Re: Chord connection


"Abstract Dissonance" <Abstract.Dissonance@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:12d41iqk6ou87f3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[snip]

Actually, you can't. The following pages go on to place restrictions on
the above list of all possibilities.


I saw that... but he does mention that they might be able to be used in
the circumstances arise. He goes back and forth between the ideas that
you can do anything and you can't.

Well, he mentions that "artistically" anything can happen and says though
that these progressions would at best be "abrupt" if used as is. As always
in music (as Schoenberg would well find out) anything can happen - but
remember he's really describing the music of the CPP era and using that as a
guide.

[snip]

ah, I think I got that point. Basically since the fundamental naturally
wants to go to the 5 below because the 5th above wants to go to the
fundamental(i.e., there is some type of parallel). i.e., since V wants to
goto I and I is V of IV then there is this dual of I. I'm just not
completely clear on the details.

It seems this goes back to his "pawns and knights and kings" analogy, which
is one of the more confusing ones! Obviously the relationship between C and
G is the same as F and C, or, in his antithetical presentation F:C:G.

[snip]


but what does accent mean? To me its not safe to say that since beethoven
composed this piece in 4/4 then every 5th beat is accented(not counting
measures but just counting the beats 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,...). I mean that it
sounds somewhat circular. i.e. Accents don't come from meter but meter
comes from accents(or maybe they are one and the same but here I'm
refering to the time signature as "meter").

Maybe I need a better definition of accent. I assume that accent is
basically a differentiation between its surroundings.

Partly, yes, but there are more (or more facets to it):
Agogic Accent - a stress created by longer duration (making the longer note
accented)
Pitch Accent - a stress created by a leap (making the pitch leapt to
accented)
Dynamic Accent - a stress created by a literal volume increase
Pattern Accent - a stress created by a repetitive pattern (making the first
element of the pattern accented)
"change" Accent - a stress created by differntiation (harmonic change,
rhythmic change, articulation change, etc.)
Harmonic Accent - a stress created by the Root of a harmony being understood
as such, or by a note moving with a harmonic change, etc.)

And there are probably many subtle ones you could find as well (not to
mention Text, which is a big one).

If you hear chords being strummed in even notes, with the chord changing
every 4th strum:
em em em em C C C C G G G G D D D D repeat you have two pattern accents (one
when the entire pattern repeats, and one with the change of harmony every 4
units) and one change accent (which creates the patterns) with a harmonic
change.
Those of us that recognize the realtionship pf these chords might also
notice that thy might be the key of em or G, and we may hear a secondary
accent on those chords that might be a Tonic.

Now in the old days Jon, they didn't have meters like we do, they had
"imperfect tempo" and "prolated tempo", etc. These are basically what we use
as Simple or Compouund, and Duple and Triple (and Quadruple). The music
above could be 16th notes in one measure of 4/4, 8th notes in two measures,
quarter notes in 4 measures, etc. Given that secondary "key" accent, many
might hear this as 8th notes with two harmonies per measure (with a change
of harmony on the secondary strong beat, beat 3). You can not tell what the
meter is above without actually seeing the music (though you can make
assumptions based on the fact that 4/4 is a more likely choice than 16/16 or
1/1). You can only say it's Duple (2 beats per meausure, and let's assume
that duple may imply quadruple when doubled). It could be Compound if there
is a triplet background (division) for each beat, but without any such
evidence, it is assumed to be Simple meter. It is most likely Duple or
Quadruple Simple meter without any further information although other
possibilities exist.
If you walked into a room where this pattern were being played, and you
heard it like: D D D em em em em C C C C G G G G D D D D your ear would
probably gravitate to understanding the chord change is the beat before you
even get through one cycle of the pattern, but if not, by the time the
pattern repeats most people would hear it as the beginning of the new cycle,
and assume that to be beat 1 of the loop.



This is maybe to
general but includes all the necessariy methods of accenting to produce
meter. What I mean is that if I listen or view a piece of music and know
that its in 4/4 then I know that every 5th beat is accented in some way
excluding temporary lapses in meter. i.e., wether the composer used
dynamic accents, agogic accents, etc or combinations, he used them in such
a way to make every 5th beat feel "stronger" in some way so that the meter
would be heard as duple(or quadruple).

C chord chord chord is 4/4

C chord C chord or C chord G Gchord might be 2/4 or 4/4

C Chord G(note) Chord will sounds like an alternating bass pattern, and is
likely 4/4.

That's before beat number 5! In other words, enough information might be
present in the first whol measure to imply the meter, and the second measure
(beat 5) usually reperesents some repetition of pattern, harmonic change, or
othe significant event that helps to confirm the suspicions of musin in Bar
1.


Why I say this is because I tend to think of accent as a dynamic accent
but sometimes I see a piece of music that doesn't have any dynamic
markings... then I would look for agogic accents... yet the music might be
a straight rhythm(what I mean is like using nothing but 8ths)... so I
couldn't figure out the meter.

Given no accents, and a steady stream of notes, you need to look for other
things - implied harmony changes, patterns of repetition, etc.

C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C - can't tell the meter.

C G G C G G C G G C G G is understood as Triple meter (3/4, 3/8, etc.) or
C G G E G G C G G E G G might be heard as Triple meter, or Duple Compound
Meter.

But if the piece is really in some meter then there are some
other accents out there used that make it in that meter? (maybe by pitch
or repetition, etc...)

See above.

[snip]



yeah. I'm not very clear on what a beat really is.

A beat is a recurring pulse that is felt. The music may agree with this beat
(that is, you might hear a note on every beat), or not agree with the beat
(you might have a rest, or a note held across a beat, or fall in between
beats). If, once a beat is established, the music does not agree with it for
too long, the beat is obscured.

When I listen to music I
feel "pulses" but they always correspond to notes being played.

They shouldn't. The pulse, or beat is regular (in most music obviously).
Musical events may or may not agree with the beat. Listen to Satie's First
Gymnopedie (or any of the 3). It is in 3/4 and begins with a bass note on 1,
and a chord on 2. Nothing happens on beat 3 (other than sustained things)
until a couple of bars in. But you should be hearing three pulses per
measure, not 1-2 (elapsed time) 1-2 (elapsed time). Thus the aural events
agree with the beat for the first two beats, and nothing new musically
happens on the 3rd beat, but it is there. When the pattern repeats on Bar 2
we understand it is a new measure, and we're hearing 3/4 (or Triple meter
generically).


I'm
listening to a Mozart symphony right now and I hear the "pulses" but its
really just when instruments are playing.

What do you mean? The instruments are usually playing. OK, the opening of
Beethoven's 3rd goes:

Chord Chord Music starts.
When the music starts we hear repeated notes in the accompaniment, and a
melody that help us figure out the melody. If you don't know the piece, you
probably won't be able to figure out if those first two chords are separated
by 1 beat, 2 beats, 7 beats, 13 beats, etc. You're only able to figure it
out after the fact (in much the same way that if those two chords F and C
you might not be sure what key it is until later).

So yes, if there'sno beat already established, it takes enough musical
events or patterns that imply the beat to get it going. You may see
conductors waving their batons in 4/4 while a long sustained note is held by
the orchestra. That's because no one would come in on time because they
can't feel the beat because there are no musical events to help them find
their place. But once a beat or pulse is established, you should be able to
keep it going in your head, just like a metronome. Even if there are no
sounds, or the sounds are on the off beat for one measure, you should "feel"
the beat evenly - only if there are long stretches of silence or sutained
sound with no aural clues should you be likely to lose the beat (or of
course intentionally beat obscuring patterns).






Sometimes its the strings
producing a strong pulse and sometimes its just a solo instrument.
Sometimes these "pulses" are equally spaced and sometimes they are
different in quality(that is sometimes the all the strings produce it and
sometimes its just a solo instrument(no other instruments playing)). Its
usually a regularity of pulse though... but there is not necessarily any
"first" beat that reoccurs Although lots of times there are pulses that
occur that are dynamically stronger than its surrounding pulses... I
usually take this as the first beat but I'm really just guessing.

Rarely is this the case though - there's a harmonic change happening most
likely as well.


I tend to have the impression that the louder pulses are the accented
beats... I couldn't imagine a piece where, say, the 2nd beat in 3/4 was
always dynamically accented and that would not be the really the 1st
beat...

Could be. That Beethoven 3 Mvmt. 1 has a place where it accents 2 just like
that, then has accents starting on 2 then every other beat, so, in 3/4 the
accents go 2 1 3 2 1 3 - he's making it sound like 2/4 for a bit, but if
you're counting along you're unlikely to fall off for too long as there are
other elements that help you find your place.


I surely would end up counting it as the first but would I be wrong?

Yes you would be. Here you're confusing accent and Downbeat. If the music is
3/4 and you have ONLY

one TWO three one TWO three then yes, you're likely to heat the TWO as the
downbeat because it creates a recurring pattern (and we assume the louder to
be the beginning of the new pattern)

But if the harmony underneath goes:

CCC FFF GGG CCC I don't care which beat you accent, if it has already
been established (and even if not) that this is triple meter, and the chords
are changing on beat 1, then the harmony changes here still support that.
The accents are nothing but accents not on the downbeat (thus they disagree
with, not the beat as above, but with the meter). There's nothing wrong with
that but if it goes on too long it can screw up things. However, it sounds
to me like you're only hearing one aspect of the meter - the dynamic accent,
and are not cognisant of the harmonic changes or other patterns that
reinforce the meter/beat.



I know
that just because its written as the 2nd beat doesnt mean it is...

No it is. Now, there may be some composers out there who don't understand
rhythm at all (many in fact) that don't realize they're writing meters that
disagree with the musical patterns they've created, but in published music
of the masters, it's correct. Beat 2 is Beat 2. YOU may not be comprehending
it as beat 2, but it is (again, excluding intentionally beat obscuring
patterns composer put in to have a bit of fun with the listener).

[snip]


right, but when I listen to these guys play they are demonstrating the
scale itself and not playing patterns or chords to help clarify the mode.

They may be accenting it some way, or playing a pattern you don't realize.
For instance, simply using alternate picking will create a difference in
timbre and usually down strokes are louder (even if barely perceptible) and
that may be enough to help your mind latch on to some note being "stressed"
and therefor more important.

[snip]

Oviously when two or more of these type of accents work together, it
serves to reinforce the whole multi-layered system of accents, from
hyper-measure to the smallest sub-divisions.


And the composer will handle all these accent types in such a way that the
overall feeling of accent is in the meter he wants?

Yes, in general. Obviously a composer can always stick in patterns that are
at odds with the meter, but barring that, most musical elements agree with
the meter (or at least the beat, divisions of the beat, hyper measure,
etc.). Let's take the infamous Mozart piano sonata in C (the one everyone
knows):

C E G | B cd C | (the cd is 16th notes).
over an Alberti Bass in 8ths
C G E G C G E G |G F D F C G E G | (I think).

We're dealing with 4/4 here. Note that Beat 1 in the melody has a long note
(half) as does the down beat of M.2 (dotted quarter). The longest melody
notes agree with the harmonic changes. The notes of the melody move in 2
relationships to the accompaniment - for the most part they occur
simultaneously with an accented member of the accompaniment group. The
harmony changes on the downbeat of a measure, or in the second measure,
where there are two harmonies per measure, the changes occur on the
strongest beats of the measure (1 and 3). Now once again, we can only assume
this is two measures of 4/4 as opposed to 4 measures of 2/4 but later music
implies 4/4 (and obviously 4/4 is the "default" choice). Even in the next
phrase (and by the way, phrase lengths usually agree with the meter on a
hyper metrical level) which features runs of 16th notes in the RH - the
first note of the measure is an 8th (followed by 14 16th notes) that happens
simultatneously with a change of harmony, that follows an already
established pattern. The fact that the accompaniment is playing on 1, and
4 - the 4 doesn't do anything to destroy the meter it's simply an event
that happens on a weak beat (or weak part of the measure).

[snip]


I suppose this is like when I play with my nephew and he's playing the
drums. He's just starting out and sometimes when he does a feel he "flips"
the beats... so the snare comes on the 1 and 3 instead of the 2 and 4...
basically his feel is only 1/2 a bar.

Or rather, it's half a bar offeset.

When I'm playing along with him I end
up getting screwed up because I here the the 1 as the snare now but I know
its suppose to be on the 2.

well he's wrong, but what do you do? Since he's unaware of the error, and
you know he's done it but you know he doesn't know he's done it, you should
change. In a band I was in a singer had a hard time coming in on one passage
in the right place. He'd jump in a beat early every time. Since we all knew
he did it, and the vocals were the most important part of the song, we just
followed him (so basically we'd play a 3/4 measure in a 4/4 song). Johhny
Cash did this all the time - his phrasing was "wrong". But I doubt that the
musicians would say, Mr. Cash, you dropped a beat back there. Mr. Cash was
the star, and paid their checks, so they followed him.

Now, if I'm at a gig and the drummer does this (which does happen
sometimes), I'll turn around and try to give them "ONE" so they can get back
on, because the keyboard player is the singer and he's not going to change
for anyone. If he screws up I'll follow him, but if the drummer screws up, I
know the keyboard player is not going to change so I'll get the drummer to
change. I don't screw up by the way :-)




The mis-hearing of a metronome like that though is not a problem with
your ears, it's a problem with understanding what's going on. You are not
making the mental connection with the number of clicks and number of
beats to make 1 line up on the ta each time (admittedly though, when
you're playing along with it the sound can distract you).



what is this mental connection? I do know that 1 is the different sound
and I cound it properly most of the time but any time I stop counting for
some reason theres a chance that I end up "feeling" the 1 as the first
non-accented beat. I feel it in the sense that I'm hearing a pattern being
repeated but the first part of it is the second click ;/ I can then
usually flip flop between hearing the first click as the start of the
pattern or the second or 3rd.

You're probably hearing it in a "rock" pattern where the snare falls on 2
and 4, or 3 in "half time". Have you tried playing to drum tracks rather
than a metronome click?

On the flip side, I don't have any of those fancy metronomes (only the MIDI
kind). My regular metronome is the kind with just a click - no distinction.
I think this is better because it forces you to pay attention for beat 1,
not just rely on a different sound for it!!!



So its kinda strange to me that my ear would do this for "no" reason.

It's probably the drum reason.

If I
end up feeling it that way then thats surely what my ear is telling me?
I'm just not sure what you are getting at by mental connection. Is it
something that I should subconsciously know or something that I need to be
consciously deal with(which is what I do but I suppose that when I get
sidetracked I end up feeling something different).

Something you should consciously do, and now, be aware of, and consiously
correct it. I don't know how to explain it Jon, but I'll give you an
example: This keyboard player and I were playing a piece that did something
like: C C F F | F F G G. And he said, it's 2 Cs 4 Fs and 2 Gs, and I said
absolutely not. It is 2 Cs, 2 Fs, then a measure of 2 Fs and 2 Gs. You see,
he is only looking at the chords. He sees 4 Fs in a row. I don't. I see 2 Fs
that are the last half of one measure, and 2 Fs that are the first half of
the next measure. Sure I know there are 4 in a row but I do not count them
like that. Why? Because music isn't written in number of chords in
succession, it's written in measures.

This happens with a lot of beginners when they play something like CCCC FFFF
GGGG CCCC repeat. They will miscount the Cs at the end and begin the new
pattern too early. It is simply because they don't understand meter, and
measures, and how many things make up a unit, and how many units they are
supposed to be playing. They also often don't care to take the time to learn
it, or don't know or are unwilling to admit they don't know. It's also like
the whole "rushing during a rest or long note" problem - many payers tend to
rush when they're not doing anything. Basically, they stop counting when
they're not playing. If you only play on beat 1, you still need to count
beats 2 3 and 4.

So if you know the different sound is beat 1, then you need to learn to play
to it like that. There's nothing wrong with being able to hear that as any
beat though (it's a good skill in fact - I've had to use 4 beat metronomes
to play 3/4 over and you have to be able to ignore the strong click, or know
when it agrees with 3/4!) but since everyone else uses it "correctly", you
should too.

[snip]

ok. I see how the first is in compound triple time I suppose.

Compound DUPLE actually - the Dock is a new measure.

I do feel the
accents on the Hick and *** and I assume that since they rhythm it also
supports this feeling of repetition which helps us determine the beat
structure pretty quick?

Exactly. If it went:
Hickory Dickory Mississippi Thississippi we might be confused! It sounds
like triplet triplet 4 16ths 4 16ths (assuming the syllables are equidistant
for each pair of rhymes).




I went ahead and tried to write it in notation(just the rhythm) and then I
found a midi file of it which it was rhythmically the exact same except
for the "tic toc", which I didn't add, along with the bass.

There you go. See, Lyrics also can help form a system of accents (and if you
haven't studied it, you might look up Iambic Pentameter and Poetic Accents
and things like that on Google. You'll find that there's a whole system of
what is called Meter in poetry as well).


one problem I was having was how long the end of hte last note should be.
I knew that to make it look notationally correct I had to make dock "last"
1 + 2/3 a beat...

Right, because "the" (the mouse) is a pickup to the next line the way it's
accented.

but when I tap out the rhythm I want to rush that last beat
because it seems to pause to long. I'm not sure if this is natural or not
because I left out the tick tock which fills in the silence and makes it
seem right?

Or an accompaniment? We as humans don't like long stretches of nothing
happening in music. That's why usually when a melody ends on 1, the
accompaniment does something to fill out and lead us into the next measure.
Otherwise it sounds like everyone's just sitting around waiting, and of
course people, being busy, want to get on to the next thing - they want to
be "doing" something and they don't consider resting to be doing something.
I suggest actually counting during that time!!!

[snip]


Methinks you need to learn more about rhythm and meter :-)


Ofcourse!!!! But where? There doesn't seem to be many instructional
material on it?

Teacher :-). Actually, some good percussion classes or working with a good
drummer can help mounds. You're alreayd realizing a deficiency and seeking
help, so that's a positive step. Rhythm and Meter are typically the weakest
areas of musicians (except drummers) since they usually only get what's in
level 1 of their piano method and learn the rest as they go (incorrectly in
many cases).

Ask more about this in separate posts...

Steve


.

Quantcast