Thank you. I was glad you followed up on the voicing video with this topic. I am learning about chord progressions, and the first one we usually learn is the 5 to 1, so it confused me when I discovered consecutive Fifths should be avoided, because chord 5 to 1 is a fifth.
V l is not a consecutive 5th. If you have a harmonic perfect 5th followed by another harmonic perfect 5th between the same pair of parts they would be consecutive.
Good advice, thank you. I've always wondered what the problem is with consecutives. When one of my early choral pieces was premiered, one of the basses in the choir (who was a music educator) approached me afterward and said, "I've never sung consecutive fifths before." At the time, I didn't know what he was talking about. To me, it sounds like Gregorian chanting.
If you want your piece to have an air of Gregorian chant, then that's great, but your pieces will sound a bit samey if they're all like that. The point is to not have consecutives in your part-writing *accidentally* . Also, the examples I know of consecutive 5ths, e.g. in works by Kodaly and Rachmaninoff, generally have more than 4 parts going at the time, so it's more an intensifier for a particular line rather than part of the harmonic structure as such.
A pleasure. Much more at www.mmcourses.co.uk including details of our online courses and of our exciting Maestros programme. If you value this channel and would like to help us continue to share and develop the content please consider supporting us as a level 1 Maestro by clicking here ru-vid.com/show-UC8yI8P7Zi3yYTsypera-IQgjoin Alternatively you can express your support for the channel by clicking on the Super Thanks button beneath any of our videos. Thank you.
Hi sir I have a doubt while checking concecutive 5ths and octaves in harmonising should we consider the chord tones only or even the passing tones as well ..? Or both ? Plz help tq
You could do but most music fits into a time signature and the bars organise the rhythm, help you to recognise strong and weak beats, and assist in locating bars in rehearsals.
Do you also count thirds the same way. Say you are playing a IV in c major, so a F non inverted, with an F in the left hand, moving to a G, ascending with the left and just moving from the F to a G and b in the Left hand. Wouldn't that be considered wrong? I've seen it done so many times tho with the IV to V to tonic.
Thank you for a very good video, i just want to find out if it would be applicable when the fifth chord is followed by an octave or vice-versa. E.g. an octave followed by the fifth chord, or does it mean that consecutives are only applicable when perfect fifths are followed by perfect fifth or octave followed by octaves ?
So basically if I just use the traditional triads on a specific key with no inversions, I would just get parallel 5ths?, and if so can I avoid them by using inversions?
You wouldn’t necessarily get consecutives because it depends how your melodic line interacts with your chord choice. Certainly using some inversions will help.
Thank you so much for this! I've been reading books to understand this rule but after watching your video, I understood the thing in the books easily. 😊😊. Thanks from Sri Lanka 🇱🇰
Hi, thanks so much for making this video! Just a quick inquiry, is it only considered consecutive fifths/octaves if they're in the same pair of parts? Would it be allowed to have a C in the Bass and Tenor and then a D in the Bass and Alto, or would that still be considered consecutive? Thanks so much!
Why is it not a problem for the consecutive fifths or 8ves to be between different parts, i.e sop with alto and then in the next chord alto and tenor? It can also sound awful?
@@MusicMattersGB Is that the next level? -To have no consecutives anywhere - across all parts, rather than just between parallel pairs of parts? Not sure if I'm asking this clearly.
@@MusicMattersGB Thanks, That makes more sense to me, as it impacts the sound in the same stilted way regardless with the parallel is from sop-alt to alt-tenor or just between sop and alt. Guides on theory don't seem to spell this point out. I just find that I am checking exercises for ever and ever because of this :)
hi! i have a question if you don't mind :) taking the first bar as an example, would it still be considered consecutives if, in the tenor part, instead we changed the C into a quarter note and added in another inessential quarter note (C♯ for example) before moving onto the D in the next chord? basically i'm asking if using inessential notes to break up the transitions between problematic chord notes is a common fix or if they are still considered consecutives in theory?
If you have a perfect 5th or 8ve between two parts followed by another perfect 5th or 8ve on the next beat even if you used inessential notes between they would still be regarded as consecutive.
If you go to www.mmcourses.co.uk you will find ‘tuition’ on the home page. If you book a half hour or one hour session you can then send your harmony and I will spend that time evaluating it and offering you detailed feedback.
@@MusicMattersGB I don't mean for me but for others. You tell people they shouldn't use them but I think it's too obvious to you so you've jumped over _why_ . it might leave a lot of people wondering what the problem is
@@MusicMattersGB I have also heard it's about the independence of the individual line. Consecutive movement reduces the sense of independence of the individual lines. Is this correct?
Absolutely. Independent movement between parts is musically more engaging than parallel movement unless you’re in a style that promotes parallel movement.
Two different power chords in a row could be consecutive 5ths (full three-note power chords could be consecutive 5ths *and* octaves), but usually when power chords are used they're used consistently, which would just be a doubling at the 5th. It's only potentially a problem (and only considered "consecutives") when it happens between lines that otherwise move independently...which doesn't happen a whole lot in pop/rock harmony (which tends to treat chords as discrete building blocks . He says this (more or less) near the beginning of the video.
Please i want clarity What if the initial chord has Perfect fifth or octave between tenor and bass and the next chord also have perfect fifth or octave but then there is no movement in other words the latter chord is the same as the preceding one ( same notes), is it a consecutive fifth or octave ?
Could somebody advise me , please? If I was going from one chord to the next, a full tone apart and the same inversion, is that using parallels? Thanks.
@@MusicMattersGB cannot recall if you gave an example of this in your video, but, does the "only becomes Consecutive when the pitch changes" apply to repetitive fifths as well?
Not particularly but it often weakens the harmony. Much more at www.mmcourses.co.uk including details of our online courses and of our exciting Maestros programme.
A pleasure. Much more at www.mmcourses.co.uk including details of our online courses and of our exciting Maestros programme. If you value this channel and would like to help us continue to share and develop the content please consider supporting us as a level 1 Maestro by clicking here ru-vid.com/show-UC8yI8P7Zi3yYTsypera-IQgjoin Alternatively you can express your support for the channel by clicking on the Super Thanks button beneath any of our videos. Thank you.
Thanks you!. by your videos I can easily understand!. but one thing; how important is to have the right intervals between the inner voices?.. I see that you say. its ok to have (only one maybe) a consecutive fifth when finishing or before between the alto and the tenor ( imperfect consonance 6th to a perfect consonance 5th). is the thing to avoid them how much you can?
Re intervals between middle voices. In four part harmony the general guidance is to avoid having more than an octave between the alto and tenor. Consecutives are about trying to avoid perfect 5ths or perfect octaves between any pair of parts as they progress from one note or beat to the next.
Please i want clarity What if the initial chord has Perfect fifth or octave between tenor and bass and the next chord also have perfect fifth or octave but then there is no movement in other words the latter chord is the same as the preceding one ( same notes), is it a consecutive fifth or octave ?
That's a bit strange to me. Because there is a textbook of music where in the first pages you should to harmonize a short melodies only with T,S and D in they're root position and some of them are not possible to do it and no where say that there is parallel on a beat.
I've always thought this is a weird convention. Do you know how it started? Early church organs moved with parallel fifths and octaves just playing a one-finger melody; and lutes, guitars and so on do so all the time when playing chords due to the tuning. It seems unlikely it would be a convention of vocal music, but it's possible I suppose. Keyboard music? Before about 1900 and the introduction of equal temperament music maybe it would have sounded different, but seeing as the fifths and octaves were pretty much in tune, I can't see how it would have sounded bad exactly.
Probably best to see it the other way around ie not ‘does it sound bad?’ but ‘do alternatives sound better?’ Independent movement between parts normally sounds better than parallel movement.
It was theorists looking at the music of great composers who observed that they tended to avoid consecutive 5ths and 8ves and the musical results were so much better.
@@MusicMattersGB Which theorists? Professors of composition or actual composers? It reminds me of the split infinitive rule. It's only when the rule has been established that anybody notices it. I wonder if Rameau has anything to say about it. Renaissance music is full of parallel lines.
Both. Plenty of music contains parallel lines but they’re much less likely to be consecutive 5ths than consecutive 3rds for example. Anyway, anyone can write consecutive 5ths if they wish to.
