Natural Harmony And Artificial Harmony

... distinction that I have never liked

Some harmony manuals are based on this classification, regardless of the names and labels ... this is certainly not what a good manual does or does not do

Aspirante wrote:

But in your opinion, what is this difference due to? (and which one is it)?

Sorry if the question seems naive

...forget about labels, leave them to the bureaucrats... concentrate on the substance, follow your instinct.

Paulo wrote:

...forget the labels, leave them to the bureaucrats...focus on the substance, follow your instinct.

...but yes, anarchy....

Aspirante's curiosity seems legitimate to me; certainly, getting to know things helps enrich the substance...

Ok, everything is fine... but the difference?

Aspirante wrote:

Ok, everything is fine... but the difference?

Natural harmony... chords in thirds that are structurally composed of the sounds of the first harmonics

Artificial harmony.... chords in thirds that are structurally composed of harmonic sounds very distant from the fundamental

Usual clarification: terminologies have settled and there is someone talking about natural chords and artificial chords.

BUT!

Don't get "carried away" and do not consider these adjectives in a literal sense. Harmony is not natural, practically never. And in fact, I contradict Dies Irae by saying that the idea that natural chords are based on the closest harmonics is wrong. They explain it this way but it is false. The minor third, for example, is more or less the nineteenth harmonic

You are right Thallo, but some methods bypass this message.

I appeal to Schoenberg, who in turn ... referring to Helmholtz's theories, potentially it seems that everything is and can be consonance

I didn't quite understand the relationships between Helmholtz and Schoenberg, can someone provide details?

It wasn't an attack, I know that's how they explain it, but the theory professors are wrong, they should study more acoustics...

... as for Amateur I would like someone to also talk about the relationships between Helmholtz and Schoenberg, can someone elaborate?