New answers tagged

0

You've discovered one of the tricks that Romantic piano music is based on-- throw layers and layers of dim7 chords one after the other, especially during your flashy crashy-bangy solo sections, and you'll get a dramatic sound that can end up on any key you want. A fundamental rule in music is that raised tones rise. An augmented F wants to resolve a half-...


3

♯ii°7 is really only used for one of two reasons, and in both cases it will be labeled differently: As a vii°7/iii to tonicize iii. Notice that this really only works in major keys, because in minor the root of ♯ii is enharmonically equivalent to the root of III. As a common-tone diminished seventh (often labeled CT°7) expanding tonic. Since you're in ...


1

With a little re-wording you have "If the intervals on the weakbeats are dissonant the melody cannot leap and must move by step." Your example violates that "rule." Is the clarity of the rule the problem, or do you think your example presents a special case that shouldn't apply? Personally I don't like procedural stuff like this word as ...


0

In strict third-species counterpoint, fourths are dissonant, and leaps into dissonances are prohibited except in one specific circumstance. In a double neighbor figure, there is a leap from the second beat to the third beat, with the third beat being a dissonance. This is permitted. (See, for example, this summary of the third species rules.) The double ...


1

According to Glen Haydon "The Evolution of the Six-Four Chord," the 6-4 chord had become common by the early 1200s. He gives examples due to Perotín and Adam de la Halle. There are also comments implying that the earliest known Western music used 6-5 chords. This chord had been used since "antiquity" (before we have good notation for the ...


2

In Walter Piston's Harmony he often says melodic considerations can override harmonic ones. From that perspective you might have an occasion where doubling a third would be acceptable. The point isn't to then try quantifying, or making a long list of exceptions for, acceptable doublings. You want to understand the reason for the norm in the first place, and ...


2

I have a slightly different viewpoint as other answers: no, I don't think that part-writing rules are contradictory. But unfortunately, some teachers (and pedagogical approaches) are contradictory with the guidelines that they create. I say this for one simple reason: there is nothing wrong with doubling the third of a major chord. Composers do it constantly ...


1

Doubling the 3rd of a major triad is not advised. The 5th may be omitted. So, if you do so, I guess you have to TRIPLE the root. No contradiction, but perhaps an unexpected implication! (It's not uncommon for all 4 voices to converge to the root in unison for a final note, thus quadrupling it!)


0

I don't know if the rules are contradictory but they are more rules in the sense of what sounds good, to the culture the music is created in. But everything involves compromise and it can be difficult coming to a solution. I read one author who said that four part harmony rules were created by 19th century theorists retrospectively. When learning harmony or ...


1

I'd like to add that the reason not to double "tendency tones" is that, because of the tendency, these "tend" to resolve to the same tone leading to parallel octaves. In C-major, (as an example), one doesn't double B as the tendency of B to move to C is felt rather strongly, especially as B is the third of the dominant. I know little ...


2

The 1, 4, and 5 being referred to are within the mode; that is, they are not 1, 4, and 5 of the corresponding major scale. The general principle is not to double "tendency tones". Since you're dealing with triads, this means, in particular, the leading tone. For example, in G - C cadence, you wouldn't double the B in the G chord. This idea gets ...


Top 50 recent answers are included