Help with reasonable spelling

[Musicologo]

I'm having some difficulties coming up with a reasonable spelling for my own piece. Basically I feel it having the tonal center in Eb, so I opted for Eb key signature with 3 flats.

But then the harmonic progression is basically a chromatic descending of 2 notes keeping the 1 and 7 of Eb (the bass can considered to be a pedal Eb, sometimes ghost, sometimes explicit).

chord1: Bb-Db-Eb-G
chord2: A-Db-Eb-F#
chord3: Ab-Db-Eb-F
chord4: G-Db-Eb-Fb
---
chord5: F#-Db-Eb-D
chord6: F-B-C-D

Basically I feel it makes sense to keep the Db-Eb spelled as this through all the measures.
But then I struggle... Should I spell chord 2 A-Db-Eb-F# or Gb?... A or Bbb?
Should I spell chord 5 F#-C#-D-Eb?... I don't want to have 2 notes equal, and I don't see any other way avoiding the clash D-D#... But then I'm "breaking the rule" of Db-Eb...

Then in the melody, whenever a B comes up, finale insists in having it Cb. Which sometimes makes sense. But other times i get a line of C-Cb-C-Cb-C-Cb full of alternating accidentals instead of a "cleaner" C-B-C-B-C-B...

Or shall I spell this in a totally different way?... Suggestions are more than welcome.

It would really be handy to have a "rule" for every note of the Eb chromatic scale so I could spell this piece coherently from beginning to end, but I just can't figure a perfect way.

Thank you.

[jancivil]

Basically I feel it makes sense to keep the Db-Eb spelled as this through all the measures.
But then I struggle... Should I spell chord 2 A-Db-Eb-F# or Gb?... A or Bbb?

the better spelling, particularly descended from Bb is Bbb Db Eb Gb. That's root, m3rd, P4th, P5th, m7th.

Should I spell chord 5 F#-C#-D-Eb?... I don't want to have 2 notes equal, and I don't see any other way avoiding the clash D-D#... But then I'm "breaking the rule" of Db-Eb...

Your 'rule' is a good principle for maintaining coherence. particularly as I think that is a double pedal situation. My opinion is that is primary.

Then in the melody, whenever a B comes up, finale insists in having it Cb. Which sometimes makes sense. But other times i get a line of C-Cb-C-Cb-C-Cb full of alternating accidentals instead of a "cleaner" C-B-C-B-C-B...

Unless you really must convey the 'meaning' of Cb there harmonically, I favor the cleaner line 'theory' here, two chromatic neighbors, particularly if B 'leads to' C.

[JumpingJackFlash]

There are many ways to interpret the chords you write. But it seems to me like you're reaching at straws in a desperate attempt to make a square peg fit into a round hole.

Not everything can or should be fit into one particular key you know. In fact, if you're just using random notes, it's very unlikely to do so, not in any meaningful way anyway.

It would really be handy to have a "rule" for every note of the Eb chromatic scale so I could spell this piece coherently from beginning to end, but I just can't figure a perfect way.

There are different schools of though with this.

Some favour the "harmonic chromatic scale" which basically says that:
No degree of the scale has more than two notes upon it, and
Neither tonic nor dominant can be chromatically altered.

Starting on C for example, the scale goes:
C Db D-natural Eb E-natural F F# G Ab A-natural Bb B-natural C.

The premise for this is basically that you start with the harmonic minor and take the chromatic notes from the nearest related keys (dominant and subdominant minors). The scale is the same in both major and minor keys.

For convenience however, when ascending, the chromatic scale is normally written with sharps instead:
C C# D D# E F F# G G# A Bb B-natural C.

This is known as the "melodic chromatic scale" and, with fewer accidentals, it is easier to read (sometimes A# is also substituted for Bb).
When descending however, the first scale is still used.

[jancivil]

It would really be handy to have a "rule" for every note of the Eb chromatic scale so I could spell this piece coherently from beginning to end, but I just can't figure a perfect way.

well, eg., your chord 'F# C# D Eb' or whatever you end up with makes that overarching rule pretty problematic.

there are things here where the decision belongs with the context so that is what I would address. Spelled as I did there, it achieves showing the P5 and there are no double versions of a letter name. But, Db/Eb is a double pedal in all likelihood and that spelling violates this. So, past a point it will uselessly consume some time being obsessive about that overarching rule I think.

[jancivil]

that said, there are going to be cases in 'the literature' where such a case as the pedal Db/Eb is now written as C#/D# (even tied as such) and I bet the composer didn't lose a lot of sleep behind it. I would in any case preserve the secondal relationship in spelling that.

[Musicologo]

Thank you so much for your valuable input, but I'm still lost around here.

When i do an harmonic analysis forgetting the pedals, I basically have the chords
Eb, F#m, Db, Em, B...

But I can't put a uniform "reasonable" spelling on them... If I try to write them as Eb, Gbm, Db, Fb, Cb I get a whole lot of double bb, and then an harmonic clash on the Cb, having to write Gb-Db-D-Eb...
Is this the better solution? To have a score full up with flats, but where you can read the harmony?...

Or should I forget all this and go measure by measure and write out Eb (flats), F#m (sharps), Db (flats), Em (sharps), B (sharps), and keep changing the pedals Eb/Db-D#/C#-Eb/Db-D#/C#...?

I need basically a pratical solution where the player won't be scared or turned off by lack of clarity. I need him to "look and see" at first sight what is pretended...

For more insight, basically the music is the world of snowboy and crow.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/142 ... ion%29.mp3

You can have a listen here if that helps to identify the correct harmony and the problem with a concrete spelling for it.

[jancivil]

as I indicated, a unified field type of theory seems to elude you here*. if I'm supposed to sight read it, I would prefer the secondal double pedal be consistent. I would think that's just too black a page anyway, explaining Db/Eb as C#/D# more than once.

"harmonic clash on the Cb, having to write Gb-Db-D-Eb." So that's what's holding you back? Does your ideology call for say F# C# D Eb? It's your piece.

*no, wait:

chord1: Bb-Db-Eb-G
chord2: A-Db-Eb-F#
chord3: Ab-Db-Eb-F
chord4: G-Db-Eb-E
chord5: F#-Db-Eb-D
chord6: F-B-C-D

I called your Fb 'E' in this case (you have these sixths vs that secondal double pedal). Chord 6 is an outlier to that model but it is anyway.

[Jdudeo]

I don't know if it helps or not, but to me it sounded like the sort of progression that would imply a bunch of jazzy modulations and thus defy any one rule you would try to apply to all the chords at once, so I figured out the name of each chord and each corresponding scale/mode:

chord 1: Eb7 implying Ab ionian (Ab major)
chord 2: F#madd13 implying A half whole diminished
chord 3: Absus4/F implying Ab ionian
chord 4: Ebalt (b9) implying Ab ionian
chord 5: Ebminmaj7/Db - Ab dorian
chord 6: Dm7add13 - Ab lydian dominant (lydian with a flat 7th)

The way I see it is that the first 4 chords can be considered to be in Ab major with the 2nd one just being outside for tension. I don't read music so I don't know how much this helps or not but maybe you can just mark a key change at chord 5 and treat chords 5 and 6 differently?