# What am I doing wrong here..?



## Majed Al Shamsi

I was experimenting with both, writing a Waltz, and writing for more than one instrument (piano and violin,) and I've no idea what I'm doing wrong.

If anyone can point out the mistakes for me, or point to where there is room for improvement, I'd appreciate it.

This is the link to the SoundCloud file:


__
https://soundcloud.com/majed-al-shamsi%2Funtitled-embarrassing-waltz

And this is the sheet music:


----------



## amfortas

Why do you assume you've done something wrong?


----------



## Crudblud

If it doesn't feel right to you, you'll just have to work on it until it does.


----------



## violadude

Is this supposed to sound like a traditional waltz? If you're trying to write a waltz in a traditional style I could give you tips to make it sound better, but if it's an experimental waltz then you'll have to explain more the effect you are trying to achieve.


----------



## Aramis

What Crudblud says, there are no "mistakes" to point out because there is no "proper" chord that "should" follow another instead of the cheesy one you've put there, same with melody. 

If you want to write simple waltz, first create that om-pah-pah chords from first bar until first resolvement (it's really easy, basic triades will do) - "you'll just have to work on it until it does" sound right to you - then add melody over it using only those notes in each bar that consist the chord in the piano part.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

Amfortas - Because it doesn't sound right to me, and I don't know why.

Crudblud - Problem is I don't know why it doesn't feel right to me, so I also don't know what needs working on. Any idea? 

Violadude - Yes, I'm trying to learn how to write a traditional waltz. It would be great if I could get any tips or pointers. 

Aramis - But wouldn't starting with the om-pah-pah part limit what I can do with the melody?
Does melody conform to the harmony, or is it the other way around?

Thank you all for helping me out.
Just a quick question - Is it okay to change the time signature to, say, 4/4 in the middle of the piece, and then switch back to 3/4? Would it still be considered a waltz?


----------



## violadude

The biggest problem I see is that your harmony: #1) is really static and the progression doesn't make much sense #2) Doesn't really mesh with the melody that well.

Always pay attention to how your harmonies are complimenting the melody and always think about where you want the harmony to go. Either go farther from the tonic or closer to it but staying on it almost the whole time is the least interesting thing you can do in this style.

I have re harmonized the first few bars of your melody with harmonies that fit better with the melody and a smoother bassline. Some of the harmonies might be a tad atypical for the Strauss Waltz style but they still make sense within a tonal framework.









Here's what it sounds like:


__
https://soundcloud.com/violadude%2Ftest-example

Also, I didn't do much with the first two bars because I don't really understand why they are there to be honest. A two bar introduction consisting of four repeated tonic chords preceding a melody that starts on the tonic sounds incredibly redundant to me.

Also, look for patterns that are typical for that time period. For example, near the end of the part that I have re harmonized, the melody implies I-V-I progression so why not just make that a typical I6/4-V-I cadence since it's at the end of a phrase?


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

Thank you for taking the time to help me out.

I noticed that in your sheet music, the keys of the -pah-pah parts were fairly close, from one measure to the next, while the keys of the om- part jumped around a lot. Is that the trick to avoid making it sound static?

Will change the intro, and I'll work on fixing the harmony of the piece.

Thanks again, Violadude! :tiphat:


----------



## violadude

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> Thank you for taking the time to help me out.
> 
> I noticed that in your sheet music, the keys of the -pah-pah parts were fairly close, from one measure to the next, while the keys of the om- part jumped around a lot. Is that the trick to avoid making it sound static?


Well, changing the harmony more often is the trick to making it not sound static. Writing a fluid bassline with more static inner voices is just sort of par for the course in the classical style and writing that way serves multiple functions.


----------



## Aramis

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> Aramis - But wouldn't starting with the om-pah-pah part limit what I can do with the melody?


Maybe it would. But if you have problems like this, harmonising already written melody will be extremely difficult for you and doing it the other way will be better to start off. If you want to learn to write simple tonal music for beginning, the chord progression is fundament for melody and everything. Expand and think about how to be less limited after you learn to work within the basics.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

Thank you, Violadude and Aramis.


----------



## Ravndal

The biggest problem is that you only have one chord. G major. Except in one of the last bars where you have c major. Which actually feels like a typo, since you only do it once. Use the dominant chord at least.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

Thank you, Ravndal.
I shall try to use more than just the dominant chord, soon as I get the chance.


----------



## Vasks

My takes:

1) Let your intro be a little longer (perhaps avoiding using the tonic chord [G major] altogether) and end it on the dominant [D major chord]. Perhaps the intro can be violin only or piano only.

2) Yes, you can have a 4/4 middle section and still call it a waltz, but you really should have a compelling reason why

3) The measures where the bass part (lowest note in each measure of the piano left hand) is suggestion the dominant, but your chord is a much weaker mediant (B minor chord)

4) Ms. 12 is too stagnant. The piano needs 8th note motion to keep everything moving.

5) Your bass line is too much just the pitches G and F#. Try other notes on the downbeats that harmonize pleasantly with the violin''s downbeats and you'll discover other chords must go with those downbeat notes.

6) Both hands playing the exact same notes throughout is not that effective. For one 8 bar phrase maybe. For the entire part, not.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

I still have no idea how to figure out the left hand part... 

Help!

If it's of any use, below is exactly what the right hand is playing.

G || A G F# G || B || C B A B || D || C D E C || B C D B || A B C A || G ||

It's easy to figure out what chords go with measures 1, 3, 5 and 9. The rest, though...

Also, I've noticed that inverting a chord to get a smoother bass line doesn't work, because the interval between the second and third notes becomes a fourth (dissonant). Are there any tricks to get a smoother bass line while avoiding that?


----------



## violadude

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> I still have no idea how to figure out the left hand part...
> 
> Help!
> 
> If it's of any use, below is exactly what the right hand is playing.
> 
> G || A G F# G || B || C B A B || D || C D E C || B C D B || A B C A || G ||
> 
> It's easy to figure out what chords go with measures 1, 3, 5 and 9. The rest, though...
> 
> Also, I've noticed that inverting a chord to get a smoother bass line doesn't work, because the interval between the second and third notes becomes a fourth (dissonant). Are there any tricks to get a smoother bass line while avoiding that?


Does the 4th sound bad to you?


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

violadude said:


> Does the 4th sound bad to you?


Yes, it does.
Could you please talk me through your version of the sheet music?
I honestly tried breaking it down, but couldn't understand why you wrote it that way.
It must mean that I'm missing a huge chunk of basic music theory.


----------



## Mahlerian

Fourths are considered consonances so long as there is not a fourth between the bass note and the root (the second inversion, which is more limited in use). (Of course, the "augmented fourth" from C to F# is a dissonance in any traditional circumstance.)

Stacked fourths, incidentally, make a wonderful, beautiful sound, as do parallel fourths. All music that anyone cares about has dissonances. Learn to love dissonances and make use of them, and your music will benefit immensely (listeners will find it more interesting as well).


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

What's the difference between stacked and parallel?
I understand the importance of dissonance in music, but for the bass line of a waltz, I think the inevitable repetition of fourth intervals may end up sounding more and more dissonant (to my ears, at least,) not in a good way.

Anyway, I could probably give fourths another try, as soon as I figure out how to choose a chord to go with a given point of the melody.


----------



## Mahlerian

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> What's the difference between stacked and parallel?


Stacked is putting fourths on top of each other, like D-G-C-F-Bflat-Eflat. It has an ambiguous functionality, and so can fit into many roles.

Parallel is simply moving two lines from one fourth to another fourth. Parallel thirds and sixths are a very common thing in counterpoint, of course.



> I understand the importance of dissonance in music, but for the bass line of a waltz, I think the inevitable repetition of fourth intervals may end up sounding more and more dissonant (to my ears, at least,) not in a good way.
> 
> Anyway, I could probably give fourths another try, as soon as I figure out how to choose a chord to go with a given point of the melody.


You want to think in terms of harmonic motion, not simply "what notes go with these notes?". The accompaniment, by itself, should make musical sense and have the same points of departure and rest as the melody. Since you're writing a waltz, most of what you will want is I-V-I in various forms, but near the end, the harmonic rhythm should increase (the chords should change more often).

The harmonies in Violadude's version are:
I6/4-I
I-iii-IV-V-I
IV-I6/4-V-I


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

I shall try that, and get back to you.

Thank you, everyone, for your helpful replies.


----------



## violadude

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> Yes, it does.
> Could you please talk me through your version of the sheet music?
> I honestly tried breaking it down, but couldn't understand why you wrote it that way.
> It must mean that I'm missing a huge chunk of basic music theory.


Well, all I did was harmonize your melody with the chord progression of: I-vi-IV-V : I-IV-I6-V-I

Which is one of the most basic and simple chord progressions there is. You'll see this kind of progression near the beginning of any harmony textbook. Sometimes the vi is a ii but they share the same function.

So I wrote the bass accordingly, with sufficient smoothness but also with a sense of freedom and independence.

And the inner voices I wrote in a fashion where they move around as little as possible, which is usually how inner voices in this kind of music works.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

Okay... So I've given it another try.
This is what the sheet music looks like.









I've used the I-IV-V-I progression, with inversions, which is basic... Little steps, I'm afraid.
Am I doing it right, now?
Do excuse the cheap melody.


----------



## violadude

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> Okay... So I've given it another try.
> This is what the sheet music looks like.
> 
> View attachment 46484
> 
> 
> I've used the I-IV-V-I progression, with inversions, which is basic... Little steps, I'm afraid.
> Am I doing it right, now?
> Do excuse the cheap melody.


It's getting better.

There are a few parts where the harmony doesn't really support the melody very well though, namely measures 6 and 18.

Also, inversions shouldn't just be used arbitrarily to give the music some variety. In this style of music, inverting the chord can change its function, especially when you're dealing with the I or V chord.

Also, IF you want to be really textbook about it, the order of your chord progression is "wrong", in a sense, at certain points.

IV goes to V, but V almost never goes to IV in this style.

Edit: Pst, measures 17-19 would be a good place for one of those cadential 16/4-V-I progressions. 

Edit #2: Sorry, disregard my comment about the V not going to IV. That's true, but you didn't do that, I read the music wrong.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

Thanks, Violadude. I'm currently looking into the most popular chord progressions, and I'll start practicing soon.

When you say -



violadude said:


> Also, inversions shouldn't just be used arbitrarily to give the music some variety. In this style of music, inverting the chord can change its function, especially when you're dealing with the I or V chord.


Is this what you mean?


----------



## violadude

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> Thanks, Violadude. I'm currently looking into the most popular chord progressions, and I'll start practicing soon.
> 
> When you say -
> 
> Is this what you mean?
> 
> View attachment 46605


What I mean is, different chords have different "functions". In the CPE harmonic system, chords allude to, or imply, other chords and different chords lead the harmony in different directions. The bassline is one of the defining aspects of harmony and so depending on what is in the bass, not only do different chords lead in different directions but the same chord with different notes in the bass can change which chords it's alluding to. Does that make sense? The way I explained it might be a bit contrived.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

But I thought inversions had the same notes with a different order?
Perhaps you mean the order of the notes in a chord can change which chords it's alluding to?

Also, does this talk fall under the title of functional harmony? Because I think I need to do some reading.


----------



## SeptimalTritone

An inversion of a chord is solely defined by the _bottom_ note (the bass note). In your waltz, it's the first bottom note in each measure. In a C major chord, having a C at the bass is root position, E is first inversion, and G is second inversion. You want to be careful about the inversion of a chord, especially second inversion, because the perfect fourth with the bass note is dissonant.

Root position is the most stable and the most common for most chords, especially suited for the final cadence G7-C (actually in your G major piece it's D7-G). First inversion is consonant, but more restless sounding with the third at the bass and more used to give smoothness and variety to the bassline (probably not as common for your waltz). Second inversion has to be done very specifically, either as a cadential 6-4 chord I(64) - V7 - I (good for a strong finish) or in neighboring/passing which gives a running feel. Leaping in the bassline from one second inversion chord to another is like two unresolved dissonances.

Edit: Also, the bottom note being so important is not some arbitrary thing, but intimately tied to the way the chord will sound and function. Root position is basically completely stable. First inversion is consonant, but restless sounding. And second inversion is dissonant, and if you want to resolve it as a dissonance you drop the G on top of the D to a F#, giving a D major root position chord. There are good harmonic series reasons for this which is a cool math/physics thing to read up on.

I suggest looking at http://spider.georgetowncollege.edu/music/burnette/MUS111/111.htm to brush up on music theory, and possibly getting a book like Kostka and Payne for more examples and depth.


----------



## zvioliny

What felt wrong to me was that you used the same chords every time (except near the end). If you learn chord progressions you can put the right chords in the right places (where it sounds right).


----------

