Music theory

[amethyst_fan]

My point was just that when you enter music school as a freshman, no matter what your intended major, you start at the beginning of music theory/history (unless you have the opportunity to pass out of those courses).

Yes, that's my experience.

 

[Codmate]

I was not trying to be arrogant, just showing that I have spent a lot of time in formal music training, so I'm not just making it up. Not to say I'm better than anyone, but to say that I'm not completely baseless either.





But not all harmonic series are created equal.
Do-Re-Me-Fa-So-La-Ti-Do DOES NOT EQUAL Sa-Re-Ga-Ma-Pa-Dha-Ne-Sa



I don't follow you here.

In short, the harmonic series argument is one I find totally convincing. It's a weaker interval - just because "it is"!/

Functionally, Mathematically, I can agree a minor third is a weaker interval to a major third, just as there can be strong beats and weak beats.
I guess I'm just saying sonically I would not describe a minor chord as "weak" or "sad"
Correct me if I'm wrong, I think we're agreed that it's all about context. So I would say maybe a minor third sounds "weak" to a major third, but a minor third on it's own does not sound weak. And once you put these things the context of a full piece, all bets are off.

I suppose my issue was the blanket statement that minor chords are "sad" But I must say I've enjoyed this discussion so far.

Bah - I thought I was finished.
My fingers hurt...

Are you talking Indian scales there?

That doesn't affect the harmonic series does it?

As I understand it the harmonic series is a physical phenomenon and doesn't change:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(music)#Description_of_the_harmonic_series

Here is some more good reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_of_music

 

[Codmate]

OK - just an experiment...

Here is a "sweep of the first 20+ harmonics of A1":
http://www.music.sc.edu/fs/bain/atmi02/hs/playback/sweep/

Major or minor?

I could be wrong, but I think this demonstrates Mr Goodall's point...

 

[famous beagle]

In short, the harmonic series argument is one I find totally convincing. It's a weaker interval - just because "it is"!/

Bah - I thought I was finished.
My fingers hurt...

Are you talking Indian scales there?

That doesn't affect the harmonic series does it?

As I understand it the harmonic series is a physical phenomenon and doesn't change:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(music)#Description_of_the_harmonic_series

Here is some more good reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_of_music

Yes I think y'all have a miscommunication there. I think he meant something else when he said "harmonic series."

 

[RAK]

In short, the harmonic series argument is one I find totally convincing. It's a weaker interval - just because "it is"!/

Bah - I thought I was finished.
My fingers hurt...

Are you talking Indian scales there?

That doesn't affect the harmonic series does it?

As I understand it the harmonic series is a physical phenomenon and doesn't change:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(music)#Description_of_the_harmonic_series

Here is some more good reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_of_music

I see where you going. I thought you were talking about a major scale, and that a minor third is "outside" of that series. My point in bringing up the Indian scales is that those intervals are different from the intervals in an equal tempered major scale.

But actually the harmonic series does change in a sense, when you're talking about different temperments.

A musical note, say from a clarient for example, is not just made up of one frequency, but multiple frequencies. It is these different frequencies, or overtones, or harmonics, that make up an instrument's timbre. It's why a flute playing a 440 Hz tone at 80 dB sounds different from a clarinet doing the same thing.

A clarinet is similar to a square wave, which emphasizes the odd harmonics.

So the 2nd harmonic is a 5th (3/2) above the fundamental, but in an equal tempered scale, it's not a perfect 5th.

I think my point may be getting a little scatter brained here, but let me end by saying that with each type of tuning, the scale is different. So an interval of a 5th in an equal tempered scale is not the same frequency as an interval of a 5th in a well tempered scale. And while all keys in an equal tempered scale have the same "quality," that is not the case with a well tempered scale.

 

[mshilarious]

It's just the real musicians that aren't (that was sarcasm by the way)

I don't get that, in the sense that I truly don't understand. I don't mind either style. It's just as easy for me to get desensitized to atonal music as it as to tonal music. And hey, we haven't even mentioned polytonal music

If it weren't for audiences demanding tonal music, then I suspect a professional musician would reach the same conclusion after a number of years scratching the atonal itch.

I am pretty far behind on the thread (after a mere three hours!) but far as the nature vs. nurture argument, it's really both. There is the natural overtone series which favors the major third over minor, no question there. On the other hand, the minor seventh is vastly preferred in nature over the major seventh, which has to be considered a dissonance. You see that in cultures that use pentatonic scales, and even in vernacular styles of Western music. And yet we have all been conditioned by "Sound of Music" to accept the major

The choice of number of tones is somewhat arbritrary. Clearly five tones implies seven, seven implies twelve. But in the same way, twelve tones implies nineteen. So to create a microtonal scale of 24 tones or 48 tones rather than 19 tones or 31 tones is not a natural phenomenon, it's a mathematical one which will be heard as a dissonance.

Until you grow accustomed to it.


Hey, many years ago (OK I think it was about two), a somewhat less scholarly music theory debate degenerated into a nasty argument, which happily gave rise to one of this board's more enjoyable features, the RUMBLE! series. It's a fun and games jam on a piece posted over in the MP3 clinic, no rules, no winners. To celebrate this lively thread, I will start a new RUMBLE! later tonight

 

[mshilarious]

And while all keys in an equal tempered scale have the same "quality," that is not the case with a well tempered scale.

I think that's a big reason people are bored with tonal music.

 

[Codmate]

I see where you going. I thought you were talking about a major scale, and that a minor third is "outside" of that series. My point in bringing up the Indian scales is that those intervals are different from the intervals in an equal tempered major scale.

But actually the harmonic series does change in a sense, when you're talking about different temperaments.

A musical note, say from a clarient for example, is not just made up of one frequency, but multiple frequencies. It is these different frequencies, or overtones, or harmonics, that make up an instrument's timbre. It's why a flute playing a 440 Hz tone at 80 dB sounds different from a clarinet doing the same thing.

According to WikiPedia it's not the frequencies in the harmonic series that change - it's the relative amplitude of them. The frequencies are largely the same apart from very subtle variations. Apparently.

Hee hee - do I sound like I know what I'm talking about - I just read it

"The relative amplitudes of the various harmonics primarily determine the timbre of different instruments and sounds, though formants also have a role. For example, the clarinet and saxophone have similar mouthpieces and reeds, and both produce sound through resonance of air inside a chamber whose mouthpiece end is considered closed. Because the clarinet's resonator is cylindrical, the even-numbered harmonics are suppressed, which produces a purer tone. The saxophone's resonator is conical, which allows the even-numbered harmonics to sound more strongly and thus produces a more complex tone. Of course, the differences in resonance between the wood of the clarinet and the brass of the saxophone also affect their tones. The inharmonic ringing of the instrument's metal resonator is even more prominent in the sounds of brass instruments."

There you go - may as well get it from source...

A clarinet is similar to a square wave, which emphasizes the odd harmonics.

So the 2nd harmonic is a 5th (3/2) above the fundamental, but in an equal tempered scale, it's not a perfect 5th.

I think my point may be getting a little scatter brained here, but let me end by saying that with each type of tuning, the scale is different. So an interval of a 5th in an equal tempered scale is not the same frequency as an interval of a 5th in a well tempered scale. And while all keys in an equal tempered scale have the same "quality," that is not the case with a well tempered scale.

Still - the fact remains that the major third of any tonic (in a diatonic scale) is more prominent in the harmonic series, thus the chord sounds 'stronger'.

I think taking recourse to alternative temperaments is really stretching the point a little, 'well' and 'even' temperament still have major thirds that are relatively closer to a prominent frequency in the given tonic's harmonic series than the relevant minor third.

Lets 'just avoid' 'just intonation'.

Besides, I think we're breaking the 'rules' if we start to drift into unusual or experimental temperaments too much

 

[famous beagle]

There is the natural overtone series which favors the major third over minor, no question there. On the other hand, the minor seventh is vastly preferred in nature over the major seventh, which has to be considered a dissonance.

While this is interesting, I think it actually is accounted for in music. It explains why the down-a-5th root movement is so "natural" to us. In essence, any note suggests a dominant 7th tonality by way of the overtone series.

 

[ez_willis]

Of course I have music, but I am not the one trying to break new ground. I am firmly grounded in composing tonal music...that wasn't the point of my post. The point is, come up with something post it and see if folks here are not able to figure out what you did in 10 minutes. If you can do that I'll be impressed. It was like that at some point in time by the way...it's not anymore. We have explored every chromatic note on the keyboard and came up with a way to use each and have it make musical sense, there's not much left to explore in that regards...as I said this is not my sentiments, it's just the way it is.

No, I was wanting to know if you actually had anything recorded that we could hear. Obviously, nothing that anyone has done in the last few hundred years is original, apparently. I just wanted to hear something you've recorded to help me better understand your argument.

 

[ez_willis]

The thread has turned into a series of tangential discourse-like arguments

...and it's stupid.

 

[amethyst_fan]

I just wanted to hear something you've recorded to help me better understand your argument.

I wasn't aware that I had an arguement. If I do, I'd like to know what it is. It seems to me everyone already was already enlightened on the others point of view, and it was quite educating. Sorry you don't feel the same.

It seems that the way you are asking the question, you are assuming I have come up with something original or something? That if anything, would be quite the opposite of whatever arguement I may or may not have presented...it seems you didn't read the posts very carefully...not that you should, it was more of a fun discussion that a heated debate or something.

 

[ez_willis]

I wasn't aware that I had an arguement. If I do, I'd like to know what it is. It seems to me everyone already was already enlightened on the others point of view, and it was quite educating. Sorry you don't feel the same.

It seems that the way you are asking the question, you are assuming I have come up with something original or something? That if anything, would be quite the opposite of whatever arguement I may or may not have presented...it seems you didn't read the posts very carefully...not that you should, it was more of a fun discussion that a heated debate or something.

Argument was a bad choice of words. Position would have been better. Sorry.

Do you have any music recorded or are you still contemplating its value? I'm not assuming that you have or have not come up with anything original, I'm just curious what the outcome would be.

It's pretty simple, really. Don't over-think it. Do you have anything recorded that we can listen to?

 

[amethyst_fan]

Sure, I'll PM you a short classical piece when I get home. It will be from Sibelius, so don't expect a nice audio recording, but you can get the idea.

 

[ez_willis]

Sure, I'll PM you a short classical piece when I get home. It will be from Sibelius, so don't expect a nice audio recording, but you can get the idea.

Perfect. Thanks.

 

[danny.guitar]

Wow, never expected so many replies. I've tried to read as many as I could.

I think my "soloing" is already starting to improve a little, in the sense that I'm not just playing basically the same thing every time.

I've also read a couple of articles on using the blues scale so I've been messing around with that too.

I've been recording some backing tracks and trying to play over them. So far so good, but still need to get used to all the different scale patterns and try to remember where the tonic/root notes are, and the other intervals in the scale.

 

[ez_willis]

Wow, never expected so many replies. I've tried to read as many as I could.

I think my "soloing" is already starting to improve a little, in the sense that I'm not just playing basically the same thing every time.

I've also read a couple of articles on using the blues scale so I've been messing around with that too.

I've been recording some backing tracks and trying to play over them. So far so good, but still need to get used to all the different scale patterns and try to remember where the tonic/root notes are, and the other intervals in the scale.

In time, my friend.

 

[XLR]

I've been recording some backing tracks and trying to play over them. So far so good, but still need to get used to all the different scale patterns and try to remember where the tonic/root notes are, and the other intervals in the scale.

Think about the ear-training/theory stuff when you're practicing in "study mode", a little each day. But most of the time....when you are playing just to make music... turn off your conscious thought and just play (well, always know what key you're in). Little by little the added knowledge will spur on more ideas when improvising, but without making you tighten up.

 

[famous beagle]

Wow, never expected so many replies. I've tried to read as many as I could.

I think my "soloing" is already starting to improve a little, in the sense that I'm not just playing basically the same thing every time.

I've also read a couple of articles on using the blues scale so I've been messing around with that too.

I've been recording some backing tracks and trying to play over them. So far so good, but still need to get used to all the different scale patterns and try to remember where the tonic/root notes are, and the other intervals in the scale.

Another thing I'd suggest is learning melodies. Get a Beatles fake book or a Real Book or something---anything with a lot of good melodies in it---and practice playing through the melodies and singing along. This will help things to click into place regarding how certain notes sound against certain chords.

While this won't be an obvious thing (meaning it won't necessarily teach you the names of scales or arpeggios, etc.), it will do wonders in improving your musicianship. And it's great for learning to connect your ears, voice, and fingers.

I really can't overstate how beneficial it is.

 

[RAK]

According to WikiPedia it's not the frequencies in the harmonic series that change - it's the relative amplitude of them. The frequencies are largely the same apart from very subtle variations. Apparently.

Hee hee - do I sound like I know what I'm talking about - I just read it

"The relative amplitudes of the various harmonics primarily determine the timbre of different instruments and sounds, though formants also have a role. For example, the clarinet and saxophone have similar mouthpieces and reeds, and both produce sound through resonance of air inside a chamber whose mouthpiece end is considered closed. Because the clarinet's resonator is cylindrical, the even-numbered harmonics are suppressed, which produces a purer tone. The saxophone's resonator is conical, which allows the even-numbered harmonics to sound more strongly and thus produces a more complex tone. Of course, the differences in resonance between the wood of the clarinet and the brass of the saxophone also affect their tones. The inharmonic ringing of the instrument's metal resonator is even more prominent in the sounds of brass instruments."

There you go - may as well get it from source...


Still - the fact remains that the major third of any tonic (in a diatonic scale) is more prominent in the harmonic series, thus the chord sounds 'stronger'.

I think taking recourse to alternative temperaments is really stretching the point a little, 'well' and 'even' temperament still have major thirds that are relatively closer to a prominent frequency in the given tonic's harmonic series than the relevant minor third.

Lets 'just avoid' 'just intonation'.

Besides, I think we're breaking the 'rules' if we start to drift into unusual or experimental temperaments too much

There are two different paths here that I think have combined to create some confusion.

One is the idea that an instruments sound is not made up of 1 frequency, but rather many frequencies, which determine it's timbre. A flute for example, more closely resembles a sine wave, while a clarinet more closely resembles a square wave, which emphasizes the odd harmonics. Absolutely those harmonics do not change, it's just their presence or lack of (as you said relative amplitude) that "shapes" the sound.

The other path that I was saying has to do more with scales and tuning, and I was saying that not all major scales are created equal depending on the temperment. If you look at Wikipedia's chart, the major 3rd is 14 cents flat in an equal tempered scale, and the 5th is 2 cents sharp. They also say that 5 cents is the "just noticable difference" for the human ear.
So I perhaps one could make an argument that a major third in equal temperment is "weak" compared to a major third in a more true temperment.