Page 1 of 2
#1
Where can I go to find out more about cadences?

I'm not sure if cadences is right, I just saw it online somewhere.

I've been trying to write music lately and I want to use some not-so-cliche chord progressions (I-IV-V).
Basically, I want to learn how to add emotion to my playing because a lot of it just sounds like it's formula-based. Learning how going from one chord to another feels would help. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
#2
A cadence is the name for the way in which a piece of music ends. Doesn't have much to do with adding emotion... other than adding a bit of emotion to the very end of a song.

For example: A V-I ending is a Perfect Authentic Cadence (as long as both chords are in the root position and the I chord's highest note is the tonic.)
Gear:
Agile Septor Pro 727 EB Nat Ash
ESP/LTD Deluxe MH-1000NT
Epiphone Les Paul Standard
Line 6 Spider Valve HD100 Head
Vox 4x12 Cabinet
#3
I think what you're looking for is "modes" you can find those by going to lessons and typing modes in the search bar, there's loads of info on them. There a bit difficult to understand for some people though. You should also play with little techniques, hammer on a note of a chord or pull off a note.. On some chords.. Say the G chord for example, I might do something like an up down strum on the first three chords then a full strum of the chord. For one song I wrote I do a DUDU strum pattern with an Am, but lift the E finger off on the up strokes, switch to C and do the same thing.. just the smallest things can get different emotions, as you talk about.
#4
Quote by Jsteele1408
A cadence is the name for the way in which a piece of music ends. Doesn't have much to do with adding emotion... other than adding a bit of emotion to the very end of a song.

For example: A V-I ending is a Perfect Authentic Cadence (as long as both chords are in the root position and the I chord's highest note is the tonic.)


not necessarily a piece of music. it's extremely, extremely common to have more than one cadence in a piece of music (in fact, i challenge you to find one that's not under 20 seconds long).

Quote by sparta09
I think what you're looking for is "modes" you can find those by going to lessons and typing modes in the search bar, there's loads of info on them. There a bit difficult to understand for some people though.


some people meaning you. no offense, but if you're suggesting modes here, then i doubt you understand them. modes are completely irrelevant.

TS, every technique has its place in adding emotion. everything from tremolo picking to sweep tapping can be used to connote a certain feel. connoting feels can be taught (to be honest, i don't believe in that 'playing from the heart' schtick people suggest -- i use techniques to convey emotions, and if i happen to get into my playing and visibly enjoy it, all the better). if you want to learn to connote a certain feel, then listen. listen to music. listen very actively. analyze it. ask yourself why the composer/performer/songwriter is doing what he's doing. maybe he uses a certain technique or effect. analyze the emotion that it stirs in you, and eventually you'll begin to notice patterns. once you've done this for a while (and i mean a while, but not for eternity - rest assured, it DOES come eventually), you'll know instantly what effect or technique to implement to evoke a certain emotion in the listener.

as far as your chord progressions go, learn about chord construction. once you've got a solid handle on that, look up voice-leading and start applying some good voice-leading to your chords. it's great, really - i can take 4 random chords and, using voice-leading, find some way to make them sound acceptable, at the very least.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#5
Quote by rosev
Where can I go to find out more about cadences?

I'm not sure if cadences is right, I just saw it online somewhere.

I've been trying to write music lately and I want to use some not-so-cliche chord progressions (I-IV-V).
Basically, I want to learn how to add emotion to my playing because a lot of it just sounds like it's formula-based. Learning how going from one chord to another feels would help. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Well there really isn't a formula for adding emotion to your playing. That comes from inside you. What you can do is increase your ability to be expressive on the guitar by developing your playing skills.

Learn music ..... enjoy it....... develop skills...... then PLAY. Playing with emotion is no different to talking with emotion. You do it cause you feel it.
shred is gaudy music
#6
Quote by sparta09
I think what you're looking for is "modes" you can find those by going to lessons and typing modes in the search bar, there's loads of info on them. There a bit difficult to understand for some people though. You should also play with little techniques, hammer on a note of a chord or pull off a note.. On some chords.. Say the G chord for example, I might do something like an up down strum on the first three chords then a full strum of the chord. For one song I wrote I do a DUDU strum pattern with an Am, but lift the E finger off on the up strokes, switch to C and do the same thing.. just the smallest things can get different emotions, as you talk about.


I totally know modes upside down, and backwards. I can see what you're saying though, adding dynamics with strum patterns and inflections.

I think I was looking for how two chords relate. like a V-I sounds like balance is re-establish and using it in a chord progression can help add that feeling.
#7
Quote by AeolianWolf
if you want to learn to connote a certain feel, then listen. listen to music. listen very actively. analyze it. ask yourself why the composer/performer/songwriter is doing what he's doing. maybe he uses a certain technique or effect. analyze the emotion that it stirs in you, and eventually you'll begin to notice patterns. once you've done this for a while (and i mean a while, but not for eternity - rest assured, it DOES come eventually), you'll know instantly what effect or technique to implement to evoke a certain emotion in the listener.

as far as your chord progressions go, learn about chord construction. once you've got a solid handle on that, look up voice-leading and start applying some good voice-leading to your chords. it's great, really - i can take 4 random chords and, using voice-leading, find some way to make them sound acceptable, at the very least.


That's a good answer. I'm going to figure out what this voice-leading is. Thanks.
#9
Quote by rosev
I totally know modes upside down, and backwards. I can see what you're saying though, adding dynamics with strum patterns and inflections.

I think I was looking for how two chords relate. like a V-I sounds like balance is re-establish and using it in a chord progression can help add that feeling.


The thing is, it does not add feeling.

YOU add feeling. this is important to understand.

a cadence is a cadence. Its simply a point of resolution. You can't like throw cadences everywhere to add feeling. They don't serve that function.

Same idea goes for dynamics. If you feel emotions, and you play dynamically as a result thats one thing. But to add dynamics simply for the purpose of adding emotion doesn't work. The feel comes from you. The dynamics are the result.
You can develop your skills (which includes being able to play dynamics) by learning to play music on your guitar.

If playing with feel is what your after, then you want to make sure you're not barking up the wrong tree so to speak. To me cadences and dynamics are something you SHOULD learn about, but don't think they will solve your playing with "feel" issue. They wont. (this goes for any fancy word/theoretical concept).
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 16, 2010,
#10
Quote by GuitarMunky
The thing is, it does not add feeling.

YOU add feeling. this is important to understand.

a cadence is a cadence. Its simply a point of resolution. You can't like throw cadences everywhere to add feeling. They don't serve that function.

Same idea goes for dynamics. If you feel emotions, and you play dynamically as a result thats one thing. But to add dynamics simply for the purpose of adding emotion doesn't work. The feel comes from you. The dynamics are the result.
You can develop your skills (which includes being able to play dynamics) by learning to play music on your guitar.

If playing with feel is what your after, then you want to make sure you're not barking up the wrong tree so to speak. To me cadences and dynamics are something you SHOULD learn about, but don't think they will solve your playing with "feel" issue. They wont. (this goes for any fancy word/theoretical concept).

+1
#11
There are only 4 cadences

IV-I Plagual, used mainly to extend a song that has already "ended" in a IV-I vamp

V-iv Deceptive. Play I-V-I-V-I-V-iv and youll see why its called deceptive

Imperfect Authentic- Any form of V-I

Perfect authentic Root position V to root position I with the root in the upper voice as well
#12
there are much more than 4, what about imperfect, phyrgian half, cadential 6/4, half cadences...
#13
Quote by griffRG7321
there are much more than 4, what about imperfect, phyrgian half, cadential 6/4, half cadences...


imperfect is only used to describe cadences that are not in root position. phrygian half...well, phrygian half. it's a half cadence. cadential 6/4 is an authentic cadence (I 6/4 - V - I, yes?) and half cadences...are half cadences.

there are a lot more than 4 cadences, yes - but every cadence can fit into four categories - authentic, plagal, half, and deceptive.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
Last edited by AeolianWolf at Jun 16, 2010,
#14
Nah, I just didn't completely understand what he was asking for in his first statement. The whole cadence thing was where I was lost, something I'll have to look into. But I think you hit what I was trying to get to on the head wolf, good reply.
#15
Quote by AeolianWolf
imperfect is only used to describe cadences that are not in root position. phrygian half...well, phrygian half. it's a half cadence. cadential 6/4 is an authentic cadence (I 6/4 - V - I, yes?) and half cadences...are half cadences.

there are a lot more than 4 cadences, yes - but every cadence can fit into four categories - authentic, plagal, half, and deceptive.


Imperfect is used to describe anything - V.
#16
Quote by griffRG7321
Imperfect is used to describe anything - V.


nope. half is anything - V. maybe you're using british terminology?

perfect means that the chords are in root position, and that the tonic is the highest voice of the final chord. imperfect means that one of these conditions is not met.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadence_%28music%29

hm...it DOES seem to list imperfect cadence as another term for a half cadence. one day we musicians have just got to get together and do away with this. we need one name for one concept.

i prefer to use authentic for V - I and half for x - V, that way perfect and imperfect are still open for use in regards to the two criteria i mentioned.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#17
TS, check out this link:

http://classic.musictheory.net/55

It explains cadences (and phrases) pretty well, and it gives musical examples, so you can put what your learning in context. It's a really great website.
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#18
Quote by AeolianWolf
nope. half is anything - V. maybe you're using british terminology?

perfect means that the chords are in root position, and that the tonic is the highest voice of the final chord. imperfect means that one of these conditions is not met.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadence_%28music%29

hm...it DOES seem to list imperfect cadence as another term for a half cadence. one day we musicians have just got to get together and do away with this. we need one name for one concept.

i prefer to use authentic for V - I and half for x - V, that way perfect and imperfect are still open for use in regards to the two criteria i mentioned.


In england:

perfect - V-I (root being in bass and highest part.

Imperfect - anything - V

Plagal - IV - I

Interrupted - V- VI
#19
I always wondered how knowing this technical shit helped in your songwriting abilities. I mean... does it really? Like fully? All the way? Or is it something to claim as a penis extension?

Call it what you will... if it sounds good, use it.... if it sounds shit... discard it. I never quite got to the use of this crap of perfect, plagal and ring a ring a rosies lets all die together shit.

Anyway, maybe its ignorance... maybe its just sheer boredom
#20
Quote by evolucian
I always wondered how knowing this technical shit helped in your songwriting abilities. I mean... does it really? Like fully? All the way? Or is it something to claim as a penis extension?

Call it what you will... if it sounds good, use it.... if it sounds shit... discard it. I never quite got to the use of this crap of perfect, plagal and ring a ring a rosies lets all die together shit.

Anyway, maybe its ignorance... maybe its just sheer boredom


Yeah, it's probably that.


Don't use that "if it sounds good" argument. It gets old. Theory helps you understand music and can help you filter through all of the bad stuff and make it easier to find the good stuff.

And yes, this cadence stuff helps. If I want finality to my ending, I don't have to dink around playing a bunch of two chord combination trying to find the sound, I'll just do a PAC. Or I could play a chord progression on guitar that ends V - vi while singing the end of a verse to make it sound sad.
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#21
Quote by griffRG7321
In england:

perfect - V-I (root being in bass and highest part.

Imperfect - anything - V

Plagal - IV - I

Interrupted - V- VI


in america:

authentic: V - I
half: anything - V
plagal: IV - I
deceptive: V - vi

perfect: the roots of both chords are in the bass, and the tonic is the highest note of the final chord.
imperfect: one or both of the above conditions are not satisfied (also if viiº is used in place of V7, creating a leading tone imperfect authentic cadence).
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#22
Quote by AeolianWolf
in america:

authentic: V - I
half: anything - V
plagal: IV - I
deceptive: V - vi

perfect: the roots of both chords are in the bass, and the tonic is the highest note of the final chord.
imperfect: one or both of the above conditions are not satisfied (also if viiº is used in place of V7, creating a leading tone imperfect authentic cadence).


That SUCKS!

#23
Quote by rockingamer2
Yeah, it's probably that.


Don't use that "if it sounds good" argument. It gets old. Theory helps you understand music and can help you filter through all of the bad stuff and make it easier to find the good stuff.

And yes, this cadence stuff helps. If I want finality to my ending, I don't have to dink around playing a bunch of two chord combination trying to find the sound, I'll just do a PAC. Or I could play a chord progression on guitar that ends V - vi while singing the end of a verse to make it sound sad.

I don't think it actually gets old... cos it is valid. Knowing theory does help a bit... but not a lot. Can't help you at all in fact if you are not applying it or even experimenting.

My question actually pertained to technical shit... like actually knowing the names of plagal and authentic cadavers... whats the point? Looking at it as V - I not good enough? Or even just chord names?

Theory helps you understand music and can help you filter through all of the bad stuff
And what exactly is the bad stuff?
Last edited by evolucian at Jun 16, 2010,
#24
Quote by evolucian
I don't think it actually gets old... cos it is valid. Knowing theory does help a bit... but not a lot. Can't help you at all in fact if you are not applying it or even experimenting.

My question actually pertained to technical shit... like actually knowing the names of plagal and authentic cadavers... whats the point? Looking at it as V - I not good enough? Or even just chord names?

And what exactly is the bad stuff?


The technical stuff helps you communicate with other musicians effectively.

And the bad stuff is the stuff that isn't the stuff you want to write.
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#25
Quote by rockingamer2
The technical stuff helps you communicate with other musicians effectively.

And the bad stuff is the stuff that isn't the stuff you want to write.


"Hey John... I want a perfect cadence there"

"Hey John... I want a V - I there"

"Hey John... I want a G to C there"

Which is better and more human?

And the bad stuff is the stuff that isn't the stuff you want to write.
That doesn't quite answer it... what exactly is so bad you don't want to write?
#27
Quote by evolucian
"Hey John... I want a perfect cadence there"

"Hey John... I want a V - I there"

"Hey John... I want a G to C there"

Which is better and more human?

That doesn't quite answer it... what exactly is so bad you don't want to write?


Uh, any three of those is just fine. If I were talking to someone who didn't know about cadences, I would say the third, but if they did know their stuff, I would say "I want a PAC."

What makes it bad is that I don't want to write it. I don't mean "bad" and a negative way, in a way that says "I don't want this."
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#28
Quote by rockingamer2
The technical stuff helps you communicate with other musicians effectively.

And the bad stuff is the stuff that isn't the stuff you want to write.


No, learning bogus terms that have no use other than to point out a concept that could be figured out by common sense is a waste of time.

I think I'd be willing to slap someone who told me to use a "PAC".

Music is enough of a headache by itself already to be adding useless names.
#29
Quote by Coagulation
JUSTIN BIEBER?

Still dont really know who it is... but if you fighting to not sound like him in your playing, then you fighting your roots. Embrace em buddy... warble that voice some more and do some crotch grabbing
#30
Quote by rockingamer2
Uh, any three of those is just fine. If I were talking to someone who didn't know about cadences, I would say the third, but if they did know their stuff, I would say "I want a PAC."


That sounds rather nerdy to me... I'm glad I know some down to earth muso's who don't have their head stuck up their technical elitist asses. No relation to you however.

What makes it bad is that I don't want to write it. I don't mean "bad" and a negative way, in a way that says "I don't want this.
You dont need theory for that. Or real big terms. All you need is... "Doh... that sounds shit!"

Cos even if you know your theory, you still gonna land up writing crap sometimes. Its inevitable. And it happens... theory aint gonna do shit to make something bad sound awesome
Last edited by evolucian at Jun 16, 2010,
#31
Quote by Pillo114
No, learning bogus terms that have no use other than to point out a concept that could be figured out by common sense is a waste of time.


what, you mean like "dorian", "lydian", and "locrian"? oh, wait a minute...

you guys are diminishing the power of theory, though. sure, it's not going to make a shitty song sound good -- it's not magic.

Quote by Pillo114
I think I'd be willing to slap someone who told me to use a "PAC".


...maybe so, but i'd slap someone if they didn't know what an authentic cadence was. that's like day 3 shit we're dealing with. V, then I. period.

you guys can call us elitist, but we can call you ignorant. we're not going to get anywhere calling each other names, and certainly not to any agreement.

music is music - a completely subjective art form. he who criticizes is most deserving of criticism.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#32
I must have missed that day Aeolian... was probably getting laid. Still... speaking geek talk to a fellow musician at practice/songwriting sessions aint gonna make music that much fun. I still prefer chord names to symbols to cadential featurettes.

Cmon... thats asking for an ass whipping. Any dude says play a cadence of some type... I'm gonna make him swallow my guitar neck. Btw... you called yourself an elitist (a while ago)... I was just relaying it. If music is viewed as art... why ruin it with technical mumbo jumbo.

And I'm not against the TS asking his question... its just a temporary niggle in my crack with all these terms. Just call it what it is instead of making it into a plague. Because... in my view... you have those terms... the other side of the coin is using the chords to sound out and make something pretty and viewing it in terms of chords... not shitty disease sounding things. It is nerdy when done that way, you gotta agree with that. And I'm serious... if I'm really jamming with someone who says something that includes cadence... I'll make a kebab out of them and said guitar neck... and then promptly pack up and leave after wiping away any fingerprints I may have left at the supposed scene I was supposedly at
#33
Evo

If I'm jamming with some mates, or making up a song, i'm not going to be shouting out "plagal cadence!" or "Andante con moto!" or "play the next section in compound time".

These are all just terms used for analysis/to show you know your shit.
#34
Quote by AeolianWolf
what, you mean like "dorian", "lydian", and "locrian"? oh, wait a minute...



I know that's a sly attempt at something but it's exactly my point. It's a literal mind**** to be constantly thinking of terms on sensical stuff that doesn't require any names. In the case of modes it's the intervals that matter and not its name, because if you stick to names you're going to get messed up going into the modes of the other scales.

you guys are diminishing the power of theory, though. sure, it's not going to make a shitty song sound good -- it's not magic.


No, it's not diminishing it, it's getting rid of useless stuff I already learned and internalized. Only musicologists are the ones interested in all the names because they couldn't do it themselves.

...maybe so, but i'd slap someone if they didn't know what an authentic cadence was. that's like day 3 shit we're dealing with. V, then I. period.


So why keep its technical term then, part of communication is to keep it as simple as possible and within musicians the less you have to speak to get your message across the more efficient you'll be. Thinking of all these terms while playing is an absolute wankery and a waste of time. Save the time for the actual music.

you guys can call us elitist, but we can call you ignorant. we're not going to get anywhere calling each other names, and certainly not to any agreement.


You're not elitist, you're just flaunting the little theory you know. Any "composer" could sit on their ass all day and talk about theory. It's worth nothing if he has nothing to say musically though. I'd rather be "ignorant", cut down all the Piston jargon and get to the music itself.

music is music - a completely subjective art form. he who criticizes is most deserving of criticism.


That means you actually have to do it first...
Last edited by Pillo114 at Jun 16, 2010,
#35
Quote by Pillo114
That means you actually have to do it first...


who says i haven't? just because i have five tracks on UG? i have nothing to prove to UG, nor do i have anything to prove to people like you. i'm here to help, and that's all.

EDIT:

Quote by Pillo114
You're not elitist, you're just flaunting the little theory you know.


you did NOT just say that.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
Last edited by AeolianWolf at Jun 16, 2010,
#36
Quote by AeolianWolf
who says i haven't? just because i have five tracks on UG? i have nothing to prove to UG, nor do i have anything to prove to people like you. i'm here to help, and that's all.



No, and no one has to prove anything to UG nor myself, but I think if someone enjoyed music so much to the point of reading Piston they'd be itching to make music at any chance they get.

EDIT:

you did NOT just say that.


Ignorance is bliss right? Welcome to the Ignorant squad.
#37
Quote by evolucian
Still dont really know who it is... but if you fighting to not sound like him in your playing, then you fighting your roots. Embrace em buddy... warble that voice some more and do some crotch grabbing



this guy ...



LOL

regarding theory n stuff.


I dunno, if you dig it, why not learn it. The only issue I have is when people that aren't all that experienced use the fancy words as way to win arguments. Like they read a bit of it.... and then all the sudden they are experts.

Thats just human nature (immaturity) though.... A big chunk of what is said on the internet is garbage anyway IMO. (argument for argument sake).

I think though that guys like AeolianWolf (and others here) are genuinely trying to learn theory for legitimate reasons. personally, I think thats great.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 16, 2010,
#38
Quote by GuitarMunky
this guy ...



LOL

Coagulation... don't fight it bro... i repeat... embrace it. Although crotch grabbing at that age might just look like puberty dawning badly. But nonetheless... yoo can do eet!
#40
Quote by griffRG7321
HOLY **** Look alike or what




^ the kid who ruined star wars. Damn him ( and jar jar too)

and yeah they kinda do look alike.
shred is gaudy music
Page 1 of 2