorize the sound. Some things are really theoretical, like i.e. Chord Substitutions, but as a whole, it's like learning the (musical) language . . . and later on, when I discovered my awakening interest for jazz . . . . well, I think you are lost without some reliable basics . . . 
 

All one really needs are the fundamentals: pitch, meter, keys, some basic harmony. Someone once said "Composers start composing first, and figure out how later." The essence of it is art, not theory. You only need theory to get it down correctly on paper.

 
I don't think so. You need theory like you need grammar for writing literature or poetry - but you need to go beyond the theory to create art. There is a saying: "Learn your chords and scales and all that, then forget about it and just play" (C.Parker) That doesn't mean, that this technical stuff is useless, but you got to reach a point of "automation", when you don't have to think about technic anymore. You just know it. You have it in your fingers and ears.
And at that point of learning / knowing . . . . 

And rules especially are to be avoided. When asked what rules he followed, Debussy replied "My own." He was violating all kinds of crap, like parallel fifths, using exotic scales, etc. And he changed music forever.
 
Edit: Debussy actually said something like "Whatever please me." Which is exactly what Duke Ellington said: If it sounds good, it is good.

. . . . . one is able to break rules to create something new. But at first Debussy as well as Ellington had to learn the rules before they broke them. 
 
However, when you are happy with your way of playing / composing, great. Who am I to judge? Different strokes for different folks.
 
But I doubt this Key signature thing to be really useful. Harmonics are complex, and relative minor is such a small aspect, maybe it could hamper complex composing / improvising when you focus on that alone. Chord Track  (S1, Cubase) analyses vertical harmonics, not horizontal. 
Meanwhile, have fun :) 
 
Cheers :) 
 
BTW: Sorry for my english, I'm still trying. As I do with music  . . . ;)

michael diemer

mkerl

michael diemer

mkerl
To be honest - I would highly recommend to learn the fundamentals of Music Theory. It doesn't hurt. Everything to gain, nothing to lose. No need to stumble around to finally express your ideas by accident. 
Jm2C
 
Cheers :)

I actually did work through a music theory book back in the 70's. I'm fairly literate that way. However, like many I am primarily an "ear" guy. I think you learn a lot more by listening than by plowing through textbooks.

 
Back in the days with my teachers I didn't just read textbooks. I had to play chords, scales, changes, modes and classical pieces with my instrument - so I listened and tried to memorize the sound. Some things are really theoretical, like i.e. Chord Substitutions, but as a whole, it's like learning the (musical) language . . . and later on, when I discovered my awakening interest for jazz . . . . well, I think you are lost without some reliable basics . . . 
 

All one really needs are the fundamentals: pitch, meter, keys, some basic harmony. Someone once said "Composers start composing first, and figure out how later." The essence of it is art, not theory. You only need theory to get it down correctly on paper.

 
I don't think so. You need theory like you need grammar for writing literature or poetry - but you need to go beyond the theory to create art. There is a saying: "Learn your chords and scales and all that, then forget about it and just play" (C.Parker) That doesn't mean, that this technical stuff is useless, but you got to reach a point of "automation", when you don't have to think about technic anymore. You just know it. You have it in your fingers and ears.
And at that point of learning / knowing . . . . 

And rules especially are to be avoided. When asked what rules he followed, Debussy replied "My own." He was violating all kinds of crap, like parallel fifths, using exotic scales, etc. And he changed music forever.
 
Edit: Debussy actually said something like "Whatever please me." Which is exactly what Duke Ellington said: If it sounds good, it is good.

. . . . . one is able to break rules to create something new. But at first Debussy as well as Ellington had to learn the rules before they broke them. 
 
However, when you are happy with your way of playing / composing, great. Who am I to judge? Different strokes for different folks.
 
But I doubt this Key signature thing to be really useful. Harmonics are complex, and relative minor is such a small aspect, maybe it could hamper complex composing / improvising when you focus on that alone. Chord Track  (S1, Cubase) analyses vertical harmonics, not horizontal. 
Meanwhile, have fun :) 
 
Cheers :) 
 
BTW: Sorry for my english, I'm still trying. As I do with music  . . . ;)

Your English is no problem, and you're way ahead of me, who am a typical American one-tongue-er (if that sentence makes any sense).
 

 
I should point out here that I am a hobbyisit. Anyone priming for a serious professional career as a composer (perhaps a dubious undertaking, unless you have connections in the film world - like, your last name is Newman), should learn as much as they can. As a hobbysit I have the luxury of learning as much as I need, to do what I want to do. Sometimes I wonder what it what have been like if I had gone to music school instead of pursuing a different career. But knowing me, I probably would have left as soon as someone tried to tell me how to write my music.

 
There are too many highly-trained composers whose music sounds like, well, highly-trained composers.