-
Hi guys
I'm working on Bach Chorales to improve my voice leading and harmony. The inversions notation system used by classical musicians is a real PITA for me. I understand it, but the abbreviation system is so confusing for me, so I decided to analyze them with modern chord symbols.
Did you experience that? Is there any down point analyzing them with modern chord symbols? Is there any advantage using the old system?Last edited by rodolfoguitarra; 01-10-2024 at 06:00 AM.
-
01-10-2024 05:03 AM
-
01-10-2024, 05:50 AM #2joelf Guest
Why not? They, including the Maestro, were thinking a whole different way then. And figured bass was their 'lead sheet'. As long as you understand what's happening harmonically who cares how you got to it? But you do need the Roman numeral system to get to where the progressions are going. So combine it with modern chord names if that's easier for you.
Ex: (and I'm not sure about the 'stacked numbers' indicating inversions. Been a long, long time). If you want to write, say, the symbols D Min/F E half-diminished Eb 7 b5, etc. instead of the inversion numbers do it! As long as you pin the inner voice movements in the bass and the V of Vs, etc. no one's gonna shoot you.
I wrote modern chords in on Chopin's Prelude #4, b/c that's the language I understand. And I wanted to see the harmonic scheme's similarity to Jobim's Insensatez. There are some wild changes in that one! (the Prelude, not Insensatez). And I seriously doubt Chopin was thinking like a modern songwriter (even though he was one of the great earlier songwriters). But a classically trained teacher who also played jazz had me analyze a Little Prelude in D Minor the old way. So I did, and that understanding was helpful too.
Either way it's understanding movement, irregardless of nomenclature, that counts...
-
The old system like you say is the best one for me.
Originally Posted by rodolfoguitarra
-
Learn the Roman numerals and figured-bass system while you go. It's the language people use when discussing this stuff. Naming a chord as Bb major only tells you it could be called that. Naming it as IVb or 6/3 above a D bass informs you that it is in the key of F and is in first-inversion form. Honestly, once you've analysed four or five chorales this way, you'll realise the value. There's a reason they did it. Playing figured bass in a baroque ensemble was the best musical education I ever had,
-
01-10-2024, 10:11 AM #5joelf Guest
Not sure if old JS used them, but the whole Italian/German 6th thing has faded into the cobwebs of my noggin since City College, from which I graduated in like '88. We had one prof, Persky, a prick everyone hated but a good theorist. He brought in Lionel Ritchie's Hello as an example of one of these, let's say in D Minor. On the bridge, the measure after '...cause I haven't got a clue...' is like Eb maj 7/A 7 b9 (2 beats each). So he said it was one of those (while snickering, b/c he seemed to think it was a crap tune and lame attempt by a mediocrity. B.S.! I like Hello and play it all the time. Hip changes and melody).
OK, eggheads: What kind of 6th is that? And what theory book can I learn about them in?
Also, I have a hard time understanding minor harmony generally. I think if you go up the scale diatonically in C Minor the ii chord would be (in 4 voices) a D half-diminished. And the V is a G 7th chord. But wouldn't that infer a harmonic minor scale, usually associated, at least in jazz, with a V 7 chord? So what's the iii, Eb Maj 7? I guess IV is F minor 7? What's VI then? In major you have an E natural. So I guess it's A half-diminished b/c of the Eb---what Monk and Diz called 'C Minor 6, 6th in the bass. But what entire tune is derived from only that scale? Not Bebop, b/c it goes elsewhere on the bridge. Not Round Midnight, which travels everywhere. (I bet Monk could give a crap about analyzing his tunes. He wrote what he heard, period. Amen to that.) Tin Tin Deo wanders too. Actually it was mostly written by Chano Pozo, from a Santaria chant. Gillespie wrote only the bridge. That one wanders too much to pin as minor. But I bet the chant itself had no chords.
Also so many tunes vamp on i/ IV 7---say, A Minor/ D9. So that's either a Dorian or the other one with a #7, I forget what it's called---maybe 'real melodic minor'? So how does this fit into the diatonic scheme? Are we in A Minor or C? I guess it depends where the piece goes. Like Oya Come Va is definitely a minor tune, never leaves those 2 chords. And Corcovado, one of my all-time faves, is sometimes in C, sometimes F, sometimes A Minor. I suspect it's mainly C, b/c it ends there (but on A Minor 6th---also driving me nutso since it has a G #). Then there's that scale that has a b7 going one way and # 7 the other, supposedly to make it easier for singers back in the day (melodic minor?).
Chuck Wayne and Barry Harris didn't go with modal names. Chuck would call a D Dorian a 'D minor 7th scale'. (And don't let' even talk about Phrygian. I probably use it, but am clueless to understand how). So probably the OP has a point. Usage (especially modern jazz usage) should tell on the names of things, not some system from centuries ago.
Maybe it's a case of rules made to be broken? I like that idea. Like alterations that 'bend' things a little to create variety. (Like if you start of with that A Min 7/D9 vamp you still could be in C if the tune goes there, despite the F# in the 2nd chord).
I mean I personally don't lose any sleep and am mostly an intuitive ear player. But I teach and get frustrated. I say 'Minor harmony is different than major---then stop there b/c I don't know how to further explain or demonstrate it...Last edited by joelf; 01-10-2024 at 10:55 AM.
-
Figured bass? Cantus Firmus? It was such a pain to try to translate and figure (ha ha) it out, but once I saw harmonic movement as originating from a moving bass line and realized that inversions were the key to smooth voice leading, it started me on seeing all harmony not from the symbol of the chord, but from the voices within the chord and hearing roots moving internally.
Then I got turned on to and turned on by the Almanacs.
Game changer.
But admittedly a steep learning curve at the outset.
There was a time when I was introduced to Ben Monder's music. Then I got to know him. I remember phoning him up one day and talking about what we were working on. He said "I'm working mostly on Bach Chorales. I read through one a day. It's really changing the way I see harmony."
There was something really useful in that advice. What it is is up to you.
-
Ted Greene liked chords and their names..Chorale ideas..
https://tedgreene.com/images/lessons...1972-08-15.pdf
the diagrams are from Teds site members..below them is how Ted wrote this kind of stuff
-
I have no doubt that Roman Numeral Analysis is useful.
My whole point is: what is the advantage for a jazz musician analysing for instance a chord as V6 instead of V/3rd (or G/B to be clear)?
-
Well, if it's a dominant, you will anticipate the motion and you will know where your B is, you will know there is an only B, it's on the bass an nobody doubles it. Originally Posted by rodolfoguitarra
C- G/B C/Bb F/A F-/Ab G
Some will know what it is.
That notation looks like a mess for me, with a traditional notation it's clear.
-
http://bachchoraleharmony.com/wp-con..._Preview-4.pdf
This book uses the two systems. In the intro the author talks about it.
-
Cool but there are too many symbols, imagine a Real Book full of tabs, it's what I feel when I read it. Originally Posted by rodolfoguitarra
It's better beginning with something simpler.
I'm sorry it's in French !
http://jacques.duphly.free.fr/Basse_...orand_Vol1.pdf
You also need a keyboard.
-
A curious fact is that Bach has not used the Roman numeral system.
-
When I was a student, the exam was about playing "une basse chiffrée" on the keyboard, believe me there was no Roman numbers at all ! Originally Posted by rodolfoguitarra
Now I'm older and kind of experimented I feel it's easier than playing a whole written score when you know how it works.
-
Figures. Originally Posted by Lionelsax
(Sorry couldn’t resist.)
-
I would recommend looking at the two part counterpoint between melody and bass first. When Bach taught students, this was apparently the way he did it. He would ask them to write a bunch of different basses for the same chorale. Originally Posted by rodolfoguitarra
Pay close attention to the counterpoint between bass and melody. Schoenberg called the bass ‘the second melody’ and I always like that.
The inner voices could then be examined.
I think you’d learn a lot from analysing with chord symbols. Ted Greene certainly did!
However, if you want to access the old sources directly, Bach and his contemporaries used the figured bass system.
Here’s a cheat sheet from one his students notes
http://normanschmidt.net/scores/bach...bass_rules.pdf
may as well learn from the man himself?
It may take a little while to learn to read figured bass, but I think it’s worth it. It’s very compact, for one. I occasionally translate c18 sources into jazz notation, but I haven’t done any of this stuff yet.
-
I play a little Bach Chorale each day as a warm up and bought an 8 string to do it properly.
This is the main profile photo from my private YouTube channel. Roman numerals will get you from A to B but many roads lead to Rome....choose your favourite or explore them all.
-
I would not use Roman Numerals, Fundamental Bass Theory or even chord symbols on Bach (or on most classical music, period), you will miss a lot of crucial information, and more importantly Bach himself didn't think that way. That sort of theory is not how classical composers used to think, they used traditional figured bass (like continuo) and counterpoint. Heck, they didn't even use the term "tonality", which was invented in the 19th century.
If you really want to understand how he was thinking, I'd recommend someone like Professor Derek Remes, who's doctoral thesis was on Bach's teaching pedagogy: https://derekremes.com/teaching/hist...improvisation/
-
I love Bach having been "forced" to listen to Bach (and Mozart, Beethoven etc.) already prenatally. But when I hear/see the words "Bach chorales" in English I always get reminded of MC Cannonball ...
-
Derek Remes da man. Originally Posted by humphreysguitar
His website is full of amazing resources too.
I tend to go with Michael Koch’s view that there’s nothing wrought with using modern theory where its useful - and it is sometimes. However when it comes down to it, it’s all about the counterpoint. It is, after all, Bach.
Reply With Quote
Body Dimensions for a 1920s Gibson L5?
Today, 07:47 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos