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"
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
gro
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
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'
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
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 "reve
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
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
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 m
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
>
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 temporar
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 t
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 ?
> 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 th
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
>>> 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.
>>>
>
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 worl
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://
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 ja
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
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 th
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 n
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
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
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
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 (alt
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 orig
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 forme
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
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 rul
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 ar
31 matches
Mail list logo
