# Superlogical Students!



## om30tools (Apr 10, 2011)

Hey everybody, I am deep into my self-induced studies of orchestration theory.
In 2.4 years, I have gone through the rudiments of music, Melody in songwriting, Harmony, advanced Harmony, and Composition & counterpoint. (And ofcourse, I studied every damn track I was addicted to :roll: 

I'm finally reaching the end of my planned studies - Orchestration (I would like to study texture, but I dont know any books that deal with the specifics of texture :s guess I'll have to catalogue techniques from tracks and give my own names to them :s)

Every text/book/analysis I have approached and conducted, I have written condensed notes in extreme shorthand organised SUPERLOGICALLY. 

I was wondering, who else amkes notes on theory? Because I can't ever imagine re-approaching the books/reference manuals EVER AGAIN :( It would be like having to re-learn how to walk all... over... again (I've actually done this too sadly :s)

So who else is a superlogical-organised- O..C..D(ecorated) student, or WAS at some point in their life?


----------



## windshore (Apr 10, 2011)

I'd only make a couple of comments about what you've posed here.

1. "Texture" is one way to categorize label one of many tools in orchestration but "timbre" might really be the right way to describe and research what your interested in.

2. At some point in the learning process, study of technique and categorizations becomes less powerful than real experience. 

There's a good chance that you might find something or someone who will offer to teach you just about anything but to paraphrase Shakespeare; All true knowledge comes from the senses.


----------



## bryla (Apr 10, 2011)

I am superlogically organised and I've just put Henry Brant's book 'Textures and Timbres' down. That was a great read!


----------



## caseyjames (Apr 10, 2011)

I would be love to check out any super condensed theory notes you would be willing to let some flutter out into the world.

As for texture are you looking for something more specific than orchestration? The pallet of sound's and all of the post modern production inflections that suggest things like era, medium etc, have made generalized studies on texture/timbre obsolete, or at least limited to the scope of an era other than our own. Useful in many ways but hardly a 'super logical' approach to a low level understanding of timbre.

Perhaps you might look to psycho acoustics for a more generalized understanding of how we perceive sound?

A logical approach to timbre would take into account all of the numerical details that we have available today. Overtone structure or each instrument (or of generalized tonal sound) in each register and dynamic range and how they change over time, properties of the room and positioning, artifacts of the recording process and understanding of how those have changed in each generation since we began recording... All of this information is either available or approximated in sufficient models and we certainly have the ability to crunch the numbers.

The complexity is enormous and beyond what anyone who is actually interested in making music, would find acceptable. So instead we have tools to abstract some of it and the rest is fly by night.

Its an art not a science. We are in post modern world and the pursuit of finding logical ideal to sound is no longer on the table. Shitty cassette tape punk is loved like gamelan and baroque 

But yes fluttery notes...


----------



## om30tools (Apr 10, 2011)

Texture is the name I'm using to describe what frequency bands are being used. I wont call this mixing, because I'm talking what combination of sonic bands are being used. Specifically I'm asking myself, is it harsh, is there clear piercing highs and lows, e.g. dry flutes and dry double bass. 
Is this combination changing over time e.g. Harsh Highs & Lows >>>> Dull blankets of ambience, covering the entire frequency range.

It's like when a musician describes a track as 'Piano and Trio Concerto texture' or 'Buzz Leads and low pass filtered Banjos'.

The reason I'm not referring to this type of study as 'Instrument combinations' is because it's not just instruments, but sometimes electronic doublers/helpers (i.e. some acoustic instruments are doubled by electronic bits and glitches).

Thus I choose a wider term - texture.

I've attached a pic of my Aeolian notes. Instead of just writing out all the chords for the harmonic minor like all the harmonic books tend to do, I prefer to see what my natural, melodic minor and 5th mm options. I did this for every popular synthetic scale, mode, scale etc.
Although, this is just the basics of my superlogical focus[/img].

***NB: I realise my Lead Sheet and Figured Bass notation might be inaccurate for some, but this was the esaiest logic I could find for my own satisfaction.***


----------



## bryla (Apr 10, 2011)

btw what does the hats above the numbers mean?


----------



## om30tools (Apr 10, 2011)

bryla @ Sun 10 Apr said:


> btw what does the hats above the numbers mean?



Oh, do you mean the 7th chord abbreviations?


----------



## schatzus (Apr 10, 2011)

So.. is Henry Brant's book 'Textures and Timbres' a worthy read? I thought I had heard of most of the good orcheastration books, but for some reason this one hadn't crossed my path.
(Maybe a sticky with orchestration book suggestions...)


----------



## bryla (Apr 10, 2011)

you write: altered intervals 2 6 7 with hats on. What does the hats mean? I've seen it in some harmony books.

I can recommend Henry Brant's great book as a worthy read for those who have read an Adler type orchestration book and knows about instrumentation and such and is interested in the timbral blend of instruments. I thought I had seen them all but when I stumbled upon it in a store it didn't take me that long to know what I had found! I have already read it and I've had several revelations from it.


----------



## om30tools (Apr 10, 2011)

Oh the ^ symbols denote the degrees of a scale.
e.g. the 6th note of a scale: ^6

and the arrows in front of them denote whether the degree is raised (#) or lowered (b)


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 10, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Sun Apr 10 said:


> Hey everybody, I am deep into my self-induced studies of orchestration theory.
> In 2.4 years, I have gone through the rudiments of music, Melody in songwriting, Harmony, advanced Harmony, and Composition & counterpoint. (And ofcourse, I studied every damn track I was addicted to :roll:
> 
> I'm finally reaching the end of my planned studies - Orchestration (I would like to study texture, but I dont know any books that deal with the specifics of texture :s guess I'll have to catalogue techniques from tracks and give my own names to them :s)
> ...



have u read the pershichetti book of 20th century comp? 
mentions a lot of the type of texture youd get.


----------



## om30tools (Apr 10, 2011)

gsilbers @ Sun 10 Apr said:


> have u read the pershichetti book of 20th century comp?
> mentions a lot of the type of texture youd get.



Yes I read it all last year, made plenty of notes from that book.


----------



## windshore (Apr 11, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ 4/10/2011 said:


> Texture is the name I'm using to describe what frequency bands are being used. I wont call this mixing, because I'm talking what combination of sonic bands are being used. Specifically I'm asking myself, is it harsh, is there clear piercing highs and lows, e.g. dry flutes and dry double bass.
> Is this combination changing over time e.g. Harsh Highs & Lows >>>> Dull blankets of ambience, covering the entire frequency range.



Ok, I thought I knew what you were looking to accomplish, but now I'm totally confused.

Sounds a bit like you're potentially wanting to get into scientific analysis and would benefit from a spectrograph and oscilloscope?

I'm sure that you know the "frequency bands" of any particular combination of notes is going to be significantly different depending on what instruments play them, their relative intonation and specific timbres.


----------



## om30tools (Apr 11, 2011)

Wow, I'm still confusing people?

I'll try to be clearer.
When I study texture I want to know, which range/s of the spectrotone are used (Bass, Tenor, Alto, Soprano, and beyond), I want to know if it's a clear texture or a muddy one, full of glitch fx, or full of muddy pads. Possible the track is entirely Soprano-based.

Does this make sense now?


----------



## Peter Alexander (Apr 11, 2011)

schatzus @ Sun Apr 10 said:


> So.. is Henry Brant's book 'Textures and Timbres' a worthy read? I thought I had heard of most of the good orcheastration books, but for some reason this one hadn't crossed my path.
> (Maybe a sticky with orchestration book suggestions...)



Yes, I have it. But also having the Spectrontone Chart with it helps as Brant's concepts are expressed more as notes then prose statements. I say this meaning that you've done score analysis with the Spectrotone Chart, not just looking at it. 

It's not a reading book. It's a book about doing and the more orchestration you've done, and by that I mean for real instruments, not sound designing an orchestration, then you'll get a lot out of this book. 

You might also want to consider our Professional Orchestration 2A and 2B books where a lot of these combinations have been put together for you with full page score examples from which to analyze and apply.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Apr 11, 2011)

bryla @ Sun Apr 10 said:


> I have already read it and I've had several revelations from it.



The dynamic equations in there are a more refined version of what Koechlin wrote in his books in the 1920s, which BTW, are all in classical French.

Textures here refers to combinations of instruments on a vertical harmony structure and getting them to blend correctly.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Apr 11, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Mon Apr 11 said:


> Wow, I'm still confusing people?
> 
> I'll try to be clearer.
> When I study texture I want to know, which range/s of the spectrotone are used (Bass, Tenor, Alto, Soprano, and beyond), I want to know if it's a clear texture or a muddy one, full of glitch fx, or full of muddy pads. Possible the track is entirely Soprano-based.
> ...



Not quite, and we produce the Spectrotone Chart. Send me a PM so I can understand better what you're asking. The Spectrotone Chart is for instruments, not SATB.


----------



## bryla (Apr 11, 2011)

Peter, I have both your Spectrotone Guide and Henry Brants. Brant pours his lifetime knowledge and experience out in prose and makes it easy to understand.

Arthur Lange's chart is also very easy to understand and the colorcoding was the revelation for me here! I have had a great experience analyzing scores with the chart.

For me they both are must-haves!


----------



## mducharme (Apr 11, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Sun Apr 10 said:


> I've attached a pic of my Aeolian notes. Instead of just writing out all the chords for the harmonic minor like all the harmonic books tend to do, I prefer to see what my natural, melodic minor and 5th mm options. I did this for every popular synthetic scale, mode, scale etc.
> Although, this is just the basics of my superlogical focus[/img].
> 
> ***NB: I realise my Lead Sheet and Figured Bass notation might be inaccurate for some, but this was the esaiest logic I could find for my own satisfaction.***



There is a reason why most of the harmony books do not write out all of these - many of these are little, almost never used. For instance, the diminished form of vi from the ascending melodic minor, almost nobody uses it.

I am also somewhat confused with some aspects of your chart.

For instance, in Aeolian you list III with a parenthesized plus symbol beside it, indicating that it can be augmented. This is quite rare in music up until the 20th century; regardless, it occurs as a result of raising the leading tone in the minor mode which you have taken into consideration by the harmonic minor scale by showing the augmented form there.

Also I am wondering where this subdivision of primary and secondary triads comes from - it does not correspond with any I have seen before, and I have seen many different ones.


----------



## mducharme (Apr 11, 2011)

Another thing - the scale degree alterations you list are not always associated with harmonic events, at least not in Western music. If you look at the minor triads thus:

i, ii-dim, ii7-dim, III, iv, iv7, v, V, V7, VI, VII, vii-dim6, vii-dim7 - common in all eras
bII from phrygian - commonly borrowed in all eras for use in minor
ii, ii7, IV, IV7 - in all eras, can be found often in Bach when approaching the leading tone from below requires raising 6^ as well. These, unlike vi-dim, are acceptable to the ears because we equate them with the matching chords from the parallel major, and thus these act as modal borrowings from the parallel major (except the Mm IV7 is a bit of a strange beast, Bach uses it like the others though)
III+ and VI+ - can be found in very late romantic and 20th century music

The other harmonies are rare, at least as far as western common practice goes. the 7th chords built on III and VI can be found in diatonic descending 5ths sequences but would rarely be found prolongationally.

Composers do not write in "harmonic minor" or "melodic minor", those do not really exist per se - the necessity of raising the leading tone in minor to allow for dominant-tonic progressions often carries with it the necessity of raising scale degree 6 to avoid the melodic augmented second, which forced Bach and later composers to use ii and IV and their corresponding 7th chords to avoid the false relation.

The two other scales you list (labelled 5th hm and 5th mm) are different beasts entirely, and you would not generally find those alternating with the natural minor (aka aeolian) scale in common practice. The "5th hm" you list is very exotic sounding due to the augmented 2nds found in it (I'm sure there is another name for it but don't remember what it is off-hand).

Thus in any chart, I would suggest that the harmonies be separate from the list of altered scale degrees, since certain things are consistently avoided. And, while I would group aeolian (natural minor) together with harmonic/melodic minor, I would have those two "5th" scales you list grouped further away, or even in a different paper. The Phrygian mode is closer to Aeolian than those two 5th scales are, so they do not really belong on the same sheet.


----------



## om30tools (Apr 11, 2011)

mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> There is a reason why most of the harmony books do not write out all of these - many of these are little, almost never used.



I chose to have them all written out to know what my options are, because whilst it's good to know common practice, for someone superlogical like me, I need to know the stereotypes, but also know what my other options are. It feels wierd comparing 7 triads from one scale with only 5 from another, simply because they aren't used. Apples and oranges to me.



mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> I am also somewhat confused with some aspects of your chart.
> 
> For instance, in Aeolian you list III with a parenthesized plus symbol beside it, indicating that it can be augmented. This is quite rare in music up until the 20th century; regardless, it occurs as a result of raising the leading tone in the minor mode which you have taken into consideration by the harmonic minor scale by showing the augmented form there.



This comes from Kostka - Tonal Harmony. It mentioned that in Pure minor, III is always augmented.



mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> Also I am wondering where this subdivision of primary and secondary triads comes from - it does not correspond with any I have seen before, and I have seen many different ones.



I got this from Persichetti's 20th centtury harmony. He made these subdivisions, I think based on the diatonic chord quality, and the voice leading. I shifted these around by finding these chord qualities in every mode of every scale. [/quote]


----------



## om30tools (Apr 11, 2011)

mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> the scale degree alterations you list are not always associated with harmonic events



Yes but as a student I needed to see what chords they would create, mayeb I could find a use for them within the scale I chose. Again, I wanted to know my options.



mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> The two other scales you list (labelled 5th hm and 5th mm) are different beasts entirely, and you would not generally find those alternating with the natural minor (aka aeolian) scale in common practice.



This list isn't to show what minors would go together, it's just an organised list of common minors that I could use (not necessarily more than one in the same piece). 

Thanks for the details about the chord useages though, I learned alot from harmony books, but not everything.


----------



## mducharme (Apr 11, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Mon Apr 11 said:


> I chose to have them all written out to know what my options are, because whilst it's good to know common practice, for someone superlogical like me, I need to know the stereotypes, but also know what my other options are. It feels wierd comparing 7 triads from one scale with only 5 from another, simply because they aren't used. Apples and oranges to me.



This is limiting in itself, as you are negating the possibility of chromatic alteration in the scales, which can lead to altered chords of various varieties. There are in fact some chromatically altered chords which are common and those are not listed in your chart. You are writing out idioms that are not found often, if at all, while excluding ones that are found frequently.

There are reasons why the remaining chords are not often used - they can throw the sense of key into question because they do not easily sound at home unless the voice leading works perfectly. This does not limit your options, of course, but it's hard to find those even in modern film scores.



> This comes from Kostka - Tonal Harmony. It mentioned that in Pure minor, III is always augmented..



I own the Kostka - it does not say this. It actually says the opposite.



> I got this from Persichetti's 20th centtury harmony. He made these subdivisions, I think based on the diatonic chord quality, and the voice leading. I shifted these around by finding these chord qualities in every mode of every scale.



Persichetti lists these only for the modes, where it makes sense, but those are just his observations (which admittedly are valuable). He does not list those for ionian and aeolian because those are equivalent to major and minor.

I do not understand why, for instance, you do not list iv as a primary chord in aeolian, whereas you have iv listed as a primary chord for harmonic minor.


----------



## mducharme (Apr 11, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Mon Apr 11 said:


> This list isn't to show what minors would go together, it's just an organised list of common minors that I could use (not necessarily more than one in the same piece).



That's fine, but then you should really consider adding Phrygian and possibly Dorian to your list - they are much more common than the synthetic "5th" scales you listed, and are very close to minor. You will find Phrygian and Dorian tendencies often in modern film scores.

The non-Aeolian minor modes (Phrygian, Dorian) are frequently mixed with Aeolian, and so it would make sense to list them on the same sheet with Aeolian.

The non-Ionian major modes (Lydian, Mixolydian) are frequently mixed with Ionian, and so it would make sense to list them on the same sheet with Ionian.

The only poor mode left out is the diminished mode, Locrian. That would not really fit with either.


----------



## om30tools (Apr 12, 2011)

mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> This is limiting in itself, as you are negating the possibility of chromatic alteration in the scales, which can lead to altered chords of various varieties. There are in fact some chromatically altered chords which are common and those are not listed in your chart. You are writing out idioms that are not found often, if at all, while excluding ones that are found frequently.



I didn't know the common chromatic alterations that are made in modern Film scores, hence I didn't chart them (but if theyre not on this list, it doesnt mean I wont ever make chromatic alterations).



mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> There are reasons why the remaining chords are not often used - they can throw the sense of key into question because they do not easily sound at home unless the voice leading works perfectly.



Again, I don't know what's common/uncommon in contemporary film and pop music, just a starting point. All I have to go on is Kostka and Persichetti atm :s
Do you know a resource anywhere that can help me to find most conventional practices for scale harmony, this way I could correct this chart. 



mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> I own the Kostka - it does not say this. It actually says the opposite.



Apologies! I misinterpreted my own notes :roll: Kostka said conventionally, III is NOT augmented. (but I put the scale's natural tendency to produce this quality in brackets, but underlined the common alteration).



mducharme @ Mon 11 Apr said:


> I do not understand why, for instance, you do not list iv as a primary chord in aeolian, whereas you have iv listed as a primary chord for harmonic minor.


 
Admittedly, I don't actually know how to decipher what Primary, Secondary and Tertiary chords of a scale/mode actually are (I simply thought it was all about finding the triad/7th chord which has the Augmented 2nd).

So this is pretty much a chart disaster


----------



## Danny_Owen (Apr 12, 2011)

From Persichetti p. 32: 'The Primary chords are the tonic, plus two dominant equivalents. These double dominants are those major or minor triads that include the characteristic scale step which produces the principal flavor of the mode.'

So, if we take the C Lydian scale, the primary chords would be CMaj (as it is the root) DMaj (as it features the characteristic raised fourth) and Bm (as it also features the characteristic raised fourth). The F# chord, though it features the characteristic raised fourth isn't counted as a 'primary chord' because it is diminished as it is.

The point behind having 'primary chords' is that you need a high percentage of them in a given passage to maintain the flavour of the mode- otherwise the flavour can be lost and may be heard as being the Ionian of another key (in this case G).

Hope that helps.


----------



## om30tools (Apr 12, 2011)

Danny_Owen @ Tue 12 Apr said:


> From Persichetti p. 32: 'The Primary chords are the tonic, plus two dominant equivalents. These double dominants are those major or minor triads that include the characteristic scale step which produces the principal flavor of the mode.'



1). So to find the Primary triads are the ones that contain the raised/lowered interval/s of the mode/scale? Or must they also be part of the traditional Dominant chord family (i.e. V & VII)?

2). So, since The characteristic intervals of aeolian (compared to ionian) are lowered 3, 6 & 7, by Persichetti's logic, are Aeolian's Primary triads:

i, III & VI 
(the lowered 3), 

iv, VI 
(lowered 6, minus the dim ii), 

v, VII 
(lowered 7)?


----------



## mducharme (Apr 12, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Tue Apr 12 said:


> I didn't know the common chromatic alterations that are made in modern Film scores, hence I didn't chart them (but if theyre not on this list, it doesnt mean I wont ever make chromatic alterations).



Not to worry.. here is a quick list, and all of these are covered in the Kostka:

Chromatic alterations can either form a new chord, or they can simply be melodic decoration. When dissonant with the harmony at the time, the chromatic alteration of a note can give it that extra shove in a particular direction because of the semitone relationship. If you have enough chromatic alteration there are chords which have become common in the repertoire:

Modal borrowings: It is possible to borrow chords from major for use in minor or vice versa

Common borrowings in major: iv, ii65-dim, ivadd6 (sounds the same as ii65-dim but moves to I directly, this is a favorite of John Williams for love themes), VI (and once you start getting up past romantic harmony, VII and III from minor became borrowed for the parallel major frequently)

Common borrowings in minor: ii, IV, bII (Neapolitan - flatting ^2 in minor allows you to borrow the Neapolitan triad from Phrygian. The chord moves to V and gives you that tritone motion you hear often in film scores).

Secondary dominants - act as V or vii-dim6 or vii-dim7 chords in various local exceedingly brief temporary keys, they can be used to decorate regular chords in a harmonization.

Augmented 6th chords (of various varieties) - used in major and minor keys, they result from chromatically raising scale degree 4^ in a iv6 or ii43-dim chord in minor.

Common tone diminished 7th chords - resulting from neighbor decoration of V or I chords with chromatic tones. This can easily sound very ragtime, this is used a lot in super mario brothers 1 underwater swimming music.

Chords with chromatically altered primary scale degrees in major: III (note this is not a borrowing from minor, this is iii from major with 5^ raised. When this is used without being followed by vi (as if vi follows this, it would be analyzed a secondary dominant) it is considered a chromatically altered primary scale degree) and VI (same note as last chord, except this one would say "without being followed by ii").

Chords with chromatically altered primary scale degrees in minor: vi (note this is not a borrowing from major, this is the VI from minor with scale degree 1^ lowered. This particular chromatic alteration is famously known for its use in the imperial march, but has been in many things since the late romantic era) and bii (the neapolitan switched to minor in quality).



> Again, I don't know what's common/uncommon in contemporary film and pop music, just a starting point. All I have to go on is Kostka and Persichetti atm :s
> Do you know a resource anywhere that can help me to find most conventional practices for scale harmony, this way I could correct this chart.



I do not, unfortunately. Most harmony books do not categorize the options the way I have in my postings here - they expect the teacher either to explain what is common and what is not, or the student to discover from proceeding through the text that certain chords mentioned are never seen in any examples, which of course takes time.



> Admittedly, I don't actually know how to decipher what Primary, Secondary and Tertiary chords of a scale/mode actually are (I simply thought it was all about finding the triad/7th chord which has the Augmented 2nd).
> 
> So this is pretty much a chart disaster



This is a big point of contention between theorists, but when it comes to major, minor scales the primary triads are I, IV and V (adjust the qualities for I and IV for use in minor) and the secondary triads are ii, iii, vi, vii (adjust the qualities of those for use in minor).

When Persichetti is talking about primary and secondary triads for the modes, he is speaking of what chords have the flavor of that mode the strongest. With ionian and aeolian this does not apply - we have this set of key relationships governed by tonic-subdominant-dominant interrelationships, and so that becomes the factor which separates primary from secondary triads. So, the "rule" is different for ionian and aeolian than it is for all the other modes. This could be what is confusing you.


----------



## mducharme (Apr 12, 2011)

harvestthesouls @ Tue Apr 12 said:


> 1). So to find the Primary triads are the ones that contain the raised/lowered interval/s of the mode/scale? Or must they also be part of the traditional Dominant chord family (i.e. V & VII)?
> 
> 2). So, since The characteristic intervals of aeolian (compared to ionian) are lowered 3, 6 & 7, by Persichetti's logic, are Aeolian's Primary triads:
> 
> ...



Not quite.

Persichetti is listing based on observation for all modes except Aeolian and Ionian. Those two are special cases because we have the tonic-subdominant-dominant relationship and key relationships with have been firmly established with several centuries of consistent use.

Also, for these purposes, you can not directly compare Aeolian as an altered Ionian. While it is true you can borrow chords and scale degrees from one for use in the other, so it is helpful for compositional purposes to think of them as one big entity where you can freely mix and match, that is not the way that Persichetti means by his explanation.

When Persichetti is talking about the characteristic degrees of the mode, he means the characterisic degrees of the mode relative to aeolian or ionian:

Ionian-ish modes have a major triad as the tonic chord: Lydian, Mixolydian
Aeolian-ish modes have a minor triad as the tonic chord: Dorian, Phrygian

Therefore, the chords that give the flavors of those modes the strongest are the chords that contain those notes that are different when you compare Phrygian with Aeolian, or when you compare Lydian with Ionian. You would not compare Phrygian with Ionian, though, in general, because it is a rather distant relative of Ionian. When you look at what chords comprise its special color, you look at what scale degrees it is different from Aeolian - the flatted second scale degree results in colorful changes like the neapolitan on II and the minor vii chord on scale degree 7.


----------

