Music theory

[Dave2002]

I wondered if a new thread on music theory would be of any interest.

By music theory we probably mean western classical music, though I see no reason why theory should be restricted to one form of music.

I had limited exposure to such theory in the past - in particular theory relating to harmony. It was all but gobbledegook to me, and based on rules, and possibly meant nothing to me because at the time I had no or limited access to an instrument which could "do" harmony.

Another problem with formal music theory is that it often presents rules, but without giving any links to (supposed) emotional effects.

Anyway, here is a start.

[Dave2002]

Figured bass

I found this quite interesting page about figured bass. PDF versions are available for a fee, but the articles can be read in a web browser gratis - at the moment.

http://www.thinkingmusic.ca/thinkingharmony/figuredbass/

[cloughie]

I wondered if a new thread on music theory would be of any interest.

By music theory we probably mean western classical music, though I see no reason why theory should be restricted to one form of music.

I had limited exposure to such theory in the past - in particular theory relating to harmony. It was all but gobbledegook to me, and based on rules, and possibly meant nothing to me because at the time I had no or limited access to an instrument which could "do" harmony.

Another problem with formal music theory is that it often presents rules, but without giving any links to (supposed) emotional effects.

Anyway, here is a start.

Your voice is surely the ideal instrument for harmony! ... I agree the rules can get in the way sometimes.

[LeMartinPecheur]

Your voice is surely the ideal instrument for harmony! ... I agree the rules can get in the way sometimes.

Dave probably hadn't mastered the technique for singing chords

[Old Grumpy]

I learnt piano as a child/early teens, to grade 3. I imagine, I also did some theory. Like you, I find the some of the concepts difficult. I have been attending a theory course for adults at Sage Gateshead over the past academic year, which has been quite helpful. On the recommendation of the tutor I have bought the first five ABRSM theory practice books to work through. I have also bought the Music Theory book in the "For Dummies" series, but this, by nature has an American approach.

OG

[Dave2002]

Dave probably hadn't mastered the technique for singing chords

No - I never mastered this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rmo3fKeveo

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I have also bought the Music Theory book in the "For Dummies" series, but this, by nature has an American approach.

OG

How do you find these “”for Dummies” books? I bought the one for Photoshop, and it over-explained everything to the point of being more confusing than ever.

[Dave2002]

How do you find these “”for Dummies” books? I bought the one for Photoshop, and it over-explained everything to the point of being more confusing than ever.

Try this - https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=for+dum...f=nb_sb_noss_2

[LeMartinPecheur]

No - I never mastered this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rmo3fKeveo

A very high solo

[Dave2002]

Back to theory ....

This page explains why parallel/consecutive fifths are sometimes to be avoided - https://www.schoolofcomposition.com/...rallel-fifths/

Without an understanding of why composers might have used such a rule, the general restriction imposed by the rule is pretty pointless. This page gives a better explanation than many, and certainly makes the rule more understandable than a simple dictat.

[Dave2002]

A very high solo

OK - try this one - https://youtu.be/vC9Qh709gas

[Bryn]

Back to theory ....

This page explains why parallel/consecutive fifths are sometimes to be avoided - https://www.schoolofcomposition.com/...rallel-fifths/

Without an understanding of why composers might have used such a rule, the general restriction imposed by the rule is pretty pointless. This page gives a better explanation than many, and certainly makes the rule more understandable than a simple dictat.

All very well their having a section on "How to Check for Parallel Fifths in Sibelius" but "How to Check for Parallel Fifths in Leifs" would be a very different matter.

[Dave2002]

All very well their having a section on "How to Check for Parallel Fifths in Sibelius" but "How to Check for Parallel Fifths in Leifs" would be a very different matter.

I hadn't spotted the ambiguity in the word "Sibelius" before. However, try this - https://www.quora.com/Is-there-an-ea...-music-harmony

[Pabmusic]

Back to theory ....

This page explains why parallel/consecutive fifths are sometimes to be avoided - https://www.schoolofcomposition.com/...rallel-fifths/

Without an understanding of why composers might have used such a rule, the general restriction imposed by the rule is pretty pointless. This page gives a better explanation than many, and certainly makes the rule more understandable than a simple dictat.

Part of the problem is that we are so used to things that are 'uglier' or more 'grating' than parallel fifths (which no doubt offended 18th-century ears more easily) that the rule seems very odd.

I never followed it - I liked Vaughan Williams too much, Bártok, and ... oh so many.

[Dave2002]

Part of the problem is that we are so used to things that are 'uglier' or more 'grating' than parallel fifths (which no doubt offended 18th-century ears more easily) that the rule seems very odd.

I never followed it - I liked Vaughan Williams too much, Bártok, and ... oh so many.

Indeed. I like VW a lot, but also many of the more dissonant composers. "Rules" such as that one are surely made to be broken, though they perhaps serve a purpose if we can learn to understand why they were adopted in the first place.