Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Looking for best beginner book to learn music geared towards classical and film music

General_Disarray said:
Thank you all again for your replies and great advice. I realize there are mountains of knowledge to learn, but I would like to start with the stuff that interests me the most so I can make the process more enticing. I realize that the treble and bass clefs and learning to read music is very important.

But to me the things that I'm more eager to learn are these:

1) I don't know if these even has a name, or is it just part of music theory, but what makes a set of keys sound good as either a scale or a chord, and how can I learn what notes and chord progressions are supposed to sound good? Meaning, even in the most original music, there seems to be some kind of guideline that makes chord or note progressions sound good. Does that have a specific name that I can lookup and study?

Don't get me wrong, I want to do the whole thing. I want to read the whole Alfred's book (I already know that the treble clef starts above middle C and goes from E to F, and the bass clef is for notes below middle C and goes from G to A. I sharpened a pencil and did the exercises, and loved it, I can't wait to learn more.

But many times I have Cubase loaded with Cinestrings, or the CS-80, or some brass, whatever. And I just put my left hand on the MIDI piano and play something. I realize it sounds really good, like those notes are supposed to be together in a chord, and work well as a scale too, which I think it's how it's supposed to be, correct? I mean, if it sounds well as a chord, the scale from those keys will also sound good, it's kind of a rule, right?

So I play that chord, and because of decades of listening to lots of different genres, but mostly classical and film scores in the past few years, suddenly I get this chord in my head that seems to me would be the next best choice in a progression. And I know it's just a step higher, but obviously it doesn't simply work by moving each finger to the key to the right of the first one.

Basically I would like to learn what chord and notes progressions sound well, if there are specific rules, or if people just memorized all the chords and they know from memory which choices to make.

And 2) I would really like to train my ear so that at the very least, if I listen to a violin note progression, and I'm talking about very simple stuff, just long notes and legato, I can tell right away, without playing a sampled violin on my keyboard, which are those notes. I would like to listen to 20 seconds of a song and start playing those notes on the MIDI keyboard, even if the tempo is off, and the velocity is off and so on, but at least to get the notes right.

And after that, I would like to be able to recognize chords, or being able to separate note progressions in a recording that doesn't give me multitrack, like being able to separate the violin solo from the rest of the violins, the cellos, the basses (violas are much more complicated because of where they sit in the pitch scale), but at least be able to listen to a song I love and make the MIDI mockup for it.

Do you all have any specific recommendations for those things? Again, I know all the stuff in music theory is very important, and I'm determined to learn all of it. But I would, at the same time, be able to relax and record something improvised, but that I know it's going to sound good.
Click to expand...
For chord progressions, the term you're looking for is Harmonic Rhythm. For instance in common practice period, all music is essentially I-V-I or I-IV-V-I and everything else is a derivative of those basic functional progressions. If you go opposite direction, such as V-I-V you get things like interrupted cadences, imperfect cadences etc.

So sounds like you want to find a book that has good solid chapters on harmony theory, including chord substitution, cadences etc. I'm currently studying exactly this, Bach chorale four part harmony, so learning the voice leading to go with the harmonic progressions. They go hand in hand. And then, you'll have a lightbulb moment that the melody dictates/predicates the harmony in a large way.
 
Hey all, I know this is something I will probably learn at some point, but it's one of those that you think "A google search will give me the answer right away" and it doesn't.

In the Alfred's book, lesson 5 has this very useful graphic that shows the notes on the staff and how they match the notes on the piano. I only added the octave numbers to the keys to make it easier to understand, and that is we take C3 as middle C, because the book so far only tells me that the treble staff is around the G that sits above middle C. So with Yamaha in mind, let's say middle C is 3. So it would be like this:

Alfred's book staff piano equivalents.jpg

I read the section on ledger lines, "which are added to extend the range of the staff when the notes are too low or too high to be written on the staff." Great.

But we know that in classical and film music, and actually in electronic music and others, many times we go down to octave 0, and octaves 5 and 6, so if you have to write down a G6 or an A5, or even more common, bass lines with lots of bass in octave 0, then what do you do? Do you keep adding ledger lines over and over to get to where you need the note at?

I assume there has to be a better way, right?
 
General_Disarray said:
Hey all, I know this is something I will probably learn at some point, but it's one of those that you think "A google search will give me the answer right away" and it doesn't.

In the Alfred's book, lesson 5 has this very useful graphic that shows the notes on the staff and how they match the notes on the piano. I only added the octave numbers to the keys to make it easier to understand, and that is we take C3 as middle C, because the book so far only tells me that the treble staff is around the G that sits above middle C. So with Yamaha in mind, let's say middle C is 3. So it would be like this:

Alfred's book staff piano equivalents.jpg

I read the section on ledger lines, "which are added to extend the range of the staff when the notes are too low or too high to be written on the staff." Great.

But we know that in classical and film music, and actually in electronic music and others, many times we go down to octave 0, and octaves 5 and 6, so if you have to write down a G6 or an A5, or even more common, bass lines with lots of bass in octave 0, then what do you do? Do you keep adding ledger lines over and over to get to where you need the note at?

I assume there has to be a better way, right?
Click to expand...
Put a 8vb line above the bass staff, which says to play the notes an octave lower than written.
 
There are instruments that transpose by an octave down (eg contrabass) or up (piccolo) . Also 8va and 8vb are usually placed over passages that would otherwise require many ledger lines. Tenor and alto clefs are often used for instruments that play a lot in the range where the grand staff overlaps. And transpositions like F horn do similar work.
 
Learn to read music and play the piano/keyboards fluently. Skip the classics and focus on improvisation. Rimsky was a master.

For a more classical, not jazz style, I have found these books invaluable Vol 1 & 2. You may be able to find them for free out there:
Amazon product ASIN B000GJSXWC (Maurice Lieberman Keyboard Improvisation Volume 1 & 2)

For modern pop, jazz and so on, one of the best systems I've found is from Mark Harrison starting with this book and video series. He has other books for different style so once you understand the basics, you can branch out:
Harrison Pop Piano
 
General_Disarray said:
But we know that in classical and film music, and actually in electronic music and others, many times we go down to octave 0, and octaves 5 and 6, so if you have to write down a G6 or an A5, or even more common, bass lines with lots of bass in octave 0, then what do you do? Do you keep adding ledger lines over and over to get to where you need the note at?

I assume there has to be a better way, right?
Click to expand...
Yes. There are symbols/notation for saying play this bit an octave above or an octave below what is written eg for an octave above 8va is on the score usually with a dotted line inciting for how long.
 
When asked how to learn music Kodaly said one word:
“Sing!”

I would add to this that a fundamental grounding in solfege with a moveable doh will serve you better than all he books in the world. (and incidentally you will hear JW use this system when explaining/singing his music in interviews)
 
Last edited:
pinki said:
When asked how to learn music Kodaly said one word:
“Sing!”
Click to expand...
I'm 52 and been singing since I was 14. To myself, of course, not to an audience. It did train my ear, but I don't know anything about music from the standpoint of being able to write a song, play a song, or do anything that doesn't involve MIDI mockups for now.

pinki said:
I would add to this that a fundamental grounding in solfege with a moveable doh will serve you better than all he books in the world.
Click to expand...
I have absolutely no clue what you said there.
pinki said:
(and incidentally you will hear JW use this system when explaining/singing his music in interviews)
Click to expand...
I think I gave the wrong impression that John Williams is my biggest idol. He's not. He is a great composer, but to me most of his discography is just OK, not incredible. He does have two works that are brilliant and are so far above the rest that I don't understand why they're not more celebrated. Those are A.I. and Munich.

Then there are some really good ones that I bought recently, like E.T. and the old Star Wars movies, of which "Luke and Leia" stand out as one of my favorite songs of all time, but the rest of the Star Wars stuff is enjoyable, but it doesn't shake me to my core like those two scores do, and then there is some brilliance in the JFK score in "Arlington Cemetery".

To my personal taste, he's one of the greatest because I highly respect his career and some of his works, but my personal favorite is Hans Zimmer, because I don't see any other composer that has such a long career with so many different styles and so many great scores. He's a composer that can really reinvent himself many times, like he did with Gladiator, the Batman movies, Inception, Man of Steel, and most of all, Interstellar. He's a genius. The rest have scores that are absolute perfection (Giacchino's "Jupiter Ascending" is to me one of the most amazing scores of all time), but they don't keep it up. They put out good scores over and over, but true brilliance, that's not seen very often.

And sometimes that true brilliance can come from the most unexpected people. Bobby Krlic has some things in his "Midsommar" score that are better than anything JW ever did, then Ryuichi Sakamoto & Alva Noto "The Revenant" score is far above most scores I've ever listened to.

Robin Carolan & Sebastian Gainsborough's score for "The Northman" is excellence from start to finish, and less epic but also brilliant, there's Yair Elazar Glotman and his score for "Reptile".

I can't say it enough, this is the best moment in history for film music. There's the classic but great, and the rise of streaming and computer speeds, plus obviously the internet have brought on many smaller composers that can do everything from home or small studio, people who would've been nobody two decades ago now have a way to show the world their music. And it's great music.
 
General_Disarray said:
I'm 52 and been singing since I was 14. To myself, of course, not to an audience. It did train my ear, but I don't know anything about music from the standpoint of being able to write a song, play a song, or do anything that doesn't involve MIDI mockups for now.

I have absolutely no clue what you said there.
Click to expand...
He's wrong anyway, so it doesn't matter.

General_Disarray said:
I think I gave the wrong impression that John Williams is my biggest idol. He's not. He is a great composer, but to me most of his discography is just OK, not incredible. He does have two works that are brilliant and are so far above the rest that I don't understand why they're not more celebrated. Those are A.I. and Munich.

Then there are some really good ones that I bought recently, like E.T. and the old Star Wars movies, of which "Luke and Leia" stand out as one of my favorite songs of all time, but the rest of the Star Wars stuff is enjoyable, but it doesn't shake me to my core like those two scores do, and then there is some brilliance in the JFK score in "Arlington Cemetery".

To my personal taste, he's one of the greatest because I highly respect his career and some of his works, but my personal favorite is Hans Zimmer, because I don't see any other composer that has such a long career with so many different styles and so many great scores. He's a composer that can really reinvent himself many times, like he did with Gladiator, the Batman movies, Inception, Man of Steel, and most of all, Interstellar. He's a genius. The rest have scores that are absolute perfection (Giacchino's "Jupiter Ascending" is to me one of the most amazing scores of all time), but they don't keep it up. They put out good scores over and over, but true brilliance, that's not seen very often.

And sometimes that true brilliance can come from the most unexpected people. Bobby Krlic has some things in his "Midsommar" score that are better than anything JW ever did, then Ryuichi Sakamoto & Alva Noto "The Revenant" score is far above most scores I've ever listened to.

Robin Carolan & Sebastian Gainsborough's score for "The Northman" is excellence from start to finish, and less epic but also brilliant, there's Yair Elazar Glotman and his score for "Reptile".

I can't say it enough, this is the best moment in history for film music. There's the classic but great, and the rise of streaming and computer speeds, plus obviously the internet have brought on many smaller composers that can do everything from home or small studio, people who would've been nobody two decades ago now have a way to show the world their music. And it's great music.
Click to expand...

Given your preferences, you don't need to learn much about music. Production techniques instead.
__________
 
Solfege is applying a fixed set of syllables to each degree of the chromatic scale. He's talking here about working on your relative pitch (among other things, there's also the internalization and physicality of singing itself)- so regardless of what key a piece is in at given moment, as long as you are aware of what the root tone, you can identify every other note in relation to that tone and know its relative distance. So for the imperial march, you've got the root and then it goes to a minor 2nd. In solfege you might sing it "do, do, do, do, do, do, di, di, di" where do is the root, and di is the half step up. Through this you can know what's being played without perfect pitch.

dynamicmusicroom.com

Chromatic Solfege: Learn Chromatic Scale Singing | Dynamic Music Room

Learn about chromatic solfege with charts and exercises to help anyone master this tricky concept.
dynamicmusicroom.com dynamicmusicroom.com

Solfege isn't necessary to work on/develop relative pitch, but it can help you keep track of where you are at, a kind of helpful pneumonic.

Strong relative pitch is a valuable skill but to rely on that alone is a bit silly, as you'd basically be trying to rediscover so many musical concepts on your own and ignoring how much the past and other musician's can teach you. Relative pitch won't teach you about theme structures and other forms or all manner of concepts that could be helpful, but practicing it will help internalize sounds and link those with theory. It will help you write down what you hear, or improvise with more inner ear guidance rather than muscle memory (but you need that too if your body is going to be able to follow your inner hearing). It's definitely a wonderful and valuable skill - I've been prioritizing it the past month/for the distant future.
 
Last edited:
General_Disarray said:
My goal is to learn both. What do you mean by "Given your preferences, you don't need to learn much about music"?
Click to expand...

Just what it means in the straightforward linguistic sense, based on your stated preferences in #68.

"Much" means a lot, so, you don't need to go through all of the common pedagogical approaches to music composition, nor try to cover all or most compositional frameworks.

And "don't need to learn much" doesn't equal "nothing," so you only need to learn what's relevant to your musical goals if you ever want to start achieving them before you get burned out on all the minutiae, which can be tedious and boring, some of which will have little to no direct relevance to your pursuit.

This is all relative to the abyss of diving into composition without a clearly defined direction where the result is you swimming around aimlessly inside an amoeba-like organism of compositional stuff.

Composers have more than enough to deal with, think about and keep track of in the grand scheme of things, so everything you can do to concentrate your focus is all for the good of your development. After acquiring some competency in your first interest, you can always expand from there at a manageable pace.

And you definitely don't need to drop everything you're doing and dedicate yourself to nothing but singing and modern "solfege," which is not the real kind anyway. Modern solmization has its place already within certain compositional pedagogies (melody, counterpoint, harmony, and the tonal ear training derived thereof) and is at its most effective as an integrated aspect of those studies.

Currently you're learning how to read music and the basic rudiments of Western music theory. That's plenty for now.
__________

P.S. You can avoid some miscommunication going both ways in the future if your octave reference uses the modern scientific notation, with Middle C as C4, (not C3). Better to correct this now before the wrong one becomes cemented.
__________
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom