The Girl From Ipanema - Analyzing the bridge

[Reg]

Hey Kevin thought I might give you some more information from Groves, as I said I have all copies, had to dig them out of boxes, actually I have copies of anything I quote.
Here's your quote...(on sequence from Groves) from above...
Quote:
"A melodic or polyphonic idea consisting of a short figure or motif stated successively at different pitch levels, so that it moves up or down a scale by equidistant intervals. It may be true to the diatonicism [diatonic sequence] of the passage or may involve a literal transposition [chromatic sequence]."

If we remove your comments added to Groves definition..."Diatonic sequence" and "Chromatic sequence", which have no direct definitions where as diatonicism does and I quote from Harvards Dictonary because Groves is very limited, "Diatonicism means music whose tonality is predominantly Diatonic. " music is called "diatonic" if it is confined to the notes of the scale, to the exclusion of chromatic tones."

Your use of "Chromatic Sequence" (as your definition of "literal transposition"), does not have a definition either, at least in groves or other music theory reference books. Where as Transposition does, and I quote, "the notation of performance of music at a pitch different from that in which it was originally conceived, by raising or lowering the notes in it by the same interval."
When one looks up "literal" we find "Real". So it appears your taking some liberties in your understanding of the use of Chromatic Sequence"...If you could give some page #'s or other references in regard to Chromatic Sequence... we are talking about analysis of compositional techniques...
As I said there are direct references to use of "Tonal and Real" in all music theory references. Piston uses the terms " Tonal sequence and Modulating Sequence" in his book," Harmony" and uses "Real" in his book "Counterpoint", which I made reference to. You might want to re-think your use of chromatic sequence... or not...I don't care , but please try and use actual quotes, rather than your understand of... especially for the basis of use of derogatory comments. Reg

[princeplanet]

You say "Potayto" and I say "Potarto".... c'mon chaps, this is beyond pedantic. It's not even amusing any more. You guys need your own forum, something like "Theoretical Minutia for Jazz and/or Classical Eggheads". There you could even freely argue whether it's "minutia" or "minutiae"...... but more importantly, it would be away from discussions where some of us may wish to learn something useful...

[ksjazzguitar]

Reg,

First of all, I cannot comprehend why any musician lucky enough to have a copy of Grove would keep it in boxes - wtf?!?!?!

Secondly, you are simply conflating two different aspects of the term "diatonicism" - another indication that you really don't understand the terminology.

Yes, there are different ways to classify the two different types of transposition. The online version that I have of Grove's doesn't mention "tonal" or "real" transposition in the article. Does that mean that they don't exist? No, it's just not meant to be a comprehensive entry listing every variation in terminology. They know that people understand. In my theory classes, people interchange "real transposition," "chromatic transposition," and "literal transposition" without the blink of an eye. Because we know what we're talking about. I chose the term "chromatic transposition" because it is commonly understood by people who aren't theory wonks - if I'd said "real" or "literal" I may not have been understood. "Chromatic" and "diatonic" are the terms that Finale use to describe transposition. A quick Google search will show that they are in common usage. Your attempt to paint it as some esoteric terminology is just another pathetic attempt to avoid admitting that you didn't know what you were talking about.

And your assertion that "chromatic transposition" means to transpose a half-step - that is just beyond the pale. No one with even basic theory training would think that. You can try and twist words around and combine incompatible definitions to get the confusion you seek, but it doesn't change the basic facts.

Just give it up man. You got caught trying to pretend to know something that you don't. It's not the end of the world. Your somersaults to try and hide it just make it worse.

Peace,
Kevin

[Aristotle]

Hey Kevin thought I might give you some more information from Groves,

Reg,
I think it is obvious to most people that the first two phrases of the song '99 bottles of beer on the wall' are the "same" musically. I bet most people recognize that on the bridge to GFI as well. Does it really matter what we call the sameness?

And have musicians formed a government, elected a legislature that has authorized an agency to force us - under penalty of fine, imprisonment and/or loss of license to play music - to use a fixed set of vocabulary? Jazz and political correctness, word police and thought police?

Let it go. Chill, dude. (Or was that supposed to be - Cool it, man).

[paynow]

You say "Potayto" and I say "Potarto".... c'mon chaps, this is beyond pedantic. It's not even amusing any more. You guys need your own forum, something like "Theoretical Minutia for Jazz and/or Classical Eggheads". There you could even freely argue whether it's "minutia" or "minutiae"...... but more importantly, it would be away from discussions where some of us may wish to learn something useful...

It's "potato". That's according to Merriam Webster's Dictionary.

[Reg]

Points taken and fair enough... Reg

[ksjazzguitar]

...And have musicians formed a government, elected a legislature that has authorized an agency to force us - under penalty of fine, imprisonment and/or loss of license to play music - to use a fixed set of vocabulary? Jazz and political correctness, word police and thought police?

Really man? Overreact much? You just can't seem to get over your victim complex.

If this were an astronomy forum, and someone said that the moon was made of cheese, and a forum member pointed out that he was wrong and didn't know what he was talking about - would that be an Orwellian conspiracy too? Would it be the jackbooted astronomy police, rounding up the cheese-mooners for re-education? No, it would be someone that knows what they're talking about trying to explain something to someone who doesn't care about the facts - foolish perhaps, but not some Orwellian dystopia.

Your nihilistic attempts to disrupt or mock any discussion of theory beyond "What scale do I use?" are transparent. I notice that you avoided the actual discussions of the role of theory in jazz. But that's an anti-theory guerrilla terrorist for you - always afraid of a head on fight. They prefer to snipe and run.

For those of you afraid that my tone will offend him, don't worry - he's made it clear that he only reads the first sentence of my posts.

Peace,
Kevin

[brwnhornet59]

Man!!!! Did I miss a good one or what???

[brwnhornet59]

Reg, what ever happened to that idiot?

[Gramps]

Name calling????????

[brwnhornet59]

Fact speaking.

[Gramps]

lol. Careful, he'll come back.

[brwnhornet59]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Double 07]

The analysis of the tune at the beginning of this thread was excellent stuff. This arguing that ensued WOW lol.

Anyway moving up a 1/2 step from F to Gb I like the sound of keeping everything natural over the Gb. All the scale degrees are so close better to spell it out so folks can hear the modulation better. Jobim was a very clever composer coming up with neat clever modulations. A fun tune