theory here?

[xoxos]

i'm wondering how you theory cats would describe what's happening in this, or perhaps clarify it. i have some awareness of theory but not anything developed by practice or application of the same. you never know, i may learn something :p

http://www.xoxos.net/temp/melody1.mp3

it's probably not mine, i ruminated on something i heard and it's here now. could be note for note. given my primitive theoretics, i'd say the tune begins in G#M, then modulates to D#M on the 13th bar

??

which is all well and good. you'll hear the "bass" part at measure 9 playing C, A#, G#, and then when it modulates, presumably to D#M, the bass plays D#, C#, C, which is definately not D#M.

it sort of clashes with the lead, which sounds very right using D, but D#, C#, C is definately what that phrase should be.. anyone familiar with my compositions knows i love my accidentals, but this style, in my naive conception of it, would seem to be antithetic to accidentals.

is there a term or technique for this more specific than "accidental" or "bad composition", or have i stuck myself into perceptually transposing something that shouldn't be..

[xoxos]

:p i remembered what the original was (~1800's burlesque) the originality of m. 9-12 is still suspect if that quotient is of interest. i'd still like to know if the C# in the bass sitting with the D and the D# in the melody is an accidental, mode or modulation i've miscalibrated?

[xoxos]

in comparison, this is what i heard..
http://www.xoxos.net/temp/melody0.mp3

[tapper mike]

One thing I learned early on about theory and practice. Don't over theorize anything. Sometimes (not all the time) notes fall a certain way simply because it worked at the time.

[xoxos]

very true. i was hoping someone would produce a nifty term (something with an italian name) for it and then i'd be able to do it again

[trimph1]

I think the term was called improvisation....and it seems to work very well for you.

[xoxos]

i've performed a little soundiscrappio :p

[Nystul]

Well the tune is in Eb major and it is pretty straightforward. It would (and probably originally did) sound just fine with a simple harmony using Eb, Ab, Bb chords, but that doesn't exclude other options. I couldn't really make out what was going on in the bass in the part you are asking about.

[xoxos]

i'm attempting to reconcile my scant knowledge of theory and perception that it sounds right with seeing the D and D# in the melody and the C and C# in the bass..

the melody nicely modulates up, and the bass is sort of doing "three blind mice, see how they run" and the flat C# sounds quaint and formal/ordinate, but it's "not" :p

[jancivil]

talking of accidentals when you have the problematic 'D# major' and 'A# major' as keys is... problematic.

"D" in the melody and "C" in the bass...

D# major scale has these notes - NB: alphabetically consecutive - D# E# Fx (that's 'double sharp') G# A# B# Cx.
It isn't "D# F G G#...".
The key signature would have seven sharps and two double sharps. D# major (or A# major, with G double sharp) isn't a useful conception of key, it's too unwieldy. It's never seen. Music theory questions require a consistent language. So we will call it 'Eb major' which has three flats - Eb F G Ab Bb C D.

This question poses the seventh of the scale in two variants: D and Db. From the Eb major chord the bass move Eb Db C is common voice leading to the 'IV', here Ab (C is the major third of that harmony).
That D on the Eb major harmony is a major seventh; Db is a minor seventh.

The D is a leading tone to Eb such as you find with the dominant of Eb major, Bb. The Db is a move from Eb as a dominant seventh to Ab. There would be a dominant pull in both directions. It would be unusual for that to happen at the same time. I can't make it out with these sawtooth oscillators either and I can't tell from your description if both things are happening at the same time. That would sound basically like a mistake.

[xoxos]

thank you jan, it is helpful to understand the impression of "why it works" as a component of the whole.

ftr, i unfortunately sequenced this at ~190bpm, so the 8th notes you're hearing appear as 4ths on the piano roll. the illustration is the last "2" or "4" bars, depending on how you perceive it...

accordingly, the first bass note, Eb, coincides with the D M7th in the melody, it is ("1/4note"/"1/2note") later that the bass Db is adjunct to the F 2nd degree in the melody.

here's that part repeated with the bass and lead soloed, then with the accompaniment..

http://www.xoxos.net/temp/melody1b.mp3

the ostinato (?) is at the major 7th for the duration, but again.. the M7th is required.

perhaps it's acceptable by virtue that the major is in the higher degrees and minor in the bass, as the arrangement is fairly sparse?? classical dissonance??

[jancivil]

as you describe it, it isn't very unusual. That Eb-Db-C move is very normal part-writing leading to the IV chord, Ab. Eb7-Ab; albeit you land on what may be a C minor which is close enough for the function to hold true (trying to hear in via these saws on the laptop speakers isn't worth sorting; eg., I don't know if the g in the bass there wants to go to Ab under that C And Eb). The D natural there might be called a non-harmonic tone and depending on what sets it up you can haz an Italian word for it. 'Apoggiatura' for instance. What to call it is academic IMO.

It can be handled clunkily, but that's another topic.

[xoxos]

well, i learned something new (appogi-/accachiatura) and can see some theoretic rationale for the phrase (i'll accept the Db as leading to the C, which works for me). it's still somewhat mysterious due to the ~compulsive sense that it's utterly formulaic and rote, imo music should evoke (okay, maybe not 'should', but more 'is nice when it does'), even a feeling of formality.. i'd never have expected it! says things about me.

thanks to all for looking in