Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Nov. 20 2019 13:56:58)
|
quote:
So in flamenco we have an upper leading tone resolving down to root, whereas in classical a lower leading tone resolving up to root. That by itself is bound to create differences in how things sound and thus differences in harmonic function and typical progressions as notated by scale degree roman numerals. Correct, for TRIADS. The major 7th II chord contains also the root, or common tone. But you need to now review the Aug6 Beato video. The dominant 7th version of the II chord is the exact same concept harmonically as the Aug6 practice. That being you misspell the flat 7 note for the sake of VOICE LEADING, that in fact advances UPWARD to the root the same as V7-I does. F7-E in solea for example, the Eb is respelled D#. In classical harmonic analysis you simple spell the chord from that note (D#FA), pretend it is always in first inversion (So F is in the bass, hence you hear the Aug6 interval), then decide if it has 5th or not in the voicing (Italian vs German), or the #11 in place of the 5th (French) and name it as such. For flamenco I argue we can simply take this practice and expand it to include the Spanish6th, which unlike the others takes on several different voicings, including those others or mixing them together, or allowing the leading tone into the bass, etc....AND....this is the important distinction... for FLAMENCO specific applications, allow it to function NOT as a secondary dominant, but as the PRIMARY cadence. It happens often enough IMO, even going back to early flamenco levante forms, or with simply the melody of the cante, that it can be used as away to bridge the divide between classical theory (only major or minor key analysis), vs what we have going on in flamenco. The simple jazzy view is tritone sub. B7-E is changed to F7-E. You have common tone B natural with added #11, and leading tone D#, PLUS the C natural becomes the Upper leading that a B7(b9) uses, etc. Going back to classical analysis, this tritone sub concept would also legitimize analyzing solea as in the key of E major OR E minor, but like I said it gets messy because you have all the F natural to constantly deal with either as tritone subs or simply accidentals, meaning it misses a bigger picture. quote:
So, do we have to try to find the typical classical progressions within the flamenco chord sequences, or are we free to explore what sounds like the various harmonic functions, but in flamenco context, and write these up as the flamenco progressions corresponding to each classical one. Or is it an addition rather than a replacement, so that the classical ones still apply, but we are adding unique flamenco ones. The progressions are no different. The V-I normal thing happens in cante all the time, constantly. The case of V7/iv vs I7 has to do with the phrasing. The reason flamenco is also unique, outside of the harmony alone, is the remate or closing rhythmic statement. So a closing falseta that is done on the E chord, need not be seen as the V if the next falseta or whatever happens to start right on A minor. But certain phrases might begin on the E chord then move to the A minor later. Such as the opening of the cante por solea of frijones. It is a clear case for V/iv moving to iv. Next we have V/VI to VI...because we are not changing keys in the cambio, it goes G7 to C but we are in the middle of the verse...it’s not a key change. It’s a secondary dominant function in the bigger picture. The primary cadence is next F to E. If guitar plays the walking bass falseta from A minor right away after the conclusion of the letra, no need to look back at the resolve of the cante as the V leading to the falseta. If we were to re name it all in A minor, it still works out but the ending of cante and falsetas hang on V...and this is simply showing a distinction needs to be made between A minor and por Arriba IMO. So hopefully that also addresses your other points about frequency of V to I normally occurring in Flamenco phrygian forms vs other music. I used to point to siguiriyas as being more modal, less harmonic, but lately the singers like having the cambio when singing for baile, used as next to last phrase accompaniment , because it signals the llamada is a compas away. It’s not really “new”, I noticed Gerardo nunez do this for Indio Gitano as well. quote:
Also, don't por medio and por arriba have the same characteristics, apart from what the tonic note is - so we can just say "in flamenco key" - either por medio or por arriba - when talking about harmonic relationships? Yes, though they are guitar specific due to timbral differences. But using the terms por medio, por Arriba, por granaina, por Taranta, por minera etc....in addition to being guitar specific, they also are loaded with info that pertains to the circle of 5ths. Meaning we can allow for these forms to take on a special place on the wheel in regards to key signature, family of chords, scales etc etc. In other words a Bach fugue we see modulate from A minor to nearby E minor, and later D minor via simple addition of accidentals. Same case can be made for modulation between Granaina to Malagueña type phrases or the other way toward Taranta. And we also see this done with only one or two accidentals at a time in the flamenco guitar repertoire. Also parallel movements can take advantage of these extra form names. For example going from Por Arriba to E major is a jump of accidentals...but E major shares the key signature of minera, so this device comes in handy at times. I guess for a piano player, “flamenco key” is good enough for understanding what’s happening.
|
|
|
|