|
Post by Trebor on May 28, 2006 22:06:42 GMT
There are a few useful 'rules'. Are you stuck on anything in particular? Yeah, I find the bits to do with theory particularly hard But seriously, I understand about writing out the possible chords, working out the cadences and so on. And that it's best to try to get contrary motion between melody and bass using inversions. But I'm not so sure on the middle bits. Should you try and avoid any cadential progressions if not at a cadence point? And how do you decide which is better out of (for instance) ii, IV and vi? Oh, and I'm sure there's some circle of fifths progression thing which I've never understood.
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 22:11:10 GMT
Is this a circle of fifths: I, IV, vii, iii, vi, ii, V This is a table that AP made me about chords that can follow one another etc. Any of the chords on the right can follow the one on the left: I ii, IV, V, vi, vii ii iii, V iii I, IV, vi IV I, V V I, iii, vi vi ii, iii, IV, V viib* I *I also got told not to ever use viia only the 'b' inversion
|
|
|
Post by Trebor on May 28, 2006 22:20:12 GMT
Is this a circle of fifths: I, IV, vii, iii, vi, ii, V No idea! This is a table that AP made me about chords that can follow one another etc. Any of the chords on the right can follow the one on the left: I ii, IV, V, vi, vii ii iii, V iii I, IV, vi IV I, V V I, iii, vi vi ii, iii, IV, V viib* I *I also got told not to ever use viia only the 'b' inversion Um...ok? What's the reasoning behind it (I'm not doubting it, just wondered if there's a way to help remember that)?
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 22:21:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Trebor on May 28, 2006 22:29:41 GMT
Thanks, that's really useful
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 22:31:59 GMT
I've attempted everything on the past papers apart from the composition bit. I still don't know which one to do.
|
|
|
Post by AnotherPianist on May 28, 2006 23:06:47 GMT
It's okay I don't mind, glad to be helpful *. *As long as Steve doesn't come along and tell me it's all wrong .
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 23:08:08 GMT
Stuff what Steve thinks ;D. *runs*.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on May 29, 2006 11:36:28 GMT
Stuff what Steve thinks ;D. *runs*. * throws boot at Nat * The principles that lie behind harmonic choice are ever so simple because chords all have their own function: * use the primary chords I, IV, V(7) and their first inversions as your first choice. The function of primary chords is to provide harmonic stability. * when using the same chord twice, invert one of them. * the function of secondary chords is to add extra colour, usually on weak beats. * the secondary chords to use most often are II(b) and VI. * use VI to replace I on a weak beat for colour, for example I-Ib can be replaced by I-VI. Never the other way round because: 1) that muddles the sense of tonality; 2) roots rising a 3rd nearly always sound weak (roots falling a 3rd always sound good). * use VI also to replace I to avoid a finished-sounding perfect cadence. * II and IIb are pre-cadence chords. Use IIb for preference, and always IIb in minor keys. * Ic is a great pre-cadence chord. Use it on a strong beat and always preceeding V. Don't use it under any other circumstances. * a superb cadence progression is IIb-Ic-V(7)-I, but the chords must move from left to right as I have written them down, because of the way in which Ic and V need to resolve. The IIb or the Ic will often be missing, but their order will never be succesfully reversed. Get you head round that little lot and you already have the basics for writing good harmonic progressions. Once you have that, you can expand into using less common chords III and Viib, along with passing second inversions (Ib-Vc-I, for example) and secondary 7ths. I do not teach chord III at all because opportunities to use it are so rare. Steve
|
|
|
Post by chocolatedog on May 29, 2006 11:42:03 GMT
Ehup Steve!
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on May 29, 2006 11:49:50 GMT
Ehup cd
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 29, 2006 12:09:43 GMT
*throws boot back at Steve*
|
|
|
Post by AnotherPianist on May 29, 2006 12:36:09 GMT
AP, a number of the chord progressions in your chart would sound weak in reality because of the number of roots rising a third, for example II-IV. I suggest you have another think about this and modify the table. How does this look? I, ii, IV, V, vi, vii ii, V iii I, vi IV IV I, V V I, vi vi ii, iii, IV, V viib* I I'm feeling slightly confused, I didn't suggest any that rise a third . I think that we have the same tables (with your first one, I tend to do the inversions afterwards to get a nice bass line) except that I've allowed iii in a few places you haven't. In practise, however, I don't use iii unless nothing else is legal or I've hardly used any secondary chords. I was never sure about V->iii it's a falling third but never read anything suggesting that one should do it. I tend to allow iii sometimes, though, as one can (rarely) occasionally get a melody that's not hamonisable by these rules, thus the more flexibility the better (I can't hear it in my head you see, so in an exam if the rules don't work I'm done for ).
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on May 29, 2006 13:14:15 GMT
I'm feeling slightly confused, I didn't suggest any that rise a third . I might be misreading your table. According to Nat, 'any of the chords on the right can follow the one on the left:' so I read this 'ii iii, V' as meaning that V can follow iii. Ah yes, I see how I misread it. Sorry. I shall go back and edit the post. Blame Nat; most things are her fault anyway ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Steve
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 29, 2006 13:24:09 GMT
That's nice of you to say Steve .
|
|