gjbch -> RE: Music theory (Jun. 23 2010 18:01:02)
|
quote:
Yep, i actually have and always wondered about this. Why is it the circle of fifths and not of seconds, thirds, etc.. what makes the V-I resolution more special than others? If there is a reason at all, besides the fact that we "are used to it". This is a great question, and pretty complex. There are many explanations for this, some of them very dense, but the simplest way to put it is because of the leading tone (the seventh scale degree in a major scale, or the raised seventh in a minor scale). In C major, the leading tone is the note B – this note has the strongest need/desire to resolve up to C, and if it doesn’t it could sound unresolved. This is something composers work with a lot: it’s fun to play with expectations like this. Try playing an ascending C major scale on the guitar, and end the scale on a B. It’ll sound unresolved, like we were just left hanging. This is what I mean by having a strong need for the note B to resolve up to C. So if you analyze a V – I progression note-by-note you’ll see other similar relationships, albeit less powerful, that add to the overall sense of resolution going from V or V7 to I. A V7 – I resolution in C major: G B D F – C E G The G is a common tone, creating continuity between the two chords. The B resolves up to a C. The D resolves down to a C (some people argue it resolves up to an E, but I personally don’t hear it that way. This is rather subjective, though). The F resolves to the E. So each of the notes of the G7 chord want to resolve to each of the notes in a C chord, creating a very powerful harmonic relationship. But like I said, the leading tone – tonic relationship (B resolving to C) is actually what makes it such a strong resolution. A diminished 7th chord (B D F A in the key of C major) can be substituted for a V7 chord. Notice they have all but one note in common – the G is now an A. So actually the vii dim – I relationship is nowadays just as powerful as the V-I, and sounds much less corny imo. The reason ii chords don’t tend to want to resolve to I is because: D F A – C E G There is no leading tone in a ii chord. If anything, the ii wants to resolve to the V: D F A - G B D They have D in common, the F resolves up to G and the A down to G (or up to B). The reason iii chords don’t tend to want to resolve to I is because: E G B – C E G Notice they have 2 out of three notes in common – the only difference is the note C or B. This means they have very similar harmonic function, and you can actually use them as substitutions (ie: substitute an E minor chord for a C major chord, or vice-versa). When chords are harmonically this similar, there is a sense of harmonic continuity or harmonic extension (the harmonic function is prolonged) rather than a sense of harmonic change (like a resolution.) The circle of fifths is just a handy shortcut for figuring out how many sharps or flats each key has. It happens that keys separated by a fifth (ie: the key of C major or G major) have all but one note in common (in this case, F or F#). quote:
Just red this, and a bit more explanation would be nice: "Also, be aware that music theory goes far beyond simply understanding common-practice tonal music. Since flamenco isn't strictly tonal, I would suggest beginning with the basics before jumping into tonal, modal or post-tonal theory, otherwise you might get confused because it might not line up exactly with the music you're analyzing." A solea, for example, is played in E Phrygian with a sharp 3rd (E F G# A B C D E). While they are the exact same notes as a melodic A-minor scale (A B C D E F G# A), they are not synonymous! We would have to analyze the piece in the context of E Phrygian mode rather than do a tonal analysis based around A minor. The “tonic” chord in this case is E major – this is when the solea is at rest, when there is relatively little harmonic tension, when everything has resolved (use your ears). If you were analyzing this tonally (in the context of A minor rather than E Phrygian), you would say that the E major chord is the dominant, and so wants to resolve to the A, which is definitely not the case when you hear a solea. This would be an example of how a tonal analysis falls short of what is actually occurring. In this sense, a solea is not a tonal piece of music, but rather somewhere between tonal and modal. Taking it one step further, the “dominant” function in a solea would be the F major (or even F maj7) chord, because this harmony has a very strong tendency to want to resolve down to E. People would never call F the dominant because it would be far too confusing, but from a purely practical and functional harmonic perspective it serves the same exact function as a V harmony. Notice the half-step between E and F acts somewhat like a reverse leading-tone in tonal music. The note F resolving down to E is what makes this such a powerful harmonic relationship. Try playing a descending E phrygian scale and end on F - it will sound just as unresolved as the C major scale ending on B. But on the other hand, Alegrias are usually more tonal than not, and analyzing them tonally would work just fine.
|
|
|
|