-
Besides, I thought that picture was kinda funny.
-
01-05-2015 10:54 AM
-
Just to verify who is in consensus with your "correctness"...
Did you go to Julliard or did you go to Berkelee ?
If what you say is the One and only correct method...
Then why do we mark 7 and not b7 in dominant chords But always mark Maj7 ?
It must seem pretty inconsistent to correctness in your perfect world.
Personally I always write all the intervals out when I have to describe a scale, because I know there are different methods, and it avoids all confusion.
But also because that's how I learned intervals and modes +20 years ago.
Besides beeing obsessed with intervals and naming intervals and functions of every chordprogression and melody I heard,
I went to a school then, where we learned to differenciate the gregorian modes a.o. by the intervals contained.
And in every theory class we had to sing the modes by ear from a given note.
Bottom line is not to get caught in absolute idealistic correctness, because it won't help the music.
Just learn it by heart and adapt when you meet people who speak a slightly different language.Last edited by vhollund; 01-05-2015 at 11:53 AM.
-
3 ways to memorise a scale :
By
- its contained intervals
- how it differs from the pure minor or major scale
- by its construction step wise in half, whole, m3...
I would never cry 'Incorrect' if someone could name a 4th method
On the contrary
The individual imaginary landscapes of a person is part of what make him unique.
And as long as you can adapt...Last edited by vhollund; 01-05-2015 at 12:21 PM.
-
We are not talking about scales, modes, keys, or chords. One conceptual building block at a time when teaching fundamentals please.
-
Seems like most responders so far read your subject line but not your post, so may have misunderstood your question.
Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
The reason people often write or say "#5" instead of "Augmented 5th" is mostly for convenience or perhaps sloppiness. "Augmented 5th" is the technically correct term for the interval C to G#. But on the bandstand it's easier and quicker to say #5. It's also easier to write #5 on paper, and it takes less room on the page.
The same is true for your other examples. E.g., it's a little easier to say or write "b3" than "minor 3rd".
However, you should understand that some intervals have yet other names. For example, in modern western music the C to G# interval is the same as the C to Ab interval, so can be called "minor 6th" or "b6".
Finally, if you invert an interval (i.e., move the lower note to the top), you've changed the interval, so it obviously needs a different name. For the example above, Ab to C can be called a "major 3rd" or "3rd".Last edited by KirkP; 01-05-2015 at 12:37 PM.
-
A minor third is a third too
-
True. So another factor in naming intervals is the context. For example, if you're on the bandstand playing in a minor key and someone says to play the 3rd, they'll usually mean the "minor 3rd". But they might mean they "major 3rd", so it's sloppy. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
-
I would think the OP gets it... the distance between Two Tones, and the spelling or name of the interval can different names from different applications or references etc...
But we are on a jazz guitar sight, and when the topic move on to different discussions it doesn't hurt, usually helps. Not all classic musical terminology works with Jazz, usually it misses much of what might be going on. I'm not saying playing jazz from a traditional approach is wrong.... but there are also terms for that approach....
It's also helpful to hear and understand... other uses of terminology, even if they are incorrect, generally the point is the music, not the language talking about it.
-
From this answer I can assume you didn't go to either of the 2 schools to which you so arrogantly make reference. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
As Reg points out, the actual practicality when wanting to play music, is what will decide what is correct or not.Last edited by vhollund; 01-05-2015 at 02:43 PM.
-
Just to verify who is in consensus with your "correctness"... Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Did you go to Julliard or did you go to Berkelee ?
If what you say is the One and only correct method...
Then why do we mark 7 and not b7 in dominant chords But always mark Maj7 ?
It must seem pretty inconsistent to correctness in your perfect world.
Personally I always write all the intervals out when I have to describe a scale, because I know there are different methods, and it avoids all confusion.
But also because that's how I learned intervals and modes +20 years ago.
Besides beeing obsessed with intervals and naming intervals and functions of every chordprogression and melody I heard,
I went to a school then, where we learned to differenciate the gregorian modes a.o. by the intervals contained.
And in every theory class we had to sing the modes by ear from a given note.
Bottom line is not to get caught in absolute idealistic correctness, because it won't help the music.
Just learn it by heart and ADAPT when you meet people who speak a slightly different language.
Try not to be a d*** about semantics
Keep your eyes on the music
Last edited by vhollund; 01-05-2015 at 01:38 PM.
-
This is a fundamentals topic. If one learns their intervals cold (major minor diminished augmented and perfect) they can then understand any chord's construction.
After learning half-steps and whole steps one can deal with scales. After learning intervals one can learn chords as entities unto themselves (Maj7, mi7, Dom7, etc. ) and don't need to go back to think about intervals, at least not constantly.
So before learning chords, the first order of business is to learn your intervals (1) by concept, (2) by spelling on the staff, and (3) by ear.
One thing at a time, first things first, Rome wasn't built in a day, etc., etc.
Beginners need drivers Ed., not the inside info on winning the Daytona 500 or Monaco Grand Prix.Last edited by fumblefingers; 01-05-2015 at 04:40 PM.
-
I just went to my old "Grove dictionary of music" and "larousse de la musique" (yeah I still use books) to read the entries on "interval". It is quite astonishing that most of it is about "ratios" and "distance". The Larousse start the entrée by "The interval is a distance between two sounds". So it IS a distance.
Both source spend a lot of time on ratios and partials (overtones).
It is mainly calculated in a ratio between what would be a unison octave and how much would you need to "cut the string" to get the other sound.
So from what I just red: the names are given for convenience, it is a practical art after all, and they refer to their relationship to the lower note (being the fundamental) and the high one being one of the overtones.
This said the interesting this is you get 1 normal (LDLM term) name and 1 deformed (LDLM again) name for an interval.
Major and perfect are normal names, rest is "deformed" (thats the interesting word).
Now why would it be called "deformed"?
because in comparison to the "normal" name, the "deformed" variations will be a more remote partial in the overtone serie.
That simple.
I found that interesting, maybe not useful except in a conversation with folks who debate about the essence of the interval
-
That is interesting, I checked my New Groves etc... hasn't changes, the New Groves.... of Jazz doesn't have much.
So we now have the history of intervals, the classic def. of interval, the out of the closet Jazz versions... and of course all the incorrect usage of the term.... what's next, maybe some more intervalic art work etc... I enjoyed fumblefingers pic.
Sorry, but music can get a little boring.
-
-
I like that picture. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
So how many posts does it take to create a cluster?
-
Come on, try to show a little restraint, so that the thread is still readable for others.
On topic :
Minor 3rd interval/m3/b3 :
1) Term for a physical/sonical relative distance of three half steps,
between two notes:
"A minor third"
2) The same physical distance of one note in relation to the root of a chord, a scale, or a tonality, refered to as :
"The minor third"
3) Notation
When we refer to a written interval, it is always in reference to a consistent written distance.
Ex. Thirds :
...which can very well differ from the actual physical/sonical distance between the 2 notes.
Ex.
An augmented second (written) is an interval that is sonically equivalent to a minor third :
Last edited by vhollund; 01-06-2015 at 04:35 AM.
-
The topic is exhausted now. Nice to see that you are now focusing on a discussion of intervals instead of scales for the Getting Started/Fundamentals audience though.
Your post has one error and one omission:
1. Once again, we don't have flat intervals (b3). By the same token we don't have sharp or natural intervals. That's short hand or abbreviation. Best to leave that for a discussion of chords. We have:
Major,
Minor,
Augmented,
Diminished,
Perfect
and octave displacement alternatives - Compound intervals.
(we also have double augmented and double diminished)
2. Your last example is correct but is not labeled - these are called Enharmonic intervals.
In summary, excellent, up to date textbooks written by distinguished pedagogues (both Jazz and Traditional) are available to all from Amazon. We should refer to their well established, broadly accepted foundations unless we have new discovery. Doing otherwise confuses the issue. There isn't any new discovery that adds to the literature here.Last edited by fumblefingers; 01-06-2015 at 10:34 AM.
-
Something that used to confuse me a lot - the Augmented Sixth.
This is an interval in classical theory that crops up a lot. It happens when you do this type of chromatic motion in two voices:
A Ab G against F F# G - the augmented sixth interval is F# against Ab.
The interval is the same size as the minor seventh, but has a different name because of the way its written. It's use leads to a class of chords called the augmented sixth chords. In chord symbols we would probably write them like this (in C):
Ab7 (German sixth)
Ab7 (no 5th) (Italian sixth)
Ab7#11 (French sixth)
These chords can move most commonly to G7, but also to C as both chords have the note G in (I suppose Em is also a possibility)
These chords are in fact extremely common in jazz, but they are usually understood to be tritone substitution of D7 ---> G7.
However the direct move from Ab7 to C crops up an awful lot in tunes esp. pre war tunes (it seems to me) -
Out of Nowhere, Mood Indigo, I'm Beginning to See the Light, Lullabye of the Leaves, Darn That Dream and Just Friends for example and isn't easily understood from the perspective of ii-V-I's and tritone subs. So I've started to use the classical understanding, although I suppose you could just as well say 'Ab7 --> C is a thing' and leave it at that.
Anyway it used to seem rather long winded and pedantic but I've come to appreciate the rigour of classical theory. Jazz Harmonic theory (in so much as there is really something separate to Harmony called 'Jazz Harmony' which some would dispute) is a little hazy on functional stuff. It's coming from a very different place.
-
Originally Posted by vhollund
Yes, why do intervals have two names?
This is the internet and it happens here a lot, once a thread goes past one or two pages of replies they start going other directions, insults occur, and generally start falling apart. You might want to start a new thread to dive into a topic.
-
Well maybe true yes... but the forum is what we make it,
we set the standard.
And we choose how
Personally I think it's fine that a topic can expand, once ofcourse, the main question is answered.
But it can get too selfpromoting and derailed, too. To the point where it is a detriment to equal conversation and readability.
The first thing I said in this thread:
》Minor 3rd, has the name b3 too because b3 is is shorter and more practical in written form.
I should have added
And simply because a large number of people use b3 for m3
But I assumed that the OP had already come to this conclusion, by himself, since the question was not to 'if' but to 'why'.Last edited by vhollund; 01-06-2015 at 01:45 PM.
-
@Fumblefinger
When it comes to language, I have the attitude that what is largely used, understood and accepted, is go.
And b3 is largely used for m3.
Books and dictionaries tend to fall behind when it comes to new words and uses.
I understand that you prefer refering only to books, and I'm not going to 'correct' you on that.
But my approach is to adapt.
As long as the language as tool, doesn't get in the way of understanding, I prefer accepting new uses and keep my eyes on the music.
If you want to be the policeman of semantic correctness that's your choice. :-)
Personally I think it not usefull, and a waste of time and space to derail, to what equivalent the different pronouncations of "tomatos".
But it is also a huge task if you want to tell all the people using b3 for m3, that it's wrong.
I don't envy you the job ;-)Last edited by vhollund; 01-06-2015 at 01:37 PM.
-
No it's just that those abbreviations are not widely used in an educational treatise of intervals, nor are they needed. That's what confused the OP.
That said, abbreviations using accidentals - ARE needed in chord symbols for sure, at least for the 5th, 9th, 11th, 13th.
i don't recall seeing a b2 or b3 in a chord symbol in band charts, fake books, or other printed jazz music so I'm not certain what wide use you're referring to.
ciao.
-
The Internet
I've have rarely seen b2 in partitions, not b3 ... ever.
Chord terminology doesn't vary much no.
m3 is refered to as #9 when the major third is also present
The reason for that is probably that the sound of the major third is stronger In the determination of minor/major, and that the minor third therefore looses the denominative status of third.
And when no major third is present the chord simply recieves the nomination 'minor' or 'min', or 'm', or '-'
b2 is usually refered to as b9Last edited by vhollund; 01-06-2015 at 03:06 PM.
-
I've found from way too many years of experience... that when labeling, talking or notating music... there are usually two reasons for what I choose,
The 1st is to reflect what I want musically, I want the notation or how I spell etc... to reflect what the reference is for the Music. And many times I would adjust that to be understandable for different groups of People.
The 2nd is for performance... how to make it easy for musicians to read the notation. And of course that can change with different instruments, different levels of performers and even different parts of the world.
It's very difficult to get classically trained musicians to perform jazz in jazz styles... beyond the standards from shows, musicals and film etc...they just don't understand and feel much of what performing jazz is... From rhythmic and harmonic aspects to even simple articulations, ornamentation, accents and slurs can be almost impossible.
My point is when one forces established Common Practice Period understandings, terminology and notational practice as the only language.... your going to miss much of what jazz is about.
Jazz encompasses Common Practice Period understandings, terminology and notations... it's western musics basic reference... but not as the only source.
I would be interested as to what are the lists of reference texts that you use fumblefingers, the traditional are fairly easy, but the jazz texts... that would be interesting. Generally with jazz there's still some thinking required.
-
Easy,
The Jazz Language, Dan Haerle - used at world renowned Jazz Studies program at UNT
Harmony 1 - Barrie Nettles, Berklee College of Music (google to find all 4 semesters online, downloadable fo nothin. You're welcome folks, not you Reg you went there for heaven's sake)
and to keep things interesting,
Jazzology ( can't remember author names, not a college text at any notable program as far as I know)
in this book the correct interval types are taught - and then the use of accidentals is explored as "shorthand" and "abbreviations". The motivation? Referencing chords and scales. In other words, not needed to understand intervals when the discussion is on intervals alone.
as an aside, Berklee has a cool online set of entry exam short tests that a saw yesterday or so. They briefly quiz a person on intervals. Guess what? Conventional descriptions are required.
i don't know why I have to over make a simple point. The shorthand symbols are not needed to understand intervals. Further, most good quality sheet music uses reasonable symbology for chord symbols to boot. No b2, b3, #4, b7, #7 BS.
have I seen some goofy charts by "jazz arrangers" too? Yeah. I had to read a chart of notated chords which were effed up, but the real joke was that the arranger added little block string and dot diagrams above the stave - like a guitar book- because he thought that's what was called for regarding the guitar. And the diagrams? Nonsense symbols made up out of thin air. Meaningless dots and lines. Poor guy.
with the Information Age and ubiquitous jazz studies programs we have new generations of reasonably informed jazzers coming up. One would hope that some of the hack habits of the past would begin to evaporate. In other words, reasonable nomenclature is found widely.
btw - I have as much jazz ed. as traditional. I think what the well published schools put out works just fine, Berklee being the obvious example.Last edited by fumblefingers; 01-07-2015 at 02:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
Melody between melody
Today, 03:25 AM in Chord-Melody