[pianotech] theory question

[Tom Rhea, Jr.]

My range of music theory is not as wide as most of the members of the List
so you're right in my inappropriate use of the two terms.  Thanks for the
illumination.

 

Tom

 

  _____  

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Mark Schecter
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 5:51 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Cc: <pianotech at ptg.org>
Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question

 

Tom,

 

I think you are conflating two terms, and along with them, the concepts to
which they refer. 

 

Inharmonicity is the non-harmonic frequency of a partial (which would
otherwise be called a harmonic) due to, in the case of the piano, the
stiffness of the wire. 

 

When the same note is spelled differently depending on the harmonic context,
the change is called enharmonic. 

 

It is arguable whether a singer or instrumentalist would have to change
their intonation when the spelling changes - if the harmonic context were
provided by a fixed-pitch instrument that was tuned in equal temperament, no
change would be required at all. 

 

But a chord does not contain inharmonicity, unless the instrument(s) playing
the chord have inharmonic partials, as the piano does. 

 

An ensemble of non-fixed-pitch instruments such as a string quartet may well
adjust their tuning toward greater consonance when not constrained by fixed
pitch instruments like keyboards and lutes. But that goes more to the
question of temperaments than to the spelling of enharmonic equivalents such
as G#-Ab. Hope this helps. 

 

 


On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:00 PM, "Tom Rhea, Jr." <rheapiano at cox.net> wrote:

Hi Paul,

 

An instrumentalist generally only plays one note at a time but all of the
notes of the score must be harmonically related.  That's true even with a
vocalist.  If you look at a score (piano, orchestral, choral, etc) and
analyze each chord, you'll find that they can be broken down into a very
logical, though sometimes extremely complex, structure.  What confuses me at
times, is a note (G# for instance) that crosses a bar line and becomes an A
flat.  Musically, they're the same note but harmonically they're not because
the other notes in the chord have changed, making the entire structure into
something different, even though the two notes (G# and A flat) sound the
same to the ear.  Instrumentalists, but especially vocalists, have to be
aware that the A flat must be tuned slightly when going from a G# because of
the inharmonicity within the chord structure.  As piano technicians, we have
to be aware of the same inharmonicity when tuning since some of the
intervals need to be stretched or compressed slightly to match the
temperament.  The same occurs in instrumental or vocal music, too,
especially with string instrumentalists and vocalists.

 

I hope this hasn't been too long-winded and makes some sort of sense.

 

Regards,

Tom

 

 


  _____  


From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Paul T Williams
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:30 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question

 

Ahhh!   Makes sense to me. Thanks for clarifying this.  I always wondered
that, too.  But;  why do this, when the notes are just written in the score?
Would a bassist wonder why he/she is playing an E or G when it's a C chord?
I've always just played what's written. Am I missing something? 

Best, 
Paul 






From: 

"Tom Rhea, Jr." <rheapiano at cox.net> 


To: 

<joegarrett at earthlink.net>, <pianotech at ptg.org> 


Date: 

09/27/2011 02:04 PM 


Subject: 

Re: [pianotech] theory question

 


  _____  





Hi Joe, et al,

The actual theory behind this convention is this:

Consider the CEG major chord and the note positions when being played.  All
the notes are said to be in their root positions.

When a first inversion of the CEG chord is being played, the E and G are in
their root positions but the C has been moved up an octave and is now a 4th
interval above the highest adjacent root note, the G.  This position, EGC,
is said to be a C Major 4 or first inversion of the C Major chord.

In the second inversion of the CEG chord, the only note still in its root
position is the G.  The C and E are moved an octave above their root
positions, such that the E is a 6th interval above the G (in its root
position) and the C is a 4th interval from the G (in its root position),
hence a C Major 6/4.

All of the chords are spelled from the bottom.  However, the intervals which
comprise the inversions are labeled from the highest note still in its root
position to the one or two notes that have been moved up an octave from
their root positions, either a 4th interval for a first inversion or a 6th
and a 4th interval for a second inversion.  The labeling of the inversion
intervals is always from the highest interval first.

I hope this helps with understanding the theory question.

Regards,
Tom


-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [ <mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org>
mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Joseph Garrett
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 2:26 PM
To: pianotech
Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question

Ken said: "I concur with Tom. You count from the bottom up. A "6" is the
interval between the E and the C when in first inversion. In second
inversion, G, C, E, there is a 4th between the G-C and an "6" between the
G-E."

Ken Gerler (I was a theory major in college)

Hmmm? if that were the case, then the later would be a 4/6 rather than a
6/4. Right?<G> Personally, I prefer the Jazz Musicians way of saying
something like "the C chord with a G in the bass.<G>
That's my take on that.
Joe


Joe Garrett, R.P.T.
Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110927/06e87143/attachment.htm>