djeggnog, YOU were a professional musician...answer THIS non-religious question.

by the pharmer 19 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  DT

  I don't know the background of this thread, so I'll just comment on this statement.

  "I had to have been exhausted to have completely ignored the fact that there are 12 intervals (half-steps) in a musical scale when I wrote what I did about the harmonic F#-minor."

  I don't see the problem. There are 12 intervals in a musical scale. That scale is the chromatic scale. It's the basic collection of notes in our modern twelve note equal tempered system. They are used to form a large variety of other smaller scales that are more commonly used in musical settings. (major, minor, pentatonic, whole tone, etc.) It's not true that there are 12 intervals in the harmonic F#-minor scale. However, he didn't say that and I don't think he even meant to imply that. I certainly wouldn't have interpreted that statement in that way. He could have stated things a little more clearly, but that doesn't mean he made a false statement, in this case.
• 

  Twitch

  What DT said

  Though the orginal quote in question does leave room for interpretive error by someone not familiar with scales, my first thought was that he was referring to the chromatic scale but the exact relevance to the harmonic minor scale was unclear.

  As for the rest, it don't confront me,....;)
• 

  OUTLAW

  This may be difficult for you to accept, but the guy that played the tenor sax, the guy that played the alto sax, the guy that played the trumpet and me, the guy that played the trombone -- we four -- were called "the brass section." You want to criticize us for not referring to ourselves as "the woodwind section," and I'm ok with your doing this. However, I've told you what the four of us were called, how we were referred to when justaposed against what was called "the rhythm section" (electric guitar, bass guitar, drums and keyboards), for even when the guy on tenor sax switched to play the soprano sax or the flute, or when the tenor sax guy was forced to play the drums when the drummer had to use the bathroom, or when I switched to play the alto sax or keyboards(!), we continued to be "the brass section."

  @djeggnog

  Ya it`s difficult to accept..

  Even a Minimal Amout of Music Education teaches you different the sections.

  Musicians know Which Section,their Instrument belongs in..You don`t and..

  You have a Bullshit Reason for not Knowing..

  I think you may know some musicians and feel that makes you a Musician..LOL!!..

  You do the same with JW`s..Why wouldn`t you do it with Musicians?..

  ................... ...OUTLAW
• 

  cantleave

  Thank god for wikipedia ehh eggy!
• 

  the pharmer

  DT and Twitch. I really do understand what you're saying, but the original quote came from his comments in my "Is this not an easy question" thread, which I believe clearly shows how his comment is an error.

  I had addressed this particular error of his (along with others) in my post #63 in that thread. The whole context had to do with major vs minor keys/chords/scales.

  Here is an excerpt from that post:

  With respect to the melodic major and minor "triads," it is always the third note in the minor triad that is flatted, so to speak, which is why, as I stated above, I had to have been exhausted to have completely ignored the fact that there are 12 intervals (half-steps) in a musical scale ..

  Are you serious?? Or are you just playing around?? Major and minor scalse consist of 7 intervals (varying combinations of whole and half-steps).

  12 half-step intervals in a musical scale? We musicians refer to that scale as a chromatic scale. What the heck does the chromatic scale have to do with this??

  You can see how I thought of the chromatic scale immediately as well, so DT, although I know exactly what you're saying, it doesn't explain his error when you see it in full context. I didn't want to post that whole context, because it gets rather lengthy. Sorry for not being more clear with that. But please, have a read through that other thread, you will more than likely understand my point. (Not only that, but I just noticed he says "melodic major and minor" in that little excerpt I just pasted...yet another error, there are melodic minor scales, but not melodic major scales.

  Thanks for showing me that context really does matter, because I can see how, me not having provided the context could actually be confusing.

  Please let me know if you see anything wrong with what I've pointed out (after reading the context of the other thread). I wish I knew how to post a link to that thread, but I don't -- sorry.

  Sincerely,

  Pharmer
• 

  the pharmer

  (And to think he took me on this long journey all because of the example I used in my post #41 -- which I really meant to have been a simple example.)
• 

  DT

  the pharmer,

  I reviewed the context, but didn't read the entire thread due to it's length and complexity. The music theory is of some interest to me, but I don't have the time to follow every argument and error that may have been made. My general impression is that he made a mistake about which note was the minor third in an A minor chord that he might have avoided if he considered the scale in relation to the entire chromatic scale. It's easy to make mistakes like that when tired (or even fully awake). My impression of the source of the problem could be wrong and I would welcome a correction if I'm mistaken and anyone cares enough to explain it.

  The whole thing about enharmonic equivalents is quite interesting, if not as important as it once was. There was a time when different tunings and temperaments were used and notes like C sharp and D flat were actually slightly different notes so it was important to distinguish between them. Even then, I understand they were sometimes notated incorrectly out of convenience and the performers could just rely on context or intuition to get the right intonation or else they were close enough to not make a practical difference.

  I have done some composing in microtonal temperaments. For example, if you divide the octave into seventeen equal intervals instead of twelve, the enharmonic equivalents are no longer equivalent and actually differ significantly. I composed a piece for a concert that used two microtuned pianos to account for all seventeen notes in that temperament. One piano played the sharps, while the other played the flats and some notes were available on both pianos. It was a little confusing and my piece had a harmonic structure that had little to do with the type of music theory that led to this confusing situation. I often use a different way of notating that kind of music when composing, but this had to be translated into standard notation with the sharps and flats notated correctly so they would be played by the proper piano. I'm certainly not an expert, as I sometimes still get confused by all this. I sometimes find it easier to try to forgot this kind of music theory so I can explore different kinds of structure and ways of thinking about music, so I'm pretty tolerant when others get the details wrong.
• 

  the pharmer

  DT, what follows pretty much sums it up.

  In my initial example, my point was, we had a piece of music to interpret, and it was a given that it was in the key of “A”…BUT, there was some dispute as to which key of “A” it was…major/minor. The WT and I differed on the interpretation of certain notes (C’s) as to whether they should be played as C-natural or C-sharp.

  What significance would that have? In my example, although the entire JW ensemble would sound ‘in harmony’ with each other (since they all played the C’s as ‘naturals’ – vs. sharp), they ultimately would be incorrect in their interpretation (maybe they didn’t see the key signature or read the accidentals correctly or whatever the case for the misinterpretation) – and therefore the piece sounded in a minor-key , instead of the major-key which the composer intended. I was just trying to point out how a misreading or misinterpretation of one note in a piece of music (C# vs C-natural) could ultimately change the way a piece sounds in terms of its major-minor tonality. I did not mean for it to get into a music theory lesson.

  If this was music, and it was written in the key of “A”, and you insisted on singing/playing every “C” as a C-natural, it would sound like the piece is in a Minor key – i.e. A-Minor. If everyone sang/played “C” as a natural, it might sound correct – i.e. in harmony with each other – but if the composer (Jesus Christ) intended it to be in the key of A-Major (not minor), every “C” should actually be sung/played as a C-sharp instead of C-natural, thus making it a Major key.

  I don’t know how, but He missed my point, so I clarified further:

  Using “chords” to clarify…an “A” chord consisting of a triad (3 notes) has an A, C, and E in it. The A-major triad (chord) consists of A (natural), C# (sharp), and E (natural); whereas an A minor triad consists of A (natural), C (natural…not sharp), and an E (natural). If you know a piece of music is in the key of “A”, but you have C-naturals all over the place, it is going to sound as a Minor tonality. Play C#’s in place of all the C-naturals, and it will sound as a Major tonality.

  Simplified further…find a piano and play A-natural, C-natural, and E-natural all at the same time…hear the minor quality. Then raise the C-natural by a half step to a C-sharp but leave the A and E where they are (as naturals)…hear the major quality.

  He totally missed my point and diverted the subject by claiming that there is no way there would be any confusion as to whether or not it was major or minor solely based on the type of “C” being played (many could argue the same regarding his real example of the WT’s misinterpretation of scripture that I was basing this example on) because there would also be F#’s and G#’s all over the piece …as if those two sharps (F# and G#) were definite proofit was MAJOR. What he didn’t consider, was that the A-melodic minor scale also has F#’s and G#’s (ascending), and only differs from the A-major scale by having a C-natural instead of a C#.

  He continued with more and more misinformation on the subject from that point on.
• 

  DT

  Thanks for the review of what happened. It is a little amusing how a simple question turned into a complex discussion of music theory.
• 

  the pharmer

  I know!

  DT, don't get me wrong, I do appreciate what you’re saying about the elements involved in your more complex compositions, but let me make this clear. We were not discussing complex tonalities or modes; this was basic major vs. minor keys. The more he explained, the more mistakes were made…on basic things!

  You said, I sometimes find it easier to try to forgot this kind of music theory so I can explore different kinds of structure and ways of thinking about music, so I'm pretty tolerant when others get the details wrong.

  This wasn’t a matter of him getting some minor details wrong about some obscure and confusing music theory…these were errors in the very foundation and fundamentals of music theory.

  He made a comment that, “there are no sharps in the A-minor scale”; Well, there isn’t just one A-minor scale, there are three! So that statement is incomplete and incorrect because all three “A-minor” scales need to be considered before making that kind of claim -- Melodic minor, Harmonic minor, and Natural minor. ( Natural minor is the only one of the three A-minor scales to not have any sharps; the other two do. And if you read his description of the other two minor scales, they are not correct either, indicating to me that he didn’t completely understand basic minor scale forms. )

  We’re not talking advanced theory here…and given the fact that he was pointing out and debating smaller details (instead of looking at the big picture), I couldn’t let these basic errors (the very foundation of music theory) go unaddressed.

  This might seem insignificant, but when he tried to use these incomplete and incorrect statements to criticize me and discredit my point, I needed to address them.

  I hope I made sense.

  Thanks for your input!