And a tritone subsitution is doubly as effective if you include the seventh of the chord too (as the seventh of the tritone substitution is the third of the regular dominant chord, which are both tension notes within the chord)!
This is the first time I’ve heard a clear explanation of a 6/4 chord and why it’s called that. Thank you! Also, the “give people what they expect but not necessarily how they expect it” Is a great concept.
The grandfather of mediant 3rds used in film scores is Mr. Bernard Herrmann. He used the mediant 3rds beautifully for the, "Sleep," cue from Psycho. John Williams drew a lot of influence from Mr. Herrmann, so it makes sense that he would give that duff of the cap to the grandfather of film scores using that beautiful 3rds relationship.
Harmony and Voice Leading by Aldwell & Schachter identifies the "accented 6/4", which is much like a cadential 6/4, but not cadential. So the IV 6/4 chord here would be functioning as the I chord to which it resolves. Definitely seems like what Williams is doing here, though he "denies" the resolution with the modulation. Does seem to be an oddly overlooked use of the 6/4 chord in many textbooks though.
I think you got the bass going V I but the harmony going V IV. The 6/4 is created by sheer expectation fulfilled by the bass but delayed elsewhere. IV is reinterpreted as bVI which can go to V or a tritone sub kind of thing where he also has the melody outline a mi cadence and that's the fifth o the new key as in a renaissance plagal cadence, just different harmony and bass. Very interesting, seems logical.
While the specific usage here is awesome, as someone who struggles a little with the application of inversions, I also really appreciated the traditional use of second inversions as devices. Would love some more of those, for first inversions and chord with extensions too!
3:45 there are actually harmonic functions involved, the bass changes the tension level in the chord. Because of this, generally the ending of songs that use this use the tonic as a bass to eliminate all tension, while in every song this resolution chord was in inversion.to maintain a tension level for example.
I think you kind of forgot one important relation: B major as a key is parallel to G# minor, which in turn enharmonically speaking (Ab minor) is the "minorized" subdominant of Eb major - a classic in romantic era composing. The melody resembles this quite clearly actually. The harmony is just there to obfuscate this imho. Or to try a different version of this well known path.
As a choral singer, I tend to think of melodic lines and how they are phrased -- gives a different perspective on the chords, leading tones, etc. Enjoyed your presentation!
Good insight. One small smart-alecky correction @6:35 ff: B major to Eb major is up a diminished 4th, not a major third. If it modulated to MIDIculous’s D# major, that would be up a major third. 😁I suppose one could argue that he did actually modulate to D# major, since that would be the chromatic mediant modulation it feels like, but that he notated it enharmonically to make it easier to read. 🤷♂️
I always find these videos helpful, especially the melodic structure and orchestration ones 👌 I wondered if you'd have any helpful tips and tricks for adding ornamentations to melodies. It's easy to Google examples, but I find incorporating them in a way that feels appropriate can be tricky. Hopefully you've some insight on adding ornamentations in a way that adds to a melody and doesn't distract or feel unnecessary.
The Emaj/B functions in both keys so is arguably not a chromatic mediant. It functions as a IV chord in Bmaj and a Neopolitan 6 in Eb. A Neopolitan 6 is a bII chord usually in first inversion that resolves to the tonic. It is so named because the interval between the 3rd and the root of a chord in first inversion is a minor 6th. In Western art music, It's rarer in second inversion but in jazz harmony it's just referred to as a bII, usually used in root position and is a substitute for the IV chord. BTW - John Williams uses the bII chord all the time - especially in Hook. I’m assuming you analyzed the chords correctly because I’m on a phone and can’t really hear the harmony. Listen to the main theme of hook and hear the bII used as a cadence. You could probably analyze it as a form of a plagal cadence.
Agreed, the h 6-4 chord is the enharmonic equivalent to the neapolitan of e flat major, so it functions as a bridge chord and this is a plagal cadence. This kind of modulation is well known also in older text books.
This is a great video, and you explain the theory well - I don't feel that enough attention was given as to what the aural effect of this was, past the theory. I really like your brevity generally, too.
Of course he breaks the "rules". That's what makes him and his contemporaries special. If you go down the Williams rabbit hole, you'd be surprised with how often he gives the middle finger to textbooks 😂
This video is really interesting. I wonder how should one analyse a song such as God Only Knows by the Beach Boys, where the 2nd inversion is used in very different contexts that don't seem to line up with traditional music.
That opinion on the plagal cadence needs explaining. (Which the video you linked didn't do, btw.) My take is that styles like euro-classical or jazz have a preference for stronger cadences, while styles like blues or pop have a preference for weaker cadences; and that your opinion on plagal cadences is informed by your musical preferences.
They aren't being used as cadences in the examples he referred to at least, they are asides after the final cadence. If some Avengers movie ends with the character at a party delivering the tension and release of a light joke, that wasn't the final cadence of the story. The defeat of the bad guy before the party was. But for a standup comedy routine, that last joke would be the final cadence. So yeah all about context, but I think he was referring to common practice contexts. If you expand your genres outside the scope, you will find basically all of the textbook rules of harmony being violated.
Plagal cadences were cadences because there was a minor 3rd or major 6th contracting or expanding to a unison or octave, but rather than in the phygian half cadence (the other mi cadence), that note they cadence on in a plagal cadence was the 5th of the chord. Without that voice leading or antiquated conception of a cadence, plagal motions usually fail to accomplish the same purposes. Harmonic heuristics and the divorce of the rhetorical function from the word for a rhetorical function - cadence - causes a working debt for students learning things that are inconsistent with even the music it was most intended for. Enharmonics make this nasty so say the melody line B G# Bb was made into one key and transposed down a half step so you get Bb G A. The melody is outlining a mi cadence on A, and A (Bb there without transposition) ends up being the 5th of a major chord. For an old style plagal cadence on A, you just need Bb and G going to A, a bass that goes from G to D, and a line with two notes per note that goes D E F#. What he did instead of being that G minor to D major, was Eb major to D major. There is the tritone sub, you have a bass dropping in contrary motion to the melody, and you have even the renaissance cadential idea of melodic enclosure with a minor 3rd of a perfect consonance. Imo while the harmonic relationship of mediant between keys is very fresh, enough that it /could/ sound like a nonsensical jump, this little renaissance connection grounds what could have been a dubious note very firmly with what preceded it. Now doing away with transposition I also think the bass note being on B is in part because it was F#7 and one would expect it to go to some B chord. Harmonically instead you get retrogression to that E, and a IV chord is always VI of some V of the relative minor, but that V of some minor can just be a major tonic.
I watched the follow-up video and did not see why you feel a plagal cadence is not a cadence. Don't Stop Believing and all the I V vii IV songs rely on the plagal cadence. Unless you claim they have no cadences, and I kinda doubt that, since they clearly have a home base to cycle back to. I might be being obtuse, that's not off the table, but I just don't see your argument as to why a IV-I cannot provide the sense of ending that a perfect or imperfect or deceptive cadence can.
Bro I disagree with you analysis: it's too much rooted in chords thoughts that, in my opinion, don't explain the reason of logic behind it. First of all in F# the 4th is a ritard of the 3, not a chord by itself, in fact he posticipate the real enter of the note A# flourishing the note with a tipical upper-down: appoggiatura and volta B and G# and then it resolve in A#. The bass in the same moment move from F# to B that is also the third of G#minor, the related minor key of B, and then move to D# major (5-1 of G# minor). In the same moment the Contralto is moving F# E D# : in fact the E generate a passing dissonance with the base (the fourth) and when it resolve in D# the bass is in the same position, generating the sensation that the first F# was preparing a Cadenza d'inganno F# G#minor passing through his 5. Before you listen the rest you are not in E flat but you are in G#minor super closed to B. Changing it with transcendental enarmony and it become E flat, and in fact he put after characteristic E flat chord (don't remember, maybe 2 and 4 and 5?) Anyway, I thing this is a more correct way to explain why it sound logic and it explain the process to be able to compose a passage like that. Speaking only about the chord logic is feeble. But anyway you do a great job, you are bravo, you know the things, I don't want to say in anyway that you are not conscious of this things. Music Respect Bro, see you in the next video!
There are no right or wrong ways to use a chord. Music theory is not about rules, just guidelines, and John Williams (as well as other great composers) prove that. Any chord can come after any chord, to quote Vincent Persichetti.
Music theory is not a set of rules. It’s a set of observations about what people have done and what’s generally worked. Western tonal music theory in particular is describing the music of the baroque and classical periods, and most of what you’ll learn in that theory has effectively been thrown out the window in “modern” music, meaning pretty much anything since 1900. 😅 Jazz is loaded with inversions and voicing that are completely different than what you’ll find in a typical Western tonal music theory book. Regarding the comment about perfect 4ths being dissonant, I’d suggest you go back and review Schachter’s Harmony and Voice Leading or another book that explains when 4ths are consonant vs. dissonant - it’s contextual.
I've not seen inversions discussed this way. The way we were taught is not bass + triad where the bass note is the inverted note, rather as single block chords, triads or whatever with no bass. So a triad in root is c e g, 2nd inv is e g c, 3rd is g c e. This feels like it comes from a jazz background, where the chords are more complex. This seems more natural to me. The point of inversions is smooth voice leading, so inverting being about the 'main' part of the chord seems more logical.
@@RyanLeach I understand that. But the way you are presenting it is (from a piano perspective) left hand playing a bass note, right hand playing a triad. You say something about it not matter what the orders of the right hand/triad are for the inversion, that the type of inversion comes purely from the left hand note.
@@chrisjames3272 The order of the other notes doesn't affect the inversion - it affects the voicing/position of the chord. Inversion is determined by the bass note. Any theory book will tell you this. It doesn't come from jazz - it comes from classical music. Also, what you call 2nd and 3rd inversions are actually 1st and 2nd inversions. Yes, the simplest form of 1st inversion C major would be E G C (and this is probably how they are first introduced to beginners). But that's not the only possibility. E C G, E C E G, E G C E, E C E G C E G, E C C C E C E E G G E C... Those are all 1st inversion C major chords because of the bass note. They are simply different voicings.
@@MaggaraMarine But when you say bass note, you mean the note at the bottom of the chord. Like if you play g 1st (b d g), and then in the left hand played a g, would you describe that as a 1st inversion?
@@chrisjames3272 Without the G in the left hand, yes. With the G as the bass note, no - it isn't an inversion. It is a different voicing/position, but not an inversion, because the root of the chord is in the bass. "Slash chords" are inversions (at least most of the time). G/B is 1st inversion. G/D is 2nd inversion. But G major with G in the bass is still root position, regardless of the order of the other notes. Again, you can talk about the voicing/position of the chord, but that's not the same thing as inversion, even if some piano teachers incorrectly call them inversions. (I understand why - it's easy to say "play 1st inversion G major in the right hand and G in the left hand", but that's not how inversions actually work. They should talk about position, for example "G major with 3rd on top". You could also say "1st inversion G major with 5th on top". This is better than "root position G major in the right hand, B in the left hand".) Here's what Tchaikovsky says about chord positions in 4-voice "keyboard style" harmony (in Guide to the Practical Study of Harmony, page 12 - BTW, the book is freely available on IMSLP): _Turning now to the practical application of the above treated chords, we will begin with placing the fundamental tone in the Bass. In the highest voice any of the three tones of the chord, the fundamental tone, the Third or the Fifth may be used. For the two inner voices we will use respectively the intervals of the triad nearest to the Soprano._ _These three cases are called the positions of the chord. According to the interval of the triad which appears in the Soprano, these positions are called the fundamental position or position of the octave, the position of the Third, and the position of the Fifth._
I... I'm not gonna watch a video about how Pluto isn't a planet. Maybe if you didn't grow up in a Christian household, then you can hear Pluto as "not a planet". But for me, every single "amen" at the end of the prayer, played with an air of finality, reinforced for me that it's a cadence. Er... planet.
I'm talking about the recommended video at the end, of course. This video is the bees'. The other one probably is too, but I'm not watching that one on principle. I probably already watched it, tbh.
Not about wether IV-I is a cadence, but the “Amen cadence” coming as an extra bit after a V-I feels much more like a decoration than a destination or close for a phrase
@@RyanLeach And there is a enormous difference between what's happening musically, in a nearly universal human sense, versus what's happening psychologically in a personal sense. I have always heard plagal cadences as decoration when they're after a V-I, as you say, but I didn't grow up in a traditional church and never sang hymns that went there.
Yes, probably the chord after E major is not E-flat major, but G minor. So now I understand the title of this video. I don't know if there's another video that explains this mistake.
And a tritone subsitution is doubly as effective if you include the seventh of the chord too (as the seventh of the tritone substitution is the third of the regular dominant chord, which are both tension notes within the chord)!
That’s true. I think it’s technically required to have the 7th in there otherwise there isn’t a tritone to use for the substitution.
This is the first time I’ve heard a clear explanation of a 6/4 chord and why it’s called that. Thank you!
Also, the “give people what they expect but not necessarily how they expect it” Is a great concept.
It comes from figured bass!
The grandfather of mediant 3rds used in film scores is Mr. Bernard Herrmann. He used the mediant 3rds beautifully for the, "Sleep," cue from Psycho.
John Williams drew a lot of influence from Mr. Herrmann, so it makes sense that he would give that duff of the cap to the grandfather of film scores using that beautiful 3rds relationship.
Harmony and Voice Leading by Aldwell & Schachter identifies the "accented 6/4", which is much like a cadential 6/4, but not cadential. So the IV 6/4 chord here would be functioning as the I chord to which it resolves. Definitely seems like what Williams is doing here, though he "denies" the resolution with the modulation. Does seem to be an oddly overlooked use of the 6/4 chord in many textbooks though.
I think you got the bass going V I but the harmony going V IV. The 6/4 is created by sheer expectation fulfilled by the bass but delayed elsewhere. IV is reinterpreted as bVI which can go to V or a tritone sub kind of thing where he also has the melody outline a mi cadence and that's the fifth o the new key as in a renaissance plagal cadence, just different harmony and bass. Very interesting, seems logical.
While the specific usage here is awesome, as someone who struggles a little with the application of inversions, I also really appreciated the traditional use of second inversions as devices.
Would love some more of those, for first inversions and chord with extensions too!
3:45 there are actually harmonic functions involved, the bass changes the tension level in the chord. Because of this, generally the ending of songs that use this use the tonic as a bass to eliminate all tension, while in every song this resolution chord was in inversion.to maintain a tension level for example.
I think you kind of forgot one important relation: B major as a key is parallel to G# minor, which in turn enharmonically speaking (Ab minor) is the "minorized" subdominant of Eb major - a classic in romantic era composing. The melody resembles this quite clearly actually. The harmony is just there to obfuscate this imho. Or to try a different version of this well known path.
As a choral singer, I tend to think of melodic lines and how they are phrased -- gives a different perspective on the chords, leading tones, etc. Enjoyed your presentation!
Nice vids bro! Keep going 💪
Hook is one of John Williams' best scores
Gorgeous passage from an excellent score by the Maestro. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the harmonic progression there!
Good insight. One small smart-alecky correction @6:35 ff: B major to Eb major is up a diminished 4th, not a major third. If it modulated to MIDIculous’s D# major, that would be up a major third. 😁I suppose one could argue that he did actually modulate to D# major, since that would be the chromatic mediant modulation it feels like, but that he notated it enharmonically to make it easier to read. 🤷♂️
Nicely done. JW is a master at these . Thank you
Nice. Also motive wise it repeats - the Major 3rd G# to E is mirrored with G to Eb. That acts as motivic pivot.
nice !!! luv all the theory stuff coming out lately !!
Great job, really well explained! I’ve been recommending your videos to my students as well.
I always find these videos helpful, especially the melodic structure and orchestration ones 👌
I wondered if you'd have any helpful tips and tricks for adding ornamentations to melodies. It's easy to Google examples, but I find incorporating them in a way that feels appropriate can be tricky. Hopefully you've some insight on adding ornamentations in a way that adds to a melody and doesn't distract or feel unnecessary.
The Emaj/B functions in both keys so is arguably not a chromatic mediant. It functions as a IV chord in Bmaj and a Neopolitan 6 in Eb. A Neopolitan 6 is a bII chord usually in first inversion that resolves to the tonic. It is so named because the interval between the 3rd and the root of a chord in first inversion is a minor 6th. In Western art music, It's rarer in second inversion but in jazz harmony it's just referred to as a bII, usually used in root position and is a substitute for the IV chord. BTW - John Williams uses the bII chord all the time - especially in Hook. I’m assuming you analyzed the chords correctly because I’m on a phone and can’t really hear the harmony. Listen to the main theme of hook and hear the bII used as a cadence. You could probably analyze it as a form of a plagal cadence.
Agreed, the h 6-4 chord is the enharmonic equivalent to the neapolitan of e flat major, so it functions as a bridge chord and this is a plagal cadence. This kind of modulation is well known also in older text books.
This modulation II to I would be a Neapolitan chord (as a subdominant function)?
Correct! Because it has a function, it is not a chromatic mediant.
Great explanation! Love your video
Great! New Ryan Leach video !
Excellent explanation
Great explanation and examples!
Great datum! Thank you.
This is a great video, and you explain the theory well - I don't feel that enough attention was given as to what the aural effect of this was, past the theory. I really like your brevity generally, too.
My favorite movie score and music analysis? Heck yeah bro.
Of course he breaks the "rules". That's what makes him and his contemporaries special. If you go down the Williams rabbit hole, you'd be surprised with how often he gives the middle finger to textbooks 😂
This video is really interesting. I wonder how should one analyse a song such as God Only Knows by the Beach Boys, where the 2nd inversion is used in very different contexts that don't seem to line up with traditional music.
That opinion on the plagal cadence needs explaining. (Which the video you linked didn't do, btw.)
My take is that styles like euro-classical or jazz have a preference for stronger cadences, while styles like blues or pop have a preference for weaker cadences; and that your opinion on plagal cadences is informed by your musical preferences.
fair point
They aren't being used as cadences in the examples he referred to at least, they are asides after the final cadence. If some Avengers movie ends with the character at a party delivering the tension and release of a light joke, that wasn't the final cadence of the story. The defeat of the bad guy before the party was. But for a standup comedy routine, that last joke would be the final cadence.
So yeah all about context, but I think he was referring to common practice contexts. If you expand your genres outside the scope, you will find basically all of the textbook rules of harmony being violated.
@@lerippletoe6893 Yeah, it should be called a coda, not a cadence in that context.
I think it's important to remember Johnny is a jazzer. Often his orchestrations are simply what played at the piano while writing.
nice!
Plagal cadences were cadences because there was a minor 3rd or major 6th contracting or expanding to a unison or octave, but rather than in the phygian half cadence (the other mi cadence), that note they cadence on in a plagal cadence was the 5th of the chord. Without that voice leading or antiquated conception of a cadence, plagal motions usually fail to accomplish the same purposes. Harmonic heuristics and the divorce of the rhetorical function from the word for a rhetorical function - cadence - causes a working debt for students learning things that are inconsistent with even the music it was most intended for.
Enharmonics make this nasty so say the melody line B G# Bb was made into one key and transposed down a half step so you get Bb G A. The melody is outlining a mi cadence on A, and A (Bb there without transposition) ends up being the 5th of a major chord. For an old style plagal cadence on A, you just need Bb and G going to A, a bass that goes from G to D, and a line with two notes per note that goes D E F#. What he did instead of being that G minor to D major, was Eb major to D major. There is the tritone sub, you have a bass dropping in contrary motion to the melody, and you have even the renaissance cadential idea of melodic enclosure with a minor 3rd of a perfect consonance.
Imo while the harmonic relationship of mediant between keys is very fresh, enough that it /could/ sound like a nonsensical jump, this little renaissance connection grounds what could have been a dubious note very firmly with what preceded it. Now doing away with transposition I also think the bass note being on B is in part because it was F#7 and one would expect it to go to some B chord. Harmonically instead you get retrogression to that E, and a IV chord is always VI of some V of the relative minor, but that V of some minor can just be a major tonic.
I watched the follow-up video and did not see why you feel a plagal cadence is not a cadence. Don't Stop Believing and all the I V vii IV songs rely on the plagal cadence. Unless you claim they have no cadences, and I kinda doubt that, since they clearly have a home base to cycle back to. I might be being obtuse, that's not off the table, but I just don't see your argument as to why a IV-I cannot provide the sense of ending that a perfect or imperfect or deceptive cadence can.
cool
Rules are only guidelines. 😘
6:50 These are the miscellaneous chords.
Bro I disagree with you analysis: it's too much rooted in chords thoughts that, in my opinion, don't explain the reason of logic behind it. First of all in F# the 4th is a ritard of the 3, not a chord by itself, in fact he posticipate the real enter of the note A# flourishing the note with a tipical upper-down: appoggiatura and volta B and G# and then it resolve in A#. The bass in the same moment move from F# to B that is also the third of G#minor, the related minor key of B, and then move to D# major (5-1 of G# minor). In the same moment the Contralto is moving F# E D# : in fact the E generate a passing dissonance with the base (the fourth) and when it resolve in D# the bass is in the same position, generating the sensation that the first F# was preparing a Cadenza d'inganno F# G#minor passing through his 5. Before you listen the rest you are not in E flat but you are in G#minor super closed to B. Changing it with transcendental enarmony and it become E flat, and in fact he put after characteristic E flat chord (don't remember, maybe 2 and 4 and 5?) Anyway, I thing this is a more correct way to explain why it sound logic and it explain the process to be able to compose a passage like that. Speaking only about the chord logic is feeble. But anyway you do a great job, you are bravo, you know the things, I don't want to say in anyway that you are not conscious of this things. Music Respect Bro, see you in the next video!
There are no right or wrong ways to use a chord. Music theory is not about rules, just guidelines, and John Williams (as well as other great composers) prove that. Any chord can come after any chord, to quote Vincent Persichetti.
Music theory is not a set of rules. It’s a set of observations about what people have done and what’s generally worked. Western tonal music theory in particular is describing the music of the baroque and classical periods, and most of what you’ll learn in that theory has effectively been thrown out the window in “modern” music, meaning pretty much anything since 1900. 😅 Jazz is loaded with inversions and voicing that are completely different than what you’ll find in a typical Western tonal music theory book. Regarding the comment about perfect 4ths being dissonant, I’d suggest you go back and review Schachter’s Harmony and Voice Leading or another book that explains when 4ths are consonant vs. dissonant - it’s contextual.
Yes and I’m referring to their use in this tonal context
Why you call it John Williams trick if this existed before he was born?
Funny, I was taught inversions by what note is at the top 😅
Sorry, we purposely trained you wrong. As a joke.
🤣
What inversion isl a Cmaj7 chord with a 3rd in the bass and a #11 on top?
@@GiordanoBruno-o5i2nd inversion with a #11 on top? 🤔
I've not seen inversions discussed this way. The way we were taught is not bass + triad where the bass note is the inverted note, rather as single block chords, triads or whatever with no bass. So a triad in root is c e g, 2nd inv is e g c, 3rd is g c e. This feels like it comes from a jazz background, where the chords are more complex. This seems more natural to me. The point of inversions is smooth voice leading, so inverting being about the 'main' part of the chord seems more logical.
the bottom note is considered the "bass" even if it's not literally a bass instrument, in the same way the top note can be considered the "soprano"
@@RyanLeach I understand that. But the way you are presenting it is (from a piano perspective) left hand playing a bass note, right hand playing a triad. You say something about it not matter what the orders of the right hand/triad are for the inversion, that the type of inversion comes purely from the left hand note.
@@chrisjames3272 The order of the other notes doesn't affect the inversion - it affects the voicing/position of the chord. Inversion is determined by the bass note. Any theory book will tell you this. It doesn't come from jazz - it comes from classical music.
Also, what you call 2nd and 3rd inversions are actually 1st and 2nd inversions.
Yes, the simplest form of 1st inversion C major would be E G C (and this is probably how they are first introduced to beginners). But that's not the only possibility. E C G, E C E G, E G C E, E C E G C E G, E C C C E C E E G G E C... Those are all 1st inversion C major chords because of the bass note. They are simply different voicings.
@@MaggaraMarine But when you say bass note, you mean the note at the bottom of the chord. Like if you play g 1st (b d g), and then in the left hand played a g, would you describe that as a 1st inversion?
@@chrisjames3272 Without the G in the left hand, yes. With the G as the bass note, no - it isn't an inversion. It is a different voicing/position, but not an inversion, because the root of the chord is in the bass.
"Slash chords" are inversions (at least most of the time). G/B is 1st inversion. G/D is 2nd inversion. But G major with G in the bass is still root position, regardless of the order of the other notes. Again, you can talk about the voicing/position of the chord, but that's not the same thing as inversion, even if some piano teachers incorrectly call them inversions. (I understand why - it's easy to say "play 1st inversion G major in the right hand and G in the left hand", but that's not how inversions actually work. They should talk about position, for example "G major with 3rd on top". You could also say "1st inversion G major with 5th on top". This is better than "root position G major in the right hand, B in the left hand".)
Here's what Tchaikovsky says about chord positions in 4-voice "keyboard style" harmony (in Guide to the Practical Study of Harmony, page 12 - BTW, the book is freely available on IMSLP):
_Turning now to the practical application of the above treated chords, we will begin with placing the fundamental tone in the Bass. In the highest voice any of the three tones of the chord, the fundamental tone, the Third or the Fifth may be used. For the two inner voices we will use respectively the intervals of the triad nearest to the Soprano._
_These three cases are called the positions of the chord. According to the interval of the triad which appears in the Soprano, these positions are called the fundamental position or position of the octave, the position of the Third, and the position of the Fifth._
I... I'm not gonna watch a video about how Pluto isn't a planet. Maybe if you didn't grow up in a Christian household, then you can hear Pluto as "not a planet". But for me, every single "amen" at the end of the prayer, played with an air of finality, reinforced for me that it's a cadence. Er... planet.
I'm talking about the recommended video at the end, of course. This video is the bees'. The other one probably is too, but I'm not watching that one on principle. I probably already watched it, tbh.
Not about wether IV-I is a cadence, but the “Amen cadence” coming as an extra bit after a V-I feels much more like a decoration than a destination or close for a phrase
@@RyanLeach And there is a enormous difference between what's happening musically, in a nearly universal human sense, versus what's happening psychologically in a personal sense. I have always heard plagal cadences as decoration when they're after a V-I, as you say, but I didn't grow up in a traditional church and never sang hymns that went there.
This is just wrong!
Which part?
Yes, probably the chord after E major is not E-flat major, but G minor.
So now I understand the title of this video.
I don't know if there's another video that explains this mistake.
this might be weird but can you do a video on how to mikey mouse in music.