Keith Emerson and music theory - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

richardh

Prog Reviewer

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26171

Topic: Keith Emerson and music theory
Posted: February 01 2012 at 16:07

A weird thread really. It needs to lay down and die peacfully.

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 30 2012 at 16:59

You were not trolled. You gave me your opinion and that's fine. Because of your arguments (wich were certainly not bad) you made me reflect on some aspects I could never think about. My opinion changed a bit because I had reflexions on the subject. Evolution is certainly not a bad thing. If you don't like me changing the post, I'll take it back to it's original form. This is a subject on wich I reflected and it is distateful I agree.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 30 2012 at 16:49

The_Jester wrote:

You're right about the fact that we can't prove if one or the other says right and it was actually my fun of finding a subject on wich nobody could respond exactly but try to convince the others to their opinion. I searched on the web and I can't find out if he studied in music so maybe you could help me find the info. I'll edit my topic since my opinion slightly changed. I must admit that musical rules are not golden rules but what I wanted you to reflect on in the first place is that you should check on yourself before pointing others. The only thing I wanted to point out is that I think that Keith Emerson's solo isn't logical if we stick to the chord change and could be a lot better to my ears.

I will try and excuse the tone and phrasing of your post as English is not your first language, though I am finding that a little difficult since it makes the whole thread look like trolling to me and I find that inexcusable. Also editing the OP after 80 posts have been made in reply to it I also find distasteful. I suggest that is something you reflect on.

What?

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 30 2012 at 15:49

Gerinski wrote:

Dean, the re-post of the 2008 post by Trademark was nice.

I think in the end it's just all those 4ths which are confusing The Jester, many people are so used to the most common intervals of 3rds and 5ths that can not get the 4ths, that's too bad.

Tarkus and many other songs by ELP have been covered by an endless number of musicians, ELP have toured with an orchestra.... if Keith's music was wrong all these musicians wouldn' have done so, I guess that says it all.

I really like the 4ths and the riff in Tarkus is amazing. My point is that his solo doesn't stick to the form of the song and that it is not logical. It sure creates dissonance but I think it is unwanted. I too like dissonance in a lot of things (free jazz, contemporary classic, progressive rock, etc.) but I think that his solo is not supposed to be as dissonant as that.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 30 2012 at 15:39

Dean wrote:

The_Jester wrote:

I don't think there's a goal in Keith Emerson's solo in the beginning of Tarkus. It also meets my expectancies and it doesn't seem to be used to resolve a note (that's my conclusion after seeing the score.) My track is also the proof that it could still sound good (to me) without being completely off road in the middle of about every mesures (well, that's my opinion).

I see you use the phrase "it could still sound good" implying that it sounded good before you changed it. I think it would help a lot of people (myself included) if you could indicate precisely where you think Emerson went "wrong".

The harmonic lead in of Tarkus is not "goal oriented" because it is unchanging - there is nothing to resolve because nothing has changed - what we have here is the opposite of expectation, which is why I said Tom's explanation was not applicable to this (Tarkus).

Your original premise was (and I quote):

"I don't think Keith Emerson knows his music theory pretty well"

and "Keith Emerson don't know all the subtilities of musical theory and the link between the theory and composition"

and "I'm sure he does not master it perfectly"

and "He sure knows a bit of his musical rules but not enough and still want to apply the rules he learned but it's not always working"

and "Keith Emerson's dissonances sound only like errors"

and "I simply say that he doesn't seem to know it enough"

and "that still does a dissonance because he doesn't consider chord change or the note he should play"

and "he doesn't consider the chord changes in the beginning of Tarkus, and the notes he should play (if it was by the book), he does not play them"

It is impossible for me to demonstrate how much Emerson knows of Music Theory, just as it is impossible for you to demonstrate that he does not. However, we know he has had some level of classical training in the UK (ie he possibly is ABRSM Graded from an early age) - that will have covered Music Theory (anyone Grade 5 or over has to pass Theory examinations) and since he can play and arrange complex classical pieces it suggests he not only knows it, he understands it. You are saying that because he ignores some rules, he shows that he does not understand them. I say this is an error by you.

What I have attempted to show is that Music Theory is not the Golden Rule that MUST be followed - sure you have to follow these "rules" when you are learning music and want to pass examinations to gain certificates and honours to show to your teachers and examiners that you actually understand the theories you have learnt, but once you are free from academic learning you can do whatever you like.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Gerinski

Prog Reviewer

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5093

Posted: January 30 2012 at 14:13

Dean, the re-post of the 2008 post by Trademark was nice.

I think in the end it's just all those 4ths which are confusing The Jester, many people are so used to the most common intervals of 3rds and 5ths that can not get the 4ths, that's too bad.

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 30 2012 at 13:41

The_Jester wrote:

Your original premise was (and I quote):

"I don't think Keith Emerson knows his music theory pretty well"

and "Keith Emerson don't know all the subtilities of musical theory and the link between the theory and composition"

and "I'm sure he does not master it perfectly"

and "He sure knows a bit of his musical rules but not enough and still want to apply the rules he learned but it's not always working"

and "Keith Emerson's dissonances sound only like errors"

and "I simply say that he doesn't seem to know it enough"

and "that still does a dissonance because he doesn't consider chord change or the note he should play"

and "he doesn't consider the chord changes in the beginning of Tarkus, and the notes he should play (if it was by the book), he does not play them"

Edited by Dean - January 30 2012 at 13:50

What?

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 30 2012 at 13:03

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 30 2012 at 09:41

^ I think that was originally a Miles Davies quote ("there are no bad notes, just badly resolved ones")

Time for a rewind back to 2008 and the release of Opeth's Watershed album containing the track "Hessian Peel" which contained a "wrong note" in the opinion of one of our reviewers - much to the amusement of Mr Akerfeldt - needless to say, a long forum argument ensued. One informative post was made by ex-forum member Trademark (aka Tom Hirst - a professional luthier):

Trademark wrote:

This is gonna be a long one. Smile

There seem to be some misunderstanding here in terms of the use in this context of the word "wrong" and how it relates to the concept of music theory. First; music is theory is not, never has been, and hopefully never will be a set of "rules" that are used to create music. This concept runs contrary to the very nature of music. What music theory is and always been and hopefully always will be is an important and useful tool we can use to understand and then explain what composers have done.

Composers and songwriters from every era in history share a certain set of "tendencies"; that is, they tend to all use many of the same techniques for changing the key or progressing from one chord to another, or ending a musical phrase, etc.. Music theory identifies these patterns and tendencies and creates a kind of list that can be used to help categorize music by historical period, to help see how a composer is different from his contemporaries, or to just plain understand the music at a deeper level than can be done with the ears alone. Seen in this light there are no wrong notes, only unexplained ones. The list of categorizations for notes is long The rules for using notes are not rules, rather they are explanations of what has almost always been done in the past.

Over the past 4 centuries or so of musical study a vast number of tendencies in music have developed that are very seldom not observed (other than in serial or other deliberately atonal music which falls outside this discussion). For example, when a note outside the key is used if it is a sharp (#) it will resolve up, if it is a flat (b) it will resolve down. Certain chords are reserved for very specific purposes such as key changes and other special effects, etc.. This does not mean they cannot be used for other purposes, only that 95% of the time they are not. Darqdean's explanation above is one of the clearest and most concise I have ever read annd I'll probably borrow it for use in my Music Appreciation class. Clap

The following needs to be added to the idea though. Tonal music is "goal oriented". That is, we expect certain notes of chords to follow others. We probably are not even aware of our expectations, since composers and songwriters follow the established patterns so strongly that they become subconsciously ingrained in all of us. Part of the beauty in music is the composer's ability to surprise us by occasionally NOT meeting our expectations. This can be done in a number of ways, one of which is the "wrong note" that is being discussed here.

Adding a note or chord that is outside the prevailing harmony surprises us and makes us sit up and pay attention to the music because we now wonder what else new might be coming next, like a plot twist in an Agatha Christie mystery. You say "Wow, I did not see that coming." However, as with any literary reference there must be a satisfactory resolution to the twist. If I, as a writer, were to suddenly introduce a fire-breathing dragon or an alien space ship into a political thriller about unrest in Zimbabwe I'd have to give this unexpected new character a thorough explanation or my story would lose all credibility. It is not wrong for me to introduce this new element in my story, but it could make the story lose focus and confuse my reader rather than helping him follow the plot. Wrong note dissonances in music carry the same responsibility. They must resolve in a manner than does not leave the listener wondering why the hell that note was stuck in there. It needs to make sense when taken in the context of the whole. The musical concept of "wrong note dissonance" is not new. Listen to any of Charles Ives' music and there are so many examples it makes the head spin, but they all resolve into the whole in a way that makes sense.

With all this in mind how can the wrong note in this case really be wrong? The question here is really not one of wrong or right, but of how it resolves into the whole, and as Cert,The T, myself and others have repeatedly pointed out, you can either like it or not like it as you own personal tastes, or biases dictate.

Of course the explanation given by Tom is applicable to a wrong note in a measure of right notes, often during a key-change, and not to this aledged example where Emerson "solo" continues in the old key when the ostinato bass line changes key, but the point still stands - you can either like it or not like it as your own personal tastes.

Edited by Dean - January 30 2012 at 12:22

What?

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: January 30 2012 at 09:08

The_Jester wrote:

Nothing's an error.

I have heard it from musicians that there are really no wrong notes. I can't accurately capture their reasoning but they laid more stress on how these notes were resolved.

Gerinski

Prog Reviewer

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5093

Posted: January 29 2012 at 13:33

The_Jester wrote:

http://soundcloud.com/amadjester/tarkus-first-mesures

Here you go if you want to see the first mesures. I'm not too proud of the ending though.

I listened to it but I still don't know what are you referring to, sorry...

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 29 2012 at 12:23

http://soundcloud.com/amadjester/tarkus-first-mesures

Here you go if you want to see the first mesures. I'm not too proud of the ending though.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 29 2012 at 11:53

What?

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 29 2012 at 11:52

I could but I can't do it on all the song it will too long. And I'm not the best composer ever, I'll never do a great job on Tarkus.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Gerinski

Prog Reviewer

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5093

Posted: January 29 2012 at 10:48

I have Tarkus as a midi file, it's not an amazingly accurate version but I guess it's decent enough for this purpose, if you have any sequencer or midi editor program like Cubasis or the like, I can email you the file and you can easily move the "wrong" notes to their "correct" place and send me the file back, then I will know what are you talking about.

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 29 2012 at 10:18

Nothing's an error.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Snow Dog

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995

Posted: January 29 2012 at 10:11

^There are no errors.

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 29 2012 at 10:10

I too believed it was played by feel wich can result in errors (even though maybe it is completely wanted).

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Snow Dog

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995

Posted: January 29 2012 at 10:01

^ It is all wanted. Keith discussed the section at length with the rest of the band. And even though it was scored it was very much played by feel.

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 29 2012 at 09:57

I know it is 4th but when 4th are used many time there can be key changes just like Tarkus in wich there's a key change in the middle of every mesure of the first mouvement. He doesn't do the key change change in his solo wich isn't dramatic if you like it like that. Maybe it is wanted, maybe it isn't, I don't know I'm not Keith Emerson. I believe it isn't but that's my point of view.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte