Beta dominance

>Joey, I don't think Monz' post was so wrong. One teacher I had (with whom
we
>used Forte) did the same kind of thing, emphasizing that the "subdominant"
>function is one of "dominant preparation" -- my best recollection (in
>reference to major or harmonic minor):

>VII Dominant
>VI Tonic or Subdominant
>V Dominant
>IV Subdominant
>III in minor, a rare augmented triad; in major, Subdominant
preparation
>II Subdominant
>I Tonic

>The idea here is that any chord labelled "subdominant" usually leads to a
>chord labeled "dominant", though not always immediately; any chord
labelled
>"dominant" tends to resolve usually immediately, to a chord labeled
"tonic";
>and any chord labeled "tonic" can do whatever it wants.

Hi Paul (Erlich). Thanks for getting into the "fray" on this one. It
seems like this is all a matter of semantics... we all agree that the
system is basically modulating through the Pythagorean matrix as its
fundamental characteristic. So perhaps the overall point, from the tuning
perspective, is "moot" as Daniel Wolf suggests...

However, to continue anyway, how was I to know that VI, called here
"Subdominant" was not specifically referring to a IV chord, but meant ANY
secondary function, i.e. V of V?? Particularly since Monz referred to the
Riemann system as a:

[Monz TD 526:8]
>paradigm which places the tonic in the center as a balancing point and the
subdominant and dominant >on either side of it in opposing forces, with all
other chord-roots being categorized into one of the three >'positions.'

Let's get REALLY simplistic for a moment. Therefore the chart would be:

F--C--G

IV--I--V

And, the "secondary functions" of an extended series of fifths would be:

F--C--G--D--A--E

IV--I--V--IV (implied) -- IV (implied) -- IV (implied)

It looks a little "lopsided" to me...

And, what about all the fifths on the "other side":

Bb, Eb, Ab, etc?? [I guess those fourthy subdomiant ones are pretty "cool"
rock progressions...]

Do we get, many thanks to Pythagoras:

Ab--Eb--Bb--F--C--G--D--A--E

IV (implied)--IV (implied)--IV(implied)--IV (the "real one")--I (thank
god)--V (whoopee)--IV (implied, you "gotta believe")-- IV (implied) -- IV
(implied)

Man, I'm sure glad I'm not a V. I'd get "whalloped" by all the "betas...!"

In any case, if this is the Riemann system, I would rather opt for the
Forte which, as we have shown is quite a bit different. Just for
reference, here it is again. (I hope the server can store it...)

[From TD 525:20]:

>Here's Forte's functional harmony chart, again from _Tonal Harmony in
Concept and Practice_:
>I quote:
>
>II -- Supertonic -- Dominant preparation
>III (in major)-- Mediant -- Leads to dominant preparations IV, II-6 or VI
>III (in minor) -- Mediant -- Independent triad that often usurps role of
tonic
>IV Subdominant -- Dominant preparation or melodic embellishment of tonic
>VI (in major) Submediant -- Dominant preparation or tonic substitute
>VI (in minor) Submediant -- Dominant preparation
>VII (in major and harmonic minor) -- leading tone triad -- Dominant
substitute or melodic >embellishment of tonic
>VII (in natural minor) -- Natural VII - Secondary dominant in relation to
the mediant triad.
>
>Unquote...

Obviously, Paul, your teacher was teaching Reimann and *not* Forte, since
the definitions you mention are quite different from Forte's definitions
and terminology shown above.
P.S. -- And don't forget the III in minor, you call a "rare augmented
triad" frequently becomes MAJOR like superman... establishing the relative
major, trashing and usurping the entire scene... as Allen Forte so clearly
and capably lays out...

:-)

Joseph Pehrson

Joseph Pehrson wrote,

>>II -- Supertonic -- Dominant preparation
>>III (in major)-- Mediant -- Leads to dominant preparations IV, II-6 or VI
>>III (in minor) -- Mediant -- Independent triad that often usurps role of
>tonic
>>IV Subdominant -- Dominant preparation or melodic embellishment of tonic
>>VI (in major) Submediant -- Dominant preparation or tonic substitute
>>VI (in minor) Submediant -- Dominant preparation
>>VII (in major and harmonic minor) -- leading tone triad -- Dominant
>substitute or melodic >embellishment of tonic
>>VII (in natural minor) -- Natural VII - Secondary dominant in relation to
>the mediant triad.
>>
>>Unquote...

>Obviously, Paul, your teacher was teaching Reimann and *not* Forte, since
>the definitions you mention are quite different from Forte's definitions
>and terminology shown above.

Not at all! As I see it, the two are virtually identical!

>P.S. -- And don't forget the III in minor, you call a "rare augmented
>triad" frequently becomes MAJOR like superman... establishing the relative
>major, trashing and usurping the entire scene... as Allen Forte so clearly
>and capably lays out...

My teacher (first semester) did not forget to lay all this out as well.