Music Theory questions

**aliza** · Nov-02-2011, 2:33pm

Hi. I'm studying for the AP Music Theory exam, and I hope to use this thread to post any questions I may have in the process.
I'm currently in the chapter on intervals, and the book says: "Remember that when you are spelling intervals below a given pitch you must still associate the top note to the major key of the bottom note. You cannot change the given note." I understand the relationships between different intervals, but I have no clue what this is saying. Can someone help?

**DougC** · Nov-02-2011, 3:11pm

I strongly suggest that you talk with your teacher about this. The notion is unclear to me and I'm very hesitant to make any suggestions that might affect your understanding. I seems to say that you have to stay aware of the root in order to keep the interval pattern of the mode or key in order to 'spell' your intervals. But only you teacher knows what he/she wants. NOT ME. O.K?
Good luck.

**thewhitegts** · Nov-02-2011, 3:21pm

Originally Posted by DougC

I strongly suggest that you talk with your teacher about this. The notion is unclear to me and I'm very hesitant to make any suggestions that might affect your understanding. I seems to say that you have to stay aware of the root in order to keep the interval pattern of the mode or key in order to 'spell' your intervals. But only you teacher knows what he/she wants. NOT ME. O.K?
Good luck.

I'd have to agree with your assumption, too. It's worded quite strange, though. I teach theory as a part of my private lessons. None of the material I use has ever worded anything like that when discussing intervallic patterns, though.

**SincereCorgi** · Nov-02-2011, 3:22pm

Yeah, I second Doug, this seems like a thing that might make more sense in context. My suspicion is that they're using non-specific intervals like 'a third' or 'a sixth' instead of 'a minor third' or 'a major sixth', and the idea is that you have to figure out which kind to use based on the the key signature. Talk about a confusing way to write it, though...

**DerTiefster** · Nov-02-2011, 3:29pm

I was trying to imagine what was meant, and only came up with the example of a major third with respect to C as the low note vs. the same interval against C#. In the former case, you'd write C-E as the third interval. In the C# as root case, one might be tempted to write C#-F, but that would not clearly retain the 3rd note position and C#-E# might be preferred. E# is part of the C# scale, and happens to be the same pitch as the F of the C scale (we're even-tempered, here, no?).

Anyone want to take a crack at a third interval above E#? I think it might be G##. But, yes, ask someone who knows what the author meant. Or look at any examples provided and see if they make sense. I suspect the only reason you're getting any answers is that there are folks like me, who are fascinated with puzzles.

**Chip Booth** · Nov-02-2011, 3:51pm

Sounds to me like it might be suggesting a way to name an internal when the the root note (say a C) is higher than the next note. We usually talk about intervals with the root note at the bottom and we go up the scale from there, so in the key of C the G directly above C would be the 5th. What would the interval be from this C to a G below it? A 4th below, or is it still the 5th of C?

Or maybe that has nothing to do with it...

**aliza** · Nov-02-2011, 3:54pm

Thanks for your ideas, I'm trying to learn this on my own, just out of the book (I know that sounds a bit crazy) so I don't have a teacher. At least I'm happy to know that it's not just me not understanding something basic. I guess it's just worded strangely and that's all.

**Mark Robertson-Tessi** · Nov-02-2011, 6:12pm

I'd agree with the line of thought of Michael T. I'd say that the book is referring to a situation like "What is the major third below F?", and someone saying C#, which is incorrect. C# would be a diminished 4th. Dflat would be a major third. So the book is saying whatever your answer is for the lower note, the given note (F) must be the true major third. "You can't change the given note" means you can't make the given F into an E# so that your answer of C# becomes correct.

CHeers
Mark

**aliza** · Nov-02-2011, 7:20pm

Thanks. That makes a lot of sense. now I can move on.

"stay tuned for further questions"

**SincereCorgi** · Nov-02-2011, 9:07pm

Originally Posted by aliza

Thanks for your ideas, I'm trying to learn this on my own, just out of the book (I know that sounds a bit crazy) so I don't have a teacher.

It's not that hard to learn on your own, but, if you do, I hope you're using a keyboard constantly while reading- play all the examples, even if you already understand them intellectually. It's really easy to learn theory as a total abstraction, so it's important to turn it into actual sounds as often as possible.

**flyingfrog75** · Nov-03-2011, 10:37am

It sounds to me like they might be talking about chord inversion. I think what they're getting at is if you change the root of the note then you end up with (in classical theory) a type of inverted chord, and it is technically a different chord if you were to use the classical symbolism for inversion along with the chord name. I've found that (if what the writer is saying is what I think he's saying) you only find that sort of editing in classical sheet music. It really doesn't matter how the chord is inverted, a C chord is still technically a C chord no matter how you stack it in practice. However, it can change the sound somewhat depending on if the G or the E is in the root of the chord, but it doesn't change it that much. Then again, maybe the author is talking about spelling chords using the notes from the scale and not borrowing chords out of another scale. But if that was the case, it seems like it could have been worded a whole lot more intelligibly.

**aliza** · Nov-03-2011, 6:43pm

oh, that's a good point. I've been using keyboard as far as scales and modes are concerned, but I haven't really been playing the examples. maybe I'll start that. thanks.

**Jim Broyles** · Nov-03-2011, 8:36pm

Originally Posted by aliza

Hi. I'm studying for the AP Music Theory exam, and I hope to use this thread to post any questions I may have in the process.
I'm currently in the chapter on intervals, and the book says: "Remember that when you are spelling intervals below a given pitch you must still associate the top note to the major key of the bottom note. You cannot change the given note." I understand the relationships between different intervals, but I have no clue what this is saying. Can someone help?

This is the key here. If you are given a note and instructed to spell an interval below that note, the bottom note is the tonic in spelling the interval. Just as Mark said above, you cannot change the top note, so it must be a (interval) above the bottom note, in the bottom note's major key. The example he gave is perfect. Here's another one I found on line:

If you are asked to write a note that is a certain interval below a given note, the process is similar. Simply count down from the given note, starting on the number of the interval. If you are given a 'G,' and told to write a note that is a diminished fifth below it, start on that 'G' and count down from 5 until you reach 1. You'll now be on the note 'C'. Ask yourself the question, 'Is there a 'G' in a 'C' major scale"? The answer is "Yes", so this is a perfect fifth. We want to make the interval smaller(to make it diminished), so we raise the 'C' to a 'C-sharp'. (In this case, we raise the 'C', because the 'G' was the note you were given. Do not change the given note.)

Here is where I got it.

**aliza** · Nov-04-2011, 4:51pm

Thank you Jim, I understand what it's saying now. That's a pretty cool site you got that explanation from.

**DougC** · Nov-05-2011, 10:35am

Originally Posted by SincereCorgi

It's not that hard to learn on your own, but, if you do, I hope you're using a keyboard constantly while reading- play all the examples, even if you already understand them intellectually. It's really easy to learn theory as a total abstraction, so it's important to turn it into actual sounds as often as possible.

Yes, it is really important to hear what all of this puzzle stuff sounds like. I really like to have an instrument in hand when I have the pencil and paper, or computer screen on. Often the sounds are familiar and the theory gives certain situations a 'name'. So you already know some of the sounds or finger patterns and finding what they are called in theory is just their name.

A great resource is musictheory.net It has an interactive interval tool. It is a dream come true.
http://www.musictheory.net/calculators/interval

Aliza. Thank you for the question. I think we all benefit from working on these things.

**aliza** · Nov-06-2011, 9:14am

Hi everyone. another question. I know that certain intervals are "perfect". but what is it that gives them that title? Is it because both notes of the interval are part of the other note's scale?For example, given the note C, a perfect fourth would be an F. and if the first note was an F, a C would be part of the F scale. But if you take the C, and give a major third, the note would be an E. but given an E, C# would be the note that is part of the scale.

I'm not sure if I'm wording this correctly, but is that the basic idea?

**Tom Wright** · Nov-06-2011, 9:51am

Interesting view, not sure if that applies generally, but it might.

I understood the term "perfect" to mean they were neither major nor minor.

**aliza** · Nov-06-2011, 10:37am

Oh. That didn't even occur to me

thanks Tom.

**JeffD** · Nov-06-2011, 10:55am

Originally Posted by SincereCorgi

It's not that hard to learn on your own, but, if you do, I hope you're using a keyboard constantly while reading- play all the examples, even if you already understand them intellectually. It's really easy to learn theory as a total abstraction, so it's important to turn it into actual sounds as often as possible.

Hey Corgi is that the right approach? Would it not be better to play the examples as much as possible on the mandolin? If that is the OPs primary instrument I mean.

**JeffD** · Nov-06-2011, 10:58am

Originally Posted by aliza

Thanks for your ideas, I'm trying to learn this on my own, just out of the book (I know that sounds a bit crazy) so I don't have a teacher. .

I have done that with many subjects. In more than a few occations I had to write the author or authors to get something clarified. With the web this is easier than ever.

Authors, I have found, are flattered by questions, because it shows someone was into it enough to ask. Also most authors seek to be understood. Clarity above all. So if something is unclear, they are motivated to explain and perhaps change it in the next edition.

**SincereCorgi** · Nov-06-2011, 12:42pm

Originally Posted by JeffD

Hey Corgi is that the right approach? Would it not be better to play the examples as much as possible on the mandolin? If that is the OPs primary instrument I mean.

Ideally, yeah, you could play them on any instrument, but in my experience most theory books have their examples arranged for a keyboard. (Things that are relatively easy on a keyboard – like showing how a bassline interacts with the melody in the right hand – become virtuoso maneuvers on a mandolin.) I resisted for a long time, but now I think that all musicians really should learn a little piano.

**catmandu2** · Nov-06-2011, 1:02pm

There's good reason why it's standard equipment (required) in academia--not least of which is it makes things easiest, really.

**DougC** · Nov-10-2011, 11:30am

Originally Posted by aliza

Hi everyone. another question. I know that certain intervals are "perfect". but what is it that gives them that title? Is it because both notes of the interval are part of the other note's scale?For example, given the note C, a perfect fourth would be an F. and if the first note was an F, a C would be part of the F scale. But if you take the C, and give a major third, the note would be an E. but given an E, C# would be the note that is part of the scale.

I'm not sure if I'm wording this correctly, but is that the basic idea?

Perfect intervals are determined from the physics of sound. Sounds are divided up by their harmonics and perfect intervals are pretty darn stable. Going up the scale or down, the interval does not change one bit.
Getting all of this interval / pitch relations stuff takes a bit of time. Keep asking questions though!

**"Umm, fish?"** · Nov-11-2011, 5:02pm

Actually, I think the OP is talking about "perfect" fourths, fifths, and octaves. Don't get too hung up on the name. It's just a name and in this context means, "Those intervals that aren't made major or minor if you invert the notes."

If you look at the interval: C -> E, that's a major third. If you look at E -> C, that's a minor sixth. A major interval becomes a minor interval and vice versa.

If you look at C -> G, that's a fifth. If you look at G -> C, that is a fourth. No major or minor involved. The name for that is "perfect" for some reason.

**SincereCorgi** · Nov-12-2011, 3:12pm

Originally Posted by "Umm, fish?"

If you look at C -> G, that's a fifth. If you look at G -> C, that is a fourth. No major or minor involved. The name for that is "perfect" for some reason.

I think it's prob'ly because the perfect intervals are harmonically neutral (generally speaking) and common to both major and minor chord constructions. I would be interested to see a history of music theory thinking, though... I think the 'scientific' approach probably only dates to the late 19th century, and before that music was mostly taught as a practical subject (counterpoint and so forth).