# Harmonic/Melodic Critique



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Hello everyone, I wrote a short string quartet theme that I'm planning on using as a basis for an ABABA slow movement. I would really like some harmonic error critique (as well as any other problems) before writing a short bridge to a B section, then writing the B section itself etc.

http://musescore.com/user/267236/scores/248136

Thanks for the help!


----------



## Bored (Sep 6, 2012)

Try using a variation of different type of notes. It's mostly quarter I believe or of the same timing. Otherwise good!


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Bored said:


> Try using a variation of different type of notes. It's mostly quarter I believe or of the same timing. Otherwise good!


Thanks for the suggestion. I planned on doing an ABABA or ABABABA variation movement where each time the A section occurs the rhythmic variety and intensity is increased. I basically planned on having the same chord progression and measure count, but with more complex melody and rhythm. Often in these types of movements the initial theme is somewhat bare: is this okay? Or does the initial theme need to have more rhythmic variety?

Second, are you sure there are no harmonic errors? I've been told before on this forum (and on the musescore website) that I've had part writing mistakes. I tried to be more careful this time, but as you know a beginner struggling with English grammar needs a teacher with a red pen to point out mistakes.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

I agree on what I also find to be a flatness of rhythm. While it is effective to 'withhold' some variant for later, the initial presentation is still monotonous on the rhythmic front. Don't let a somewhat academic idea of first presenting it in such a sequence of even note durations keep you from rhythmically livening up the first section -- just a tiny bit.

I did hear some intervallic / harmonic combinations I thought sounded out of place (there is no right or wrong). I would suggest, since you have this in a playback device, to put it on the slowest metronome setting available and listen in slow motion from change to change. You will likely find those few places I heard as sounding less than in place. Here too, some rhythmic alteration of one of the lines (without changing a pitch, but the context of the other pitches it is hear with, and when) can not only be your friend, but stimulate other ideas of what you can do with your basic materials.

It is good that you have not got the motif going back to its melodic tonic, nor stopping on its dominant -- this leaves any motif more 'open' to being taken in other directions.

Extremely slow auditioning and following the vertical harmony will help you find any weaknesses -- whether 'by the book' or better, simply 'by your ear.'


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Okay thanks Peter I'm going to add a few sixteenths to the main motive in the first few bars and carry it over for the rest of the initial theme. That way it won't be just eighth notes and will be a bit more expressive. I'll try to do this intelligently and musically of course in order to get something I like!

Now, as for harmonic errors and rules, I wanted to ask you something very important. I've been actually very frustrated lately by this topic. There are book rules that supposedly are necessary to follow and yet my favorite composers break them all the time! Like, I was looking at the opening chorale theme in the slow movement of Schubert's death and the maiden quartet, and he has an illegal parallel fifth! I also saw in the 4th op 18 Beethoven quartet several illegal unresolved cross relations in the first page (in my last thread here I was pointed out that I myself had some cross relations which were wrong). I'm so infinitely frustrated by the arbitrariness of everything.

I put my score on half tempo and listened to it carefully a few times. There are definitely some rough edges, but I'm not sure whether they are wrong or not. Take measure 5. This is supposed to be an A major chord. The first violin has a suspension resolved on the second beat, but because the viola and cello have a passing tone on the second beat only the third beat is actually consonant for the entire quartet.

Is this second beat wrong? Well, it's definitely dissonant, but if I eliminate the passing tone in the viola and cello and just leap up a third on the last beat we get something that while completely consonant is kind of boring to my ears. The second beat dissonance has a lot of emotional character to me (and it makes the cello line completely imitate the opening second violin line which is always good!), but... perhaps it's wrong.

Now... you say that nothing is strictly "wrong", only "out of place". Well, obviously I'm not trying to write like Schoenberg. So I don't really know what you mean by that statement.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Now, as for harmonic errors and rules, I wanted to ask you something very important. I've been actually very frustrated lately by this topic. There are book rules that supposedly are necessary to follow and yet my favorite composers break them all the time! Like, I was looking at the opening chorale theme in the slow movement of Schubert's death and the maiden quartet, and he has an illegal parallel fifth! I also saw in the 4th op 18 Beethoven quartet several illegal unresolved cross relations in the first page (in my last thread here I was pointed out that I myself had some cross relations which were wrong). I'm so infinitely frustrated by the arbitrariness of everything.


A cross relation is not in itself "wrong". Arbitrary use of cross relations will end up sounding harsh, though, and if you don't have any expressive reason for that harshness, it's best to avoid it.

Parallel fifths are similar. They're inapt if you want to maintain separate parts, but the hollow sound can be effective for other reasons and in other circumstances.



SeptimalTritone said:


> Is this second beat wrong? Well, it's definitely dissonant, but if I eliminate the passing tone in the viola and cello and just leap up a third on the last beat we get something that while completely consonant is kind of boring to my ears. The second beat dissonance has a lot of emotional character to me (and it makes the cello line completely imitate the opening second violin line which is always good!), but... perhaps it's wrong.


Once again, dissonance is fine, even dissonances not justified by traditional theory. It's all about why and how it's done. Learning to hear parts that need work is part of growing as a composer.



SeptimalTritone said:


> Now... you say that nothing is strictly "wrong", only "out of place". Well, obviously I'm not trying to write like Schoenberg. So I don't really know what you mean by that statement.


If you looked at Schoenberg's scores, you'd discover that the rules of counterpoint and melodic construction he follows are much the same as your own, just allowing for certain dissonances and wide leaps that traditional theory does not.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> Once again, dissonance is fine, even dissonances not justified by traditional theory. It's all about why and how it's done. Learning to hear parts that need work is part of growing as a composer.


That's a hard pill to swallow. How about this: what book do you recommend I use beyond Kostka and Payne's Tonal Harmony? I feel that textbooks like that lay out some harmonic norms and rules, but I know they are not the full story. What would you suggest I read?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

SeptimalTritone said:


> That's a hard pill to swallow. How about this: what book do you recommend I use beyond Kostka and Payne's Tonal Harmony? I feel that textbooks like that lay out some harmonic norms and rules, but I know they are not the full story. What would you suggest I read?


I have yet to find a truly satisfying account of post-common practice harmony, as we are still in the development of new norms even today (and even among "tonal" composers). The most recent version of Piston's Harmony contains an additional section on post-common practice, but it is limited and only shows a few of the possibilities available.

In the end, theory describes what has been done, rather than what can be done in the future. Composers must develop the ability to work independently of what theory has already codified.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Thanks for the book recommendation. I'm going to order it off of amazon.

I actually misstated my initial question, so let me be a bit more specific with regards to what troubles me. I don't know the proper use of nonchord tones! The Kostka book tends to present tonal music as chord 1 -chord 2 -chord 3 - etc. with each chord decorated with nonharmonic tones like passing, neighboring, suspensions, appoggiaturas, etc. But that's not enough information to even use nonharmonic tones the way, say classical or early romantic composers did. Because one could write two instruments going in parallel second scales on top of a bass, and it would follow the book rules because those scale notes are passing tones!

For each chord I designate when I compose, I could put on it nonchord tones everywhere on different beats and different instruments etc. and as long as the nonchord tones for each instrument line are correctly resolved, then by the book it's allowed! But... there comes a point where it's just too much dissonance/awkwardness (even with just completely diatonic harmony like what I presently posted) and I'm not sure where to draw that line. Some small bits of what I wrote seem a bit off with the placement of nonchord tones, but... even then to my ears they are not _too much_ of a problem.

Maybe what I need is a counterpoint book that answers the question: "okay you know the usual chord progressions but where do you have nonchord tones in the different voices so that the result sounds pleasing?" What's a good counterpoint book?


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

I'll quote myself on the matter of books and the like:



Richannes Wrahms said:


> The true objective of a great deal of 'musical training' is not just for the skills (which are important still!) but for gaining confidence. For that, *Fux* and Schoenberg's are some of the best. *Piston*'s harmony and counterpoint 'manuals' and Alfred Mann's The Study of Fugue, among other books, may serve to fill up the gaps (in common practice). *Persichetti's is essential for twentieth-century* and from there one can go to many other 'advanced books'. For orchestration at least Rimsky-Korsakov's for an initial guide of timbre and Adler's for basic contemporary instrumentation are usually recommended (as well as taking some direction classes if possible). *Listening and studying scores* is as important as all of the above. (and contact people to look up and mark your scores)


You may add to that other specific-era study books of various sorts, for example: 'The Classical Style' by Charles Rosen and 'Twentieth-century Music Theory and Practice' by Edward Pearsall.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

I'm going to get some of those books from Amazon. I really need to do more study, both textbook and score-reading. Thanks so much!


----------

