Poparad Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra Prove your honesty and take this back, because it is unfairly rejects an important musical discovery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 poparad, I had hoped you had something to add to this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poparad Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra poparad, I had hoped you had something to add to this discussion. I do keep adding things. I don't wish it to get hostile, but all I see here is you throwing personal attacks at AuggieDoggie, and ignoring most of the points he, myself, or others have brought up. This discussion is getting way off from the original point which was never resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 "...and ignoring most of the points he, myself, or others have brought up." Please carefully reread the latter parts of this thread and see that I have carefully and completely addressed every point raised. And the original point of this thread, reread it, was that the best music does not come from the music theory books. This is exactly where we are now in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Many of you are hearing of things now from me that are new and you are stunned, baffled, confused and angry. This is normal. Soon, some of you will put your books away and assemble ideas of your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 18, 2004 Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra This is your profound weakness, unoriginal thinking. If it's not found in a book, you feel a musical idea is not valid, has no function. It IS found in a book, first of all. Second, the term 'functionless' is a specific one; it does not mean 'not valid', nor did I imply that it does. French, German, and Italian sixths (as are English and Swiss sixths, although we rarely hear of those) are functionless as well. And as far as "renaming" a Bbm chord, that's more music theory sophistry. It's a Bbm chord. You started a thread saying that music theory sounds bad. First of all, music theory doesn't have a sound, good OR bad. You come up with combinations of chords that you seem to believe have magically eluded musicians and theorists, and try to convince us that they can't be found in a book...as if you know something that nobody else does. You're wrong. I gave you the structural names for 'Bbm' in both the key of A and D...in both cases, it is so remote from the rest of the harmonies around it as to be completely unrelated...vagrant....roving....chromatic...passing. It does not have a FUNCTIONAL correlation. You think that just because YOU haven't found such a bizarre harmony explained in any of your books, it must not be in ANY books. Well, theory defines and explains your chord quite well...you just don't like that definition. If you had anywhere near the harmonic knowledge you claim to have, you would know that the 'Bbm' chord in the context of your progression functions not as a minor triad, but exists as an A+(b9), which most certainly resolves to the following D chord (albeit not in a particularly pleasing way). Keep the A from the previous chord in the bass and realize that nothing really changed. Add a 'G' to it...still, nothing really changes. Its true 'function' remains intact and unaltered. Harmony does not exist in a vacuum. Harmonic function is the foundation for the nomenclature. The nomenclature has an etymology of its own...the names reveal more than *just* the name of a chord. (edited to correct a pluralization error and the words in bold) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 "If you had anywhere near the harmonic knowledge you claim to have, you would know that the 'Bbm' chord in the context of your progression FUNCTIONS...." So now it "functions?" How did it suddenly go from a "functionless passing chord" to something with a function? That's an odd discrepancy, Auggie. Wouldn't it be more honest to say that the Bbm in the context fits pretty well and sounds pretty good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 18, 2004 Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra "If you had anywhere near the harmonic knowledge you claim to have, you would know that the 'Bbm' chord in the context of your progression FUNCTIONS...." So now it "functions?" How did it suddenly go from a "functionless passing chord" to something with a function?That's an odd discrepancy, Auggie. The discrepancy is in your incorrect naming of the chord. A Bbm chord is nonfunctional in those contexts. An A augmented one, however, is a different animal altogether. If you're going to bash 'theory', perhaps you should know a bit more of it first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 "The discrepancy is in your incorrect naming of the chord" A rose by any other name still functions the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 18, 2004 Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra "The discrepancy is in your incorrect naming of the chord"A rose by any other name still functions the same. There, their, and they're. Our and hour. You and ewe. No and know. Aisle, isle, and I'll. Rose and rows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Auggie, you epitomize the worst of musical sophistry and dishonesty. For you, renaming a chord, although it has exactly the same notes and sounds exactly the same, suddenly turns it into one that functions. With the old name, you said the chord progression sounded "horrible." But with a new name, the chord progression now functions and makes sense. Did your book tell you that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 18, 2004 Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra Auggie, you epitomize the worst of musical sophistry and dishonesty. For you, renaming a chord, although it has exactly the same notes and sounds exactly the same, suddenly turns it into one that functions.With the old name, you said the chord progression sounded "horrible." But with a new name, the chord progression now functions and makes sense. Did your book tell you that? It still sounds bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 18, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 "It still sounds bad." I'll let you save face with that response, now that all of your other points have been refuted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poparad Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra Auggie, you epitomize the worst of musical sophistry and dishonesty. For you, renaming a chord, although it has exactly the same notes and sounds exactly the same, suddenly turns it into one that functions. He didn't just rename the exact same notes. He said: Originally posted by AuggieDoggieKeep the A from the previous chord in the bass and realize that nothing really changed. Add a 'G' to it...still, nothing really changes. Its true function remain intact and unaltered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 18, 2004 Members Share Posted August 18, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra "It still sounds bad." I'll let you save face with that response, now that all of your other points have been refuted. Ummm....right. Not....knot.Way...weigh...whey.Peace...piece.etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poparad Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Also, you are avoiding points: I said you were needless namecalling here, so you just didn't answer it and continued to do so.Orginally posted by black cobrayou epitomize the worst of musical sophistry and dishonestyPlay nice, okay? You're starting to sound like SingingAx. Civil debate goes much further than namecalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Little Dreamer Posted August 19, 2004 Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 What my thread is about is the lack of critical thinking regarding the common theories in the books. For example, most on this forum will read about the dim 7th chord used in passing without considering if it sounds good or not. There's some lack of critical thinking when it comes to claiming that you have knowledge to share but then having it rendered mute by a confrontational attitude. I guess nobody's perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 19, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 Originally posted by Little Dreamer There's some lack of critical thinking when it comes to claiming that you have knowledge to share but then having it rendered mute by a confrontational attitude.I guess nobody's perfect. No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vote4dicktaid Posted August 19, 2004 Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra "If you had anywhere near the harmonic knowledge you claim to have, you would know that the 'Bbm' chord in the context of your progression FUNCTIONS...." So now it "functions?" How did it suddenly go from a "functionless passing chord" to something with a function? You would have more credibility if you quoted people right... not changing the meaning of the words quoted, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 19, 2004 Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 Originally posted by vote4dicktaid You would have more credibility if you quoted people right... not changing the meaning of the words quoted, that is. He can't challenge the accuracy or veracity of the analysis, since he knows it can easily be proven. So, he chooses to manipulate my post in an attempt to somehow discredit what I said. A cheap ploy, but not an uncommon one. And he has yet to explain how it is that 'music theory' sounds bad, which was the 'point' of his thread in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 19, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 Originally posted by Auggie Doggie He can't challenge the accuracy or veracity of the analysis, since he knows it can easily be proven. And he has yet to explain how it is that 'music theory' sounds bad, which was the 'point' of his thread in the first place. Actually, I can challenge your analysis that the Bbm functions as an A+ b9. No such chord exists, without a seventh. Suffice it to say the Bbm is a chord that leads very well to the next chord in the progression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 19, 2004 Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra Actually, I can challenge your analysis that the Bbm functions as an A+ b9. No such chord exists, without a root or a seventh. Nice edit...I already saw your initial post. I guess you took some time to find out that the chord DOES exist and had to alter your post afterwards. At least you learned a new chord today. my earlier post If you had anywhere near the harmonic knowledge you claim to have, you would know that the 'Bbm' chord in the context of your progression functions not as a minor triad, but exists as an A+(b9), which most certainly resolves to the following D chord (albeit not in a particularly pleasing way). Keep the A from the previous chord in the bass and realize that nothing really changed. Add a 'G' to it...still, nothing really changes. Its true 'function' remains intact and unaltered. The "A" note from the preceding chord is still there, whether you play it or not. Rootless harmony does indeed exist; especially when the root was heard immediately preceding it.I said 'add a G' (the 7th)...it's a nonessential tone in the chord. If it makes you feel better, call it an "A+(add b9)" instead of A+(b9)...the harmony does not change...just like a major triad on the dominant (V) works the same as a dominant seventh (V7). Play it all 3 ways...no difference. "The 'function' remains intact and unaltered." And thus your 'lack of critical thinking' (should add 'critical listening' to that as well) comments unsurprisingly end up being aimed solely at yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 19, 2004 Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 Originally posted by black cobra The only things that have proved useful are the chords and modes of the major scale, and the minor pentatonic scale. and then later...Suffice it to say the Bbm is a chord that leads very well to the next chord in the progression. Ahem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 19, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 We can "call" it an A+ add b9 chord if we want to. Yet this chord does not exist. If so, prove it. This chord cannot be found in your "nomenclature." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members black cobra Posted August 19, 2004 Author Members Share Posted August 19, 2004 I have before me the Berklee Series for Guitar by william g. leavitt, a comprehensive series you highly recommend. Can you find an augmented chord with a flat 9 that is not a dominant? What page, Auggie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.