[Smt-talk] "Neighboring" 6/4 Chords

[Murphy, Scott Brandon]

Charles mentions "a smooth modulation to the dominant." Dmitri recognizes
that cadential 6/4s are "primarily cadential 6/4s."  Putting a bare V
above a bass ^2, thus forming the 6/4, can be a clear and even potent
signal that the music is modulating to the dominant.  Generally avoiding
putting a bare V above a bass ^2, passing or neighbor, when the music does
not modulate afterwards steers clear of mixed signals.

-Scott

--
Scott Murphy
President, Music Theory Midwest
Associate Professor, Music Theory
University of Kansas School of Music
smurphy at ku.edu




On 10/2/11 5:20 PM, "Ditto, Charles" <charlesditto at txstate.edu> wrote:

>Greetings, Collective,
>
>I wonder about the number of occurrences of harmonizing the 1-2-1 in the
>bass with I(i) - V6/4(ii dim or ii half-dim7) - V4/2 of V(v) there might
>be in the tonal literature.  It could be a smooth modulation to the
>dominant.  Anybody know an example of that?
>
>Charles Ditto
>School of Music
>Texas State University
>________________________________________
>From: smt-talk-bounces at lists.societymusictheory.org
>[smt-talk-bounces at lists.societymusictheory.org] On Behalf Of
>gzar at mail2.gis.net [gzar at mail2.gis.net]
>Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2011 12:48 PM
>To: Matt Bribitzer-Stull
>Cc: Society for Music Theory
>Subject: Re: [Smt-talk] "Neighboring" 6/4 Chords
>
>Dear Matt and All,
>
>In the haste of my previous reply I also seem to have assumed that
>the bass of the 6/4-chord could as well be (and maybe better ought to
>be) part of a PT-figure, rather than just a NT-figure. I think the
>comments I made still apply, one way or another, but let me add that
>in the case of a truly "upper-NT-bass" on ^2, the "direction" of the
>resultant figure probably would be to aim the initial prolonged Tonic
>toward a deeper N/P-chord, as part of a longer, turn-like Initial
>Ascent (quasi-Schleifer) -- rather than as a P-figure immediately
>aiming towards "S"-function, as I proposed in the previous posting.
>
>Here is an example of the actual "NT-^2" ("^  - - " indicates the
>smaller prolongation, "^^ --^ --^ " the larger):
>
>^^1/5/3/1-2/5/4/7-1/5/3/1--^7/5/2/2--^1/5/1/3 (-- ^^4/6/1/2
>--^^5/5/7/2--^^1/5/1/3)
>[not great spacing -- sorry!]
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Gerry
>
>Gerald Zaritzky
>Faculty, Department of Music Theory
>New England Conservatory of Music
>290 Huntington Avenue (Room JH 325)
>Boston, Massachusetts 02115  USA
>gerald.zaritzky at necmusic.edu
>office: 617-585-1373 (voicemail only)
>
>At 10:38 AM -0500 9/29/11, Matt Bribitzer-Stull wrote:
>>Dear Colleagues:
>>
>>I find when instructing undergraduates in core harmony courses that
>>students accept the guidelines we provide for part-writing much
>>better if they understand the reasoning behind them. I'm at a loss,
>>however, to explain why common-practice composers rarely used a 6/4
>>chord above scale degree 2 as a bass neighbor motion expanding
>>tonic. V4/3 is most often a passing bass gesture (in which, of
>>course, there's a good reason why students need not resolve the
>>chordal seventh in the soprano - namely, it's not a dissonance with
>>the bass and often completes a pleasing parallel-tenths idiom) or
>>part of a collection of dominant-functioned chords, though it can
>>and does function as a bass neighbor expanding tonic; and vii 6 an
>>vii 6/5 harmonize bass neighbor notes with much more frequency than
>>a 6/4 chord.
>>
>>I'd be interested if there are any compelling contrapuntal or
>>harmonic reasons why composers tended not to harmonize neighbor
>>motions in the bass with unaccented 6/4 chords.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Matt
>>
>>--
>>________________________________
>>
>>Matthew Bribitzer-Stull
>>Associate Professor of Music Theory
>>University of Minnesota School of Music
>>
>>*** Emails sent from this account are often personal in nature.
>>Whether personal or professional, emails sent from this account do
>>not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Minnesota or
>>members of the University community. ***
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Smt-talk mailing list
>>Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
>>http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusicthe
>>ory.org
>
>_______________________________________________
>Smt-talk mailing list
>Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
>http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheo
>ry.org
>_______________________________________________
>Smt-talk mailing list
>Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
>http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheo
>ry.org
>