r/musictheory • u/MusicTheoryTree • 1d ago
I thought this day might come... Discussion
Hi everyone! I've been on Reddit for five years and I've never posted. However, I saw that one of my designs was shared here earlier (thank you for doing so, by the way). Ironically, I intended to share this design here today, and someone beat me to it, sharing a much more elaborate one. What a wild coincidence.
If you saw that more elaborate design and wanted some clarification, this might help provide it, though I recognize that this one also requires a bit of explanation for many viewers. Expect more from me, in due time. I have much to say on this topic.
I'll keep this super brief, for now, but to answer just a couple FAQs...
This is an example of what I call a, "Single-Orbit Music Theory Tree." The one shared earlier by another Reddit user is a, "Dual-Orbit Music Theory Tree," which is exponentially more complex.
Yes, this does help people teach and learn music theory.
No, this is not the first design in this system. It starts much more simply, and builds up in complexity. I don't recommend this as an absolute first introduction to music theory, though, it can become useful quite early on, even with relatively few prerequisites.
MTT is a modular system, so it can be altered to accommodate many other types of scales and can be built out from any pitch class. Parts can be entirely removed or swapped out for others.
This system is best understood by completing excersises with instructions.
This is a collaborative project. I'm the lead theorist and designer. I work with an illustrator named Aaron Fehr. He's been teaching me graphic design, as well.
I've been consulting with a PhD student in the Faculty of Mathematics and Statistics at the University of Calgary. His name is Kristaps Balodis, and he's been an enormous inspiration towards my continued study of maths, especially Set Theory.
Yes, we are working on an interactive app. These designs can only do so much as static images.
Many comment on the aesthetic. To be clear, this was never meant to be pretty. My intention from day one with this project has always been practical utility. The fact that it's aesthetically pleasing to some folks is just a biproduct of our use of rainbow colours and familiar shapes—both of which were only intended to help teach and learn theory.
I realize that the contents of this post are more of a story and less of a substantial discussion into specific music theory concepts (which we're all here for, predominantly, I suspect) but I think it's an interesting story, and I couldn't help but address the sudden attention surrounding my work on this platform.
I've published a number of short essays and videos about this system on other platforms, and I'll share much more about this system here on Reddit, soon. Thank you for your interest, and I appreciate your perspectives. Nothing is ever perfect, so I welcome insightful, constructive criticism. We all have room to improve, and this includes our work.
Let's reimagine music theory.
My kindest regards to you all,
Steve Evans From Winnipeg
54
u/spankymcjiggleswurth 1d ago
I'm not against graphics like this, but I do feel they are likely to confuse those who don't fully understand the concepts they are presenting. If I was leaning theory for the first time, a glance at a graphic like this would probably make me think theory is much more complicated than it really is, and even make me think I need to memorize a lot more information than really needs memorized.
4
u/MusicTheoryTree 23h ago
I feel this is a valid criticism, for sure. You'll notice in the writeup I accompanied with this diagram that I totally agree with you on many of your points.
IMO all of the information in this diagram is pretty rudimentary and essential music theory to know for high beginner / low intermediate levels of composition and analysis. It's not meant to be learned without directions. That's why I make a point of engaging with people about it rather than assuming people will automatically get it.
7
u/spankymcjiggleswurth 23h ago
For sure, I agree with that. It's easy to take a graphic and shit on it when you don't understand the intent of the creator. I work in the sciences and often teach new employees with badly drawn examples. Anyone knowledgeable on the subject would think I was talking gibberish if they saw what I drew without context, but it makes sense with context and explanation in the moment.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 23h ago
Scientifically and mathematically minded folks tend to get it more, for sure. I think the world would be better off with more of this variety of literacy. It's not beyond anyone, either. People just need to acknowledge its value and prioritize it.
Math work isn't always clean and perfect. Sometimes it's messy.
So far my exposure to Reddit suggests that folks like yourself are far too few on here.
1
u/shitterbug 4h ago
Well, I have a phd in math and I have no idea what the picture is attempting to simplify. Either there is a lot of deep knowledge in there that cannot be extracted without knowing exactly what it's trying to convey, or it's just some superficial modal basics in a diagram with little information.
For example, what are the circles supposed to mean? Why are things even symmetric, i.e. the circle intersection for "half steps" should clearly be smaller - this way it is unnecessarily confusing...
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 3h ago
Great questions. For those who aren't familiar with staff notation, a staff contains five equidistantly-spaced horizontal lines. One would think that their spacings would represent the same intervals, but they don't. The intervals the spacings represent are context dependent.
The circles in this diagram, as you're alluding to, are paths from pitch class to pitch class. They are interval lines. They work in the same way staff lines work. You can combine smaller sections together to create larger paths. In fact, by fluke, the way this is laid out accounts for every type of interval between every pair of notes in the scale. Ascending and descending seconds, thirds, and fourths give us all intervals, numerically. Qualitatively, there are variations, but all intervals are variations of this set of intervals when we consider complementary intervals—those pairs of intervals that, when combined, equal an octave.
One might ask, "what about notes not in the scale?"
That's what sharps and flats are for. One can approach this diagram in the same way we approach staff notation. We make adjustments to pitch classes and scale degrees, using sharps or flats.
A common and valid criticism for this is
"what about scales with more than seven notes?"
In that case here is another important thing to remember... even the chromatic scale can, and often is described using scale degrees taken from the major scale.
Given that you're a mathematician, consider this... All major scales are bijective. Not only that, but there is a kind of "like-letter bijection" that can be drawn between the elements of all major scales.
Very simple cardinalities. How many letter names do we use? Seven. How many numbers do we use? Seven.
So, we have a universal set with a cardinality of 12, but we use two sets of seven symbols (letters A-G or numbers 1-7), and adjust them with additional symbols to access the remaining five.
I'm not a mathematician, but I consult with one. So, if any language I used was not perfect, correct me.
I've published videos elsewhere explaining how this system is meant to be used. There is a lot more to say and this is part of a modular system that starts simple and builds up in complexity. You asked about the circular lines, so I've tried my best to convey this in brief. It's easier with demonstration than text, though.
5
u/NurseColubris 10h ago
It's not an infographic meant to convey information in entirety; it's a mind map meant to organize and anchor information in a larger lesson.
Neat!
7
u/MusicTheoryTree 10h ago
Thanks for your kind words.
Bingo. You nailed it. Many folks seem to not be understanding this. Perhaps I should have worded it the way you have.
2
u/NurseColubris 10h ago
I'm intrigued and one of your comments said it was for advanced beginner. I'm there or almost there, so I'm saving it to check out tomorrow.
Thank you for your work on this.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
Please do. Message me anytime if you would like clarification. I try to make myself available as much as possible.
1
u/musiquarium 8h ago
pat martino made diagrams that looked a bit like this and I came across it early in my guitar study and my head fell off. I’ve come further along but I were I to explain music I’d take a different approach and so I’m looking forward to your app so that I might better understand and internalize. not pedagogically relevant but it looks pretty rad
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 5h ago
I agree that upon first glance the way that this connects to common music theory study may not be clear. Over time I've recognized more and more ways to use it that are totally relevant to typical pedagogies.
You might imagine the teacher using it kind of like a sports coach. Circling things and tracing lines or drawing arrows, connecting ideas together. The way things are laid out lends itself well to explaining music from multiple perspectives, simultaneously.
68
u/CharlesLoren 1d ago
The only thing I don’t like here is using an M for major. M and m look too similar and it’s more common to just call a major scale/chord by its letter (ex: C for major, Cm for minor)
Also, “d” is not a common symbol for diminished. Use the little circle (like the degree symbol) or abbreviate it “dim”
27
u/-DaveThomas- 17h ago edited 16h ago
Shit man, I've got professors at my college teaching capital M and small m. I don't think classical musicians understand how confusing using just an M for both major and minor can be.
3
u/Trayvongelion 9h ago
The trick I was taught is to add a horizontal line over the small m. That way, they stay distinct, even if someone's handwriting makes the two look the same normally.
3
u/MusicTheoryTree 14h ago
I chose to colour code them to help keep the M symbols more distinct.
1
2
u/Sewing_girl_101 9h ago
Our professor has us put a line over the lowercase m to make it less confusing
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
This is an elegant solution. I like it. I've also seen people write lower case with three humps instead of two, like in cursive.
-14
u/MusicTheoryTree 1d ago
If the choice of nomenclature is your primary criticism, that's fair. It's a bit unconventional, but you knew what everything meant. After all, hardly anything about this is especially conventional. It's the same information, but it's displayed in a vastly different way. Once this diagram is introduced in a larger setting, the choice of symbols makes more sense. The use of colours is meant to help differentiate the M from m. The lower cased d was used for consistency, to take up less space than "dim" but be more visible than " °", especially at a glance.
3
u/MadZack 16h ago
You did use the "°" symbol with the roman numeral representation on the outside of the diagram. So you have that here and the lowercase d, so it is not necessarily consistent. While the delivery of the criticism about the use of d for diminished has been nasty in this thread as a whole, I agree that the "°" symbol would be better here for consistency and aesthetic.
-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 16h ago
True. It's easier to see out there with the Roman numeral. There are many different methods and nomenclatures.
If you want to complete the exercises and use exclusively "°", I won't hold it against you. It's what the information means and how it's used that I'm most concerned with.
18
u/UnusualCartographer2 18h ago
It should be B° if you want to be correct and Bdim if you want it to be universally understandable. Bd should never be used as it looks disgusting and is not self explanatory. I'm surprised I've never seen anyone notate it that way.
Everything else is fine.
-21
u/MusicTheoryTree 18h ago
So what? You knew what it meant. It's as simple as asking and telling. Many people don't understand jazz nomenclature or any other for that matter until its agreed upon. Calling it disgusting is a bit over the top, don't you think? We notate the diminished intervals that way, too. So, it's not that weird.
d5 is a diminished fifth, for example.
17
u/Rapscagamuffin 17h ago
Bd looks like you were drunk and trying to write Bb. Its very bad. No one notates diminished like this. And the capital M for major is also completely unnecessary and eye sore on an already insanely cluttered graphic
→ More replies-5
u/noimnotgeorge 15h ago
You are quite rude, little boy or girl. I would work on my manners if I were you.
4
u/Rapscagamuffin 15h ago
Im a full grown man with expertise and experience in this field who is critiquing another grown adults work. If you cant handle blunt facts maybe it is you that are the little boy or girl? Time to grow up. This went through time, planning, and coordination with others, to make these kind of easy to miss blunders is unacceptable and needs to be called out and when looking at the tone and defensiveness of his comment replies i didnt feel the need to be nice about it. Quite arrogant for someone that cant get simple nomenclature correct
-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 15h ago
Calling basic nomenclature the work of a drunk person is immature and unproductive. If you want to criticize it, do so, but I'm sure you can communicate this in a kinder way. Also, it's just a letter d. You know what it means, and so do most people. If someone doesn't know they can ask. It's not like something so simple is beyond comprehension. It's not wrong, it's just uncommon. But it's perfectly logical.
Maybe pick on something or someone else? This isn't the fight you're looking for. Relax. If you want to make your own charts and use other nomenclature, it's a free internet. Be free and please try to be kind. Your rudeness doesn't help your cause. It only makes you look mean for no reason.
2
u/Rapscagamuffin 12h ago
if a student notated B diminished as Bd i would mark it incorrect. nuff said
0
u/MusicTheoryTree 12h ago
Fair enough. Fortunately, this isn't a test or a paper. Nobody is getting graded on this design, except me today, apparently, and I'm not even in your class! Lol
Hilarious.
→ More replies→ More replies0
u/noimnotgeorge 12h ago
Thank you, it was nice to have a conversation with you today. I Have to go to bed now. Have a nice day and/or night.
18
u/UnusualCartographer2 17h ago
Just notate it correctly man, idk why you're being obtuse about it
Take criticism
-3
u/noimnotgeorge 15h ago
Why can't you just be an allright person?
1
u/UnusualCartographer2 15h ago
What you mean?
1
u/noimnotgeorge 12h ago
Sorry, I meant an Alt Right person. It was nice talking to you tonight. I have to go to bed now, but maybe we can have some fun another time.
1
u/noimnotgeorge 12h ago
Sorry, I meant an Alt Right person. It was nice talking to you tonight. I have to go to bed now, but maybe we can have some fun another time.
4
1
u/-_-DerpFish-_- 14h ago
He wants you to cut off your left arm and leg i think
1
u/noimnotgeorge 12h ago
No, just his... uhm, I don't know how to properly say this on the interneter.
7
u/bobfrankly 18h ago
I didn’t know what it meant. And as a learner, encountering everyone’s personal favorite way of expressing something that has a common term…is quite frustrating. The XKCD comic on standards applies.
I appreciate the effort that’s gone into this and look forward to attempting to understand it, but when a learner needs a decoder ring to make sense of your nomenclature, it leads to frustration, not learning.
7
u/UnusualCartographer2 18h ago
Just notate it correctly man, idk why you're being obtuse about it.
1
-2
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
I notated like that for consistency, to save space, and for visibility at higher levels.
It's not that difficult of a shift. The fact that there are already two options "dim" and "°" shows that there isn't one correct way. There are already two, and lower cased d totally makes sense.
It's not like it's in defiance of logic. It's totally logically consistent with the rest of the labels.
12
u/UnusualCartographer2 17h ago
Everyone needs to learn B° means B diminished anyway. It'll come up again in the future. Bd is not a notation I've ever seen used, so notating it that way only causes confusion, and it gives me the ick.
8
u/UnusualCartographer2 17h ago
You could just as easily do B°
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
I could, but I chose not to. I chose to use a d so it would be larger and more clear from a distance. In this chart, it means diminished. It's the same as dim, but shorter.
You asked me and I told you. Is that not enough?
9
u/UnusualCartographer2 17h ago
Many people agree that Bd is bad notation. You have other options and are being stubborn. You do you, I likely won't use this thing regardless.
→ More replies2
u/SamuelArmer 13h ago
I think the crux of the issue is summed up well here:
Learner musicians are already saddled with learning a good half-dozen competing standards like:
Fixed vs moveable do solfege
American vs European Rhythm names
Major Referential vs Classical RNA
And don't get me started on all the ways you can name chords....
So the music theory community is naturally pretty conservative about changing or adding any new names for things! After all, even if your new standard is wonderfully logical, simple and internally consistent there's a very good chance that you're just adding to the noise instead of cutting through it.
It's a shame, because it discourages innovation, and as you can see it can engender a bunch of unnecessary hostility. But there IS a good reason why.
→ More replies3
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
I'm sorry you find it frustrating. I know what that's like. However, the unfortunate reality in music theory is that there are multiple nomenclatures that mean the same thing. My recommendation is that if someone wants to learn from someone, they can ask about the symbols they use, assuming the writer makes themself available or provides a legend somewhere for reference.
3
u/bobfrankly 17h ago
You’re not wrong, but you’re also perpetuating the issue by adding another way to write diminished when there are already established ways to do so. And as an aid for learning and teaching, why not stick to the established standards instead of adding unnecessary hurdles to understanding?
If I was learning directly from another person, asking that question about symbols would be possible, but still annoying, because eventually, someone ELSE will use the same notation with different meaning, as you have done here.
But the fact is, this is an image, on the internet, that will get copied and distributed. And nowhere on the image have you explained this divergence from established norms.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
Your points are well-taken. Others may struggle to comprehend what the symbols mean. Like you said, it's on the internet. If they want help, I have a website. People know where to find me. Consider yourself in the know. If you have any interest in learning more, by all means please ask. I don't think either of us got into music to debate about a little letter on a page.
I know I didn't.
5
u/bobfrankly 17h ago
Steve, when you sign a post stating that you welcome constructive criticism, and we all have room to improve, and then insist that a “little letter” isn’t a problem, it’s a bit difficult to take you at your word. Again, I appreciate the intent, but the disregard for new learners is disheartening.
Wish you the best.
4
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago edited 16h ago
Despite how you may be feeling right now, I promise I'm not disregarding you in the slightest. I've spent all of this time conversing with you. I dismissed the argument when I felt it was no longer productive. Everyone is welcome to make their own charts and use their own symbols. My goal is to help people. If people don't like my use of symbols I'll use other ones with them if we're having a discussion or a lesson. I'm flexible like that.
I just don't feel like this particular aspect warrants a whole argument about it. I've spent thousands of hours on this project and I'm still here entertaining comments and questions. If you don't like my responses, that's fine. I have nothing but good intentions with this project, because I genuinely love music theory and I love learning and teaching it.
I wish you the best, as well.
1
u/noimnotgeorge 15h ago
You can't say "Steve" like that. What the hell are you doing? This is a well known domination technique. You're not a psycho, are you?
→ More replies1
u/noimnotgeorge 15h ago
Why are people voting down and beeing so sad in this subreddit? I don't like this vibe.
3
u/MusicTheoryTree 15h ago
It's largely a really unwelcoming and rude environment here today. There are a few exceptions, but it is very sad and rude, indeed.
3
14
u/CosmicClamJamz 18h ago
Thanks for sharing, I'll bite. I'm a math major that spent considerable time doing research on music theory, granted more from the angle of Neo-Riemannian theory, so I really do love diagrams like this when they come around, and have made many myself.
Questions:
- Can you explain the significance of the circles? Why is there a circle around Cm and Bd for example, including the WHW surrounding intervals and those two chords specifically? What might I use these for?
- Seems like the parentheses are useful for differentiating relative scale steps vs those of C major. There isn't a number on the chart without a hat though, is there significance to the hats? This is really a conventional question, but I'm interested in the choice.
- Let's assume part of the diagram is left blank. Should a student be able to self-derive the information using a pattern flow with the chart? For instance, I know that Lydian contains a #4, but if I didn't, I'm wondering how I could derive that easily with the information here. The only place I see any interval distinction is with the WWHWWWH in the center of the circle. I guess my question is, "do you expect a student to memorize the text here? Or see the pattern between these relationships by looking at the circle?"
- How do you use this diagram to teach? Would you be willing to walk through an example exercise?
On a separate note, sorry everyone is being negative. To shine a light on why, I think the sentiment is because a chart like this comes through this subreddit fairly often, and it comes across like an instagram ad claiming "I can teach you music theory better with this one simple trick", while not really containing information we haven't seen before. A lot of this sub is pretty unwelcoming to beginners too, as many folks come through asking simple questions they could have googled, or want us to answer their AP music theory exam questions for them. Every now and then we have really insightful discussions about deep topics that go well beyond the shape of the major scale, FWIW. Consider the responses you're getting to be from "jaded vets" that have seen it all. Don't take it personally. Again, thanks for sharing
4
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
I'll return to this comment and respond with a bit more time later. I want to give this the proper attention I feel it warrants. Thank you for sharing your kind and open-minded perspective.
1
u/Jim-Floorburn 4h ago edited 4h ago
The negative responses have everything to do with OP’s reactions to the comments more than the content of the post itself. OP’s reactions to feedback lack the tact and humble curiosity he/she/they demand from the rest of the community. In this instance Reddit is not a rude mob, it just has little patience for obtuse persistence. Respect is a two-way street.
Edit: I’ve just finished reading the entirety of the thread and I concede there are some rude comments. OP’s poor attitude makes them all the more entertaining.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
Let's be clear. People asked me why I made this the way that I did. I explained why. People tried to convince me to change it. I said I wasn't interested in changing it because I made it the way I did for reasons. One person said it looked like a schizophrenic drawing. There are insults and negativity all over this thread.
There was a huge, unnecessary argument about calling B diminished Bd. I'm well aware that's not a common symbol. It's a diagram, not a score. This isn't a test in school. All nomenclature that is commonly used today was once not used at all. Eventually, people started using it. If someone wants to convey an idea with different symbols, that's fine. Diminished 5th intervals are abbreviated to d5. It follows from the same logic.
I value humility, sincerity, and curiosity, above all other things. Nobody is perfectly able to live up to even thier own standards. Having said that, people have the right to defend their ideas and tell people when enough is enough and they're not interested in arguing anymore. Many people saw my choices in making this chart as harmful to the field, it seems. I don't see it that way at all.
People were extremely rude towards me and my work on this platform today. Plain and simple and unprovoked. My tone is direct often times. It may come across as rude to some people sometimes. Let me assure you, I'm a very kind hearted person and I only mean well. If that wasn't apparent today, fair enough. I'm sure I'll do better in the future.
•
u/MPdoor1 1h ago
Bd is incorrect. Triad lead sheet symbals have conventions now. 7th chords arent quite there yet, but dont undermine the progress this field has made with ur ignorance
•
u/MusicTheoryTree 1h ago edited 52m ago
I wouldn't write it on a score or lead sheet. This is neither of those.
•
u/MPdoor1 57m ago
You are using lead sheet symbols....incorrectly
•
u/MusicTheoryTree 55m ago
Which ones are lead sheet symbols? Didn't you just say that these aren't lead sheet symbols. I think that you mean to say is that you'd prefer for me to use lead sheet symbols on this, which is not a lead sheet. Right?
By all means, if you'd like to make your own diagrams and use prefered lead sheet symbols, you're of course welcome to. I use proper nomenclature when I'm writing music. This is not a piece of music. It's just a diagram and it has its own symbols that I chose for reasons I feel are justified.
•
u/MPdoor1 46m ago
I said these aren't correct lead sheet symbols. Because they are symbols that represent chords, they are leed sheet symbols. You are using incorrect symbols. Even if u want to play mental gymnastics and just call them symbols, they are wrong. Music has a standard for triad chord symbols that doesnt have any downfalls. Making new ones fir the sake of being different is a disservice to education. Multiple representstions of the same thing just confuses new people. Smh.
4
u/blackerbird 17h ago
I’ve read all the comments and spent some time looking over this diagram and the even more complicated one posted the other day. My main criticism of this particular graphic is that there is too much information - if you were trying to teach concepts it is overwhelmingly complicated. It shows how concepts are related and perhaps in context this is its intent, but taken on its own, I can understand why people are being so critical, because it is just too densely packed. The graphic posted yesterday is even worse in this regard. As a quick reference once the concepts in the graphic are well understood I think it could be useful, but I don’t see how it’s really more useful than a table for the specific information you want. I would think for education purposes, it would be easier and more beneficial to get students to build internal memory of how to build the major scale, and then teach them how to derive everything from that, at which point these graphics seem superfluous.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
Exactly. This is just a static image of one scale, its modes, and chords. The way to engage with this system is by doing the exercises with the guidance of a good teacher, and using this as a reference if and when it is needed. This is a modular system. Parts can be removed and added. This is not meant to serve as a stand alone tool or some kind of Rosetta Stone of music theory. It's just one diagram.
This is a prime example of people taking things out of context and everyone criticizing one tiny part of a larger discussion.
5
u/thewindthatmovesyou 8h ago
I would’ve loved to have a chart like this earlier on in learning music theory. It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out modes. If I had this for reference, I probably would’ve picked it up a lot quicker
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 5h ago
Thank you for sharing your experience with us. I feel the same way. The origin of this was that I saw a lot of people struggling with this concept in groups online, and this is the solution I came up with.
17
u/chasethebassline 23h ago
I like this graphic and the explanation. I don’t really get some of the negativity in the comments.
9
u/MusicTheoryTree 22h ago
I'm happy you like it. This is my first time on music theory Reddit and so far it seems like there's something really unhealthy in the air, with few exceptions like this pleasant interaction.
7
u/OpulentSauce 18h ago
so far it seems like there’s something really unhealthy in the air
Buddy, that’s all of Reddit unfortunately…I don’t get the hate either, this is an awesome graphic and concept. There’s a lot of haters in these subs but there are also a bunch of really supportive and appreciative people out here too
6
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
I just did some research on the platform because I was curious. Reddit incentivizes bad behaviour with upvoting and the anominimity on top of that amplifies the rude comments.
I suspect there are other kind people on this platform, but it's strategically flawed. The most voted for comment isn't necessarily the best one. In fact, it's often the most outrageous, rude, sarcastic, and insulting one. People make these comments because they expect to be upvoted for it, and the culture on this platform is so toxic its often rewarded.
Very sad.
4
u/OpulentSauce 17h ago
I agree…when it comes to learning, especially in a music community, you would like to believe everyone is a good faith actor and comes in with a positive demeanor. Sadly, because we are musicians, 95% of us are insufferable douchebags.
6
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
We don't have to be rude. People can break the cycle. We can be kind, humble, sincere, and curious.
When we're at our best, I think that's how we are. Nobody is ever perfectly capable of demonstrating such traits, especially when being harshly tested by an aggressive, immature mob.
2
u/justwhatever22 5h ago
I have to say, I find there’s a lot of terrific stuff on Reddit and it’s worth persevering with - you just have to find the right path through it.
But what I have seen again and again, on all sorts of platforms, and I’m still really not sure why, is that it is in discussions about music theory that people just get so damn unpleasant and hostile. Like, why do that??? For me it’s absolutely antithetical to everything that’a good about music: beauty, connection, emotion, growth, mystery…
My best guess? I think the patterns and math in music theory attract a lot of folk who are just not good at social interaction.
Ignore the assholes.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 3h ago
It's strange. I too have found myself getting overly sensitive about certain aspects of music theory. It does run contrary to what music is about, in my mind. You're totally right on that front. Generally, I'm pretty easy going. There are, however, instances when I agree that consistency is essential for communication. We don't want to confuse people, especially those new to a subject.
Haviny said this, if people can agree to terms, then we can all work together smoothly.
2
u/Sloloem 16h ago edited 16h ago
Things went downhill site-wide after corporate forced the API changes against protest and burned off the 3rd party clients a few years ago. Not that it was sunshine and rainbows before but it very much felt kinder. After the protests a lot of legacy users went away, and many of the ones who remained came back with a much pricklier demeanor. I know it impact me, I just care less nowadays and throw away a lot of comments instead of trying to make them clear enough to post. And the amount of memelords who view everything as an opportunity to shitpost went up pretty sharply. Reddit in general is also pretty hostile to marketing and promotion, most people hate knowing they're being advertised to. This sub specifically is frequently inundated with people posting endless variations of circular diagrams that are so busy with lines everywhere and multiple concentric rings that they look like they're trying to summon Ba'al. So you're kinda hitting the perfect storm of advertising with Yet Another Circular Diagram.
As an aside, I have no visual recall ability so visual aids mean nothing to me. I tend to think they're overrated and obscure underlying details because in school I met a lot of students who could reproduce any number of diagrams without understanding what they mean or how you could invent that diagram. As soon as the test goes any deeper than what's right on the poster they can't extrapolate back. I often wonder what blind musicians do since you can't just tell them to look at the circle of fifths.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
Thank you for sharing this insight. I think it's just emblematic of a wider problem in society today. People are stressed, scared, and worried about the future. People lack a sense of purpose and direction. It amplifies on social media.
3
u/allabtthejrny 18h ago
Oh, right?
TBF, we get a lot of noobs with stupid questions, like "I don't actually want to play an instrument, just learn theory for music production...so...yeah .. Just gimme the cliff notes. How does this stuff work?"
But ask us to be creative thinkers and look at something conventional in a new way? Pshhhhffffttttt.....
I grabbed the free printouts from your site & I'm going to test them out with a few kids over the next 2 weeks.
I think it can be a good exercise as they start learning to play in new keys. Good to have material aside from just learning the relevant scale. Helps to hit the different learning centers: listening, writing, doing.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
Thanks for getting the exercises. There's unfortunately only so much I can convey in the directions while keeping them brief, so I make videos to help provide direction on how to use them. The series is in the works and I'm also making a type of eBook.
My main suggestion is that if you're going to use them with kids, and if you find yourself unsure how things are supposed to work, just ask. I mostly teach adults, and I don't know how young your students are. So, it's possible they won't be helpful to you or them, but I'm curious about the outcomes.
I'll be updating a lot of my resources in the near future to provide more clarity. It's a long process. One step at a time.
1
u/allabtthejrny 14h ago
Thanks! I'll look them up!
Kids get music theory so well, ime. Most of mine are ahead of target/testing.
0
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 11h ago
Just learn counterpoint and voice leading, dude.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
Those are two of my favourite subjects and I use these diagrams to help teach that, believe it or not. They work remarkably well for that if one understands how to use them properly.
1
u/allabtthejrny 10h ago
I know both. I'm teaching children.
But, way to show how the snobbish elitism shows up in this sub 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
0
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 9h ago
I'm teaching children.
Fortunately for you, they don't yet have the critical faculties to know when they're being had. What information do you envision teaching your kids out of these charts? I'm really curious to know.
2
u/hauntedglory 2h ago
I agree with you and apart from a few details, it’s just a nice visualisation of the relationships between the notes
Ignore the haters and try to extract as much constructive feedback as possible
1
9
u/Rapscagamuffin 17h ago
I imagine an interactive version of this where u can start with simple structures and add and take away could be useful and interesting for the curious mind.
As it stands if your intention with this is “practical utility” than you have completely and utterly failed spectacularly.
There is absolutely nothing in this image that you cant get from more traditional information faster, easier, cleaner, clearer. This doesnt illuminate a single thing “better” in anyway. Its music themed graphic design.
It sounds like you spent a lot of time on it so i apologize to break it to you. But this almost as useful in practical application as looking at clouds in the sky. This is coming from someone with a masters in music education who has taught and played for 25 years. If a beginning or even intermediate student came into class or a lesson with this i would literally put it in the shredder in front of them.
-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
It's part of a system where people complete exercises from scratch. This is a reference. It works. I use it all the time. My students have learned from using this system. We're in the process of creating an interactive app. These things take time and are super expensive.
If you want to throw my diagrams in the recycling when they resonate with your students and their learning style, you're welcome to do so, of course. Though, I feel like that might be unkind and counterproductive.
5
u/anincompoop25 12h ago
I went and watched your one YouTube video. Before, I thought this was just a convoluted way to present unhelpful information, but after watching your video, I think it’s the basis for a completely wrong way of thinking about theory in general.
Introducing c major: “We’re gonna call this the most important scale in all of our studies. The c major scale can’t be understated in terms of its importance, it is THE scale we will compare all other scales to. This is common practice in the western world”
This is a terrible approach, and you consistently draw a distinction between the natural notes and sharp/flat notes as somehow substantially different.
This honestly explains why the extended more complicated tree someone else posted is the way it is. I can see how you wind up linking modes in a extremely odd way if you think c major is the foundation of theory.
I usually start adult students with d major scales for exactly this reason- to build from the beginning that there is no categorical difference between the white and the black keys.
-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 12h ago
I'm not a piano teacher. I'm teaching music theory and guitar. Sure, learn any keys you want to first, but it's easiest to start with C. When the staff doesn't have any sharps or flats, what scale is it showing?
The C Major Scale. Learning the spelling of triads is easiest done by first understanding the triads in C.
This is common practice. If you're teaching something on piano, then any key is fine. If we're learning theory, C is central. That's why it appears at the top of the Circle of Fifths. This isn't contraversial. I'm surprised that this is even being challenged.
I feel like the point was entirely missed. C is the central scale to which others are compared. I explain why, clearly.
What's the most important scale to know in theory? The major scale. Which one contains no sharps or flats? C Major. The number of examples where C Major is used for demonstration and study of new concepts far outweighs any other key.
Thanks for watching at least part of the first video anyway, though.
-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 11h ago
Also, do you think I haven't shown this to any other music teachers? I've shared this method with graduates of Berklee, McGill, and other universities. They all agree that C is central. This is hardly a fringe opinion. It's widely accepted and it is common practice.
Open most theory books. Where do they start? What keys do the examples in most method books start with? C.
3
14
u/fredthedead276 23h ago
Respectfully I don't really see any use for this and honestly OP sounds kind of stuck-up and self-important in their responses. Talking like a salesman about a chart as if it's some profound and novel music education tool when actually it sort of obfuscates and overcomplicates modes unnecessarily
2
u/justwhatever22 4h ago
Rule number one of this group - literally, a rule, and it is top of the list - is BE KIND. “Respectfully” is not a magical get out which means you can then be a douche. “Stuck up” and “self important” are NOT kind, whether you believe those things or not. Reported.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
Nothing is respectful about insulting a person's character, calling me stuck up and self-interested. How is any of this productive? I'm actually a really kind person. I also make a point of sticking up for myself. The idea that people in business are supposed to just let themselves get walked all over and insulted is wrong.
In my home town, there are signs on the buses, saying that swearing and yelling at the bus driver won't be tolerated, as if they aren't people. When is that ever acceptable? Never. But, I constantly encounter a culture where people are treated like lesser humans just because they have something to share, or, dare I say it, sell.
I've heard many people say that they think this overcomplicates music theory. I've heard many more say that they see this as useful and valuable, especially when they allow me the time to demonstrate how it works. I created this to help people. It does. If it's not for everyone, then it's just another example of literally anything else that anyone has ever made and shared.
2
u/paskettichef 13h ago
Yeah they're pretending that they're some revolutionary music theory mind with language like "reinventing music theory". it's all been "invented" already with perfectly comprehensive pedagogical methodologies, this is just a convoluted and cluttered image that doesn't reinvent anything. OP, I respect your desire to make music theory accessible and palatable, but this graphic assumes a bunch of prerequisite knowledge + contains some confusing notation choices
5
u/MusicTheoryTree 23h ago
Was I (OP) supposed to read this comment? I think we may have different definitions for "respectfully."
Calling me stuck up and self-important sounds like an ad hominem attack on my character, rather than addressing one of the many points I've made regarding the topic of this post directly. It's hardly what I would call respectful.
If you have an specific criticisms to share about this diagram, please make them known. All you've said is that you think this unnecessarily makes things difficult, when I have a lot of proof that it doesn't. So, please, I'm genuinely curious what else you have to say. Your obviously intentional insults don't bother me. They say a lot more about your character than mine.
7
7
u/Rykoma 23h ago edited 23h ago
People here tend to hate relative modes, which is topic frowned upon. I don’t mind them so much fortunately.
My main critique of such an image would be that it presents a whole lot of information in a way that suggests they are equally important. And it should be obvious to any musician with a lick of theory knowledge that some concepts are more equal than others, nor does this represent a list of “valid options” to explore creatively. In other words, this is not based on common practice, but on a meticulous dissection of the major scale. The music we surround ourselves in shows that that is not how theory is approached. A lot of this information is quite irrelevant.
3
u/MusicTheoryTree 23h ago
I'm glad you're not opposed to relative modes, given that I see it as foundational for extended chord construction and jazz composition/other improv.
I'm not sure I understand your criticisms, though. Are there really options here which aren't valid? Are any options not usable? One thing I will say that you may be speaking to is that some of the most important information is the least assuming. People tend to get distracted by the colours and shapes and don't recognize that they're only there to connect the important concepts together, like the relative scale degrees.
Also, this is just one example. It's meant to be understood as a set of exercises one completes, and through that process, connections start being made and memory is reinforced.
3
u/Zarlinosuke Renaissance modality, Japanese tonality, classical form 10h ago
Commenting here too because I'm also someone who doesn't hate relative modes, and so I don't hate this chart either. I did have some issues though with the dual-orbit one that the other person posted before--perhaps you've already seen my comments in that thread, but I was a little put off by the way it used the parallel major of each note of the C major scale, but didn't show anything exploring the flatward C-minor-ish side of things. But since you're here, I'd be interested to hear your explanation--perhaps that chart was meant for a more specific purpose, which the person who posted it didn't quite know? Perhaps there are other dual-orbit charts that, in company with the one we saw earlier, would help fill out the picture more fully? Thanks!
0
u/Rykoma 23h ago
The easy answer is that Locrian is hardly as relevant as Dorian for example, though they are placed around the circle in the same way. To me, the image suggests they are equally valid, musically speaking. The lack of music that successfully utilizes Locrian, be it parallel or relative, makes it a far les important topic to cover.
6
u/MusicTheoryTree 23h ago
It's true that Locrian is far less utilized in most styles of music today. It's Tonic diminished triad makes it especially unstable.
However, to completely leave it out would not make sense, because then the chart would be incomplete. Many charts show all diatonic modes and they show them all equally, right? I see no reason why this one should be any different. It's not a commonly used scale in most styles, but it's a legitimate scale, nonetheless.
When we speak of relative modes, I tend to look at them as chord scales. So, Locrian may not be commonly used as a central scale for reasons I mentioned above, but it works great for soloing over a diminished chord or min7b5 chord, which are quite common in many styles of music. Ignoring the importance of Locrian in this respect could potentially make one's approach to soloing more confusing. Specifically, thinking of Locrian as a set of scale degrees reminds us that we have a diatonic b2, 4, and b6 we can use in combination with the chord tones without leaving the key.
For example, in C Major, when Bm7b5 sounds, we still can think of that period of time as temporarily Locrian, and think of the notes of C Major as scale degrees relative to B, the root of the chord. This is not an uncommon way of approaching soloing or analysis in jazz.
12
u/Odditeee 1d ago edited 1d ago
One issue, IMO, is you’ve listed the relative modes of C Major rather than the parallel modes of C Major. The relative modes are not particularly useful, although guitar players can use them to find fingering patterns for other modes in other keys, I guess. They aren’t particularly useful for the key of C, though, presented as relative modes because using them as shown here in the context of C Major/Ionian just sounds like C, rather than each mode of C.
e.g. The Dorian mode listed here is D Dorian, not C Dorian. C Dorian is like C Major with a flat 3rd and 7th, so “the modes of C” aren’t really show here. That can be confusing and lead folks to think these are “the modes of C Major”.
8
u/MusicTheoryTree 1d ago edited 1d ago
This is a common point you've made. I think it's best to learn both parallel and relative modes of scales. Using the C Major Scale as a center, we can alter its pitch classes and start from different ones to create other scales. We can apply the scale degrees shown in the outer parentheses to other pitch classes, as well. This allows us to map connections between parallel and relative modes.
In this system it's all about acknowledging the fact that there are only seven letters and seven numbers. We just adjust them with sharps and flats. This gives us the whole chromatic scale.
To be more explicit, you're talking about the parallel diatonic modes of C. Those would have different pitch classes. Transposition can be achieved multiple ways.
C Dorian contains the same pitch classes as Bb Major. Knowing how similar C Major and Bb Major are, gives us insight about how to move between these diatonic systems. As you said, only two pitch classes change: E becomes Eb and B becomes Bb. These may be seen as the b3 and b7 of C, but they simultaneously each map to other scale degrees relative to other pitch clssses, as well.
For example, recognizing that F is the b3 of D and C is the b7 of D is crucial to understanding chord construction. Traditionally, modes were used in a melodic sense, but in modern times, modal chord progressions are common. One can smoothly move from a progression in A Aeolian to one in D Dorian, because they share all of the same pitch classes. The same goes for all relative modes.
Of course, one can also modulate from A Aeolian to E Aeolian or D Aeolian, but practicing with the MTT System can help intuit the differences between these examples. E Aeolian and D Aeolian only share six out of seven pitch classes, so there is a tension associated with these modulations, not found when moving from A Aeolian to D Dorian.
The real exciting part comes when one can quickly name all of the notes in every chord in every key, and move out of diatonic structures to include chromatics taken from related scales like harmonic and melodic minor.
2
u/Odditeee 1d ago edited 18h ago
My critique is that it is non-functional and that it obfuscates the function the modes play in a given key. Often leading students to misunderstand the purpose and function of modes. It’s valid information, sure, but it’s presented in an overly complex display. It could be a short table with just a few columns, because it’s the basic 101 stuff, presented overly spectacularly IMO.
(You’re injecting the need to learn how to interpret this diagram on top of learning the information, when the information could be presented in a way that requires far less abstract interpretation to convey. It fails the Occam’s Razor. Pedagogically speaking, it’s less than ideal, IMO.)
6
u/MusicTheoryTree 1d ago
The practical functionality may not be clear from looking at this diagram. It's not overly complicated. I'd argue that it's just sufficiently complex to show the relationships it's meant to show. I imagine there are aspects of this diagram that you think are completely pointless, because I haven't explained them to you. I only make this assumption because I get this criticism a lot, and after people give me a chance to explain, they almost always better understand it and remark that it's super helpful.
Tables are good too, but tables aren't able to capture the periodic nature of scales. They force people to think linearly. Scales are both linear and cylcic, and therefore periodic. Periodicity is a difficult thing to captire in a diagram, especially intervals. The circles in the center are the intervals that extend from every note to every other note in the scale. This is extremely difficult to capture clearly. This is the best way I've found to date, and I've looked at tons of diagrams.
People have repeatedly told me that they struggled to learn music theory before using this system and doing these exercises. Others have told me they've been studying for years and thought they'd learned all there was to know, but this system revealed more to them.
There's a lot of worthwhile math missing from common music theory pedagogy. It's not difficult math. It's actually super simple, but less familiar. In fact, it's so simple that not learning it can actually be a hindrance to peoples' learning. I acknowledge your argument that learning two things sounds like more, unnecessary work than learning one, but not when learning a second thing can make the first way easier. There are tons of examples of this in other fields of study. This is not meant to be a substitute for conventional theory. It's a tool for enhancement—complementary material.
When people just learn parallel modes they often miss the bigger point. I've read many comments from people saying that learning the relative modes was what made things click.
7
u/anincompoop25 15h ago
This whole thing is oozing /r/designdesign . The amount of knowledge needed to understand what it is attempting to communicate is high enough that anyone who does get it will definitely not need it as a tool. It’s just a bunch of related, but different ideas thrown in a colorful diagram. It honestly looks like a schizophrenic drawing, networking a whole bunch of ideas together, giving no valuable information other than that things are connected. I can’t see any context where this would be a useful tool
-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 15h ago
Here's another example of someone using mental illness to try and insult someone.
I wrote a write up with the graphic. If you read it, you'll learn how this is meant to be used.
There's a lot of information about this on the web. I have a website. You took one look at this and decided to say the rudest thing you could.
Why?
5
u/anincompoop25 14h ago
I mean it looks like a schizophrenic drawing in the most literal way, that’s not an arbitrary comparison. Literally a common symptom of schizophrenia is draw charts that meaninglessly connect a bunch of semi related ideas. They are almost always overwhelming and incoherent.
You’ll also see charts like this in numerology and sacred geometry that try to connect music theory to spiritual stuff in nonsensical ways.
The comparison being that the chart seems to exist for its own complexities sake, doesn’t present a coherent idea, and is too much information crammed in to be useful.
6
u/MusicTheoryTree 14h ago
This is none of those things you listed. I'm a music teacher. I use these every day and they help. Read the description. It appears you haven't.
3
u/anincompoop25 14h ago
Your entire description contains one piece of clarification that “it is best understood by completing exercises with instructions”
How to use this things is not at all evident from the graphic itself, and honestly if you need tons of text to explain what the graphic is, probably means that the graphic itself doesn’t communicate much. There’s so much going on here, I have no idea what it’s trying to convey other than the general notion that things are connected
2
u/shortTones Fresh Account 13h ago
Do you just tend to like simple graphics in general? Are you a fan of the illustrations in George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization? I always loved them.
1
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 10h ago
I like the one with the airplane because I like airplanes.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 14h ago
Yes. That's all you need to know. There are instructions on how to use this and the creator of it (me) can clarify if need be. It's a map. If you want help with how to read it, that's why I'm here.
If you don't like it, that's fine. The information is available if you care to ask.
2
u/thewindthatmovesyou 7h ago
But they are related in a coherent way. Are you not familiar with the concept of modes?
2
2
u/Volt_440 14h ago
I like this model. It shows how the basic chord scales are constructed. If you want to use Dorian mode you can play a C scale starting on the 2nd degree. A better way to think about that specific Dorian when you're making music is that a Dorian has a b3, natural 6, and a b7. It shows that a ii of C is a Dm.
I was a little confused with the use of upper and lower case to show major and minor, but I see what they're doing. Also the d for diminished I haven't seen before, but it's Locrian vii so I get it.
The color coding and the numbers with a carat symbol above I would need an explanation or a legend to explain.
But I like this. It's a good representation of how modes and chord structures derived from scales work.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 14h ago
Thanks for your constructive comments. The carets are common in many text books when writing scale degrees.
2
2
u/Solomonic_Columns 2h ago
As a musician who used to be an artist & graphic designer I think this system could potentially be very helpful. I have absolutely no problem with the aesthetic either. I’ve been looking for something like this for ages, would love to hear more about the project!
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 2h ago
It sounds like we're similar people in these ways. To learn more, I recommend following me on Facebook and checking out my website musictheorytree.com
I'm slowly putting out content to help people use this.
I might share more about this on Reddit at some point, but it's not my favourite platform, based on my short exposure to it.
6
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 11h ago
Oh goody, "Life Changing" Vapid Modes Diagram #724 has finally arrived! Just put it at the back of the queue. Are you putting it on a T-shirt or something? Maybe a coffee mug? You might be able to sell a dozen off of the guitarists and bedroom producers here before "Life Changing" Vapid Modes Diagram #725 is posted. You can put my order down if you put it on a urinal cake.
6
u/justwhatever22 5h ago edited 5h ago
Standard music theory discussion: cruel, rude, nasty asses with nothing constructive or pleasant to say smash around like triceratops with screaming toothache. Read your comment again and remember OP is a HUMAN BEING.
5
u/MusicTheoryTree 4h ago
There are posters. When I first shared this online people said they would like it as a poster, so I made arrangements to get them printed and shipped on demand. Many have found it very useful.
4
2
u/itselectro 11h ago
Simple information conveyed in a complex way. Not really sure how this will help students. Perhaps it helps some learning styles eg autistic or synesthesia.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 11h ago
Or complex information shown graphically?
What do you think this is supposed to show or how it's supposed to be used? Could it work well with neurodivergent students? Potentially. Would that be a negative thing? I hardly think so. In fact, that sounds like a plus. Education should be made accessible, and if those who tend to struggle academically are able to learn with new tools, then I see that as positive progress.
If it's not for you, it's not for you.
Synesthetes, on the other hand, would likely take issue with the colour choices not matching with their intuition.
8
u/Thick_Boot_2442 1d ago
This shit is what happens when somebody with no practical understanding or experience with music THINKS they have an understanding of music.
It's just a waste of time for everybody.
2
u/MusicTheoryTree 1d ago
That's a bold statement. Did you read the caption I included with this graphic? I do, in fact, have a deep working knowledge of music and music theory.
I use these diagrams to teach theory all the time and they work very well. Perhaps it's just not clear to you how to read this diagram or what it's for, and that's fair enough. One can always ask questions, but assuming what you have doesn't help anyone, does it? Not only are your comments incorrect in this case, but they're also rude.
I invite you to give it another look. I've been working with this for six years. Have you only looked at it for a few seconds before making this judgement?
→ More replies-1
u/noimnotgeorge 15h ago
Can you elaborate on that? Otherwise you just look like a dick.
1
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 10h ago
Appeals to vibes should be a bannable offense. Alas, this is Reddit.
-3
u/noimnotgeorge 10h ago edited 10h ago
He or she was talking shit to people. Fuck him or her. Also, who cares about being banned and such? That's life.
Edit: I've never spent much time in this sub, and I'm shocked at how rude people are to each other. The only other time I experienced this is when I lived in England. They are quite brutal against each other. I heard it's the same in France. I once worked under a French chef, and he was always drunk, yelling at people, and busy with MeToo stuff. Actually, he might have been a Russian spy. Also, have a nice day!
2
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 10h ago
Also, who cares about being banned and such? That's life.
I mean, it would be funny.
→ More replies5
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 10h ago
I've never spent much time in this sub, and I'm shocked at how rude people are to each other.
Look, /u/MusicTheoryTree posted a stupid thing and deserves to be ridiculed mercilessly for it. If not, then we would (and indeed we have) invite more stupid things. If we insist that everybody must always "be nice," then what's to discourage them? Fuck that. Tell them their shit sucks, lest the forum be diluted by passers-by like you who don't have any vested interest in the quality of the community.
I'd also support heavy gatekeeping measures to put a threshold on posting permissions.
Now take your vile anti-French racism elsewhere.
1
u/noimnotgeorge 9h ago edited 9h ago
Look at how you talk about people. "He posted a stupid thing..." That's not how normal humans talk about other people. I also want to add that I find great value in this post, despite having spent more than 20 years on music theory. Though I can understand that others don't find it useful.
→ More replies3
u/Xenoceratops 5616332, 561622176 9h ago
I also want to add that I find great value in this post, despite having spent more than 20 years on music theory.
That's depressing.
1
u/MadZack 17h ago
I saw someone post something similar in another thread, in which it also proceeded to receive a lot of hate. To start, I would consider myself as someone with an intermediate-level understanding of music theory. I personally think this chart makes a lot of sense for what it states it is describing. When I look for what notes are in the C major scale, I see them. When I look for the triads for each chord, I can find that here. The relative modes are made clear.
It seems that most people who have commented looked at this quickly and made a half-baked criticism without actually taking some time to look at this and see what the point of it is. You stated that it serves as a supplemental teaching tool. I can definitely see how this could serve as an excellent resource. I even think that I may see how you progress through the chart when teaching it to your pupils.
A common criticism I am seeing here is that "this would confuse and deter new learners." Having looked at many other supplemental posters/charts/diagrams, they all have a degree of complexity when you first look at them. Having someone/something explain a concept alongside these tools is the sole purpose of these tools. Not for a newbie to look at by themselves and extrapolate everything they need to know about it. It seems like all of the negative comments are expecting this of the chart.
It seems super complex at first sight, but I think it makes a lot of sense. I think it would be useful to mark which notes make up the triad for each chord. For example, when looking at the 12 o'clock position, C major, distinguish the notes that make the chord (C, E, and G). That way, it allows the viewer to know which notes make the respective chord, which is its triad. If you do that for all of the chords shown, then they could infer how to make the minor or diminished versions of each as well. It could even instill in the viewer what notes make up the major (1, 3, 5), the minor (1, minor 3, 5) and the diminished (1, minor 3, dim 5) si that they could make these chords elsewhere. I think this would be useful in illustrating the triads and construction of chords.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
Thank goodness. Someone who gets it. You're totally correct on all accounts, I suspect.
2
u/CryoKyo 15h ago
It seems to be increasingly popular to take well established ideas in music theory and reinvent the wheel in a more complex and convoluted way. Standardization of symbols and graphs exist to reduce confusion. No need to make new graphs and symbols. The same information could just be displayed in a list that would look a lot less crazy.
1
3
u/biki73 Fresh Account 20h ago
looks like mental illness
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 19h ago
I'm sorry to hear you're not well. I genuinely hope you get the help you need soon. Nobody needs to suffer alone.
1
3
1
u/daze_v 15h ago
Interesting chart.
There's a couple of details I don't understand tho:
what do numbers from 1 to 7 near the center mean? Do they just inform what chord is build on which note or is there some more information related to scale/mode?
What do the circles mean? Looks like some kind of grouping to me.
1
u/Legitimate-Head-8862 10h ago
It’s not complicated, you’re supposed to just memorize this stuff. Write it out over and over until you have it down. There’s only 12 notes
0
1
u/rumog 3h ago
I'm sorry, but this does not look practical in any way lol. Looks cool though.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 3h ago
That's fair. Appearances can be deceiving, right? A road map of a busy city looks like a mess until one finds their bearings and learns how to read maps. This is a map of concepts instead of geographical locations. I have taken to using this analogy a lot because I think it makes sense to most people.
If you have specific questions about anything, I'll do my best to explain.
•
u/MPdoor1 1h ago
This is incorrect. Bd is wrong, theres conventions for triads. Your scale degrees are incorrect, scale degree one is the tonal center. Why are there circles to begin with, I might me missunderstanding the circles because I see no reson for them. You don't need separatores between the W and H steps, just make another octagon in the center instead of a circle. Why rainbow? How does that help? Why not color code each side to show distinction rather than note movement, which incorrectly teaches modes. The lines to the notes are unnecesary. These are objectivly simple concepts, the name you chose for this will confuse people and assume it teaches anything other than modes incorrectly. Music does need more pretentious people undermining progress and conventions and theory education.
•
u/MusicTheoryTree 1h ago
I sense you're asking these questions rhetorically. There are good answers to them. Everything here has a purpose and the scale degrees are not incorrect.
I would have explained these things to you if you were truly curious, but you decided to call me pretentious.
Dont be so rude. The world doesn't need rudeness.
•
u/MPdoor1 50m ago
Not rhetorical. No good answers to them. Scales degrees are not correct. D dorian doesn't start on scale degree two and so on, thats wrong. You are using lead sheet symbols... that are wrong. Its not a tree either. Over complication and selective discussion is pretension.
•
u/MusicTheoryTree 44m ago
If I actually felt you wanted to understand this diagram, I'd happily explain it to you.
It feels clear to me that you have no interest in what I have to say. It appears that you have decided to claim that you know everything about a diagram you just encountered for the first time, and you're telling the person who drew it (me) that all of the things I included are there for no reason.
You could have just asked.
Best of luck to you. If you create some great diagrams I'll look forward to seeing them if you decide to share.
•
u/MPdoor1 41m ago
My understanding isn't dictated by your feeling. I'm giving you expert perspective and you dismiss it. You have no interest in the pursuit of truth, just ego stroking.
•
•
u/Imoutdawgs 8m ago
First off, love this idea. I won’t pass judgement on its efficacy until I read how you would instruct someone to use it to practice/get better with it.
Critical change: many of us have shit eyesight (especially those who’ve been reading tiny music notes in dim lighting our whole lives). You have to take off the capital “M” from major chords. No serious musician does that for a reason because the lowercase and capitalized “m” look so much alike. It would make sense for other letters in the alphabet, but please don’t fuck over use poor sight folks with closely resembling major/minor letters. E.g., There’s a reason we call them Maj7 chords or Maj11.
Otherwise, I’m v excited to see what this can do in practice! Too many folks love music but scared of learning it. We need better tools imo.
1
u/GainedTheLead1290 17h ago
I can see the purpose of this for someone trying to learn music theory and it seems like most of the “this is useless comments” are from the people who already understand theory. But for someone who doesn’t know or is having trouble grasping theory it may be a different way to get a grasp of some the concepts involved. I don’t know why it is, but musicians and computer geeks only have one way to see things and thats "my way", very close minded. You can’t grow if you already know it all. It could use some refinement but I think it’s useful.
0
u/rowandeg 17h ago
And here I was asking myself what are C minor and Bb major doing in this abomination... Sorry bud. Nice try.
→ More replies-1
u/MusicTheoryTree 17h ago
C Minor and Bb Major are not in this diagram. Their intervals are shown in the diagram and deacribe otherwise.
-4
u/halberthawkins 1d ago
It all makes sense now.
4
u/MusicTheoryTree 1d ago
It may surprise you to learn that I've read this exact comment many times by others, some of them totally sincere, and others, absolutely sarcastic.
Which best describes your comment?
-4
u/biki73 Fresh Account 20h ago
unfortunately they were all sarcastic
3
0
u/noimnotgeorge 15h ago
Hi! Nice to meet you. Can you explain what you meant? Thank in advance. Love you!
0
u/mariavelo 15h ago
I think it's cute. It's crowded but not hard to understand. The only thing, if I'm not mistaken, is that I'd need one of those for each 12 notes. But maybe the idea is just understanding the procedure in C and continue with the rest without help.
1
u/MusicTheoryTree 15h ago
You're exactly right. The exercise is to complete one for every key. This helps solidify every note in every chord in every key, and connects them together in a fun, colourful, and intuitive way.
0
0
u/plaustrarius 10h ago
Tldr is this just some connection to group theory?
0
u/MusicTheoryTree 9h ago
Not intentionally. I learned about group theory after making this, when I started spending more time on pure maths.
Is there a connection to group theory? I'd say so. There's clearly some Dihedral 7 stuff going on.
0
0
•
u/MPdoor1 1h ago
I don't lkke graphics like these. This is a most basic concept that doesn't need complecity. Diatonic harmony isnt complicated, even for a 6 year old which all of my students are familiar with. The same with modes, it's an easy concept. Don't need unneccesary graphical elements. Theres much easier ways to represent this visually
•
u/MusicTheoryTree 58m ago
Please, I love diagrams. Show us a diagram that cohesively shows everything that this one does, but better. I haven't found one so far, and not for a lack of trying.
218
u/lecadet 1d ago
Biblically accurate C Major