![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
I've removed the sentence which was above the table "In other words, only the progressions below will affirm the tonic, any other progressions indicate a different tonic." I don't think it's true. It's difficult to "affirm" anything with just two chords, and certainly the progression III-VI, say, doesn't in itself "affirm the tonic" any more or less than the progression VI-III, say.
I have problems with the table itself, too, but I'll leave that for now. -- Camembert
Actually, I think this page should be merged into and then redirect to chord progression. Hyacinth 16:05, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Done. Hyacinth 16:50, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I hav a few things to say about how hard it is to read these roman numerals when this stuff can be written on a staff. When I've figured out who or what piece I'll use as an example, then I'll write numbers on the score and compare equivalent ratios like this: 3:2 is 12:8 or 15:10
in an example of microtonal musicology (or mechanical rendition). The work is harder than I expected. Sometimes I wonder why anyone bothers with harmony, then I notice that sometimes harmony is like an echo from the immediate past -- a note is held on one line, but the harmony it makes changes.
I don't typically hold notes in my own works. I'm sure that I've done it, but it's something that I avoid to the point where I've chucked a lot of work with repetition. And, of course, I think such work otta hav a big name behind the orijinal score without the numbers.
Any sujjestions would be welcome. It should be a short piece, because my ear for music will come into play. If someone says that it sounds inferior to the orijinal, then I hav to revise my work.
In any case, when this work is done (and I hav confidence that other people are more capable of it than I am), I think this page should begin as being quite distinct from "chord progression". Potentially, I just don't know where to look. BrewJay ( talk) 14:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC) BrewJay ( talk) 14:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I've been trying to find formal discussion of the following chord progression:
within stanza |
|||||
Examples include:
I'd appreciate any information about the following:
In addition to posting your response here, please post a copy on my talk page. Thanks!
![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
I've removed the sentence which was above the table "In other words, only the progressions below will affirm the tonic, any other progressions indicate a different tonic." I don't think it's true. It's difficult to "affirm" anything with just two chords, and certainly the progression III-VI, say, doesn't in itself "affirm the tonic" any more or less than the progression VI-III, say.
I have problems with the table itself, too, but I'll leave that for now. -- Camembert
Actually, I think this page should be merged into and then redirect to chord progression. Hyacinth 16:05, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Done. Hyacinth 16:50, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I hav a few things to say about how hard it is to read these roman numerals when this stuff can be written on a staff. When I've figured out who or what piece I'll use as an example, then I'll write numbers on the score and compare equivalent ratios like this: 3:2 is 12:8 or 15:10
in an example of microtonal musicology (or mechanical rendition). The work is harder than I expected. Sometimes I wonder why anyone bothers with harmony, then I notice that sometimes harmony is like an echo from the immediate past -- a note is held on one line, but the harmony it makes changes.
I don't typically hold notes in my own works. I'm sure that I've done it, but it's something that I avoid to the point where I've chucked a lot of work with repetition. And, of course, I think such work otta hav a big name behind the orijinal score without the numbers.
Any sujjestions would be welcome. It should be a short piece, because my ear for music will come into play. If someone says that it sounds inferior to the orijinal, then I hav to revise my work.
In any case, when this work is done (and I hav confidence that other people are more capable of it than I am), I think this page should begin as being quite distinct from "chord progression". Potentially, I just don't know where to look. BrewJay ( talk) 14:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC) BrewJay ( talk) 14:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I've been trying to find formal discussion of the following chord progression:
within stanza |
|||||
Examples include:
I'd appreciate any information about the following:
In addition to posting your response here, please post a copy on my talk page. Thanks!