Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
music theory stupidly easy
I found this on YouTube, and it is a fun. no bs way to understanding music theory 
However there is no part two. does anyone know of a similar kind video that will explain how to build and what chords to use in chord progressions?
I feel completely lost on writing chord progressions.
Comments
Sorry, this video is garbage. What's presented here is just the most basic concepts of music theory that would be presented to a child learning it for the fist time in the most obnoxious way possible. None of the concepts are presented in a way that bring any new insights that would make learning any of these basic concepts easier compared to how they have been traditionally taught. It's just the same old information presented in a more annoying way than usual.
Yeah, While I admit it is kind of obnoxious, my music theory hover right around a child's level.lol. Do you have any suggestions on writing chord progressions. I see a lot of artist not even think about the next chord, it is almost like they know some secret process to already know what chord comes next. What is this process? Or is it merely just memorizing what chords work together......I hope not because my memory sucks.
I avoid YouTube more and more these days because of stuff like this. I state here all the time how I love how the iOS music community and the technologies behind it is helping to democratize the music industry. More of us can make great sounding music on powerful technology than ever before. And the portability of iOS recording also helps the artist make music anywhere, anytime. It's a brave new world...
But those same tech advances have happened in the video realm. The power of 21st century computing makes it easy for anyone to edit and produce high quality video, and a lot of the content quality shows that ANYONE can do it, for better or worse.
One may say the same for music and audio production but I feel producing a good song is far more difficult than setting up an HD cam (now on most phones) and editing the video on easy to use editing environments. Press upload and wait, and anyone & anything can be rolling on screens both big and small.
So much of it is MTV jumpcut editing mixed with bad open license music, featuring smarmy, untalented, overearnest blowhards. It is so barf inducing I have to stick to searching for specific videos or topics. Browsing the suggested videos or most played charts is an "at your own risk" proposition circa 2016...
Largely depends on what type of music you are writing for. The thing there are certain types of chord progressions that work better in certain styles.
Where I would recommend starting is to learn C major and A minor. A minor is the minor relative to C major so both scales contain all the same chords. C maj, D min, E min, F maj, G maj, A min and B diminshed. This pattern is sometimes written I ii iii IV V vi, where the uppercase Roman numerals represent major chords and the lowercase represents the minor chords. For simplicities sake you can pretty much ignore the b chord though as it's rarely used (within c maj or a min that is) but the pattern will always be the same no matter what key you're in.
Every major or minor chord progression is just a transposition of these chords. That means you only need to know 6 chords to write just about any major or minor chord progression.
If the progression starts with C maj you are writing a major key progression, if it starts with A minor you are writing a minor key progression, but you can also get very good results without using C major or A minor at all. Something like Dmin-Fmaj-Gmaj for example.
There are no rules of course so I would recommend simply trying different combinations of these 6 chords and see how each feels. What creates a feel for a piece of music has a lot to do with how many major or minor chords you choose to include in your progression and how they flow from one to another. C maj, F maj, G maj for example will always have a very happy sound because it's all major chords. However you could try a progression like A min, C maj, F maj for an interesting contrast of a minor key that is weighted towards major chords. Once you realize you only need to work with 6 chords you'll see there aren't as many chord combinations as it might seem, the important thing is to pay attention to how the progression feels, because every chord feels different relative to every other chord, but again for simplicities sake usually chords that share notes often sound best together in a progression.
Also remember that it's not just what chords you play but how you play them, experiment with different rhythms, play the chords in 8th notes or long sustained whole notes depending on the kind of vibe you want to create. (More or faster notes means more energy which creates more urgency in the sound, it's the same as when a high hat pattern suddenly goes from 8ths to 16ths,)
Contrast is also important when writing melodies, a good melody usually uses mostly notes from the chords you're playing in the progression but throws in just the right note from somewhere else in the scale at a key moment to create interest.
Sometimes writing a chord progression is about knowing what you want to communicate and searching for the chords that match, other times it's just playing progressions until you find one that resonates with you. Once you do think about the emotional balance of the progression and try to create a melody that matches that emotional balance. Then you can try transposing that progression up or down until you find the key you like it best in.
^ excellently explained @Judochopjames
@eross for trying this out in praxis I can recommend a tableaux and palette for you https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/fiddlewax-pro/id905878913?mt=8&ls=1 free for higher education
Great post, but some misinformation here. The pattern will not always be the same no matter what key you're in. It will be the same, provided you're in a Major key. But it won't be the same if you're in a minor key. Taking the A minor key (and I'm talking natural minor here - you can exclude harmonic/melodic minor for now) from your example, the Aminor chord is your 1 chord. So, it's i, iidim, III, iv, v, VI VII. This pattern Judochopjames listed and the minor patter I listed will be the same for all major and natural minor keys. (say G Major/E Minor)
Try these chord progressions: I - V - I, I - IV - I, I -IV - V - I, I - ii - V - I, I - vi - ii - V - I. (or the minor equivalents) Those are pretty standard. The blues typically has 12 bars with only three chords, the I, IV and V. The IV, V and vii all strongly want to "resolve" to the I. Going from either of those chords to the I brings about a sense of resolution. Try playing these and listening. Now try a different chord to a I and it still feels resolved, but maybe not as much as a IV, V or vii. But truthfully all chords want to resolve to the I. Some just bring about some more suspense prior to resolving to the I. Sometimes, you want to mess with the listener though, so you go elsewhere from those chords and keep up the suspense. (and I'm using I and i interchangably in this paragraph and the rest of my post)
You can also substitute chords. Any given chord has two common tones with the chord two steps above or below it in the list Judochopjames made and the minor list I made. C Major, the I chord in the key of C Major consists of C, E and G. the iii chord in C Major (E minor) has E, G, and B while the vi chord (A minor) has A, C and E. The V chord in C Major, G Major has G, B and D notes. So, substitute the V chord for the iii in this case. Similar tones, but different feeling. Go with some of the standard progressions listed above and start substituting.
Once you've got that down, you can expand to sevenths, augmented, diminished, and sus chords and see how those chords make you feel compared to their triad counterparts.
You could try exploring the Hooktheory site - it has some useful tools and the anlaysis of chord progressions used in hit tunes can be illuminating.
I was just about to recommend Hooktheory. I certainly find it useful.
Wow, you are awesome! this is the stuff I really wanted to learn.
So if I learn Cmaj and Amin, that will get me a good start for most songs? and then I can just adjust transposition to match the key of the song? am I understanding correctly?
http://harmonytheory.soundprism.com/
thanks that's really helpful!
I love the support on this forum. Now I'm confident I will eventually learn music theory by taking everybodies tips here. awesome!
I've always hated "traditional" music theory -- seemed like a lot of hocus-pocus mumbo-jumbo, with rules that were less logical than English grammar and spelling. And in some ways, it is.
Things started to click for me when I looked at it from a physics perspective. Physical objects vibrate (and make sound), and there are naturally occuring harmonic frequencies. So if you have a string that vibrates at 440 times per second (making a sine wave), the physics of the whole thing will also add in some other frequencies -- 880 (an octave up), and lots of integer ratios like 2:3, 3:4, and so on. The magnitude of the other frequencies impacts the tone....
And this is where harmony comes in. The human ear is designed to pick up on the root frequency of a sound, and also the harmonics -- evolution is your friend, and hearing the frequencies around a sound will let you identify what's making that sound. For some combinations of frequencies, you'll go "yeah, that sounds good," and for others, "no, that sounds wrong."
Now we have our good friend J. S. Bach enter the scene. There's an infinite number of possible frequencies for a sine wave.... But if you narrow it down to just twelve in an octave, you get a set of frequencies cover a lot of really good combinations. The CDEFGAB white keys -- very nice sounding scale (at least to Western ears, that have been hearing that scale since Bach cooked it up). Pick every other key (CEG, DFA, EGB), and they make nice sounding groups -- your classic chords. Throw in some of the black keys, and you get some minor chords.
The traditional music theory stuff -- that's sort of a wrapper that gets put around the physics (and was made before they really had the physics figured out -- Bach just went with what he thought sounded good). Using only the notes from the scale -- it's sort of like using a limited set of colors, but it's a rich enough set that you can paint lots of interesting things, and small enough that you can describe them to someone else (and have them know what you mean).
The notation using the chromatic scale survives differences in tuning. Suppose my A is supposed to be at 440 hertz, and then I play an A followed by a B. If someone else has a differently tuned instrument (A for them is 441 hertz), if they play a B (also tuned differently), the ratio between the notes will stay the same -- and the general melody line holds together. It's pretty slick, actually.
I've got a free app that does frequency analysis (really really in need of an update...). You can play a sound, and see all the frequencies that are in things. Play chords in different keys, and there's some patterns that should jump out at you, and maybe have a light bulb turn on. It hasn't been updated in so long that I don't think it works with the current Audiobus.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/spectral-eye/id546934084?mt=8&ign-mpt=uo=4
Ultimately, you want to have chords and chord progressions, where the notes sound good together (or create tension when you want some tension). Hook Theory is an awesome site -- great for finding chord progressions that work, and you can take something you like, then tweak the chords around to make it your own.
I really with there was a +1 way of acknowledging great posts. There are some real gems in here, especially this last one from @SecretBaseDesign
agreed great post guys. very very helpful
He's a boffin. Only a boffin would casually write Bach just went with what he thought sounded good
I think it's a good start, but what I really think is important is to focus on the emotional content of sound. It's not something you'll find written about in music theory books but it's the real reason some chord progressions resonate more strongly than others. There's a reason minor chords register to our subconscious as "sad" and major chords as "happy" and it has much to do with what secret base design was getting into with sound frequencies.
In a major chord the frequencies of the notes are actually mathematically related to each other (To learn more about this look a book up called "On the Sensations of Tone" by Helmholtz) So because of this we subconsciously interpret the notes as being in harmony with one another. Because a minor chord has 1 note slightly removed from this perfect harmonic ratio we subconsciously interpret it as being sad because it's almost harmonic but not quite. It's as though our brains are recognizing that the frequencies are almost harmonic, but not quite and this yearning for harmonic resonance gets conflated with the emotion of sadness. When notes don't resontate with the root note we call this dissonance and we interpret various degrees of dissonance in different ways. It's the reason some horror themes can actually sound spooky or eerie for example.
The thing is I think there is a common misconception that there is some secret or magic chord progression that if you find it will equate to a hit song but that's just not the case. A chord progression in itself is just one piece of the puzzle. Everything from the melody played over top, to the rhythm, to the tempo, to the length of the notes and of course the instrument playing the progression will change how it feels and therefore can all alter the emotional context of the progression being played.
I don't think there's anything wrong with music theory as it's simply meant as a language based model for organizing sound, but I do think it leads many down the wrong path. Just as learning the English language will not teach you how to write a great novel, learning music theory will not teach you to write great music, nor do I think that was ever it's purpose. That's why so many of the greats never learned music theory, they simply play their instruments and search for the sounds that resonate with what they're feeling inside.
The difficulty I’ve always had with it all is that (I now realise) I simply don’t believe it. I don’t believe this notion that some combinations of frequencies can always predictably be “sad” and “happy” in every single person, as though there’s a mechanism. Music classes consisted of fighting and arguing at the teacher (equally, the religious indoctrination classes). I didn’t believe what they said, and they had no proof.
The “minor” chord has a single note out of place in an otherwise “happy” distribution of frequency intervals? Chords are in effect an additive synthesis equivalent of a single sound. Most chords seem to be played with equal volume level per note, but I think this should be varied so that the relative emphasis on each note can act as an additional modulation parameter.
Now, take a chord that is a four note chord, and vary the volumes of each constituent note each time the chord is repeatedly played to get a harmonically more interesting effect. If the chord were a “minor” or suicidally depressing chord to begin with, and the “uncomfortable interval” note were to be played successively quieter and quieter, so that it disappeared, leaving a three note chord behind that was not “minor” in that all the intervals were “comfortable”, you'd transition from a “minor” to a “major” chord. Along the way, there must have been some identifiable point where the listener didn’t feel like ending it all by jumping in front of a train, but became more accepting and docile and just let life happen to them, and further, as this “dissonant” “unwanted” “naughty” note became so inaudible as to be imperceptible, leaving behind only the remaining surrounding “major” chord, the listener would find themselves quite bemused, then intrigued, then elated and uplifted and in the end totally at peace with all around and magnificently inspired.
What I want to know is where exactly that boundary is, and what is occurring internally at that pivotal point, and is it the same in all human beings living in all ages in history? Birds too? Whales? What’s the mechanism?
+1 for this. (Western) music theory is a batch of rules that encourage playing notes where the frequencies mesh, it encourages 4/4 rhythms, and a bunch of stuff like that. But what makes sense in the language is because we speak the language.
The music you hear in Asia, Africa, native populations of many countries.... sounds very different from the "Western" Bach-influenced kind. The tones, melody, rhythm -- they come from a different set of traditions, and are interpreted differently.
The real magic of making great music is not just following the rules, but in finding innovative ways to break them. Music theory will give a framework to build from --- go with a I iv V chord progression, or something like that -- and then when you go off-script, throw in notes that are not expected -- that will catch the listeners attention.
IMO, the only way to write good music is to write a lot. Experiment with things. Most of what gets written will be awful. But occasionally, you'll stumble onto something that sounds good to you. And starting with a music-theory-based framework may keep you stumbling in the neighborhood of something that could be good. Dolly Parton writes a song a day, and has done so for decades. Andy Partridge churns out tons of songs. Dylan writes a lot. They keep cranking away, and every so often, something brilliant appears at the end of their pens. Gladwell has argued that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become great at something -- and that makes sense to me. So, write songs, write more songs, and then write some more after that, and after a while, it'll get good.
This iPad app has always been a handy reference for me for choosing chords and their conveniently harmonious neighbours. Is unfortunately abandonware now, but still works on my iPad Air2. Hope you find it as helpful as I have.
Harmonizer by Music Animation Machine
https://appsto.re/gb/FIfEx.i
There are a couple of ways to approach this. First off, play something like a CMaj7 chord, followed by a CMin7 chord and notice the difference in the emotion feel of the change. Then vice versa. Going from a major chord to the same chord in minor usually evokes a darkening or more sombering feeling, and vice versa - the major chord is brightening.
You mention taking a 4-note chord and slowly playing the minor note softer until it becomes a "happy" chord. But, the 3rd and 7th notes in a 4-note chord, assuming you're not doubling up on a note are what defines major or minor. (let's not factor in sixth chords here, although those would be one example where your approach would work) Both the third and sevenths are minor intervals for minor seventh chords, so playing a minor third and a major seventh isn't technically a minor chord any longer, just as a dominant chord has a minor seventh and major third interval. Point being, it's really not possible to take a true minor chord in a 4-note scenario, other than the sixth and remove or play softer the one minor note because multiple notes define the minor-ness of the chord.
Now, if you double up on a note in the triad such as the root or fifth, you have an imbalance in frequencies, so that point where the sound loses its minor-ness will be affected by that doubling of of frequencies.
There's also the fact that different people heard different things. Some hear certain frequencies better. Some hear higher frequencies better, etc. So that point where the minor chord loses it's minor feeling will be dependent on the person, their hearing and the notes being played in the chord.
Finally, there's the context of the music. My jazz piano teacher has always played these dissonant chords and asked what I thought. At first, I would cringe at many of them. After time, I've come to appreciate some of them. But in all scenarios, I find the dissonance less offending in the context of a piece. If one is playing all sorts of dissonant chords, then that particular chord I hated doesn't sound as bad. If we went from straight major/minor to some dissonant chords, it sounded far worse. Essentially,the effect of a minor chord on a listener will be dependent on the context of the chord progression around it. When I'm trial running chords for a progression, I play the whole progression, not just the previous chord. Because the whole progression tells the story, not just the previous chord.
There's a book whose title escapes me, but it's called Music and the Effects on the Brain or something along those lines. I think you might find some of your answers there, or at least it seems like it might be an interesting read for you.
I came in the music theory door assbackwards: the piano maker that built the spinet at my house built music theory into the instrument (didn't know this at the time, very interesting to me, much later).
I just played until it was pleasing, then I found out that the frankly incredible stuff happening with that instrument and my hands ears eyes "mind" "heart" could be notated by whoever would do such a thing. (Piano lessons begin age 10) I knew right away that not all of what was happening when I played could ever be written down. But! stuff I liked to listen too had been notated, maybe I could learn songs that gave me chills, Hall of the Mountain Grill, or Benny and the Jets.
Found out I didn't really want to play other people's music as much as I thought (Piano lessons end age 10)
Found out much later that music theory could be a resource for making up new stuff, and for "understanding" stuff that gave me chills, and maybe I could use theory to homage that shit into my shit someplace.
I like to remember that language (another form I like to play in) existed 10000+ years before anyone tried writing it down, and in the case of English it then took a few hundred years of print before someone locked down a few fpellingf
What would be a good thing is to be introduced to this sort of thing historically. At the moment it's all far too much to take in, when absolutely none of it forms a workable unambiguous model, with too much overlapping terminology and more assumptions than science.
When I was being taught music, I now think I would have liked to have been shown how music existed back in the day. I mean, the day when music was first invented. There is argument that we evolved words and language from sounds and whistles and clicks we originally made as a social networking thing. But prior to language, we probably hummed and whistled and beatboxed music with each other. It would be good to have see what the first formal notations were. Moving forward, what diversity evolved across the world as humans radiated? How did people talk about music when nobody was literate? Presumably rhythm was more important to notate than melody or backing? What words and concepts were accepted? At the point when things could be imprinted and looked at later by someone else, what constituted the accepted currency of symbols? How did these come to be? If all our scales and notes etc have Greek names, what was prior to that? Much more prior than that?
I would like to have been introduced to the subject at a point when the subject evolution itself was at its simplest, and take it forward from there. I wouldn't feel so left out as though everyone else is in on something I'm not.
To a certain extent you're right, there's no way to prove what's happening within any individual person when they hear a particular combination of frequencies. At that point you're delving into the purely subjective, much like the saying beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
What we do know however is exactly what's happening mathematically with given frequencies in different chords. We know that specific ratios create consonance while other ratios create dissonance.
The idea of a major chord being "happy" and a minor chord being "sad" is more or less a generalization than anything. There is nothing inherently "happy" about a major chord, it's just some notes resonating at different frequencies, but the resonance of the frequencies are more harmonic than those of a minor chord and what we internalize is the resonance of those frequencies. When we deviate from harmony we create dissonance and we subconsciously crave resolution back to harmony, and this is why the organization of sound (music) is able to move us emotionally. While we can't always know exactly what's happening inside any individual, we do know that some songs will universally be interpreted as sad songs and that will occur across language and culture barriers.
The important thing to understand is that it's not anything inherent in the sound itself, it's human beings who project emotional experiences onto the sound, and in that sense it does have the capacity to be subjective, and different cultures project different interpretations onto various manifestations of sound. For our purposes though, we are usually making western music for western audiences, so our concerns are how have western audiences historically interpreted different manifestations of sound.
I'd recommend David Byrnes "How Music Works" if you're interested in learning more about cultural and historical interpretations of music. The book mostly delves into how the environment music is performed in shapes the sound but he presents a lot of interesting historical information.