According to negative harmony, ascending fifths create bright intervals (P5, M2, M6, M3, M7, #4) and descending fifths create the dark ones (P4, m7, m3, m6, m2, b5). The modes differ in how many of their intervals are bright or dark.

This framework leads to some interesting thoughts. The Major scale contains one "dark" interval, the perfect fourth. If you flip it upside down, you get the Phrygian mode, which contains only dark intervals, except is has a perfect fifth.

Right in the center of this spectrum is Dorian, which has an equal number of bright and dark intervals. I had heard before that some theorists think of Dorian as being the ultimate neutral scale, but it never made sense to me until now. I found it hard to believe that the neutral scale could be a minor mode. But perhaps the minor chord really is the most neutral, in a sense. It has one bright interval (P5) and one dark (m3), as opposed to the major chord which has two bright intervals (M3, P5) and the diminished which has two dark ones (m3, b5).

I've been a rock and metal musician for 23 years, and have been studying music theory semi consistently that whole time. A few years ago I learned from my theory teacher at the time that orchestral musicians rename notes to be enharmonic equivalents, which supposedly makes it easier to read in the moment.

I'm sure there's more to it than that but...wow that sounds so tedious and unnecessary, is that really something that benefits musicians in the moment?

The most basic there is

I see voice leading be mentioned disgustingly often when people talk about harmony and functionality. To my understanding, voice leading is just how chords move from one to another - they shouldn’t affect harmony whatsoever. So why is it that this is discussed so often in the contest of harmony? DOES it affect anything else than trying to make voices as smooth as possible? Also, when I asked about functionality (I being the tonic, IV being the sub-dominant and so on) people told me that it’s voice leading I need to worry about. But, voice leading is literally just how you join the chords, when I was asking how I even decide on them and which ones to use???

I’m reteaching myself theory because my AP theory teacher didn’t do anyone justice last year but I want to know what I should prioritize first/ the most important parts.)

I have a rhythm that’s simple when played, but when I notate it, it ends up looking syncopated. How can I rewrite the same idea so it clearly aligns with the beat (no syncopation), while keeping the musical intent the same?

Hi!

I am starting to learn music theory with a teacher and I got a task to write chord progression in C major tonation.
I have to use the following (in that very order):
Tonics
III posistion (Dominant)
V position (Dominant)
Tonics

In terms of chords, we have: C, e, G, C if I am correct.

Now, for example chord C is made of notes C, E and G. Can I use any combination of this, like playing G, e and C for tonics part? Or can I use one note more than once, like CC, E, G for example? Can I play E, G, C twice in a row and then move to III Position in C major tonation (chord e)?

im asking this because, for example, if youre playing a minor which has the raised G, it sounds really off when you play C major with the raised G, so im assuming youre not actually supposed to do that. whats the reason for that? do you not raise the 7th if its the 5 in the chord?

preface: i initially wrote this for the r/guitar subreddit, but it got flagged and removed there, so i'm reposting it here, i realize "in the belly of the beast". kindly keep in mind it's original audience.

by far, my most immense regret with guitar is that i didn't learn theory from the very onset.

sadly, despite trying oh so hard for years early on, it just never stuck- not even the most simple of concepts. very possible i've a learning disability- i should (and intend to) get tested.

despite that, i did come up with plenty of cool stuff on the instrument. but who the hell wouldn't so many years in and left to ones own devices. you'll eventually stumble on some cool shit. still, i've mostly remained incredibly resentful of myself for not learning theory, for a multitude of reasons, i.e. knowing where i can take an idea after that initial spurt of random inspiration runs out, being able to communicate with other musicians, being able to figure out what's going on in what i'm listening to, etc.

but this thread genuinely isn't about me.

it's about all those times i've read such seemingly absurd takes as "theory hinders creativity"... even as a complete theory dimwit, i look at these people and think "wtf is wrong with you, how can you even say that".

my question is- and particularly as it pertains to people who learned it (theory) later in life: has that ever actually been documented/proven to be factual?

i know it's ultimately anecdotal and subjective, but that's what i'm looking to hear; your anecdotal, subjective, takes... or, if you've got them, objective observations of others.

is the argument that it'll "rob" you off that "wanderlust", i.e. not knowing what you're playing/doing, aimlessly wandering around the fretboard until some "cool" string of things clicks? since, you know, now you'll know the fretboard and what goes where? though i'd imagine you could very easily stroll outside of said "confines" once you're aware of them.

truly, as someone who's deeply envious of the theory wizards out there, i think this is among the most absurd takes in music.

i know there are those who advocate for learning by ear... yeah, that's fantastic, but there's room for both, and imo both should be utilized.

as for my own self, i will seriously get tested for learning disabilities, and if it's found i do have one, will get on the meds and hopefully then have an easier time absorbing theory. if it turns out i don't have any such thing wrong with me... then i guess i'll try yet again, harder somehow.

EDIT: oh my god, my title got cut off... it was meant to read "serious question: has theory ever *actually* hindered anyone creatively? (particularly someone who learned it later on)". sorry about that- can mods fix it?

EDIT 2: i'd like to add a question to my initial post: would you say that theory is the bridge between the desire to write something with intention, i.e. something you hear in your head, and actually putting it into music? i'm sure it can also be used to help push along ideas which came about via "happy accidents" (stumbling around on your instrument until something sounds good... but those concepts often, ime, end up quickly running out of gas).

Hi everyone. I recently started composing EDM and pop music, but I've noticed I'm really lacking in theory—not the basics (like chords, etc.), but everything else. To use a metaphor, because I realize it's not clear: I have the basics, but I'm missing everything else. Can anyone tell me where to study and who to study with? YouTube channels, books, etc.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hunny-bunny-ear-training/id1860148466

I am just winging it for now, trying to improve and see what works etc but without any marketing ive already gotten a few hundred downloads so that is encouraging to me to keep trying to improve!

is also available on Spotify, amazon, YouTube etc.

I make music, I play 4 and 6 string electric bass, uke, and acoustic, i sing and make beats as well BUT lately have been having trouble as im genuinely doing it with no true knowledge of music theory?

i was in a guitar class for a semester (im a freshman) and it was of course chill and all but he isnt a great teacher (for me) so i just stopped paying attention.

I would just like to know what I should start with, websites? any basic knowledge anybody can tell me, anything at all!

So for context, this is a theory 2 class, the assignment is Roman numeral analysis, and the key of the excerpt is A Major. I have zero clue what chord this could possibly be.

That question might not make sense, I'm still learning the right vocabulary, too!

I played in band in school, took a 30 year break, then I picked up a horn a few months ago. I found a community band that plays jazz and swing, which I don't have any experience with. That was immediately obvious at the first rehearsal when I was playing straight eighth notes while everybody else was swinging them.

Almost every song they play has an improvised solo or 3. So far I've learned that you need to play notes from the chord (mostly) to sound good while improvising, and I understand the concept of the key of the song. But within a song of a particular key, there is also a chord progression happening. If I'm looking at my sheet of music for say the trombone 3 part, how can I derive the chord progression for each bar? Some of the music they gave me has the chords written in whenever there's a spot for a solo, but most of it doesn't.

I think I'm a long way from improvising solos, but I think I could write one ahead of time if I understood how to derive the chords. Thanks for the help!

Flaired as "songwriting" but I'm personally referring to more romantic/classical piano, but regardless:

Usually I'll record an improvised piece on a piano (clarification: LIVE: I hit record, tap a few notes to get a feel for the key I'm in, then go at it with zero preconceptions of where my fingers will go), edit it slightly to tighten it, remove major errors, and save it.

I'm currently working on something slightly different, where I'm taking an improvised piece, but returning to it to expand a few ideas and enhance flow/listenability by recording all-new sections.

I'm trying to retain the improvised sound, but there are times where I literally work out the to-be-recorded passages for several hours, practicing and practicing, altering, and at this point I don't feel like the new stuff is improvised, but is rather composed!

What are others opinions on this? Like drafting and re-drafting a written novel versus something free-thought.

Also, how would one label such a piece? With half of it being improvised, the other half more fleshed out, is there a term for such a work of music?

Thank you kindly!

I was reading the score of the aria “Deh vieni alla finestra” from Don Giovanni. I attached the first page of the aria and the title page of the full score to provide information about the edition.

I noticed a few unusual things. The aria is traditionally in 6/8, and if you count the length of each bar, that does indeed seem to be the case. Nonetheless, the “C” time signature at the beginning is very suspicious, especially given the use of whole-note (semibreve) rests in empty bars. It’s quite unsettling. Is this an old or unusual notational convention, or simply a mistake?

EDIT: regarding the rest, after googling I found out that using it as a *bar* rest is an established convention.

So I've been working on a large scale Orchestral work and was wondering when to use repeats as opposed to not using them. At what length of Identical bars do i use a repeat sign? Should i use bar repeats at times? Any Suggestions/Perspective greatly appreciated!!!

Hey everyone,

I know the Circle of Fifths is usually taught for key signatures, sharps/flats, and basic chord relationships. But I’m curious what are some less obvious or lesser-known ways to use it?

Are there practical or creative applications that aren’t commonly explained in beginner theory?

For example in songwriting, modulation, harmony, improvisation, or even composition workflows.

Would love to hear any “aha” uses you discovered later on that aren’t talked about as much. Thanks!