<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
Dear Smt-Listerians,<div><br></div><div>Harmony as practiced in many sophisticated pieces in whole or at least in significant part is so much more complex than any harmonic theory I have read (German, French, Russian, English, Italian if you count fig bass). It is so much so that I have come to believe that harmonic theories tend to describe and to an extent formalize counterpoint's cliches. Whether or not we take all that Schenker has given us at face value (or try to extend in ways and into repertoires that appear to be contradictory to his thought), we still need counterpoint and harmonic interpretation at the risk of being constrained to cliches and their formalizations. Kirnberger pointed to a fruitful path. Neither counterpoint nor harmony appear to me to be monolithic when applied to various repertoires of interest. It seems better to add more well thought out tools to the toolbox and think about how, when, and which tools to use.</div><div><br><div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Baskerville; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; "><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div>Richard Hermann, Prof. of Music</div><div>University of New Mexico</div><div><br></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></span> </div><br><div><div>On Sep 4, 2009, at 7:27 AM, Ildar Khannanov wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><div>Dear Colleagues,</div> <div> </div> <div>it is so nice to discover some 30 messages in one's mailbox after a sweet trip to Russia and UK! </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>I wonder, when the spell of Church of Heinrich will fall and we will return to modest study of HARMONY and will stop substituting it with voice-leaing, counterpoint, and other tricky alterntives to real music history.. Everybody of any importance in music has been studying HARMONY, and not voice leading (which is nothing but a hole from the bagel) . This tradition, time and enegry consuming, serious, and life-long, has been replaced after the two World Wars by some kind of educated quessing. Please, return harmony into our discussions!</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>Best,</div> <div> </div> <div>Ildar Khannanov</div> <div>Peabody Conservatory</div> <div><a href="mailto:solfeggio7@yahoo.com">solfeggio7@yahoo.com</a><br><br>--- On <b>Thu, 9/3/09, Nicolas Meeùs <i><<a href="mailto:nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr">nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr</a>></i></b> wrote:<br></div> <blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><br>From: Nicolas Meeùs <<a href="mailto:nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr">nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr</a>><br>Subject: Re: [Smt-talk] I - II- IV as a progression<br>To: <a href="mailto:gzar@mail2.gis.net">gzar@mail2.gis.net</a><br>Cc: <a href="mailto:smt-talk@societymusictheory.org">smt-talk@societymusictheory.org</a><br>Date: Thursday, September 3, 2009, 4:04 AM<br><br> <div class="plainMail">A few additional considerations:<br><br>1. In the diatonic system, if two roots are distant by a 3rd, the higher chord must be major and the lower minor if the 3d itself is minor (e.g. IV-ii of ii-IV), the reverse if the 3d is major (e.g. vi-IV or IV-vi). These are the well-known R and L neo-Riemannian.<br>1a. Diatonic relations can be described in a series of the type ...E-c#-A-f-D-b-G-e-C-a-F-d-Bb-g... which goes flatwards from left to right, sharpwards from right to left; flatwards is the 'normal' direction in tonal music.<br><br>2. Schoenberg, who described the falling-3rd and falling-5th progressions as "strong", also dubbed them "ascending" because in both cases the root of the first chord 'climbs' the harmonic series of the second (from harmonic 4 to harmonic 5 in the case of the 3rd, from 2 to 3 in that of the 5th). This corresponds to Gerald Zaritzky's description, but seems to me rather metaphoric.<br><br>3. More important is that the falling-3rd and falling-5th progressions authorize a normal preparation and resolution of dissonances (especially of 7th chords). In the case of the falling 3rd, the 5th of the first chord prepares the 7th of the second, while the 7th of the first resolves on the prime of the second. In the case of the falling 5th, the preparation and resolution occur a 3rd lower.<br>3a. It is true that II-IV allows a 7th on II, as Richard Porterfield describes, but the 7th in that case does not resolve 'normally'.<br><br>Interesting points about the II-IV progression are that:<br>1. It obviously is not diatonic.<br>2. It goes flatwards, but following an abnormal path (the neo-Riemannian relation is RLRLRL flatwards).<br>3. It does not allow a 'normal' preparation and/or resolution of dissonances. This is characteristic of what often is dubbed 'modal' harmony.<br>4. It necessarily includes a false relation of tritone between the 3 of II and the 5 of IV, in addition to the chromatic relation between 3 of II and 1 of IV.<br><br>Let me add, again in comment to Richard Porterfield's message, that roman numerals, if read properly, also can form a shorthand for the voice leading.<br><br>Nicolas Meeùs<br>Université de Paris Sorbonne<br>École doctorale "Concepts et Langages"<br>Centre de recherche "Patrimoines et Langages Musicaux"<br><a href="http://www.plm.paris-sorbonne.fr/" target="_blank">http://www.plm.paris-sorbonne.fr</a><br><a href="http://us.mc450.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr" ymailto="mailto:nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr">nicolas.meeus@paris-sorbonne.fr</a><br><br><br><br><a href="http://us.mc450.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=gzar@mail2.gis.net" ymailto="mailto:gzar@mail2.gis.net">gzar@mail2.gis.net</a> a écrit :<br>> 1. I've always been impressed by the long-standing observation that a rooted falling-3rd diatonic progression is "stronger" than a rising-3rd one because each new root (especially when in the bass) is "fresh" to the preceding chord tones. (It's the same for falling vs rising 5ths, of course.) Also, the root of the first chord is "promoted" to a more-active member, in the next chord.<br>> [...]<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Smt-talk mailing list<br><a href="http://us.mc450.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Smt-talk@societymusictheory.org" ymailto="mailto:Smt-talk@societymusictheory.org">Smt-talk@societymusictheory.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org" target="_blank">http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org</a><br></div></blockquote></td></tr></tbody></table><br><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">_______________________________________________</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Smt-talk mailing list</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><a href="mailto:Smt-talk@societymusictheory.org">Smt-talk@societymusictheory.org</a></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><a href="http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org">http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org</a></div> </blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>