How would you join these two musical passages?

Right now I'm in the process of making a song, and thought it a worthy challenge to see how two disparate musical "phrases", so to speak, could be joined, for the purpose of unity.

How would you go about doing this?

Here's the first idea:

(Click me)

and the second:

(Click me too)

and a copy of the score (I suck at notating, so the score might not be A+).

What would you do, if you were asked to join these two musical bits? :D

1.mp3

2.mp3

Usually wood glue and nails works.

welp I'm using regular paper so tape and scissors could work. Although, if you were to enumerate all the inefficient ways you could join paper together, your suggestion would come out on top. :V

Random tone clusters. It's always worked for me.

Random tone clusters. It's always worked for me.

Lemme see if I understand: you basically take a few random chords/tone clusters, and compose something with those chords to serve as a bridge between the two parts?

Chromaticism. Given the type of writing in the first part, it would be very easy to either tonal shift down a half step and work your way down to the other idea. (also can use modal shifts, like mediants or submediants).

In fact on a second listen, I'd say that since you are in Gb major of some sense at the end of the first phrase, immediately shift down to F major and repeat the first phrase, but instead of ending on F major, end on [F B Db Ab] and transition to the second part which will be in Ab major.

In fact on a second listen, I'd say that since you are in Gb major of some sense at the end of the first phrase, immediately shift down to F major and repeat the first phrase, but instead of ending on F major, end on [F B Db Ab] and transition to the second part which will be in Ab major.

So basically transpose the same phrase a half-tone down, but instead end in a different chord (a dominant seventh) that sounds harmonious when it then gives way to Ab major? I tried this out, and it sounded OK after a few tries, though usually I expect a seventh to lead to the tonic (which was Gb major). Though this chord progression also works out in its own way; it sounds more propelling than if I had gone back to Gb major. Sometimes I tend to underemphasize the importance of using chord progression to connect ideas... how important would you say chord progression is, in cases like these?

If you want to get technical,

you never really completely established Gb major as the tonality in the first part because there isnt a subdominant. So since you have freedom outside of major/minor tonality, chromaticism adds a nice color. Tonal shifts are a good way of creating motion using a static idea because they are "not expected" by the listener. So maybe not a half-step down.. maybe go down a whole step to E major. Generally the more distant the two tonal regions, the more striking the shift. So F# major -> F major is very striking just like F# major -> C major (this effect is also found when playing these notes simultaneously... [F F#] is very dissonant as is [F# C]).

The thing is: Tonal shifts have a sort of contagious feel and an easy way to break out of them in sequence is to utilize a tonal functional chord. The "German Sixth" is powerful in this sense. So you repeat theme A in E major, and then instead of landing on a final E major chord (of some variety, i.e. added 2nd/6th), land on the german sixth of E, which is [C E G Bb]. Notice that this chord is the dominant seventh of F minor, which has the same scale as Ab major. Also notice that a deceptive cadence in F minor is from (Subdominant) -> [C E G Bb] -> [Db Eb Ab Ab] (or some variant of Absus4). Now that the subdominant has been established in both F minor and Ab major, you can proceed to strengthen Ab major, and thus you have transitioned.

Edit: So it's the use of tonal functions as well as chord functions in order to get the desired effect.

I kind of get it now. This is new, so it'll take some time and more experience with those concepts for it to really sink in. Still, I appreciate your response :)

Yep, no problem.

Music theory is only there to explain why things work. Keep in mind that you can always do whatever you want. If you want to read up more on those things and you are a beginner, then check out some basic harmony/counterpoint books, then study lots of scores (lots and lots) of scores to get a firm understanding of harmony/structure, then read Schoenberg's "Structural Functions of Harmony". A lot of his ideas on the reason why certain effects feel a certain way make quite a bit of sense.

Music theory is only there to explain why things work. Keep in mind that you can always do whatever you want. If you want to read up more on those things and you are a beginner, then check out some basic harmony/counterpoint books, then study lots of scores (lots and lots) of scores to get a firm understanding of harmony/structure, then read Schoenberg's "Structural Functions of Harmony". A lot of his ideas on the reason why certain effects feel a certain way make quite a bit of sense.

This is good advice. Though when you say study lots of scores, what do you mean exactly? Do you mean to perform them, or make any sort of analysis for one or more things? If the latter is the case, would you recommend first reading something on analysis (to know how to actually analyze), and then doing the analyses on the scores of my choosing?

Sorry to bug you with all these questions, but it seems like you know what you're talking about.

When I was first learning (it was a long time ago so I don't quite remember) I had read up on counterpoint and harmony and all that stuff and I wanted to see it in action, so I played a lot of bach and mozart on the piano (if you don't play piano, then you can still analyze). So basically I would examine his melodies for contour and implied harmony and then I'd see how each of the voices interact and the movement in each voice, and then I would look at how he changed keys and how the melody changed with each key change.

There are many things you can look at in a score, so it's easier to start with music of the classical era because it is quite simple compared to say, webern. And then from there work your way up. But I'd say study counterpoint and voice leading first from textbooks (then look at bach/mozart) because that is what leads to harmony. And once you understand that, then study harmony (classical era/romantic era), and then study forms and then orchestration and that way you'll have a solid understanding of how certain notes will produce certain sounds.

This is just the way that I learned though.. you don't have to do it like this haha. Just a suggestion.

Right, well it seems like the way you did it start you off with a good foundation. Since I'm after this too, I probably will take you up on those suggestions, if I see no better way; this way seems like a good one.