FA+
Shop
985
Views
Views
24
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Music / Game Music
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 120 x 120
File Size 9.07 MB
Report this content
★
More from Phosaggro
Listed in Folders
![[Original Chiptune] Fracture](http://d.furaffinity.net/art/phosaggro/music/1623045075/1623045075.thumbnail.phosaggro_fracture_v4_reducedsamplerate.mp3.jpg "Click to change the View")
[Original Chiptune] Fracture
Yearly reminder that I got my start here on FA writing chiptunes.
It's almost turning into tradition at this point for me to go back at least once every year and polish this piece I wrote back in 2016. The main change with this version was my experimentation with key modulation near the end of the song. Before this, I never really strayed too far from the key that's established at the beginning of any given song, however I recently learned a bit of theory on how to easily force a transition from any key to another through the use of leading tones. That last sentence probably only made sense if you're a musician and were forced to study theory.
I'd love to hear from anyone else that's well read in theory what they think of the key change at 4:33, though you may want to start listening either from the beginning or from 4:20 to get used to the initial key before it shifts.
Music by me
Tools used:
Anvil Studio - Initial midi draft
Reaper - Main synthesizers
Audacity - Final mix
GXSCC - Percussion
It's almost turning into tradition at this point for me to go back at least once every year and polish this piece I wrote back in 2016. The main change with this version was my experimentation with key modulation near the end of the song. Before this, I never really strayed too far from the key that's established at the beginning of any given song, however I recently learned a bit of theory on how to easily force a transition from any key to another through the use of leading tones. That last sentence probably only made sense if you're a musician and were forced to study theory.
I'd love to hear from anyone else that's well read in theory what they think of the key change at 4:33, though you may want to start listening either from the beginning or from 4:20 to get used to the initial key before it shifts.
Music by me
Tools used:
Anvil Studio - Initial midi draft
Reaper - Main synthesizers
Audacity - Final mix
GXSCC - Percussion
Category Music / Game Music
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 120 x 120px
File Size 9.07 MB
TL;DR: It sounds awesome, and the modulation is good!
This sounds cool! There's actually quite a bit to this piece that's interesting from a theory standpoint. There's actually lots of bits which you could analyze in different keys (you use your vii chord like a minor v chord a lot, sort-of tonicizing your iii chord) and you've got some mixture happening, I believe. It's all really cool to hear!
It's a little hard without a transcription, but it sounds like you're using your vii chord at 4:30 as a pivot iv chord in your new key, making the I chord after it an applied dominant (V/) to your new key. It's really smooth, and it's really well hidden since you use the minor 7th scale degree a bunch and approach the tonic through the leading tone a lot beforehand to make something that doesn't sound dominant dominant while approaching the tonic -- and you're doing the same sort of sound with the modulation too, making something that's not dominant sound dominant. It sounds *awesome,* and it's a really natural place to modulate, too, given the melodic, harmonic, and even stylistic context. You're modulating down a fifth, too, which isn't too common as it 'loses energy.' Generally, the modulation trend is upward to increase energy over the course of a song, but I really like how your modulation here gains 'depth' as it modulates downward. The sudden major I chord (the applied dominant) sounds really resolute and bright compared to the old key even as it brings the energy of the new key down. It's great, I think!
I'm in the same place -- with learning to modulate -- and I don't really think I've gotten something as smooth *and* quick as this. It's always a process for me to modulate!
This sounds cool! There's actually quite a bit to this piece that's interesting from a theory standpoint. There's actually lots of bits which you could analyze in different keys (you use your vii chord like a minor v chord a lot, sort-of tonicizing your iii chord) and you've got some mixture happening, I believe. It's all really cool to hear!
It's a little hard without a transcription, but it sounds like you're using your vii chord at 4:30 as a pivot iv chord in your new key, making the I chord after it an applied dominant (V/) to your new key. It's really smooth, and it's really well hidden since you use the minor 7th scale degree a bunch and approach the tonic through the leading tone a lot beforehand to make something that doesn't sound dominant dominant while approaching the tonic -- and you're doing the same sort of sound with the modulation too, making something that's not dominant sound dominant. It sounds *awesome,* and it's a really natural place to modulate, too, given the melodic, harmonic, and even stylistic context. You're modulating down a fifth, too, which isn't too common as it 'loses energy.' Generally, the modulation trend is upward to increase energy over the course of a song, but I really like how your modulation here gains 'depth' as it modulates downward. The sudden major I chord (the applied dominant) sounds really resolute and bright compared to the old key even as it brings the energy of the new key down. It's great, I think!
I'm in the same place -- with learning to modulate -- and I don't really think I've gotten something as smooth *and* quick as this. It's always a process for me to modulate!
Thank you for the feedback! I will say though that it doesn't modulate down a fifth, but up a fourth. The song is in A minor for most of it, with that section typically having a progression of Am -> G -> F -> C -> G -> Am, but then it modulates up to D minor by swapping out the final Am chord for an A7/C# chord, with the C# functioning as a leading tone into the new tonic of D. As far as I know, modulating up a fourth adds the most amount of energy to a song possible because it's the largest interval you can have without either modulating a tritone away or getting closer to the original note.
The new D minor section also changes the underlying chords a bit by mixing in a couple slash chords in. More specifically, it goes Dm/A -> C/G -> Bb -> F/C -> C -> Dm. The slash chords were meant to space out the constituent notes of each chord a bit more, giving it an even fuller sound.
The new D minor section also changes the underlying chords a bit by mixing in a couple slash chords in. More specifically, it goes Dm/A -> C/G -> Bb -> F/C -> C -> Dm. The slash chords were meant to space out the constituent notes of each chord a bit more, giving it an even fuller sound.
Yeah, no problem!
You're probably more right to say "up a fourth" since the piece moves upward, but modulating up a fourth or down a fifth is saying basically the same thing. It's two different ways of looking at it. People often tend to prefer fifths over fourths since we use the circle of fifths as a teaching tool and composing aid often since it describes much of Western music since the 1700's or so, but nobody *should* get on your case for using either, at least in my opinion, since music now isn't so dependent on the circle of fifths and sometimes you see the circle of fourths instead, which is... the same thing, but the other way around. (sorry for the incredibly run-on sentence. I left it, because it's almost humorous to me that I came up with it) It doesn't really matter, either is fine. Use whichever feels more descriptive. In this case, I'd agree with you, "up a fourth" is better, it describes the increasing energy that moving upward through the frequencies brings.
Honestly, I didn't notice that the voicings changed after the modulation. That's not a bad thing, but I'm just thinking it could've lent toward the depth I heard after the modulation. It's a nice touch. Not everything gets noticed by your audience, but very often details like that add a lot to music. They still hear it subliminally, like how the voicings impacted how I heard the piece even though I didn't catch them.
You're probably more right to say "up a fourth" since the piece moves upward, but modulating up a fourth or down a fifth is saying basically the same thing. It's two different ways of looking at it. People often tend to prefer fifths over fourths since we use the circle of fifths as a teaching tool and composing aid often since it describes much of Western music since the 1700's or so, but nobody *should* get on your case for using either, at least in my opinion, since music now isn't so dependent on the circle of fifths and sometimes you see the circle of fourths instead, which is... the same thing, but the other way around. (sorry for the incredibly run-on sentence. I left it, because it's almost humorous to me that I came up with it) It doesn't really matter, either is fine. Use whichever feels more descriptive. In this case, I'd agree with you, "up a fourth" is better, it describes the increasing energy that moving upward through the frequencies brings.
Honestly, I didn't notice that the voicings changed after the modulation. That's not a bad thing, but I'm just thinking it could've lent toward the depth I heard after the modulation. It's a nice touch. Not everything gets noticed by your audience, but very often details like that add a lot to music. They still hear it subliminally, like how the voicings impacted how I heard the piece even though I didn't catch them.
Comments