Lesson with Mark

I do want you to realize that, for example, in a dance piece or something, if the left hand is providing a simple block chord accompaniment, an augmented second in one of the inner voices will not be noticed and could save you from using some very awkward progressions with the lowered seventh degree or raised sixth degree. If you just want some standard harmony, chances are that iv V or ii*6 V will require that augmented second in an inner voice. In a fugue, on the other hand, every voice will be heard and the unusual second will sound unusual.

This weekend soon I will post a lesson about using chromatic non chord tones (what do you call them? like passing tones, etc...), the Neapolitan chord and that augmented III+6 chord. I also hope we can begin working on our sarabandes.

I now understand completely about the augmented seconds

I look forward to the next lesson, in the meantime I shall continue with my secondary dominant phrases, and perhaps try writing a few simple Sarabande style phrases/sentences/sections, so I have some idea of what I'm doing when we come to write our chromatic one

I apologise for the lack of exercises completed - I have been quite busy with school, and was away all weekend.

If you don't mind sidestepping slightly, would you mind having a quick look at a short prelude I wrote in an attempt to prove to myself that I can write music? (still not sure on that one) It doesn't sound quite right to me, but I can't find any textbook errors. Is this something that will improve with practice, or am I doing something very wrong?

Thanks

Well, I do plan to post that next lesson very soon! I am always behind .

You can certainly write good harmony and counterpoint; do not despair! In fact, you are quite good at both techniques and your invention demonstrates this.

But nonetheless your invention is very deficient in one major aspect of music. Think carefully about all the elements of music and decide what your piece is most deficient in.

I have attached a "corrected" version of your invention I made in a few minutes. How did I "correct" it? What improves its flow? I will give you one hint: although I altered some harmonies and added ornaments, neither of those are to what I am referring. This is something I tried to work on in our first exercise... but I think perhaps you did not recognize it for what it was.

All this said, it is a nice piece as you originally wrote it and you should be happy with your progress . Also please understand that a real harpsichordist (or pianist) would make those ornaments expressive rather than annoying like Finale.

The main differences I can see are more rhythmic variation - I used semiquavers and quavers pretty much all of the time, wheras you use some demisemiquavers, and semiquavers in both voices sometimes, which adds to the interest - and that in your version there is more of a feel of melody, and the melody feels like it's going somewhere, there is a shape to it, it's not just going all over the place, and the two voices have opposing but complimenting melodic curves.

I think I used far too many commas in that last sentence

Was that what you were thinking of? Or am I again barking up the wrong tree?

Well, actually the rhythm was not it either.

But yes, you noticed the Melody.

And I emphasize that the most important element in almost all Baroque music is melody. I know how easy it is to forget, amid technical training with harmonies and counterpoints, that both harmony and counterpoint are tools based on melody: harmony to enhance melody, counterpoint to combine melodies. And you have probably already noticed that some of your melodies are far from inspiring.

Learning to voice lead chords and write counterpoint is only the beginning of learning to write music in any style. Making beautiful music will probably imply writing beautiful melody at this stage, and unlike with counterpoint and harmony, there are no simple rules. Thus I even hesitate to point out some of your "mistakes" because they could all be appropriate in certain circumstances. Furthermore, even composers like Bach occasionally wrote awkward melodies when that would allow for a particularly interesting harmony or imitation. As we have discussed already with the aug. 2nd, it is not necessary for all the voices to always be prominent... and a very slow (or very fast) voice acting as filler clearly does not have to be so melodic.


So please do not take this advice too seriously:

(all referring to your original)
1. Notice the deceptive resolution of the leading tone in the right hand from bar two to three. This can occasionally be a special effect, but notice that your dominant chord jumps to yet another dominant chord inversion, halting the harmonic rhythm exactly where the music should be moving forward. Furthermore you approach it awkwardly in the left hand too .
2. Even in measures three and four you never resolve that leading tone.
3. In measure four, the right hand does not repeat the countersubject properly. Yes, there would have been a parallel fifth... but I used those fifths freely in my version. Try singing parts of what you wrote to see why I don't like your alteration.
4. Measures five and six, left hand: this motive could be more creative.
5. Consonant ties are usually not even a fraction as interesting as true suspensions. Most of the ones you used sounded awkward.
6. Measure nine: the right hand motive is not the most spectacular...
7. Measures fourteen through sixteen: The ending should be the most inspiring, but instead you used some questionable melodies. Especially the right hand; try singing that and you will understand.

I went through a very similar phase as I learned harmony and counterpoint. So for you to avoid the painful writing of many awkward pieces like mine, I suggest you try writing some solo melody. I suspect you will find it more difficult than you could possibly imagine. And I don't mean nice melodies... no, I mean some awesome melodies where every note counts and contributes to a strong emotion.

Of course in a contrapuntal piece you will adopt a different melodic style... but many of the same elements apply: graceful curve and solid direction.


As for rhythm, you seem to be fine if you are imitating Bach. I have a personal tendency (learned from of course the 17th century) to avoid smooth 16th note motion, but Bach's style depends on it. More importantly I think you are not aware of the major differences between motives that begin on the beat and motives that begin after/before the beat. Motives that begin before/after the beat and lead into a stronger beat are the most flowing and Bach uses them constantly. Melodies beginning on the beat, on the other hand, feel more block-like and separated. Experiment with both!





All of this is a mere introduction to the intricacies of melody and rhythm... if you are interested we could have a few proper lessons on these subjects with examples for clarification. And of course ask questions!

So just to clarify, you are learning a lot about music and should not feel disappointed in yourself, as you know remarkable things about harmony and counterpoint. I merely suggest that you now take yet another element of music into closer account as you compose. Melody is the missing ingredient.

Your points all make excellent sense to me, and now I see why there has always seemed to be something missing in my contrapunctal writing, while there are no 'mistakes' per se the melodies lack melodic tendancies. Some lesons/exercises on melody and so forth would certainly not go amiss, as this is clearly an area in which I am lacking.

I'm still always behind... but you have also not completed your exercises so I don't feel too guilty . And I hope when I do get around to writing lessons, that they are informative and quality.

THE NEAPOLITAN CHORD

As Brandon had pointed out on the fugue thread a long time ago, the NEAPOLitan chord refers to Naples, because it was very popular among a group of composers based there including Alessandro Scarlatti, I think.

Please open up the attachment "Neapolitan - Voice Leading."

Once again I will begin with a short discussion of the Neapolitan chord's melodic properties. Whether in an inner voice, merely adding color, or an outer voice, central to the melody, you should be aware of the sound of the lowered 2nd degree note.

Just to review (I think you already know the theory involved), the Neapolitan chord is a major chord on the flattened second degree of the minor scale. In major the Neapolitan chord is a sort of mode mixture and would have two altered notes. During the Baroque period, however, N was confined to minor and was far from common. More on its history later.


Example one in e-minor shows how the 2b (flattened second degree) might be approached in an actual melody. The 2b wants to move downwards towards the leading tone (and thus dominant harmony). In this example, however, it first passes through the tonic note (whether as a passing tone or in an I64).

Notice that two consecutive minor seconds result, between the 2b and the tonic and between the tonic and the leading tone. Their sound is very distinctive and you should get to know it well so that you can purposely choose the effect in your music. And in your music, all chromaticism should be purposeful. Rather than just deciding to throw in a few chromatic chords here or there, as composers we must carefully attempt the affects we want using all the resources we have. Given the melodic nature of the Baroque period, it is wiser to write a nice melody, perhaps incorporating that 2b, perhaps not, and only afterwards look back to see if a N chord sounds appropriate to the melody's character. Less wise would be to contrive some awkward melody with the sole purpose of using this or that chromatic harmony.

Example two shows the 2b leaping directly to the leading tone. This diminished 3rd is an interesting effect.

Example three harmonizes the melody of example one. Notice the the fourth degree is usually in the bass, that is, N is usually in first inversion, N6. N6 often passes through I64 before reaching V. N has a harmonic character startlingly different from its melodic character. The harmony can be quite noble. Example four harmonizes the melody of example two.


If you consider the normal circle of fifths in minor:

I - iv - VII - III - VI -(dim)- ii* - V - i,

you see that one of the "fifths" is actually a diminshed fifth; there is a diminished fifth between the roots of VI and ii*. This often goes unnoticed in sequences, and explains why VI ii6 is more common than VI ii (the bass would leap by a diminished fifth). The N chord simply corrects this fifth and moves it to between N and I:

I - iv - VII - III - VI - N -(dim)- V - i.

Since in minor V is more common than v, we get two major chords a tritone apart - a significant departure from the tonal system and thus very colorful. Examples five and six illustrate circles of fifths, first with ii* and then with N, so you can compare.

Example seven illustrates how easily parallel fifths result when moving from N to I64. The good voice leading almost requires that the sixth degree and the 2b both move downwards. Most composers place the 2b above the sixth degree so that you get parallel fourths instead. Some authors say these parallel fifths are acceptable. Either way, the listener won't be able to tell or even care!

THE NEAPOLITAN CHORD
HISTORY
If you have ever worked through Gradus ad Parnassum, you will remember Fux advocates flattening the note B to correct any tritones, whether harmonic or melodic. This was one of the principal uses of Bb (and sometimes even Eb) in Renaissance music. That sort of thought naturally leads to flattening the root of the diminished second degree chord, making it consonant and major.

That said, pieces in the mode of A (aeolian) rarely introduced the N chord the way later Baroque composers did. When they did, the Bb temporarily belonged to the phrygian mode on A. Thus the Neapolitan chord is something the minor mode borrows from the phrygian mode with its 2b.



The development of the assorted chromatic harmonies of the late Baroque is a complex subject and I could write much on the topic. During the 17th century, many bizarre and colorful harmonies were experimented with as modality incorporated chromaticism and became tonal. Some of the earliest mixes of chromaticism with Renaissance theory led to fascinating results quite unlike the harmonies of Bach or other familiar late Baroque composers.

Even in the late Baroque, however, composers were still influenced by modal theory. As late as Bach himself, composers did not think in terms of inversions or chord names or secondary dominants or root movements. Rameau's theories on the fundamental bass only gradually changed the analysis of music to understand the idea of inversion. And furthermore, it is only one way of analyzing the patters of tonal music. To truly understand harmony like a Bach or a Vivaldi or a Froberger, we must instead think of melody and voice leading.

So although I have described different ways of understanding progressions in music, remember that Bach himself was not thinking of ii* chords or inversions or anything of the sort. He was instead voice leading all the individual voices in a very tonal way, with great emphasis placed on leading tones. Bach was one to almost never use the minor v chord in the minor mode. He tends to the opposite, almost religiously using the leading tone and creating more leading tones in secondary dominants and diminished seventh chords. Composers before him did not always go so far, often times working somewhere in between modality and tonality.

This does not mean that Bach and his contemporaries wrote more "advanced" music. The harmonic colors of Buxtehude and Frobeger with their mixture of tonality and modality are simply different from the harmonic colors of Bach and Rameau. Both approaches have distinct sounds. (Personally I find the earlier styles more creative. Bach I think is sometimes too unrelenting in his tonality.) Since I see you have a taste for modal chords yourself, if you are interested I could make a lesson much later describing the 17th century's exotic chromatic-modal mix.



Anyway, whether in the 17th or 18th centuries, Baroque composers never used N very much. I have attached one of the few rare examples from the theme of Muffat's monumental (and virtuosic!) passacaglia in g minor. You will notice it, don't worry! In fact, it might be good for you to write out all the harmonies as homework. Also, what happened to analyzing the Rameau? I think I mentioned this earlier; analysis is a giant step towards understanding the Baroque styles.

And for the Neapolitan sixth, I think it would be a good idea for you to write at least one short sarabade phrase using a Neapolitan chord. Colorful chromatic chords are particularly suited to the sarabande's typically lush homophony.

The Passacaglia:
| / i - | ii* V - | i N6 V7 | VI V V7 | i - - |
You agree?

I shall start on some Sarabande-y type ideas now, using a few secondary dominants aswell, and trying out the different melodic uses of the b2.