4 part voice leading. Relevant to electronic music?

[jancivil]

[Touch The Universe]

Found this totally cool voice leading software that checks for errors in voice leading. Perfect for practicng for my class It checks for all the major errors, tells you if the chord is in 1st or second inversion, and best of all, it lets you hear the chords you're building. Check it out, there is a demo! You can watch the vid here. Cheers

[Touch The Universe]

I'm now working with primary triads in 1st inversion and have a quick question about when would be a good situation to double something other than the root in 1st inversions. Preferably it's best to try doubling the fifth before the 3rd is this correct? Is the whole doubling other than the root only to be used for problem solving, when for some reason its not possible to double the root, or if the root is further away than say the fifth? Does it only come down to doubling other than the root for smoother voice leading or to make better sounding chords, or should I try to double the root even in 1st inversions when all possible?

[coquillo]

I'm now working with primary triads in 1st inversion and have a quick question about when would be a good situation to double something other than the root in 1st inversions. Preferably it's best to try doubling the fifth before the 3rd is this correct? Is the whole doubling other than the root only to be used for problem solving, when for some reason its not possible to double the root, or if the root is further away than say the fifth? Does it only come down to doubling other than the root for smoother voice leading or to make better sounding chords, or should I try to double the root even in 1st inversions when all possible?

How many instruments (and which ones) are you writing for?

[Touch The Universe]

voice leading, writing 2,3 or all parts

[NKF]

This is generally how you learn theory. The problem where studying it is you start to think in see terms which are really not compatible with certain styles of music that use certain types of timbres.

The closed voicing that is generally taught doesn't work if you are using a harmonically rich sound say a saw tooth.

Music theory is helpful if you know enough of it to understand that it is merely framework that can achieve a certain aesthetic. My experience is that it requires enough study that one would do in an undergrad in music at a good school which even then will still box people in.

It is only after Learning it all, and studying music chronologically seeing the parralels in what does follow and what doesn't , does one really start to see the big picture. By that time , the idea of calling it a theory makes your eyes roll.

So I would say more no than yes. Those that seem to have a better grasp and can apply it tend to make the most generic progressions that sound right but offer nothing interesting at least to me. Being catchy is the easiest part in harmony and voice leading. Unless you are willing to really invest the time, theory tends to make you sound like everyone else. And the parts people use tend to focus on such a small part of it because most of the idioms don't really work at least in terms of general aesthetics.

[herodotus]

I'd be very interested in seeing a jazz fugue in strict counterpoint. To the best of my knowledge no such thing exists...

Well this is the closest thing I've heard:

[jancivil]

I'm now working with primary triads in 1st inversion and have a quick question about when would be a good situation to double something other than the root in 1st inversions. Preferably it's best to try doubling the fifth before the 3rd is this correct?

There isn't going to a broad principle for... the first part of the question. Writing is to the musical context. As to doubling the third, the more concrete objection is to doubling the third in the major triad, which sonorously is kind of ugly in just four more or less equal-weight parts. This is a style consideration; I'm not going to want to type a lot about it being objectively unattractive but in much writing it's going to kind of just mar things and suddenly seem too opaque.
But trying to write about it shows that it's best to show it in the writing examples.

Does it only come down to doubling other than the root for smoother voice leading or to make better sounding chords, or should I try to double the root even in 1st inversions when all possible?

I don't think 'should' is good here, I don't think you should specifically seek that. Smoother voice-leading is something, but eventually you want 'beautiful' voice leading. In triadic, tonal, functional harmony paradigm, doubling major thirds is not so much.

You need to study exemplars of part-writing, study some JS Bach, probably some that has been pre-digested somewhat for you at this juncture. Or one thing you may want to try is to get ahold of something where the figured bass/analysis hasn't been shown and work out the roman numbers and figure the bass for the harmonies. It should raise questions and get you really thinking.

[NKF]

These prescriptions that only serve as a guideline for first year music students are exactly the reason why I said no rather than yes. The user above gives guidelines but I feel they are somewhat hesitant as it depends. If you don't understand why you should or shouldn't, it isn't really something you can exploit.

Doubling the 3rd is recommedend when it works. Doubling the 5th isn't recommended the way the voicings usually work out, you end up with uneven register gaps that are wider on the top which tends to sound muddy.

Almost all of the theory you learn in books teach Tonal Harmony stylized by the late 19th century germans who had this obsession with order and started imposing functions on chords which is kinda helpful for the beginner but completely absurd in terms of actual merit.

I think you really need to remind yourself that it is a framework. A system of organization. Theory is the absolute worst word for it. The general principles require an ear. They are very intuitive.

[Touch The Universe]

I have another question, I'm now doing 4 part voice leading using also secondary triads ( 2,3,6,7). I know that for secondary triads there are no second inversions, and all diminished or augmented triads will only be in 1st inversion form. In first inversion 2 diminished triads, one has to double the bass note ( which is the 3rd of the triad in this case). How can I know if the the second is in diminished form and not simply a second in first inversion for which different voice leading rules would then apply. ie, how can I tell if a triad is a ii6 chord or a ii dim 6? Do I look out for naturals, or look to see if the triad has either the b-c or e-f keys which are half steps?

[jancivil]

These rules you are receiving with no question illustrates why someone might question the relevance to some music; in the OP 'electronic music'.
Why is second-inversion illegal in a ii, iii, vi, or vii chord, per se? I have no memory at all of this being taught; I had to google it. I found everything from 'you may not' do it, to 'it is uncommon to', to "The second inversion of secondary Triads should be doubled exactly the same as the second inversion of principal Triads".
Some of the statements I found amidst some singularly badly formed 'theory' texts.

What is the musical reason given? Is there any?
IE: here's a principle; in a diminished triad, that diminished fifth might have a tendency, to typically want to move a certain way in resolution. So doubling according to this preference would force parallel octaves. But this is just some lingo, absent the two harmonies you're dealing with in context of some music.

But now, in the context of your receiving this as a true statement about all of the 'secondary' triads, per se: Is this principle true of a major or minor triad?

What are the chords, what is the writing you're doing? I don't think an exercise to see if you can follow a bunch of rules is the best exercise. I'm reluctant to say much with no actual part-writing before me. I should reinforce 'if you don't understand the reasoning, you can't really exploit it'. You could prove apt at following someone's received statement of rules and in doing so make some singularly bad music.

As to determining the quality of ii, in minor ii is a diminished triad until minor is the melodic minor form. So yeah, eg., in C minor a natural sign before A is your first clue.
Eventually you should come to recognize basic chord quality more readily.

[gnosis123]

I'd be very interested in seeing a jazz fugue in strict counterpoint. To the best of my knowledge no such thing exists...

I haven't heard anything either. On the other hand, two of the most beautiful works of 20th century music - Shostakovich's "24 preludes and fugues" and Hindemith's "Ludus Tonalis" - are full of fugues using idioms (e.g. quartal harmony) that hugely influenced later jazz composers.

[jancivil]

Who knows what that means, though "in strict counterpoint"? No way to answer that. The Bernstein, I think we can trust there is a fugue, and it's idiomatic as to 'jazz'.

[dewgong]

Another example of counterpoint in jazz. Its far from strict counterpoint but its still rather wonderful. Charles Mingus has alot of very very effective counterpoint too as does Bill Evans (conversations). The Grateful dead also have alot of intermingling lines.

To the OP also, my recommendation is to forget this morass of rules. If you want to learn counterpoint as an academic discipline. Go for it. Counterpoint is differential equation solving for musicians. None of what you're learning is really going to help you musically and it might do more to harm than hinder. It will add stuffiness and rigidity to your compositional style.

[jancivil]

Here's my fave anecdote to 'the rules': I got dinged - the only thing I was taken points off for, and despite his note that 'It sounds great' - for hidden fifths in the resolution of a German Sixth in my final for Honors Music Theory at CCM.
Turns out JS Bach did that move all the time. It's next-to-impossible to follow that rule. It seemed designed to ensure no one got 100 on the test. It's bullshit and it's anal.