17435 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I read that Fischer instantly memorized games and after tournaments/matches he could recount all of his games with 100% accuracy. If this is true, even though Kasparov did all of this research and computer use, wouldn't Fischer's talent allow him to surpass Kasparov if he had the same access to computers, since he'd have even more stored in his mind? Did Kasparov ever win matches with 100% victories (GM level, not playing 50 kids at a convention).
It's impossible to say, in reality. I just like Fischer, so I'm going to go with him. It's like comparing Beethoven and Mozart. Fischer would be the Mozart of the two, but with Beethoven's attitude. I also say Beethoven was better than Mozart, but that's just based upon personal tastes.
Since many of Kasparov's games have been published, I'm not sure it's fair to say that Kasparov was able to study Fischer but Fischer couldn't study Kasparov.
Another question would be if Karpov would have won the title from Fischer, or if Kasparov's world championship matches would have been against Fischer.
I think some of Beethoven and Mozart's songs have some really heartfelt and memorable parts, Bach was the genius. His ability to blend anything so fluidly is mind boggling for me. Polyphony theory makes my brain cells smoke when I try to apply it to modern pieces of music that I like. The sound of his polyphonics puts me at ease.
Beethoven! Beethoven! Whoo!!! (and just think what the guy could've come up with if he hadn't been deaf)...
I might be tooting his horn instead of Bach's...I have to consider him a special case due to his disability...
Kasparov might be a better player, but I like Fischer much more
Some people think his deafness allowed him to rely more on his imagination and become more and more original, eventually completely transcending the classical style and creating a unique sound that later became the romantic period.
I prefer Beethoven over Mozart, who I prefer over Bach. Sometimes I like Bach, but most of the time I don't. By the way, Mozart displayed his polyphonic abilities many times, such as his 5 part invertable counterpoint in the Jupiter Symphony, which is considered one of the greatest contrapuntal accomplishments ever. Beethoven was fond of fugato with multiple parts, which he used in many of his symphonies (maybe all, but I'm not sure). I know the 2nd movement of the 3rd has a triple fugato and the 9th has a double fugue in the last movement. Let me tell you, the 9th symphony is a huge pain to sing. we basses called ourselves the 2nd tenor section...
Also, what do you mean by applying countrapuntal technique to modern pieces of music? Are we talking Stravinsky or Led Zeppelin and Nickleback?
P.S. As far as I know, Beethoven seems to be the composer who changes the world the most in terms of music, musicians, and artists. For example, he gave us the tortured genius image, and elevated musicians from mere servants to respected artists.
I think if Fischer wanted to he could have remained world champion for many years. He just had no incentive to do so.
I did read that the Russians worked together to defeat Fischer. That is a good point; the guy was literally taking on the world (and winning)
There is evidence that the Soviets did have foul play against other players, but I'm not so sure they would have cared if the World Champion match was between 2 Russians since it would keep the Russians on the top. Since their games are considered brilliant, who was the master who pre-arranged all of the moves of the Karpov - Kasparov matchs? They also displayed their skills outside of these matches, so we know they were really that good.
I don't know what I meant by that (in fact, I might never even have said it).
Actually, my initial remark was intended to be (characteristically) flippant, along the lines of saying what a genius Hendrix must've been to be able to play all that stuff left-handed. Leave it to chessplayers to take it (and everything) seriously...
My counterpoint remarks were for nameno1had. I just tagged them to the end of that one instead of making 2. I also don't think it's the chess player in me, but the classical pianist who has a degree in music part of me.
Changing from one scale to another in a piece isn't my forte, when I try it from free improvisation. Of course I can do this when, its a piece I have memorized that someone else has written. I have trouble improvising blues lines especially. I get lost in the variations available from all of the half step tones available in the scale. After I listen and compare a three of four possibilities, my tonal memory goes ka-put...I also have what I call cross melody syndrome...I used to think I knew what Pink Floyd meant when they wrote ..." and if the band your in starts playing different tunes, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon"...until I discovered you can be playing the same chord progression, but still be playing different tunes....I guess part of my problem is...I don't know the epitome of what I like is. I only have eclectic examples. I don't like to copy cat. Fusing different musical phrases together in a hodge podge to suit your fancy can be tedious and tricky. That is why I have so much respect for Bach. He could intertwine melodies so well, you almost don't even realize he was switching scales.
I think by "switching scales" you're talking about modulating to another key, or possibly using the different forms of the minor scales.
How many games were played between Kasparov, and The others you listed?
P.S: Go Kasparov!
Yup good point, and in case Reb does not know Kasparov beat Korchnoi 17 to 1 while Robert James Fischer tied Viktor Korchnoi 2 with 4 draws.
So how can anyone seriously ask this question?
...Lets say you are playing in the scale of B minor(no C note) during the verse section of a song, then lets say at the prechorus you quickly change to the D major scale is that exactly the same except you begin omitting the C# and instead use the C...I forget their correct musical names.
I have seen this in some popular songs. I find it easier said than done to freely improvise in this way that is sounds pleasing to my ear. Bach could do this same thing with several scales in the same piece and make it fluid and sound as smooth as glass.
To me a D major scale without the C# is actually the G major scale and would sound like a modulation to G. Another possibility would be that it's the dorian mode.
Without sounding argumentative or as if I am trying to correct you...what would you consider the following scale...
A minor scale a-b,c,-d-e,f-g-a...or... C major scale c-d-e,f-g-a-b,c...or...F major scale f-g-a-b,c-d-e,f...E minor harmonic scale e,f-g-a-b,c-d-e...
all are the same notes in the same order...just a different starting point...so in some way it is a matter of perspective... the same set of notes or chords could be viewed as the same or different... It would become polyphonic when you went from lets say a E minor harmonic to an E minor penatonic by substituting the Gb(F#) note for the "f" note...
What determines the key is actually the harmonic structure and how those notes will be used. The note a scale starts on gives it a strong sense of the harmony used, especially when the penultimate note is a leading tone. Within the key of C, G-A-B-C-D-E-F-G is going to sound a lot like a dominant harmony because it has all of the notes of a dominant 7th, plus it has more G's than any other note. Ending on F will really bring out the quality of the 7th, ending on E will sound like a resolution, D will sound like the supertonic wanting to resolve to C, B will sound like the leading tone wanting to go to C, and ending on A will sound like a deceptive cadence, or possibly a V - IV progression if supported by the correct harmonic notes, like G-F in the bass.
I hope you're not angry about me correcting you, but an F-scale is F G A Bb C D E, and an e harmonic minor scale is E F# G A B C D# E. A minor pentatonic scale on E will be E F# G B C E, so I assume you mean the phyrigian mode starting on E (E F G A B C D E). E minor contains a F#, not a Gb, unless it's being used in some sort of a modulation to a key with flats to e minor from a key with flats. Polyphonic is a musical texture when one has multiple simultaneous melodies. Modulating is when one changes from one key to another. In this last post it seems like you're refering to "modulating" as "polyphonic", but a homophonic or monophonic texture can still contain modulations as easily as a polyphonic.
I don't know where you are getting you information from. Maybe I have gotten some bad information myself. But for starters F# or Gb is the same note expressed two different ways. As for the scale names you are trying to use, the one you use to describe as E minor petantonic isn't correct. I know that scale because I was a metal head and still really enjoy the way a few bands that use this scale .
I'll admit I was wrong too earlier. I added a tone to this and was calling it E minor pentatonic. I realize now I got the harmonic and phrygian minor scales mixed up. That however didn't completely disqualify the point I am trying to make.
Bach definitely created polyphonic music. I just didn't do a good job describing it. I was trying to use only a sample portion of what I understood to be happening, as I tried to relate it to modern music. I recall stating trying to incorporate Bach's style into it, was something that makes my head spin. Even though I only described modulation, it is the first contradiction one begins to hear between melody and bass that characterises polyphony as it begins to occur.
On your guitar and my piano, F# and Gb are acoustically the same note, but they won't be when using pure intervals, such as solo violin music and barber shop. Even though they are enharmonic, it is bad music theory to say that e minor is Gb because you'll have a scale with 2 types of G's since enharmonics are avoided in scales with the exception of octatonic scales and sometimes whole step scales. Major and minor scales are constructed by 2nds (actually, by 5ths but that is a complicated subject), but E to Gb is suddenly a diminished 3rd. Consider this picture and see which is easier to read:
It seems that when I think of a minor pentatonic scale, I'm actually thinking of the hirajoshi scale. What you gave is correct. One way to look at it is that the minor pentatonic is a relative minor and the hirjoshi is a parallel minor scale.
I know what you mean by the contradiction of melody and bass, but it might be better to describe it as soprano and bass since they're both melodies in a polyphonic texture, and if it is imitative counterpoint, the subject will jump between the two.
A chess rule.
by I-eat-guini-pigs a few minutes ago
post your funniest illegal games here!!!!!!!!
by chesssmart82 a few minutes ago
Who is better Paul Morphy or Magnus Carlsen
by fabelhaft 4 minutes ago
I didn´t get a points for wining
by Doggy_Style 5 minutes ago
Chess is not about intelligence
by DrCheckevertim 7 minutes ago
Developing a Chess Engine
by Coder_On_Ster01ds 10 minutes ago
I am quitting chess.
by motherinlaw 11 minutes ago
Positions engines get wrong ( please contribute )
by DandyDanD 13 minutes ago
Some easy 2 move mates
by stanhope13 14 minutes ago
Can anyone become world champion?
by MSC157 14 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!