Fischer vs. Kasparov

...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.

Now I understand why you were stating things as you were. I have limited understanding of classical music training. I had never heard of the term enharmonic before. If I wrote a scale my way, I wouldn't hesitate to write the first name that came to mind. It wouldn't confuse me because, I haven't been trained one way only. I roll with the punches.

Part of the reason I described polyphony the way I did, is obviously a limited education for the best terms to use. The other is that it can be difficult to describe it, compared to a modulation when it first begins to occur, before it becomes more than two melodies that are played at once.  I guess it is a matter of perspective.Thanks for sharing the best terms. You have taught me a great deal in a short time.

Music is opinion to a degree. I have had this argument with others before. I find classically trained people to very intolerant of any other form of musical system or non classical pieces in general. You have been accomodating instead of just spouting about your degree and how I don't know what I am talking about, just to try to put me in my place. Thanks for not being that way.

To better illustrate why I don't like strict musical definitions that everyone would think we should only use as a rule, the next sentence will give you an idea of how those terms don't give good enough guidelines or necessary inspiration, to bring forth music.Someone could pound as many keys as possible on a piano in an irregular random way, with a rhythm and call it polyphony, but I wouldn't consider it music. In all technicallity, it is polyphony according the definitions of melody,harmony and polyphony. It however would suck.

Well he did admit his extreme bias for Fischer so you had good reason to ignore the rest of his post.

Sometimes modern music sounds like it's just random banging on keys, but when you have a score and analyze it, you start seeing a lot of patterns and realize it's not just a mess.  An interesting thing is that all music is an acquired taste.  If you go back to 1000 AD and play a C major chord, you're going to cause a huge fuss!  Another example is how eastern and middle eastern music often times seems strange to us, which is because they use different scales.

I hope you're not being sarcastic and saying I'm really like most snobby classical musicians.  Being in school with them really shows how arrogant most of us are.  Sure, I'll take Beethoven over Led Zeppelin any day, but I wouldn't every say that rock isn't music.  Most classical musicians will find popular songs they like and say "This is one of the few pieces of real music in popular music."  Give me a break...

What you said reminds of something, I have found fascinating to consider. I have always assumed as you have basically stated, in a sort of backward way, that music has developed through experimentation and what we would consider today as soothing to our ears, might in the distant past,have caught others totally off gaurd and wouldn't know what to think of it.

I always wondered what would happen if you took a part of the population and segregated them from the rest of society, so they couldn't be influenced by the music of our culture. After having successfully segregated them, careful to make sure they couldn't be influenced somehow otherwise, give them musical instruments and in a vary vague way demonstrate some potential, for what each could do and then let them have for a while and come back to see what happens. My guess is, it would be like going back in time in some ways.

By the way I really like some asian strings and middle eastern music. I wasn't being sarcastic, you have been very tolerant, informative and friendly. Something I haven't always encountered.

I think Beethoven was far more innovative than Led Zepplin. If they would have laid off of the drugs and alcohol, they may have been more of a band I held in a regard such as Pink Floyd. Even though Floyd did do some drugs, I think they say quickly after Sid Barrett, how destructive it could be and mellowed out, focusing more on there music, where as Zepplin sort of did the opposite.I love the Morroccan rhythms in Kashmir. I wish they would have broadened their horizons a bit more musically.

As far as that goes, if I could truly understand in totality what I like and why, I would more likely be busying writing or performing, but I think some classical musicians consider their taste too impeccable to admit they like any pop music, while I think some do pick songs that probably are pretty good, though I might not like them, just to not seem so condescending to others.

One of the things we learnt about in Music History was the changes in music. If you listen to unaccompanied gregorian chant, it's just a single melodic line. Then there was organum, which added the 5th above the note and doubled at the octave. Eventually someone thought of making the other voices have completely different pitches, which gave rise to polyphony and eventually harmony. The tritone (i.e. B-F) was called "The Devil and Music," but we have them all of the time now (i.e. G7).

With the innovations Beethoven created, his music would have been heard very differently to an 19th century person than to us. If you consider the large difference between Beethoven and other classical period composers, the big 2 are Mozart and Haydn, one can see why so many people were initially against his music and thought it was trash. This is one of his most dissonant, "ugly" pieces, and this video has many quotes of what people thought at the time. Since you like polyphony, you might like this since it's a fugue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s0Mp7LFI-k

As for the eastern music, I thought this was neat, and you might get into it. There are a few videos of people actually performing on it, also:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7Cq3pbcMkI

I thought of something, and the thing about spelling enharmonic notes is how they're used. In a fully diminished 7th chord, all 4 notes can act as a new leading tone, which is what will determine the spelling. C-Eb-Gb-Bbb should resolve to a Db chord, and D#-F#-A-C should resolve to some sort of an E, and F#-A-C-Eb to a G, and A-C-Eb-Gb to Bb. The versitility of the fully diminished 7th chord means it gets used in a lot of modulations.

Another chord is the German Augmented 6th. In C major the Ger+6 is Ab-C-Eb-F#, which resolves to the dominant (GBDG). This chord is actually enharmonic to Ab7, but Ab7 traditionally resolves to Db. The difference is that in the Ger+6 the Ab resolves down to G and the F# resolves up to G, but in Db the Ab jumps down to Db and the Gb resolves down to F. It's sometimes used to modulate, such as going from the key of Db to C, treating the dominant of Db as the Ger+6 of C.

Here is a good example of enharmonic spelling gone nuts. These are both the C major scale:

I am really upset. I just spent a good deal of time putting together a post and apparently it timed out. Now I have to start all over. I am not sure when I'll get back to it. This is the 3rd time this has happened to me on Chess.com. I am about to complain about it. It really irks me...

Yeah I hired some Polish dancers...

Thanks again for volunteering more information. I enjoyed the Beethoven Fugue. There were some parts at the begining that I didn't like the timing of, but the harmonies never sounded sour to me.

As far as eastern music, I prefer Japanese and Chinese strings, while I like Middle Eastern rhythms,scales and modes. I am not big on sitar and Indian music.

Here is a cool vid I found while looking over what you showed me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ7WbmhCsqs

It is something I had been wondering about for a while, but didn't knowwhat to make of it. It certainly would help to explain why I like Jimi Hendrix's 1/4 tone bends and why I don't like many of the 12 tone scale intervals. I have found I am very particular when it comes to harmony,resolution and modulation.

I found this to be interesting too:(I quoted your post above)

I thought of something, and the thing about spelling enharmonic notes is how they're used. In a fully diminished 7th chord, all 4 notes can act as a new leading tone, which is what will determine the spelling. C-Eb-Gb-Bbb should resolve to a Db chord, and D#-F#-A-C should resolve to some sort of an E, and F#-A-C-Eb to a G, and A-C-Eb-Gb to Bb. The versitility of the fully diminished 7th chord means it gets used in a lot of modulations.

Another chord is the German Augmented 6th. In C major the Ger+6 is Ab-C-Eb-F#, which resolves to the dominant (GBDG). This chord is actually enharmonic to Ab7, but Ab7 traditionally resolves to Db. The difference is that in the Ger+6 the Ab resolves down to G and the F# resolves up to G, but in Db the Ab jumps down to Db and the Gb resolves down to F. It's sometimes used to modulate, such as going from the key of Db to C, treating the dominant of Db as the Ger+6 of C.

This explains why when I try to resolve a progression or choose the next chord interval in a progression, I might get the root right but I can't find the right harmonizing notes. I can't stand the way certain chords sound together. They either sound cheesy,too plain, or as if the have any "hook" to them.

Many people would probably be ok with a pop song that has a progression that goes Gmaj,Cmaj,Emin,Dmaj repeat...but I would rather replace the Emin with this chord on the guitar(forgive my enharmonic ignorance as it might apply in this case) D#("A" string 6th fret),G("D" string 5th fret),B("G" string 4th fret) B( open "B" string), G("E" string 3rd fret). I don't know the name of this chord. I could look it up in Ted Greene's Chord Chemistry Book, but it would take me a while. It probably has more than one name too.

I can tell you that it is the first chord in the Pink Floyd song "Don't Leave Me Now" from The Wall. It is the second chord in both Aerosmith's "What It takes" and John Michael Montgomery's " I love The Way You Love Me".

I actually wrote a song that uses a part of the progression from the last two songs I just mentioned. That is when I discovered it, but I made sure the rest of it was different as those two are slighlty different as well.

Here are a few other songs that I really like that might help explain me musically. I like Dogs from Animals by Pink Floyd and Shine On You Crazy Diamond also by Floyd. Maybe you can take all of this information and decipher my crazt eclectic tastes.

Oh I see, you're talking about the Parham again - G7 diminished; or is it the G7 Nations with dimished economic prospects?? ok I'm confused again

Contradictions in the roots and harmony are always confusing...

FINALLY I SEE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The video was interesting, but I felt like the guy didn't demonstrate the 19 tone temperment enough.  I ahve a book that talks a little about tunning systems and it predicts a 54 note scale would be the scale with the most tones.

GBD# is a G augmented chord.  It could also be spelt EbGB, which would be an Eb aug.  If you want to go nuts you can call it an augmented F double sharp or an A double flat.  To be honest with you, when I played it on the piano, I heard the D# as a non-chord tone that resolves to the note D.  I suppose it would really depend on the harmonic rhythm and the voicing.  What notes are you using in the bass?

Diminished triads are 2 minor thirds, minor triads are minor + major, major chords are major + minor, and augmented chords are 2 major 3rds.  I can give a list of the 7th chords if you really want me to.

I don't think I can say anything else about the post because Pink Floyd isn't accepted by my personal tastes.

It might really be best to talk about this stuff in personal messages instead of on Fischer vs. Kasparov (Fischer, by the way.)

Agreed, I was going to say that 5 posts ago, but I didn't want to seem as if I was blowing you off for any reason. I also agreed that the guy could have given a demonstration in terms of playing an actual song instead of leaving it to my imagination to figure out how I could apply it more to song than the current smore popular system. This the names I found for that chord:         Eb aug5 ||R3a5, G  aug5 ||R3a5, B  aug5 ||R3a5 ( bear in mind, these came from a reverse chord finder I found online...I am still going to look it up in Ted Greene's Book. I can't the PDF file though.

The Eb(D#) is the bass note of the chord. You can just as easily play an A note for the bass, for a relative chord and an E for the bass of an alternative. You can use all three and begin to build a song as Floyd did. I am really sorry you don't like Floyd. One of the lures for me, is the fact that they use reknowned orchestras to play in the recordings,concerts, etc. I like that chord slowly arpeggiated and strummed in various rhythms.

I am going to take this conversation to private messages. TTYL. Thanks again.