QUESTION OF TONICS

But the raised fourth was used only contrapuntally when the tonality already existed. Only later was it also used in a harmonic sense ... and without too much preamble, and anyway, the doctor didn't prescribe it, in the sense that anyone can use the fourth without altering it.

modale wrote:

Forgive me if I insist, but I am convinced that the answer to this question is crucial for framing tonal organization. At the base of tonal organization, is there an Ionian or Lydian scale?

at the base of “tonal organization” there is nothing. It is not a theory developed in a research laboratory; it is an ex post abstraction. First, the compositions arrived, and then Russell sat down and tried to analyze them.

There is no mystical and unknown reason at the base of everything; we can make all the distinctions we want, we can talk about the role of the fourth degree, its function, its use in certain repertoires and in certain harmonic or melodic movements, but THE FOURTH DEGREE IS NOT A TONIC. When Russell implies the contrary, he does so OUTSIDE of the tonal system, and this is a fundamental premise.

Russell is not talking about Mozart. Let's shout it out.

In fact, many scales/chords of tonal harmony contain the augmented IV: augmented Lydian, Lydian dominant, whole tone scales, diminished octophonic scales, blues scale.

confirmation... what you are talking about is expanded harmony, not tonal. But we should, in this sense, understand how THE AUGMENTED FOURTH is a TONAL concept. In a whole tone scale built on C, F# IS NOT AN AUGMENTED FOURTH; it does not have the acoustic rendering for it, it does not have the function for it, it does not have the frequency for it (to be pedantic). That F# is the fourth degree of a whole tone scale. Period.

It is simpler to think that in reality, at the base of the tonal system, there is a Lydian scale and not an Ionian scale almost always altered by the presence of an augmented fourth. Why conceive as the source of tonal organization a scale destined to be in a nearly constant state of alteration!

it doesn't matter much if THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD refutes this theory... a poorly formulated theory, among other things, since (I repeat) Mozart uses the natural fourth much more often than the altered fourth... but who cares!

The lydian scale is formed using the interval of a fifth; if we use this interval, we have: C-G-D-A-E-B-F#. On the fifth degree of the lydian scale, there is the ionian scale.

The ionian scale is formed by breaking the interval of a fifth to create the tritone F-B: C-G-D-A-E-B-F.

Why break it? Surely to create a dominant that resolves to the tonic triad! But by doing this, the harmony is reduced to its bare bones.

This leads me to believe that at the base of the tonal system, there cannot be a scale that does not respect the interval of a fifth.

Therefore, I believe that the ionian scale is a product of the lydian scale and not vice versa.

If we place a lydian scale at the origin of tonal organization, tonal harmony becomes what is built on the scale that arises from the fifth degree of the lydian scale, and where do we put everything else? The II-V-I no longer exists in the lydian scale. Music cannot be reduced to a "turnaround."

Besides, if we extend the succession of fifth intervals to the end, we obtain the chromatic scale. The perfect scale is the chromatic one; why limit ourselves to playing seven notes? The lydian scale is an extract, a synthesis of the chromatic scale, just as the Ionian scale is.

This is why I previously said that seeing Harmony merely as tonal Harmony is like looking at a landscape through a keyhole.

Well, if that's the reason for limiting oneself to 12 notes... with MAX/MSP I create my own temperament... music is varied and infinite. A different matter is historical issues and theoretical motivations.

It's just a matter of agreeing on what we are looking for....

thallo wrote:

i don't understand... if the tonal system is the keyhole, then why do we have to talk about tonics??

TONICS ARE TONAL, tonal system means, effectively, a system based on tonics...

But for me, one can also talk about other things, eh. I mean, jazz harmony, non-tonal or post-tonal harmony have given birth to much more interesting findings than the attraction between tonic and subdominant... ... that's the point. We are talking about someone saying "damn, guys, did you know a sound can be a tonic but also a dominant?", which is a bit more banal than hot water...

In my opinion, everything has already been said here

I wonder which is the dominant in Partch's temperament

I am withdrawing from this discussion.

Another Modal path

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/2395-armonia-pandiatonica/