I prefer counterpoint, because it has formal rules to it and makes things sound so baroque. I haven't delved much into Harmony, though. I'm planning on buying Rameau's Treatise on Harmony to learn more about it, but for now I like using counterpoint techniques. :)

Wow, I haven't anybody else who loves baroque music as much as you. :P I used to be like you, but with classical/romantic, then I started looking into the modern (anime ost) stuff, hehe.

Anyways, I believe that no matter what type of music you compose, a solid foundation of both harmony and counterpoint is crucial. However, I use harmony as my main guiding force. If it sounds wrong, I can use what chords I know to fix it. After all, when you break it down in the end, music is just chords. But I use counterpoint to help with the movement between chords. And yes, like you said, counterpoint is useful with all its rules, but then again some rules are meant to be broken. ;)

You need both. ^^

Counterpoint without knowledge of harmony is rubbish.

k, this may sound stupid, but what's counterpoint? sound very theoryish...

Originally posted by Archangel@Jun 3 2004, 07:21 AM
k, this may sound stupid, but what's counterpoint? sound very theoryish...
Counterpoint is the most complicated and migraine-inducing area in music theory, next to probably Orchestration. It is the study of the melodic "voices" or "parts" that are played (together) in a piece.

I've been reading a little on it as well, and it's giving me a terrible headache.

I don't know the meaning of any of these..theory things, but who said you can't compose without them? Could someone try to describe or give examples of these terms? It might help everyone who doesn't know these.. (wait, I'm alone?)

Yeah, this stuff can be confusing, hehe. Well, counterpoint literally means point against point. The easiest version of counterpoint is two voices, kind of like a duet. They go off and sing in their own direction, but they do it in a way so that it makes sense and so that it is complementary. In more complicated songs, it goes up to 4 voices, or more. When it's 4 voices, you commonly get SATB (soprano, alto, tenor, bass). But yeah, counterpoint is just the movement of those voices, and there are just some rules to follow to make it sound right, so that it doesn't end up as one big mess. It's like a bunch of people talking together; you've got to organize it!

Technically, you're right; you don't need knowledge of harmony and counterpoint to compose. What's important is the sound. But if you do use it, it makes things muuuuuuuuuuuuuch easier! :lol:

Originally posted by Archangel@Jun 3 2004, 07:21 AM
k, this may sound stupid, but what's counterpoint? sound very theoryish...
Yeah, me either. Never thought these things existed! Can anyone explain the difference between the two? @_@

I probably use both but aren't actually aware of it! I do make a lot of use of chord roots in my pieces though to ensure the different parts don't clash :)

I usually use syncopation, antiphonal and imitation in my works. Sometimes I use synthetic scale.

what you mean? like a technique for composing music? I usually just beatthe hell out of it lol *slam on the keys* lol.. I prefer themes to bad guys cause it could be evil then slowly goes to demented @_@ lol...
anyway :shifty: :whistle:

Originally posted by Ravelle@Sep 9 2004, 02:11 PM
I usually use syncopation, antiphonal and imitation in my works. Sometimes I use synthetic scale.
gees, what are those? guess I need to do some research on them.

anyways, I mainly use chord inversion to refine my chord progressions. Not only it minimizes jumps between chords, but also it really makes a difference in terms of moods and flows. for example, a progression ends in a root position chord is usually used in the ending, while the same progression with a 1st or 2nd inversion on the ending chord can create a suspended feeling for the audience and make them want to hear more---- and that's usually used in transitions.

I also use counterpoint and try to avoid parallel 5th,8th spacing errors, etc -- all those stuff in 1st year theory. ;)
finally, I agree with Noir's "technique" of singing the melody while composing, ---- it really helps increase the memorability of the piece.

If anybody who even plays an instrument says they don&#39;t know music theory, they&#39;re lying to themselves and others. Reading music notation is the first part, so congratulate yourself for knowing part. Anywho, I compose the bass line and then the melody. Due to this, I end up with a lot of action-ish pieces from the over heavy bass. It gives me a solid foundation anyways. I just keep entering a sequence of notes until I find something I like. Then I go along with that to finish the piece. Could explain why my pieces sound so random >.< and without feeling.

I love Baroque music too
It&#39;s sophisticated, but since i&#39;ve never learned Counterpoint, i can&#39;t really TRY and compose something baroque-ish, it just wouldn&#39;t sound right

I believe when you compose, you don&#39;t use TECHNIQUES, you use different structures. Counterpoint or Fugue styles has structures of melody and counter melody. Where as romantic period there&#39;s melody and accompaniment.

To me i like using the traditional melody vs accompaniment structure of composing a piece. Though i never completed it because of my busy schoo life (lameness, so depressed that i don&#39;t even have time to get my hands on the keyboard and actually make music).

you could fool me, ya know. I really think that I just think of a good melody, then think of a counter-melody that fits (or maybe just a chord pattern) and then put them one first, then only the second, then both together, and then some sort of thing that follows the same Idea, but is warped a bit (different key?). Whatever that&#39;s called, it works&#33; :heh:

I don&#39;t use a particular technique, BUT I compose specifically what I enjoy listening to. Rpg game type of musc, or music with strong emotion, or message behind it.

I prefer to use modal/whole tone scales when i compose, because it makes the music less predictable. I usually take at least a day to compose just 3/4 bars, as i like to try out different chords (avoiding simple major/minor ones where possible). If i come across a interesting chord in a piece i am learning, i see if there is any way i can include it into my composition without stealing the whole phrase.

I hardly ever follow all of these silly rules i learned in theory- i make my own mind up what sounds right (personally, i think parallel 5ths/8ves sound fine). I don&#39;t really agree that there is any &#39;right&#39; way to compose, apart from just experimenting with different sounds. I find impressionistic music more tricky, but more interesting to compose, as when you are experimenting, you can see if the sound reflects what impression you are trying to put across (e.g waves on the ocean/ bells etc)