New answers tagged

2

There are many plausible ways to see the chords, and all of the interpretations are equally true at the same time. Eb9#11 : can be used like you would use (1) Bbm (or Bbmmaj7) in the key of F major, or (2) tritone substitute dominant A7 going to Dm, or (3) F7 or Cm going to Bb major, ... or maybe (4) like an Eb7 or Eb9 if this was a mixolydian blues/funk/...


4

The song is in F major, so that E♭9♯11 chord is really just an altered ♭VII chord. In music of this style ♭VII is often used as a type of dominant, so measures 5–8 just alternate between tonic and this dominant substitute. As for the Bm7♭5 in m. 9, ultimately it's the start of a larger sequence: notice how m. 9 just moves down a ...


3

For instance, in Chopin's Nocturne in B-flat minor in the first measure there's an accidental on the fourth note. But it's really just a change from B-flat natural minor to B-flat harmonic minor, which has the A note, which isn't in the natural minor. This idea makes the assumption that Chopin intended to compose music in something called the "B-flat ...


0

An accidental means either a temporary scale change, or an out-of-scale passing note. But accidentals are only written for explicitly written notes. The lack of an accidental does not mean that there couldn't be an implied temporary scale change. For example if in a song that's in C major, there's a D7 chord (which has an F# note) in the harmony, but the ...


0

No, not normally. There are, in 12tet, 12 notes available to make tunes out of. Basically, 7 of those are used - the diatonic notes. But if a composer decides that one of the other 5 need to be played, he'll use it. But to do so, it needs writing as an accidental, as it's not in the set of diatonic notes for that key. It certainly doesn't mean suddenly there'...


0

To respond to something that came up in comments: to be clear, the Omnibus Progression doesn't need to be "modified" to be played indefinitely. If you look at the Wikipedia page first example, there's only an octave given in the example, but you end up with a G7 chord that is precisely the same voicing as the E7 seen as the fourth chord in the sequence. ...


2

I've seen (but I cannot remember where) a cyclic type of omnibus. As the progress is just an extended voice exchange, one could exchange the voices back though that would give a <> style rather than a wedge. One cheat (which works for all progressions but may not be musically interesting) is to double everything at the octave (or make 3 or 4 octaves if ...


0

Further to the Wikipedia page already linked to by Athanasius in a comment, the omnibus progression can also be extended in such a way as to harmonise a descending chromatic scale in one part and an ascending chromatic scale in another, like this:


2

I can't comment on Laurence Payne's comment because of reputation, and I also think that the actual transposition/inversion order isn't really the crux of OP's question. At least we got OP's question properly: What I fail to understand is that he still started from the same note, so why is it not same root? Why is the ending note is suddenly the root? Is ...


2

I think you're skipping over something - he states that Rachmaninoff transposes the theme from the key of A minor to D♭ major. The key changes just because he transposes it - there's no way getting around that. I don't quite understand what you mean by changing the mode; I don't know either piece very well, but from what I can see there's no modes changing. ...


5

D♭, not D♯. But stick to the main part of the explanation, where the original melody, rooted in A and rising up a perfect 5th to E is inverted. It still ends up a 5th away from A, but this time a perfect 5th DOWN, ending on D, which now feels like the root. That's the end of story as far as the 'negative melody' is concerned. Having got his ...


Top 50 recent answers are included