Music theory is not logical

Chords, scales, harmony, melody, etc.
User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Post Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:42 pm


User avatar
IncarnateX
KVRAF
3802 posts since 25 Jan, 2009 from Forgotten Realms

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:16 am

jancivil wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:38 pm
Compare 'the harmonies are all tertial'
which I like to understand with a consequence, given I have understood you correctly .... ‘therefore they need not necessarily subordinate to one tonic, key or root...’ but that does not mean Shoenberg dissolve harmony all together, right?
to what is later known as the atonal triad (aka 'the Rite chord'):
Yup, that sound I know and is fairly easy to simulate but I have never taken time to really dive into these. Would not have much clue about what is going in terms of harmony when fiddling with these moods.

Of course, I recognize that there is a difference between pushing tonality beyond its limits but still have your feet plantet in traditional harmony and detach yourself from it as far as possible. However, since I have ever only scrathed the surface of atonality by being forced to listen Shoenberg for one hour in a theory class 28 years ago, I have no idea where to look for examples that takes antonality even further.

Thanks for exciting clarifications once again.

User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:56 am

IncarnateX wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:16 am
jancivil wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:38 pm
Compare 'the harmonies are all tertial'
which I like to understand with a consequence, given I have understood you correctly .... ‘therefore they need not necessarily subordinate to one tonic, key or root...’ but that does not mean Shoenberg dissolve harmony all together, right?
Not then, but as I read particularly A.S.'s own remarks (challenging to locate yesterday) on the piece, this was the beginning of the end.

User avatar
IncarnateX
KVRAF
3802 posts since 25 Jan, 2009 from Forgotten Realms

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:32 am

jancivil wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:56 am
this was the beginning of the end.
Aha, that makes good sense then.

User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:28 am

to shift gears, that so-called atonal triad is pretty useful for 'modern' jazz. G C#/Db F# for A7(13) or Eb7(#9), and completely moveable. Linearly, G C# F# D# E F# G Bb A et cetera... works in two or more keys.

Foxy Lady chord, 7#9, too.

You could take a line like that and plane it with the quartal type construction...

Keep going: G C# F# C F B E Bb Eb A D G#, full chromatic. Ascend or descend, mix it up...

User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:38 am

IncarnateX wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:16 am
jancivil wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:38 pm
Compare 'the harmonies are all tertial'
which I like to understand with a consequence, given I have understood you correctly .... ‘therefore they need not necessarily subordinate to one tonic, key or root...’ but that does not mean Shoenberg dissolve harmony all together, right?
Right.

This is a good thumbnail:
... the web of harmonic or tonal relationships from which the sextet is spun. Throughout, Schoenberg explores the possible intersections between what might be called diatonic/dominant and chromatic/half-step worlds. By diatonic/dominant I mean those relationships that revolve mainly around the tonic-dominant axis, especially V-I (or V-I). Although, as Swift notes, the dominant is absent as a "large-scale key area" in Verklärte Nacht, it is nonetheless present as a significant harmonic force, [...]. Other significant relationships are based primarily on half-step motion around certain important pitches or key areas—hence the designation chromatic/half-step.

Pt II Chapter 5
<Tonal-Harmonic Relationships>

User avatar
vurt
addled muppet weed
43055 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:18 pm

IncarnateX wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:16 am
by being forced to listen Shoenberg
:o :cry:

User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:42 pm

Oh, the humanity!

User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:32 pm

We were forced to listen to hours of the medieval period Holy Roman Church vocal polyphony and then write about distinctions.
Mediocre or poor - budget labels no one ever heard of - recordings of it on cassette. Until I started kind of not going and the professor called me on the phone one morning in my room to say we should not continue. Not exactly kicking me out but I took the option. 8 AM. I wasn't making it to high school at any 8 AM either. :(

Anyway I'm getting ideas in this, just prattling on as I am. That chromatic bit there out of the quartal triad is some good shit. :D

emess
KVRer
17 posts since 11 Feb, 2019

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:22 am

mediumaevum wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:33 am
Summed up my simple questions I have yet to have answered are:

Do you count the root tone (don't know the proper name, I begin with C, so let's call C root tone) when counting to a Third Interval?

Do you go up or down/right or left on the keyboard when counting an interval?
Think of an interval as the distance between two notes.

For instance, a minor second interval is defined by a one semitone (or half step) distance from any given note. Therefore, the minor second of C is C# (or Db), the minor second of C# is D and so on...

Basically, don't count the notes themselves, but the lines between each individual note.

Now there are two types of "thirds", one minor and one major. Those are just labels that you'll have to commit to memory. The minor third is three semitones away from the root note (one whole + one semi), and the major third is four semitones (two wholes). Then, from C the minor third is D# (or Eb) and the major third is E.

Whether you go up or down the keyboard, it doesn't change the distance between two notes.

Edit: Didn't realize this post had six pages, and now I see OP has grasped this concept... My bad! :lol:
Last edited by emess on Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fmr
KVRAF
8572 posts since 16 Mar, 2003 from Porto - Portugal

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:32 am

emess wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:22 am
Now there are two typed of "thirds", one minor and one major. Those are just labels that you'll have to commit to memory. The minor third is three semitones away from the root note (one whole + one semi), and the major third is four semitones (two wholes). Then, from C the minor third is D# (or Eb) and the major third is E.
NOT. This is one of the common mistakes made by people who didn't learn Music Theory properly, and creates confusion.

When counting from C, a D can NEVER become a third. It is ALWAYS a second. A third from C is ALWAYS an E. Therefore, to have a minor third you need to have Eb (NOT D#) and to have a Major third, you need to have an E. A D# would make an augmented second, not a minor third.

It may seem the same thing when played, but it isn't. An augmented second will eventually lead to something completely different than a minor third (considering voice leading).
Last edited by fmr on Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fernando (FMR)

emess
KVRer
17 posts since 11 Feb, 2019

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:41 am

fmr wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:32 am
NOT. This is one of the common mistakes made by people who didn't learn Music Theory properly, and creates confusion.

When counting from C, a D can NEVER become a third. It is ALWAYS a second. A third from C is ALWAYS an E. Therefore, to have a minor third you need to have Eb (NOT D#) and to have a Major third, you need to have an E. A D# would make an augmented second, not a minor third.

It may seem the same thing when played, but it isn't. An augmented will eventually lead to something completely different than a minor third (considering voice leading).
Thanks from clarifying. It makes complete sense since you cannot have the same letter twice in a scale.

So C natural minor would be C D Eb F G Ab Bb...

Am I thinking straight?

User avatar
fmr
KVRAF
8572 posts since 16 Mar, 2003 from Porto - Portugal

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:45 am

emess wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:41 am
fmr wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:32 am
NOT. This is one of the common mistakes made by people who didn't learn Music Theory properly, and creates confusion.

When counting from C, a D can NEVER become a third. It is ALWAYS a second. A third from C is ALWAYS an E. Therefore, to have a minor third you need to have Eb (NOT D#) and to have a Major third, you need to have an E. A D# would make an augmented second, not a minor third.

It may seem the same thing when played, but it isn't. An augmented will eventually lead to something completely different than a minor third (considering voice leading).
Thanks from clarifying. It makes complete sense since you cannot have the same letter twice in a scale.

So C natural minor would be C D Eb F G Ab Bb...

Am I thinking straight?
Yes, you are. Those are the "natural notes" of C minor. Of course, it will most probably show one common alteration (the B), and, less commonly, a second one (the A). These two can (and many times do) occur during a composition in C minor. That's what gives the charm and variety to the minor mode - one is not limited to a scale of seven notes, but actually have NINE. It is and will always be C minor, still.

BTW: I always object to the distinction between C minor natural, harmonic and melodic. There is only one C minor - the rest are merely alterations of the base mode. There isn't one hyerarchy to those, and we can use ALL of them in the piece - it will still be C minor. "Just" C minor.

EDIT: This is true for all minor tonalities, of course.
Fernando (FMR)

User avatar
jancivil
KVRAF
17945 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from No Location

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:26 pm

C D# is an augmented second. Use case of, looks like C D#, 6 7 of E minor.
The other error in spelling, example given C minor *triad* with a D# is D# to G is a diminished 4th.
There is a use case for that actual interval as well; eg., F# G D#, 2 3 (or 9 10) 7 of E minor.

Spelling carries meaning in tonal harmonic music. So *don't count the notes themselves, but the lines between each individual note* is exactly wrong.

mystran
KVRAF
5256 posts since 12 Feb, 2006 from Helsinki, Finland

Re: Music theory is not logical

Post Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:24 am

emess wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:41 am
So C natural minor would be C D Eb F G Ab Bb...
For any traditional scale, the letters always go in order A,B,C,D,E,F,G in a loop. Note that this order is alphabetic. I guess whoever came up with it must have preferred minor scales and it's quite curious that we also generally tune instruments on reference A.. but whatever. You can rotate the starting letter to your tonic and you can add any number of sharps or flats as required, but the letters always go in order.

For example, if we wanted a minor scale in Cb, we would have Cb, Db, Ebb, Fb, Gb, Abb, Bbb. On piano Cb is the same physical key as B, so the actual physical keys used are the same as for B minor, where the notes would be B, C#, D, E, F#, G, A, but note that in both cases we follow the alphabetic ordering, with flats/sharps to adjust the actual pitches.

The only common exception to this "alphabetic" rule is the German nomenclature (used in many european countries, at least in classical circles, so it's good idea to be aware of this weirdness) where "H" is used in place of "B" and "B" instead means what is known as "Bb" elsewhere. Your scale can only have one of these though and otherwise all the same logic applies though. I can't seem to find a reference on the web right now, but if I'm not mistaken this weird convention traces back to some early typographical issues, making it quite illogical for real.
If you'd like Signaldust to return, please ask Katinka Tuisku to resign.

Return to “Music Theory”