Lace
Reaction score
0

Profile posts Postings Media Albums About

  • Hokie dokie. It's just really balls cause you are never there when Fab is/Fab is never there when you are.

    I'm sorta confused about the whole thing, you mentioned something yesterday about your mom wanting you and her to be home when I arrive?
    Train gets to the station at 2:08. Emily and Zach are going to arrive at your house before you have to leave, so it will be the three of us there. If you don't want us hanging out in your house without supervision, we could find something else to do, but I promise we won't do any permanent damage.
    Okay, first thing I want you to do is listen to the first 24 bars of Titan of Thunder, and identify the tonic. For easy reference, the chords are:

    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    Bm
    Bm
    C
    C
    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    Bm
    G A
    B
    G A
    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    G
    G
    D
    A

    Listen to it and identify which of these chords feels like the "home" chord. Note that I'm not asking for a specific bar number, just a chord name. So, for example, if the answer were E major, you wouldn't say "the E major chord in bar 3" or something, you would just say "E major".
    Huh, when I went to Europe, I found the food to be much better. I didn't go to England however, I went to Germany, Holland, Switzerland, and Italy.
    If there is I'll tell you. Mainly, I'll just assume if you don't ask any questions within a couple days of me posting that you understand.
    fix'd. I think that you were able to catch the one little typo is sufficient comprehension evidence. I'll post moar stuffs soon as I'm less busy (may be a while).
    Oh, and I also meant to mention another thing in my bit about my own music theory education. I was also taught about the 7 modes at a pretty young age (around 4th-5th grade, as I recall).
    Tually, we had a test in MDT class today, which I breezed through, so I have more free time than expected.

    So, as I was saying, consider the seven modes all starting on the same note (let's go with F) like so:
    9jqZC.png

    F lydian is, of course, all white keys starting on F. Notice that, with each successive step downward on the above image, a single note in the scale is flatted. We now have the logical sequence of modes. Lydian is the most major, being the brightest and happiest, Locrian is the most minor, being the darkest and scariest, and the other five lie on a spectrum in between. I will therefore rename each of the modes to reflect this spectrum, like so:

    Lydian - Hypermajor
    Ionian - Major
    Mixolydian - Hypomajor
    Dorian - Hypominor
    Aeolian - Minor
    Phrygian - Hyperminor
    Locrian - Diminished

    Recall from page 13 of this conversation:
    me said:
    You also mentioned seeing little numbers used to denote the chords. My guess is you're referring to the figured bass symbols. Roman numerals are used to indicate diatonic triads, (so the first is 1, the second is 2, etc.). Uppercase indicated major, lowercase indicates minor, uppercase with a plus sign indicates augmented, and lowercase with a degree sign indicates diminished. So the figured bass symbols used to indicate the diatonic triads of an Aeolian (minor) scale are: i, iiº, III, iv, v, VI, VII.

    By taking this pattern and "rotating" it, we get the other 6 modes:
    Ionian: I, ii, iii, IV, V, vi, viiº
    Dorian, i, ii, III, IV, v, viº, VII
    Phrygian: i, II, III, iv, vº, VI, vii
    Lydian: I, II, iii, ivº, V, vi, vii
    Mixolydian: I, ii, iiiº, IV, v, vi, VII
    Aeolian: i, iiº, III, iv, v VI, VII
    Locrian: iº, II, iii, iv, V, VI, vii

    It's getting irritating to have to either open character map or copypasta from a previous post every time I want to type the º symbol, so we're just gonna use a minus sign from now on. Reordering the list I quoted in the new spectrum, with the new names, we have:

    Hypermajor: I, II, iii, iv-, V, vi, vii
    Major: I, ii, iii, IV, V, vi, vii-
    Hypomajor: I, ii, iii-, IV, v, vi, VII
    Hypominor: i, ii, III, IV, v, vi-, VII
    Minor: i, ii-, III, iv, v, VI, VII
    Hyperminor: i, II, III, iv, v-, VI, vii
    Diminished: i-, II, iii, iv, V, VI, vii

    As the name implies, music written with MIT is not bound to a particular mode at any point in time, since it's mode-independent, but it is still tonal, so it is bound to a particular key at any point in time. For example, rather than saying that a piece is in the key of E-flat major or minor, as you would in MDT, you simply say it's in the key of E-flat (in theory at least - in practice it's often convenient to attach the major or minor label anyway, for reasons I'll mention later). What this means is that, at any point in time, we can choose from any of the seven diatonic triads of any of the seven modes of the key we're in. At first this might lead you to believe we have a palette of 49 chords to choose from, but this is incorrect, as there are many duplicates within the 7x7 grid. To quantify this duplicity, consider the following:

    Between any two consecutive modes on the modal spectrum, exactly one note of the scale is changed. For example, between Hypermajor and Major, the 4th scale degree changes (in the key of F, as in the above image, between B-natural and B-flat). Since one scale degree is changed, three of the seven diatonic triads are changed (one which uses the altered scale degree as its root, one which uses it as the 3rd, and one which uses it as the 5th) while the other four remain unchanged. In our example, changing the B-natural in F Hypermajor to the B-flat in F Major changes the B diminished (iv-) to B-flat major (IV), the G major (II) to G minor (ii), and the E minor (vii) to E diminished (vii-). We can continue this process with each other pair of consecutive modes, getting three new chords with each transition. So, to summarize, we start with the 7 diatonic triads of the Hypermajor mode, and then add 3 new triads for each of the 6 transitions, giving a palette with a total of 7+6*3=25 chords, like so:

    Hypermajor: I, II, iii, iv-, V, vi, vii
    Major: ii, IV, vii-
    Hypomajor: iii-, v, VII
    Hypominor: i, III, vi-
    Minor: ii-, iv, VI
    Hyperminor: II, v-, vii
    Diminished: i-, iii, V

    Note that there is nothing magical about Hypermajor that you have to start there. I just chose to start there for convenience. Also, it is a mistake to assume that each of these chords "belongs" to the mode it's listed under, since many chords belong to multiple modes. In fact, if I had started on a different mode, we would still have the same set of 25 chords, but they would be grouped differently.

    Each of the above 25 chords is different. However, the way they are currently named, there are four duplicate names (II, iii, V, and vii, shown in bold). To resolve this, we'll keep the four on the major end of the spectrum named the same, and change the names of their four counterparts on the minor end of the spectrum. As it happens, MDT has already given us a name for the II chord: Neapolitan (we'll abbreviate this as "Npl"). In continuing this pattern, I've decided to name the vii, V, and iii chords Vanilla, Chocolate, and Strawberry, respectively (abbreviated "Vnl", "Chc", and "Str").

    So, to summarize, we have major, minor, and diminished variants of chords with roots on each of the seven scale degrees, giving us 21 chords, plus the 4 ice cream chords, for a total of 25 chords in our palette.

    I think that's enough for now.
    By "one of the meanings" I was referring to the two distinct meanings of slashes.

    In that case, no, that is not one of the meanings. One use of a slash is to indicate the inversion of a chord. For example, if you said a chord was a D chord, that would imply that it has a D in the bass and at least one F# and A somewhere else. This is called root position. If the chord were in first inversion, then the F# would be in the bass, rather than the D, and so you would call the chord D/F# (read "D over F#" or "D with F# in the bass" or "D in first inversion"). You could also have 2nd inversion (D/A). You could even have an NCT in the bass (i.e. D/G) but this is unusual.

    The other meaning of a slash is tonicization, which we'll cover later.

    huzzah for linguistics! :D



    I'll try to cover as much MIT as I can right now, but in about 20 mins, I gotta run off to class and learn about MDT :p

    As the names of the two paradigms imply, a key distinction is the handling of modes. MDT uses only major and minor, ignoring the other 5 modes (dorian, phrygian, lydian, mixolydian, locrian). Furthermore, a piece using MDT will be definitively in either major or minor at any given point in time. There is a thing in MDT called "mode mixture" where you borrow notes from the opposite mode, but, when this is done, it's kind of a big deal, like "HEY LOOK, I'M DOING MODE MIXTURE!!! :awesomeface:". In MIT, on the other hand, one can simply drift freely between each of the seven modes without it being a big deal.

    This being the case, there is a logical sequence the modes follow, and it is unusual to jump directly between two modes that are far apart on this sequence. I have to go now, so I can't explain this sequence yet, but if you're really smart, you might be able to figure it out. As a hint: consider the scales of each of the seven modes all starting on the same note.
    Am I correct in thinking one of the meanings is enharmonics, or am I crazy?

    I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. It is true that, by looking at the function of the chords, we will be able to determine which of the enharmonic equivalents is the "correct" one (though there still may be some cases with ambiguity).



    I'm going to use your aspiration list as more of a guide than the inspiration one. The general trend in your ranking seems to be:

    game/film (me, gir, pixel, johnnybill - though I think it might be slightly more descriptive/precise to call this category "neo-romantic", since that term actually describes the music itself, rather than its setting/context. It is true that a lot of game/film music is neo-romantic in style, and a lot of neo-romantic music is used in games/films, but the two are in no way synonymous.)
    classical (bach, van bait)
    popular (mike, taytay, coleoptera)

    Scott doesn't fit real well into any of these categories, but I'll keep in mind that you like him.



    This is good news, because the ranking of these three categories in terms of how much you aspire to them happens to be the same as their ranking in terms of how well qualified I am to teach you about them.

    An interesting thing about my own education in music theory (which I think is somewhat apparent in my compositions) is that I was taught about chords, keys, and scales at a very young age (like around 2nd-3rd grade -ish), but I didn't start learning about the traditional way chords function (what I'm about to teach you) until very recently (not even a year ago). Through middle school and high school, I would pick chord progressions for my compositions intuitively, not following any particular set of rules (in fact I usually still do, even now that I know more about the rules). I strongly suspect something similar could be said about some of the other musically inclined forum members (gir, cultr, rtnario, jethawk, safu) as well as Pixel (since he claims not to know much about music, but his music does fit into scales/chords).

    One thing I find very interesting about just the concept of music theory in general is that things we classify as "rules" might be more accurately described as "trends", in that they are more descriptive than prescriptive. For example, in a typical 1st/2nd semester music theory class today, the music of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven is often used for examples of pieces that use and obey the rules being taught about functional harmony. However, most of the concepts of functional harmony that are taught today were not actually conceived until after these composers' deaths! In my opinion, this is very significant, because it means that, rather than composers following a set of rules laid down by theoreticians who came before them, it is in fact the theoreticians who are following the composers. Rules of music theory are generally conceived when theoreticians try to form a logical framework that the works of similarly-styled composers fit into, while the composers themselves were driven largely by intuition.

    I had suspected that you would rank neo-romantic style the highest, so I've spent the last few weeks trying to devise a paradigm for describing the way harmony functions in my compositions. It is in many ways similar to common practice functional harmony (as used by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, etc.) but with a few key distinctions. The paradigm is far from perfect, and will probably be revised significantly along the way. This will be just as much a learning experience for me as it is for you!

    Unfortunately, the computer lab I'm in closes in 10 mins, so I don't have time to describe this paradigm to you. I will say, however, that, from now on, I will refer to common practice tonality as mode-dependant tonality (MDT) and my paradigm as mode-independant tonality (MIT).
    I think technically you're supposed to use the Report Post button
    But I'll probably see a VM even sooner so yeah this works.
    For easy reference:

    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    Bm
    Bm
    C
    C
    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    Bm
    G A
    B
    G A
    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    G
    G
    D
    A
    Bm
    Bm
    E
    E
    G
    A
    Dm
    D#
    Fm
    A#
    C
    D
    Gm
    Gm

    Also, I notice that you use space to indicate breaks between measures and slash to join two chords in the same measure, while I use newline for the former and space for the latter. Using slash is not a great idea, since the slash already has two very different meanings when dealing with chords (we'll get to these soon), which can be confusing enough, so it'd be better not to add a third. Using a comma wouldn't be too bad though.

    I think there's enough here to get started, though we may or may not do the rest of the piece later.

    Before we go on, however, I'd like to know something from you which may affect how I go about teaching you. How would you describe the style of music that you are most interested in composing in?

    If that's too vague of a question, maybe answer this one instead:

    Rank the following composers in terms of how much interest/aspiration you have toward composing in their style (if you're unfamiliar with any of them, you may omit them):

    Bach
    Mozart
    Beethoven
    Brahms
    Liszt
    Wagner
    Rachmaninoff
    Debussy
    Stravinsky
    Copland
    me
    GIRakaCHEEZER
    Pixel
    John Williams
    Louis Armstrong
    Michael Jackson
    Taylor Swift
    The Beatles
    Journey
    any others you feel like mentioning
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Back
Top