Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jul 2, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: It used to be applied only to the i chord in a minor key, at a cadence. But the effect shows up so much more often that it can be used on pretty much any normally-minor chord, though traditional theorists might not apply the term "Picardy" to it. Maybe it should be called an orange note (opposite of a blue note). Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 30, 2005, at 2:44 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: On 30 Jun 2005 at 0:14, Christopher Smith wrote: On Jun 29, 2005, at 11:34 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: I don't know of anyone who uses "subdominant" to refer to ii, for instance. They may talk about "subdominant function" chords, or the group of chords that function as "predominants" but I don't hear anyone explicitly calling a non-IV chord a subdominant. You might have missed my backpedalling on that one. I meant to say there is a tendency (right or wrong) to say "subdominant" or "predominant" when what is really meant is subdominant or predominant AREA or FUNCTION. Confusion can arise from the use of the same term in two different contexts. Picardy third (now often applied to ANY major-quality resolution chord where a minor one is expected in the key, wrongly or not) Well, that's one where I don't know of any more limited definition. It used to be applied only to the i chord in a minor key, at a cadence. But the effect shows up so much more often that it can be used on pretty much any normally-minor chord, though traditional theorists might not apply the term "Picardy" to it. Toncisation (used to mean only with a secondary dominant, now can mean articulating a temporary tonic by any applicable means) (on that subject, what do you call a plagal resolution to a temporary tonic? A "plagalisation"? I shudder at it, but it IS logical. Musicians who play gospel (where it is most common) call it "backcycling", but that is a bit obtuse IMHO. Drawing on "applied dominant" perhaps "applied predominant"? Not clear. Applied how?) I don't recognize the validity of your claim of the original restriction -- that makes no sense. It could be that the term was first used to talk about those progressions, but that doesn't mean it can't easily be adapted to cover other progressions as well. I agree that the goal is similar, but shouldn't there be a distinction between approaching a chord by its dominant, and approaching it by some other means? For that matter, I would LOVE to include viidim7/X as a tonicisation (the regular one, using a dominant-area chord) but my theory teachers didn't recognize it as a tonicisation. Maybe things have changed a bit since then, or maybe I just had REALLY conservative theory teachers (I mostly had problems understanding the connections between what I was playing and writing, and what I was analysing in theory class. It took me YEARS to work that out!) If the term were "dominanticization" then you'd have a point. Yes, I suppose you're right on that one. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Has anyone mentioned the term "sesquialtera"? _New Grove_ again, article "Hemiola": from Gk. hemiolios: 'the whole and a half'; Lat. sesquialtera). In early music theory, the ratio 3:2. In terms of musical pitch, when the string of the monochord was divided in this ratio the two lengths sounded the interval of a 5th. The term was also used from the 15th century to signify the substitution of three imperfect notes for two perfect ones... [the rest previously quoted by me]. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jul 1, 2005, at 1:35 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: Well, I'm concerned about the idea that you would assume that Lully wrote anything at all in 3/4. I don't know of any French music from that period in which modern 3/4 occurs in the original sources, nor any time signature with a 6 in it. It's in 3/2, actually. _Bourgeois Gentilhomme_ Act 4 initiation scene. Solo voice in obvious 6/4 rhythm alternating w. chorus in half notes. You could look it up. And BTW, my assumptions have nothing to do with it. It's right there in black and white. You wanna argue w. _Grove_, go argue w. _Grove_. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
From Technoid: On 6/30/05, Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello folks. Has anyone mentioned the term "sesquialtera"? One source i have says "IIn Hispanic Music, it may refer to the mixture of duple and triple time within groups of six quavers (eighth notes)." Sesquialtera is also an organ stop that is (usually) a non-breaking (i.e., one that doesn't "break back" as the notes ascend) mixture consisting of two "ranks" of pipes--one at 2 2/3' and the other at 1 3/5'. (Yeah, I know it has nothing to with meter, so this is kind of OT...) Yes, I know that use of sesquialtera for organ stops. I think it originally meant two in the space of three. Hal -- Harold Owen 2830 Emerald St., Eugene, OR 97403 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit my web site at: http://uoregon.edu/~hjowen FAX: (509) 461-3608 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On 1 Jul 2005 at 11:19, Andrew Stiller wrote: [I wrote:] > > I *do* see a problem with calling something a hemiola that is > > EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what a hemiola actually is. > > Of two examples given in the relevant _New Grove_ article, the second > (from Lully) is of the type you call "reverse hemiola," and is > characterized in the text as "an instance of the same basic > phenomenon." Note that the writer of the article does not consider > this an opposite at all--as neither do I. Well, I'm shocked. To me that's a mix-up that demonstrates a lack of understanding of the entire functional basis of hemiola, a rhythmic slowing (something of a metrical modulation, to use a more modern term), whereas this reverse hemiola *speeds up* the beat. Secondly, the 3/4 vs. 6/8 thing (or in older music 3/H vs. 2/H.) happens within a single measure, whereas hemiola takes place over two measures. Last of all, the main function of hemiola, traditionally, was a pre- cadential slowing of the harmonic rhythm, to mark cadentially significant points. Calling the 3/4 vs. 6/8 shift the same thing obscures extraordinarily important distinctions, and leaves out essential aspects of the mechanism involved in defining the hemiola functionally. Given the fine distinctions we make musically, it seems that we ought to be equally concerned about precision of terminology. > I note, too, that in any case (such as the Lully) where there is a > regular alternation of 2X3 and 3X2, the composer's choice of time > signature (3/4 or 6/8) is essentially arbitrary, yet the musical > meaning of the passage is not affected thereby, nor is the nature of > the metric phenomenon under discussion. > > What it all boils down to is that multiplication is commutative. Well, I'm concerned about the idea that you would assume that Lully wrote anything at all in 3/4. I don't know of any French music from that period in which modern 3/4 occurs in the original sources, nor any time signature with a 6 in it. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On 6/30/05, Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello folks. > > Has anyone mentioned the term "sesquialtera"? One source i have says > "IIn Hispanic Music, it may refer to the mixture of duple and triple > time within groups of six quavers (eighth notes)." Sesquialtera is also an organ stop that is (usually) a non-breaking (i.e., one that doesn't "break back" as the notes ascend) mixture consisting of two "ranks" of pipes--one at 2 2/3' and the other at 1 3/5'. (Yeah, I know it has nothing to with meter, so this is kind of OT...) I've enjoyed the discussion on 6/4. Whenever I think of hemiola I think of Brahms's use of hemiola ... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
I *do* see a problem with calling something a hemiola that is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what a hemiola actually is. Of two examples given in the relevant _New Grove_ article, the second (from Lully) is of the type you call "reverse hemiola," and is characterized in the text as "an instance of the same basic phenomenon." Note that the writer of the article does not consider this an opposite at all--as neither do I. I note, too, that in any case (such as the Lully) where there is a regular alternation of 2X3 and 3X2, the composer's choice of time signature (3/4 or 6/8) is essentially arbitrary, yet the musical meaning of the passage is not affected thereby, nor is the nature of the metric phenomenon under discussion. What it all boils down to is that multiplication is commutative. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Hello folks. Has anyone mentioned the term "sesquialtera"? One source i have says "IIn Hispanic Music, it may refer to the mixture of duple and triple time within groups of six quavers (eighth notes)." Hal Owen -- Harold Owen 2830 Emerald St., Eugene, OR 97403 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit my web site at: http://uoregon.edu/~hjowen FAX: (509) 461-3608 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On 30 Jun 2005 at 9:20, Christopher Smith wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2005, at 12:54 AM, Mark D Lew wrote:
>
> > On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
> >
> >> Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built
> >> on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant
> >
> > Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the
> > 4th of the scale.
> >
> > So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as
> > "subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong.
>
> Described as a "subdominant function" or "subdominant area", yes. This
> confusion is why so many theorists use the term "predominant" as I had
> mentioned. But that term has its pitfalls, too.
Using the term "subdominant function" is not even close to using the
exact term "subdominant" to apply to non-IV/iv chords.
And it's nothing like the mis-use of hemiola to mean something that
exactly contradicts the actual meaning of the word.
> Ideally (IMHO) a music theory jargon term would be
>
> 1) easy to pronounce and spell,
> 2) unambiguous in application, and
> 3) have a sense of what it meant built in. Kind of like the German way
> of building compound words ("Fork" might be
> "Foodpickerupandputterintomouth" to use my old theory teacher's
> example that always got a giggle. The purpose of the thing is evident
> as soon as you say it.)
>
> "Predominant", while it satisfies the first two requirements, causes
> confusion as to its function. "Subdominant function" is long, and
> certainly could be called ambiguous, since "subdominant" also means
> just the IV chord and the 4th scale degree.
I don't see any problem whatsoever with either of the terms, but my
entire theoretical training was based around this approach, and the
consistent use of those terms.
How would you apply this list, then, to what you argue is a
permissable shift in the meaning of the word hemiola?
I think people misuse it because they never have actually been taught
the original definition, probably because a lot of the people using
it have never actually played much of the music in which the genuine
hemiola is part of the musical style.
--
David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton
David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On 30 Jun 2005 at 0:14, Christopher Smith wrote: > On Jun 29, 2005, at 11:34 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > > > >> On 29 Jun 2005, at 9:28 PM, Raymond Horton wrote: > > > >>> The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats > >>> each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). > > > > That's not the right meaning of hemiola. A hemiola is: > > > > W W W > > H H H | H H H > > > > across two measures in a 3/2 context, (or H H H in two 3/4 > > measures). In 3/2, the hemiola is overlaying a 3/1 measure over top > > of two 3/2 measures. > > I think "hemiola" is one of those terms which has gone beyond its > traditional meaning, to mean any 3 against 2 OR 2 against 3 counter > accent in our modern times. Well, I think it's a problem, because it uses only 1/2 of the definition/function of the hemiola in the music in which it emerged. > Other terms that I think have moved on in a similar fashion: > > Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on > it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant (though it doesn't > invariably have to). Some of my colleagues have replaced this term > with "Predominant" to be more clear. But what if it doesn't go to the > dominant, but directly to the tonic? Is it still a "predominant"? If > not, then why have a different name for the same chord in the same > key? I don't know of anyone who uses "subdominant" to refer to ii, for instance. They may talk about "subdominant function" chords, or the group of chords that function as "predominants" but I don't hear anyone explicitly calling a non-IV chord a subdominant. > Modal - had a big discussion about this one last year on the list. > Doesn't mean now what it used to mean a couple of centuries ago. Of > course leads to Actually, this is a case where it never meant a single thing, and now we've gotten to the point that we recognize that there are at least two distinct meanings. It's like the word "organum," which has at least 3 distinct meanings. > Tonal - which might be one of those words that can't be used any more > in ANY context except historical, because of all the different ways it > is construed > Picardy third (now often applied to ANY major-quality resolution chord > where a minor one is expected in the key, wrongly or not) Well, that's one where I don't know of any more limited definition. > Toncisation (used to mean only with a secondary dominant, now can mean > articulating a temporary tonic by any applicable means) (on that > subject, what do you call a plagal resolution to a temporary tonic? A > "plagalisation"? I shudder at it, but it IS logical. Musicians who > play gospel (where it is most common) call it "backcycling", but that > is a bit obtuse IMHO. Drawing on "applied dominant" perhaps "applied > predominant"? Not clear. Applied how?) I don't recognize the validity of your claim of the original restriction -- that makes no sense. It could be that the term was first used to talk about those progressions, but that doesn't mean it can't easily be adapted to cover other progressions as well. If the term were "dominanticization" then you'd have a point. > All of these expanded uses came about because we needed to talk about > them, but didn't have a brand-new term, so we used an old term that > did something similar, but restricted, in an older context. I even > hear some jazz musicians (mostly bass players) talk about "musica > ficta" in a jazz context, meaning that they use sharper notes walking > up to a target and flatter notes moving down to a target; a great > departure from the raised 4th and lowered 7th the term used to refer > to. I don't see a problem with those. I *do* see a problem with calling something a hemiola that is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what a hemiola actually is. All of your examples that I would agree are acretions of additional meanings are extensions by metaphor, or extensions of usage from the original context, and the extensions all apply to things that are SIMILAR, not the EXACT OPPOSITE of the original meaning. Hence, our invention of the term REVERSE HEMIOLA. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Richard wrote: If someone says to me "sub-dominant" within a music discussion, I will take that to mean the pitch just BELOW the Dominant or the 4th pitch in the scale. but the original meaning of "sub-dominant" was the "dominant (fifth) below the tonic". The fact that it happens to be the same scale designation as the note below the dominant is an artifact. This is also how one makes sense of the use of the term "sub-mediant" for the sixth degree, being the mediant below, to the dominant below, as the mediant above is to the dominant above. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 30, 2005, at 1:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant If this is true, then do you call the 7th a sub-tonic ? If it is a tone below the tonic, yes. A semitone below would be a leading tone. I'm not sure why this point leads from subdominant discussions, though. Call me aa A-retentive tradionalist, but I believe that by changing the meaning of the term obfuscates it's meaning and makes subsequent discussions between musicians/composers/arrangers much more difficult than it already is. If someone says to me "sub-dominant" within a music discussion, I will take that to mean the pitch just BELOW the Dominant or the 4th pitch in the scale. I was unclear in my original comment. Some people say "a subdominant chord" or "a predominant chord" interchangeably, to mean "a predominant FUNCTION chord" or "a predominant AREA chord". So he might say, "the iim7 and the IV are both predominants" interchangeably with "the iim7 and the IV are both SUBdominants" when he might have MEANT to say "subdominant FUNCTION or AREA." In jazz, the predominant function extends to a whole bunch of other chords, too, from borrowed modes and extended chords. But THEY aren't REALLY predominant all the time either, so the name is kind of misleading, which is my original point. These chords don't have to go to a dominant, so they aren't really PREdominant. We don't have a really good and descriptive name that avoids confusion. PS - Does a sub-dominatrix lead to a dominatrix, or is that anyone who is submissive to a dominantrix ? Heh, heh! It's obvious to me that the dominatrix is simply the feminine version of the dominant. So, in music as in poetry, a resolving dominatrix is a dominant that is stressed (though usually it is the submissive who is more stressed! He might need resolution, too, for all I know - I have no intimate knowledge of these matters.) 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
> On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: > >> Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built >> on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant > If this is true, then do you call the 7th a sub-tonic ? Call me aa A-retentive tradionalist, but I believe that by changing the meaning of the term obfuscates it's meaning and makes subsequent discussions between musicians/composers/arrangers much more difficult than it already is. If someone says to me "sub-dominant" within a music discussion, I will take that to mean the pitch just BELOW the Dominant or the 4th pitch in the scale. Richard Bartkus PS - Does a sub-dominatrix lead to a dominatrix, or is that anyone who is submissive to a dominantrix ? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 30, 2005, at 12:32 PM, Phil Daley wrote: >>> On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: >>> Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant >>> >>> Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the >>> 4th of the scale. >>> >>> So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as >>> "subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong. >>> >>> mdl Thinking about this, I believe I was taught that a iim7 chord resolving to dominant was called a "secondary dominant". My theory teacher was from the Rochester school. No, an example of a secondary dominant would be a II7 chord (dominant quality, or V7/V) resolving to a V. These (the II7 and their ilk) are also called "applied dominants", but only when they resolve properly (in classical analysis, that is.) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
>>> On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: >>> Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant >>> >>> Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the >>> 4th of the scale. >>> >>> So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as >>> "subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong. >>> >>> mdl Thinking about this, I believe I was taught that a iim7 chord resolving to dominant was called a "secondary dominant". My theory teacher was from the Rochester school. Phil Daley < AutoDesk > http://www.conknet.com/~p_daley ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 30, 2005, at 11:39 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: Some of my colleagues have replaced this term with "Predominant" to be more clear. Christopher Is that the predominant opinion? Ooh, TWO puns aimed my way in less than twelve hours! I love it! Christopher (hoping to convert the world!) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Some of my colleagues have replaced this term with "Predominant" to be more clear. Christopher Is that the predominant opinion? Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Yes, I realise that, just as there are many more "dominants" available than the one built on the 5th degree (speaking of both dominant function and dominant quality). Some of these concepts have grown so much that they deserve their own terms. Like the bVII dominant7 chord resolving to I in jazz is so much more common than say, a Neopolitain chord in the idiom that it is only right that it should have its own name, too. One school calls it a "backdoor" resolution, which is at least easy to spell and say, even if it is less than descriptive. Christopher On Jun 30, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Ken Durling wrote: Well, if you think of it as a subdominant *function* it's not so very wrong. In a similar way vii serves a dominant function. Ken At 09:54 PM 6/29/2005, you wrote: On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the 4th of the scale. So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as "subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Well, if you think of it as a subdominant *function* it's not so very wrong. In a similar way vii serves a dominant function. Ken At 09:54 PM 6/29/2005, you wrote: On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the 4th of the scale. So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as "subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 30, 2005, at 12:54 AM, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on
it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant
Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the
4th of the scale.
So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as
"subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong.
mdl
Described as a "subdominant function" or "subdominant area", yes. This
confusion is why so many theorists use the term "predominant" as I had
mentioned. But that term has its pitfalls, too.
Ideally (IMHO) a music theory jargon term would be
1) easy to pronounce and spell,
2) unambiguous in application, and
3) have a sense of what it meant built in. Kind of like the German way
of building compound words ("Fork" might be
"Foodpickerupandputterintomouth" to use my old theory teacher's example
that always got a giggle. The purpose of the thing is evident as soon
as you say it.)
"Predominant", while it satisfies the first two requirements, causes
confusion as to its function. "Subdominant function" is long, and
certainly could be called ambiguous, since "subdominant" also means
just the IV chord and the 4th scale degree.
Christopher
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Mark D Lew wrote: On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the 4th of the scale. It's news to me, too. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant Really? I only know the term as referring to the chord built on the 4th of the scale. So you're telling me that a IIm7 chord would be described as "subdominant"? To me that sounds very wrong. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On Jun 29, 2005, at 11:34 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: On 29 Jun 2005, at 9:28 PM, Raymond Horton wrote: The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). That's not the right meaning of hemiola. A hemiola is: W W W H H H | H H H across two measures in a 3/2 context, (or H H H in two 3/4 measures). In 3/2, the hemiola is overlaying a 3/1 measure over top of two 3/2 measures. I think "hemiola" is one of those terms which has gone beyond its traditional meaning, to mean any 3 against 2 OR 2 against 3 counter accent in our modern times. Other terms that I think have moved on in a similar fashion: Subdominant (used to mean the 4th of the scale, or the chord built on it. Now means ANY chord that can lead to a dominant (though it doesn't invariably have to). Some of my colleagues have replaced this term with "Predominant" to be more clear. But what if it doesn't go to the dominant, but directly to the tonic? Is it still a "predominant"? If not, then why have a different name for the same chord in the same key? Modal - had a big discussion about this one last year on the list. Doesn't mean now what it used to mean a couple of centuries ago. Of course leads to Tonal - which might be one of those words that can't be used any more in ANY context except historical, because of all the different ways it is construed Picardy third (now often applied to ANY major-quality resolution chord where a minor one is expected in the key, wrongly or not) Toncisation (used to mean only with a secondary dominant, now can mean articulating a temporary tonic by any applicable means) (on that subject, what do you call a plagal resolution to a temporary tonic? A "plagalisation"? I shudder at it, but it IS logical. Musicians who play gospel (where it is most common) call it "backcycling", but that is a bit obtuse IMHO. Drawing on "applied dominant" perhaps "applied predominant"? Not clear. Applied how?) All of these expanded uses came about because we needed to talk about them, but didn't have a brand-new term, so we used an old term that did something similar, but restricted, in an older context. I even hear some jazz musicians (mostly bass players) talk about "musica ficta" in a jazz context, meaning that they use sharper notes walking up to a target and flatter notes moving down to a target; a great departure from the raised 4th and lowered 7th the term used to refer to. This points up a need for a jazz theorist's convention, where we could all talk to one another and come up with proper terms for all this stuff, but not so far removed from the common classical terminology that nobody outside of jazz knows what we are talking about. I am insistent with my students that they make the connections between what they learned in their classical theory courses and how it applies to their jazz performance, composition, and arranging. It IS mostly the same as classical, after all, just expanded a bit more in places, and with a few different idiosyncracies. It seems that every jazz school has its OWN way of describing things, and often there are huge holes in the analysis and terminology. Comments? (no swearing please.) Helpful hints? Resources? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
You are correct that the question was answered, once, but I was hoping for a consensus. Thanks for the summary. RBH Darcy James Argue wrote: On 29 Jun 2005, at 9:28 PM, Raymond Horton wrote: And, so far, my question hasn't been answered with any degree of consensus by the experts on this fine list during this gentle mayhem that has ensued from the original question. Actually, way back at the beginning, Johannes answered your original question -- "In such a use of 6/4 I would not consider it correct to use half rests" -- and I concurred. I don't believe anyone else has disagreed with this, despite the tangent the thread took. The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). In those measures, you can (and should) use half rests where appropriate. I just wasn't certain, in 6/4, whether five beats rest should generally be a dotted half plus two quarters Yes. or a dotted half plus a half. No. The latter is easy to read, Debatable. but I suspect that Johannes is indeed on target with his asstertion that the former is most correct? Yes. Also, for another example: two beats rest, followed by a quarter note, quarter note, half note. Should the rest(s) be two quarter rests, Yes. or will a half suffice? Not unless this is one of the temporary 3x2/4 situations. My principal composition teacher, the late Nelson Keyes, was always quite irked when he would see a half rest in 3/4 in a published work, but it is a rule that is often broken. I don't know if this is the same type of situation. Yes, it is. Please don't let me down this time, folks! I think most people assumed, as I did, that the question had already been answered to your satisfaction. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On 29 Jun 2005 at 23:15, Darcy James Argue wrote: [nothing I'm quoting here, but I can't find the original post, but wanted to respond to something Raymond said] > On 29 Jun 2005, at 9:28 PM, Raymond Horton wrote: > > The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats > > each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). That's not the right meaning of hemiola. A hemiola is: W W W H H H | H H H across two measures in a 3/2 context, (or H H H in two 3/4 measures). In 3/2, the hemiola is overlaying a 3/1 measure over top of two 3/2 measures. In the group I play in, we call the switch to 3/2 in a 6/4 passage a "reverse hemiola," because it speeds up the pulse, whereas the function of the hemiola is always to slow down the pulse. In the music where the hemiola is part of the dialect, it's usually a pre- candential harmonic rhythm change that is slowed down, going from harmonic rhythm of HHH to harmonic change at half that speed. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
On 29 Jun 2005, at 9:28 PM, Raymond Horton wrote: And, so far, my question hasn't been answered with any degree of consensus by the experts on this fine list during this gentle mayhem that has ensued from the original question. Actually, way back at the beginning, Johannes answered your original question -- "In such a use of 6/4 I would not consider it correct to use half rests" -- and I concurred. I don't believe anyone else has disagreed with this, despite the tangent the thread took. The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). In those measures, you can (and should) use half rests where appropriate. I just wasn't certain, in 6/4, whether five beats rest should generally be a dotted half plus two quarters Yes. or a dotted half plus a half. No. The latter is easy to read, Debatable. but I suspect that Johannes is indeed on target with his asstertion that the former is most correct? Yes. Also, for another example: two beats rest, followed by a quarter note, quarter note, half note. Should the rest(s) be two quarter rests, Yes. or will a half suffice? Not unless this is one of the temporary 3x2/4 situations. My principal composition teacher, the late Nelson Keyes, was always quite irked when he would see a half rest in 3/4 in a published work, but it is a rule that is often broken. I don't know if this is the same type of situation. Yes, it is. Please don't let me down this time, folks! I think most people assumed, as I did, that the question had already been answered to your satisfaction. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
At 09:28 PM 06/29/2005, Raymond Horton wrote: >I just wasn't certain, in 6/4, whether five beats rest should generally >be a dotted half plus two quarters or a dotted half plus a half. The >latter is easy to read, but I suspect that Johannes is indeed on target >with his asstertion that the former is most correct? I would say yes. In your case, think of the 6/4 measure as two bars of 3/4. If you had two beats rest in a 3/4 followed by a quarter note, you would use two quarter rests. >Also, for another example: two beats rest, followed by a quarter note, >quarter note, half note. Should the rest(s) be two quarter rests, or >will a half suffice? This is the same situation as above, except that you're talking about the first half of the measure rather than the second. Use two quarter rests. (If you use a half rest, the bar looks suspiciously like a 3/2 bar, which may confuse things.) Aaron. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). I just wasn't certain, in 6/4, whether five beats rest should generally be a dotted half plus two quarters or a dotted half plus a half. The latter is easy to read, My 2c: as long as it's not misleading, isn't that the point? but I suspect that Johannes is indeed on target with his asstertion that the former is most correct? That may be so, but see above. Also, for another example: two beats rest, followed by a quarter note, quarter note, half note. Should the rest(s) be two quarter rests, or will a half suffice? Again I say, if it's clear and easy, it's clear and easy. I can think of situations in which being correct according to older practice would be more clear, but language (written and spoken, and symbolic like written music) changes and tends towards efficiency and simplicity, and I'm usually for it. Chuck My principal composition teacher, the late Nelson Keyes, was always quite irked when he would see a half rest in 3/4 in a published work, but it is a rule that is often broken. I don't know if this is the same type of situation. Please don't let me down this time, folks! Raymond Horton ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
Raymond Horton wrote: My, we've really explored many sides of the 6/4 meter issue since I posted my question late last night! I think we've settled that: in general, 6/4 should divide in the middle, 3/2 should divide in threes, just as 6/8 and 3/4 do. There are exceptions, but the general rule should hold. The arguments seem to be just how much exception one allows. Fair enough. My problem is, I've got the editor from my publisher waiting on me to proof his engraving of an arrangement of mine, and I need to tell him, like tonight or tomorrow, whether or not to change some of our mutually inconsistent rests. And, so far, my question hasn't been answered with any degree of consensus by the experts on this fine list during this gentle mayhem that has ensued from the original question. The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). I just wasn't certain, in 6/4, whether five beats rest should generally be a dotted half plus two quarters or a dotted half plus a half. The latter is easy to read, but I suspect that Johannes is indeed on target with his asstertion that the former is most correct? Also, for another example: two beats rest, followed by a quarter note, quarter note, half note. Should the rest(s) be two quarter rests, or will a half suffice? My principal composition teacher, the late Nelson Keyes, was always quite irked when he would see a half rest in 3/4 in a published work, but it is a rule that is often broken. I don't know if this is the same type of situation. Please don't let me down this time, folks! Raymond Horton While it might not gain me fans among some, I would just say to go with the beat. It's MUCH easier to read. If you have the measure divided in half by the pulse of the piece, I'd use two dotted half-rests, and subdivisions of those. If divided in thirds, three hald rests, and so on. Just my 2 cents. cd -- http://www.livejournal.com/users/dershem/# ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] half rests in 6/4? - back to the original question, please!
My, we've really explored many sides of the 6/4 meter issue since I posted my question late last night! I think we've settled that: in general, 6/4 should divide in the middle, 3/2 should divide in threes, just as 6/8 and 3/4 do. There are exceptions, but the general rule should hold. The arguments seem to be just how much exception one allows. Fair enough. My problem is, I've got the editor from my publisher waiting on me to proof his engraving of an arrangement of mine, and I need to tell him, like tonight or tomorrow, whether or not to change some of our mutually inconsistent rests. And, so far, my question hasn't been answered with any degree of consensus by the experts on this fine list during this gentle mayhem that has ensued from the original question. The work in question is most definitely in two groups of 3 beats each (although it often hemiolas into 3/2 temporarily). I just wasn't certain, in 6/4, whether five beats rest should generally be a dotted half plus two quarters or a dotted half plus a half. The latter is easy to read, but I suspect that Johannes is indeed on target with his asstertion that the former is most correct? Also, for another example: two beats rest, followed by a quarter note, quarter note, half note. Should the rest(s) be two quarter rests, or will a half suffice? My principal composition teacher, the late Nelson Keyes, was always quite irked when he would see a half rest in 3/4 in a published work, but it is a rule that is often broken. I don't know if this is the same type of situation. Please don't let me down this time, folks! Raymond Horton ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
