I’m no pro, but when I was prepping for my Grade 8 theory exam, I found myself in a similar spot. I ended up joining a small Discord group where we’d geek out about leading tones and debate whether parallel fifths were really the worst crime in music. If this forum turns into a music theory haven, I’m all for it!
Also, quick plug for online music lessons – I stumbled onto ArtMaster while brushing up on my secondary dominants. They had this interactive lesson that broke down modal borrowing in such a clear, fun way I actually looked forward to “homework.” It was a lifesaver for my understanding, and now I throw terms like “Sonata-Allegro” around like I’m a pro.
Haha! It’s the crime only when you’re in a harmony exam room! It doesn’t sound bad, as can be heard apparently in rock music and the “My Girl” hook. It’s just a way to dissuade young composers of the 17th century to abolish writing music in the old way when parallel 5th prevailed. Sort of like, “Use thirds and sixth if you want to be a modern composer! Don’t use fifths much. That’s your grandpa’s way. Put two fifths together and I won’t talk to you in public again!”
There is nothing wrong with the interval of a perfect fifth. The no-no occurs when two voices that are supposed to be contrapuntal move in parallel perfect fifths. Why? Because the interval of a perfect fifth is already prominent in most “musical” sounds, manifested in the 3:2 ratio of the 2nd and 3rd harmonics. So, using parallel perfect fifths diminishes the independence of the voices, making them behave as one voice. So, by definition, the music technically ceases to be counterpoint when parallel perfect fifths are employed. IMO, finding an alternative to parallel perfect fifths…results in things sounding more interesting.
You’ve definitely created a thread that raises more questions than answers.
Well, I’ve heard only one music theory which says that good musicians (I mean those who are playing any musical instrument) are good in math. And my grades are proving this theory wrong.
Anyway, now I’m focused more on my music lessons rather than math. I think I have a higher chance of obtaining a scholarship. I even found a couple of helpful tutorials at www.artmaster.com. So, let’s hope that I’ll be good at music, at least.
I get the impression there’s a wide spread of music theory levels with people on Elektronauts, so the notion of a Music Theory discussion thread here is tough to judge and pitch to.
I’m all for people posing actual theory questions though.
My personal exploration at the moment is the space between minor and major 3rds… I’ve been trying to figure out a cross over point (in cents) where a minor 3rd becomes major (to me and my ear; I think we’d all hear it differently) and vice versa; and then trying to use it in a compositional context.
(…also interesting that the ‘blues 3rd’ lives in this space).
Edit: car horns are also a good source of neither major nor minor 3rds… )
In western music tradition with its strict 12 intervals it sounds like “when the sound of the letter ‘a’ becomes letter ‘e’”
We just memorize how they sound and learn how to recognize them.
By the way, for really deep theory I’d recommend scoreclub.net.
It’s from composer to composers. Even though it focused more on orchestral and cinematic music, Alan’s teaching is one of the best I’ve ever seen. Quite expensive, though.
Funny I was playing slide this morning on my archtop. I have it tuned to C major for Carnatic or Indian type scale. With the slide I like to use microtones as passing notes and the one between m and M3 sounds very pleasing to my ear.
A string quartet or an unaccompanied choral ensemble is typically going to play natural intervals, as opposed to equally tempered intervals. Instruments that must “tune” every note play together (we hope) using natural intervals.
At the same time, we’ve all become inured to equal temperament, and I believe it does affect the way we hear intervals…or accept the out-of-tune-ness of some intervals, such as the major third (C-E) on a piano.
The coolest way to tune intervals, imo, is to add overdrive or distortion to both sounds, adjust the pitch up or down, microtonally, of one of the voices, then listen to the difference tone produced. The smaller the interval, the lower is the frequency of difference tone produced. For example, the minor-third on the piano is an approximation of the ratios 6:5 and 7:6. In a dominant seventh chord, C-E-G-Bb, 6:5 is E-G, and 7:6 is G-Bb. To describe both of these intervals as “minor thirds” exposes the limitations of thinking about intervals this way. Changing the tuning between these two intervals (6:5 to 7:6), using the method I described above, causes the difference tone to travel an octave downward.
Same as Jukka, big fan of Nahre Sol. I deep-dived into Music Theory via the Youtube gang : Adam Neely, Nahre Sol, David Bennett, and Ben Levine. Also discovered a few web site like : Music Theory for the 21st Century.
I have been willing to deep dive more into jazz harmony (Mark Levine books, Bill Dobbins books, etc.) but mostly find a way to internalize some of the concepts which I find the hardest part when not actively playing an instrument or well enough. I guess I would need to put the work into the Piano while I mostly want to explore composing and arranging actually. (Side note but I really want to find a isomorphic keyboard one day as this would help I feel)
You can use your voice instead, which is the main recommendation in the book reference here above.
I’ve read the Levine books (Jazz Theory, Jazz Piano Theory). They are nice (and pretty deep) but they don’t explain too much the “why”, unlike Harmonic Experience. For example, for understanding modes and tetrachords, the explanations in HE are much better.
Another great though unlikely book reference is the following, unlikely because it is tempting to think of it as a scam at first (their website does not really help with all their package offers) but it has got surprisingly useful songwriting tools and explanations in it (eg the circular harmonic scale):
"Minor asides on *How Music REALLY Works* as I slowly plod through"
Not as much of a fan of the evo-psych just-so framing in the early portion, but still giving it a chance.
Edit: Oh noooo they’re endorsing P.E.A.R. and I haven’t even gotten into actual discussions of music. I may enjoy Harmonic Experience more if this keeps up!
Edit edit: Feeling like some podcaster is trying to Neurolinguistic-program me into buying a timeshare. I may be unfair but I’m going to edit my experiences along the way in
Hehe, no worries, I do appreciate book recommendations! I’m familiar with some of the other areas of existence/pseudoscience the author is trying to set the stage with so I’m still taking breaks and trying to get back to the hunt for more useful models amidst any “just-so stories”.
Edit3: I suppose I am now getting some further weird politics peppered into this before any useful stuff, though I did expect that with the evo-psych theories conflated with evolutionary biology fact and “undeniable sexual differences” chatter building up towards his self-published unifying theory of Music. Still, onward!
Edit4: Part I of the book is completely useless conjecture and just-so stories. On to Part II! (18% of the book according to Calibre)
As for the other book (“How …”) , I did not perform any political background checks of the authors and I do not endorse their views on the world. So yes, do not feel urged to spend your money there.
A more authoritative text for songwriters, and initially much more demanding for the reader, is Melody in Songwriting by Jack Perricone:
I recently did the course on Artmaster (which led me here). It’s a really good entry into music theory and I really like David Bennett’s teaching style
It’s just a way to dissuade young composers of the 17th century to abolish writing music in the old way when parallel 5th prevailed. Sort of like, “Use thirds and sixth if you want to be a modern composer! Don’t use fifths much. That’s your grandpa’s way. Put two fifths together and I won’t talk to you in public again!”
)
