This presentation really clicked with me and helped me A LOT! THANK YOU. (ps you look like the doppleganger of my homie Troy lol) Also, one suggestion - try sidechaining your voice to the audio coming from push so it ducks when you speak. Some parts were hard to hear with the audio being routed from the same channel.
I don't know if the tuner worked on push 2 before live 12, but it does now, and routing midi tracks to an audio track with a tuner seems like almost a better solution since I only care about the sound that's coming out, not the keys being pressed. Of course that doesn't show chord names and stuff that would be nice too
I'm kinda hoping they add some more push 3 features to push 2. Like use a knob as the jog wheel. They do already have session view in the display which is awesome
This lesson has been a godsend for me, thank you. Has suddenly made it very easy to work out chord qualities using scale degrees. This has always escaped me as a guitarist still - affter SO many years - somewhat unable to mentally grasp the fretboard. Mind blown! You''re a star
This video should have WAY more likes! I haven't taken music theory since middle school, and this helped me brush up and apply it in a useful way! Thank you!
Hi Alex, great content, really appreciate all the Push 3 knowledge you're sharing with the world, definitely doing a better job than Ableton themselves! I hope you take it as constructive feedback, but the level of your voice (in this video at least) is too low compared to the sound from Push. When listening with a phone speaker it's less perceptible, but when moving to studio monitors, or a 5.1 TV system, I'm forced to decide between hearing your voice properly or annoying my neighbors with the piano haha :) Thanks again for the content and wish you a goodnight!
Glad it was helpful! More to come. Thanks for the feedback - noted. I kind of boxed myself into in a corner by routing both my microphone and Ableton into 1 channel.
@@metamindmusicofficial Can happen to the best of us haha Looking forward to the new content (so far I've spent more time watching your videos than playing with my new Push 3)
Love this I'm a guitarist thats owned Push V1 for about 10 years . Bought push 3 a couple of days ago , can't play a keyboard very well but I can play push as the layouts similar to guitar and this video explains that , wish this was around 9 years ago LOL! Great Vid !
I somewhat agree - a lot of the time the rules are “created” after the fact through analysis but weren’t used throughout the creative process. Where sometime theoretical rules are used while writing. What rules does the band Car Bomb follow 🙃
@@metamindmusicofficial They follow their own stylistic practice, (like almost all composers ever). Fast tempos, disonant intervals, harsh sounds, distorted d-tuned guitars, poly rhythms, tempos changes etc if I wanted to sound like them in an authentic manner, I would have to follow their "rules"/stylistic recipe, not break them.
A worthwhile distinction here might be between rules, conventions, and laws. The laws are physical and universal, so they aren't up for breaking. They constrain what one is capable of. Rules may be defined, as you are saying, as the features that determine the style, which can be expressed with specific numerical values. One might think of a "ruler" or a "scale." these aren't to be broken or followed; they're more of a description of a piece or style. These are constraints imposed by the artist creating the music. This leads us to the last type of constraint. The thing that Alex is pointing to when he says rules here, I suspect, is convention or tradition. Conventions are themes, devices, and techniques that can be described theoretically. The point of breaking out of convention (called "rules"), in this case, maybe to take something that already is established as a style and challenge the status quo. There are many reasons why one might do this. Rebelling against an established authority is a popular one. So, all things obey the physical laws which define the foundations of theory for practical purposes. Some artists may implement constraints to create familiarity and establish an audience via their unique thru-line. Some may take what's been done before and recognize that set of possibilities as not constraints but a set of traditions or rules to break.
@@musictheorytree User Yes, you're on the right track, By my estimation there are 3 quadrants in relationship to music theory and "rules". 1st is the physics of sound acting in accordance with human cognition, ( which can only be observed not broken) they are more like laws than rules. 2nd, our ability to discern chaos from order, which is how we comprehend patterns/structure/clarity etc, within the capability of human cognition, working memory, and auditory ability. ( The Geometry of Consonance: Music and Mathematics by Dmitri Tymoczko does a good job explaining it.) 3rd - stylistic practice/recipes for creating sound. You cannot rebel against the 1st, the 2nd one, people have tried to varying degrees, to change perception, but for the most part, the majority of audiences prefer "vanilla" music with clarity, patterns and structure. The 3rd is the stylistic convention, sure you can "rebel against this" but you are extremely late, contemporary classical musicians have been doing this for 100's of years, and they were never rebelling against the "rules" of music theory, which are in essence observations. History composers would rebel against the preferences of the " bourgeoisie and the elites" tastes, it had nothing to do with "breaking the rules of music theory". It also implies that there is a "standard", we assume its the classical period, and anyone who doesn't write like Mozart is "cool edgy and breaking all the rules". It's a nonsensical perception, that isn't conducive to creative freedom because it encourages ignorance of craft. A standard example of "rule-breaking" is rock bands use consecutive 5ths and apparently this is a "no no", which makes rock musicians cool for doing so, here's the thing, consecutive 5ths were 1st in choral arrangements, composers where using them for 100s of years before smooth voice leading "no consecutive 5ths" rule ever existed, does this mean "no consecutive 5ths" composers are edgy rule breakers and rock musicians conformist to tradition? or is it just substituting one stylistic practice/rule for another, like you know, every piece of music ever written?
