On 7/10/06 1:00 PM, Darcy wrote:

> A question though -- is it really true that this prelude's harmonies
> "have not been well explained"? Tymoczko's animation uses jazz chord
> symbols, and Chopin's progression is easily explainable in terms
> familiar to anyone versed in jazz theory.

Well, other than noting the chromatic voice leading in individual "voices"
between the few functional chords, the majority of the chords in the opening
phrase are usually called "transient, non-functional."  It seems even that
Chopin encourages this through some (deliberate?) misspellings, e.g., the
first Eb, which functionally should be a D#.

My knowledge of jazz theory is quite sketchy.  What I do know seems to put
its focus on chord identification, rather than the details of chord
progression -- other than to identify common chord progressions with or
without substitutes.  I'm probably wrong about that -- as I said, my
knowledge of jazz theory is sketchy.

Speaking in extremely basic terms, traditional classical theory looks at
functions (tonic, pre-dominant, dominant), and looks to account for the role
of each vertical simultaneity in terms of its role in a progression or a
prolongation.  It is when the vertical simultaneities don't seem to "fit" in
and of themselves that we explain them by talking about voice leading and
transient or non-functional chords.  In the case of that Chopin prelude, the
transient chords outnumber the functional ones (at least in the first
phrase), and hence the comment that "the harmonies have not been well
explained" is not surprising to me.  Tymoczko says he wants to propose a
theory for when things are inexplicable in traditional terms but
never-the-less sound "good."  He says his observations work for music from
the mid-19th century through to the present time.

Darcy, how would that first phrase in Chopin's e minor prelude be explained
in jazz theory terms?  I'd be curious to see that.

I saw a report in the Washington Post about Tymoczko's article -- the
newsworthiness was that it was published in Science (clever move on his
part).  He is a very smart guy, and could be on to something.  He is also
not making any extravagant claims, but seems to be offering this as a way of
understanding.  Traditional music theory really does struggle with mid-19th
through 20th century harmony (unless it carefully follows a well-established
theory/method).  Unfortunately, I could not look at the movie link -- keeps
timing out on me. 

David Froom


_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to