Download “The Essential Secrets of Songwriting” 6 e-book bundle, and be the best songwriter you can be!
______
Is it possible to create attractive, appealing song melodies without having a strong background in music theory? I believe it is, and I say that as a person who has had a career-long interest in teaching music theory. As a composer and a teacher, I am a strong believer in the benefits of understanding the rudiments of music. And every so often, I feel the need to address the issue of creativity and theory. Specifically, does music theory stunt a songwriter’s creativity?
Every so often, someone will write me with a question that goes something like, “Can I have this chord follow that chord?” or “Am I allowed to [insert musical idea here].” In other words, they want to know if music theory “permits” their musical brainwave to exist. Are they violating the rules of music theory by going ahead with their idea?
My answer is always, in the nicest possible way, “Who cares?” Music theory was never meant to tell people what to compose. If that were the purpose of theory, music composition would never rise above selling pencils as an artistic activity.
Music theory has its place, and I believe that songwriters who have such a background benefit greatly. The story that music theory stunts creativity is a ridiculous myth. Theory doesn’t close your mind, it opens it. Theory allows you to communicate musical ideas to others easily, and improves composition without actually telling you what to write.
And because theory teaches you common musical constructs and explains how and why they work, the study of music theory improves your ear.
Nonetheless, can you write attractive, appealing song melodies without having a theory background, or even being able to read music? Yes, for this simple reason: composition fuels theory, and not the other way around. The theoretical rules of music evolve over time, by composers writing what they want to hear. Theory, in turn, merely explains; it doesn’t dictate.
So how can songwriters create beautiful melodies if their knowledge of music theory is scant or missing entirely? Here are some ideas:
- Use your musical instincts. One might argue that it should actually be easier for a songwriter who doesn’t read music to do this.
- Even without music theory, most musicians know scales, and so keep this basic rule in mind: most melodies should move mainly by scale steps, with only occasional leaps.
- Good melodies tend to have a “climactic high point”. This is a spot in the melody that is usually a coinciding of a high pitch with a structurally significant chord (the tonic or dominant chord).
- Good melodies incorporate a recognizable shape, called a motif, which tends to repeat (either as-is, or modified) throughout the song. This motif is part of what makes a melody memorable. A good example is Springsteen’s “Born in the U.S.A.”, which repeats that catchy melodic hook over and over.
- Good melodies should place high-emotion words higher in pitch. There is a natural pulse to language, and your words should reflect this natural pulse.
And more about point number 1, above: The study of music theory sometimes gets a bad rap in songwriting circles because there is sometimes a tendency for theory-trained musicians to limit themselves to what they understand. This is sad; it’s like an artist not using a colour on their palette because they don’t know what to call it.
I encourage any songwriter to study rudimentary theory as a way of improving your creativity and opening your musical mind. In the meantime, keep those five points in mind. It is very possible to write very fine music without specific theory instruction.
Another good thing to study for this sort of stuff I think is opera recitative. The problem is that opera tends to make people who aren’t already fans of it shudder in horror. But everything you say here had to be invented in whole cloth by the people who created opera 400 years ago: how do you make someone TALK and SING at the same time, convincingly? What words are emphasized? How does the melodic contour parallel the emotional contour of what’s being said?
Not the arias mind you, just the recitative, the sung dialogue. The arias are nice, but there’s a time when studying exactly how one SINGS the words, “Caesar, turn toward me and nowhere else the light of those eyes which I adore,” illustrates how to communicate through song better than anything else. Or “Let them come! Caesar has never before felt fear!”
Hey Gary,
I can’t agree more – music theory is just one tool. I’m constantly reminding my classes that what I teach them (I teach intermediate/advanced theory at the Art Institute in Vancouver) is just a tool … NOT a rulebook. If you think of theory as a rulebook, then that’s when it closes your mind.
Theory can help you write, understand and communicate musically, but it will not and should not be expected to tell you how to write or be creative.
Being creative with sound (music) came first – understanding and codifying it (theory) came later. Sure, you can use theory to be creative – it gives you options and perhaps helps you come up with things you may not have thought of through instincts, but it’s not a recipe – that’s a trap I see too often.
I always remind my students – use your ears first and then use theory to understand what you did and possibly look for other interesting options. On the way, you may find a “happy accident” – that’s what makes music cool.
HI Dave – Completely agree, 100%!
-Gary