I’m here standing up applauding this awesome video. Thanks man. You are the best counterpoint lessons channel on RU-vid (believe me, I’ve seen most of them)
I can not praise you enough! I am a professional orchestra musician wishing to learn more about composition, and your videos are an invaluable source of information to me!
Thank you so much Dr Gran for this wonderful content all across your channel! I recently discovered it and I am elated with your presentation and explanations! I feel I am learning more than I ever have and a lot of missing links are finally being formed in my mind! Thank you again 🙏🏻
Love this thank you! I don't think this is mentioned in the video but in 1:1 species we weren't allowed to repeat tones. I see in the examples here there are repetitions, are there any rules around when you can and can't repeat? or is it just fair game within this circumstance? Thanks!
Good evening, Dr. Jacob Gran! First of all, thank you so much for everything you make available on RU-vid. It's a lot of wealth! I would like to know if between bass and alto there can be successive 5ths by opposite movement, as in your example A E - F C (from the 3rd to the 4th chord, 5/3 5/3). Thank you very much. I would like to know how to get your help.
Great question; "anti-parallel" fifths and octaves are a very complicated topic. The short answer is that I don't think all cases are bad voice leading, and the cases that are bad are usually bad for other reasons than the "anti-parallel" (i.e. contrary) motion. They are unavoidable in the 5-, 6-, 7- and 8-part compositions of the renaissance and happen all of over the place in those textures, but they can also be found in textures of 4 voices and fewer (Taneyev shows an example from Palestrina in only two-voices). Although most modern textbooks forbid anti-parallels, they are not forbidden by Fux and there is one funny instance in which Haydn corrects one of Beethoven's counterpoint exercises by going out of his way to include anti-parallel fifths. In my opinion there is nothing faulty about the 12th and 5th in this three-voice exercise, but others may disagree. I think I may have responded to this question elsewhere in the comments to this video, so you may find more discussion there.
Great to hear how Fux presents alternate options with pros/cons rather than one dogmatic solution for all purposes. Perhaps why his book has aged well...
You have consecutive 5ths between the bass and middle voices on the 3rd and 4th notes. As regards approaching a perfect consonance by similar motion, the top voice must move by step to avoid hidden 8vas or 5ths
Hello Mr Gran, I really appreciate your video tutorials on counterpoint. I studied the matter some 30 years ago up to four part fugue writing. I hope you don't mind me critizising the progression from the third to the fourth chord: there you wrote anti-parallels between the lower voice and the cantus firmus (12 to 5). Best regards Hans Jürgen Steffenhagen
That is a good point Mr. Steffenhagen; a simple way to avoid the antiparallels would be to change the third measure to yet another G in the soprano and a return to C in the bass. Modern textbooks would consider my passage just as bad as parallel fifths, which I find baffling. Forgive me for writing a long response to a simple point, but I find it interesting, and I would appreciate anyone's feedback. I didn't want to teach any rule that I could not explain in clear language, and I failed to formulate a strong version of the rule against antiparallel fifths. Consecutive fifths approached by contrary motion are not prohibited or even mentioned by Fux or Jeppesen, although they do not occur in any of their examples. However, they are permitted explicitly by Vincentino (1555) and occur in examples from Palestrina (I could look them up if need be). So, did Fux avoid them because he considered them equivalent to parallel fifths, as modern authors would have us believe, or do they not occur in his examples for more subtle reasons? Clearly, consecutive perfect intervals of any kind (even 8-5 or something like that) are frowned upon in first species 2-voice writing. But Fux's stated reason for this is that perfect intervals "lack harmony." So the problem is vertical, not horizontal. Looking at my example, Fux could have criticized the 12-5 progression between CF and bass from m. 3-4 for this reason (if we take those voices in isolation), but he would not have criticized the contrary ("antiparallel") motion that was used to approach the fifths. Later, when Fux moves on to three- and four-voice first species, we suddenly find many examples of consecutive perfect intervals, all of them necessarily approached in contrary or oblique motion, because lack of harmony is no longer a problem when there are complete triads. One could therefore argue that this 12-5 progression is permissible because it is embedded in a three voice texture, although I wouldn't go quite that far. It is obvious why 8-15 and 15-8 would not occur in strict counterpoint due to register and spacing constraints; a specific rule against antiparallel octaves is therefore overkill. There are three possible situations where 12-5 or 5-12 could occur in the voice leading between root position triads: 1) Bass motion by step. This would require the non-bass voice to move by a leap of a seventh, which is prohibited. 2) Bass motion by 3rd or 6th. This is what occurs in the example in the video. Of the possible versions of this, I think my example is the most fluent, as the larger leap of a sixth occurs in the bass and the voices leap towards one another rather than apart. In fact, the voice leading motions are nearly identical to the Fetis example at 14:25. 3) Bass motion by 4th or 5th. In this case, the voice leading is objectionable because there are always going to be far superior alternatives. Example 5-17b in the Kostka/Payne textbook is a good example. So in summary, I don't think we need a separate rule prohibiting consecutive perfect consonances approached in contrary motion because the rule would be redundant; the examples of this kind of voice leading that are genuinely poor are poor for other reasons that are covered by other rules. And I do not view the voice leading in mm. 3-4 to be poor for any reason that has occurred to me.
Very nice!!! Thank you! I apologize if you cover this in another video, but when writing three or more voice counterpoint, do you add each voice one at a time until completed or fill all the voices against a cf note before moving to the next?
I would definitely try to compose both counterpoints together, in order to make sure there is a maximum of harmony in each measure (as many complete triads as possible). Completing an entire melody would restrict the possibilities of the last voice, and you could paint yourself into a corner.
After 1:1 and 2:1 excercises I will learn to fill in a third note to get full triad. What is best, first to have a Sopran and Alto and after that to fill a third note, or do wie better write the bass note first and than the upper voice? best regards
Within reason, if your intervals and motions are OK, do the non-CF voices have overall freedom? Is the bass aloud to wander outside of the octave-range limit (it looks like Fetis does)? I've reworked a different CF (as middle voice) three different ways and the soprano and bass have lots of skips and leaps (the bass more so) a la the Fetis example. I'm wondering where the line is between being "kosher" and bad composition.
Usually the range limits are the SATB vocal registers, so going outside of an octave is fine as long as a bass voice could sing it. “Leapiness”is more idiomatic in the bass, and it usually frees up the other voices to flow smoothly. If both counterpoint voices are leaping more than normal I’d say there may be something wrong. The judgement ultimately comes down to the fluency of each individual line, which follows the same rules as in the earlier exercises.
I have a question. In strict 2 voice CP, no Dissonances are allowed, and no skips of a 6th or greater. In 3 voice, when the CF is in the Middle, the Bottom CP has to be a Perfect/Imperfect Consonance interval from the CF, and the Top CP has to be a Perfect/Imperfect consonance interval from the CF. My question is in regards to the Bottom CP and the Top CP. Does the Bottom CP have to be a Perfect/Imperfect Consonance from the Top CP as well? I notice when you explained the Cadance that a voice leading error was a direct motion of an octave interval between the Bottom and Top CP, which led me to this question. As well, I assume that the Bottom and Top CP also have to follow the rules of motion with one another between Imperfect and Perfect Consonances?
Yes, the two outer voices must have correct voice leading with respect to one another, and they cannot form a harmonic dissonance in first species (1:1) counterpoint.
Great video! I have on question though: How do I form a cadence if the upper voice ends in 9-8 (like in the first homework Cf)? Are there any other resources on cadences you could recommend?
Great question; I was not as clear as I could have been during the video. In three voice 1:1 counterpoint, there are only two basic cadences possible, and they are combinations of the four melodic cadences (also called "clausulae"). Most of the Cantus firmi are going to end with a Tenor Cadence (^2 - ^1), like the CF you mentioned, and this was traditionally considered the strongest kind of melodic closure. The first kind of cadence happens when the Tenor Cadence occurs in any voice other than the lowest. The remaining upper voice will take the Soprano Cadence (^7 - ^1) and the lowest voice will take the Bass Cadence (^5 - ^1). The reasons for all this is discussed beginning at 5:45 in the video. The second kind of cadence happens when the Tenor Cadence occurs in the lowest voice. One of the upper voices will take the Soprano Cadence, and the other will take one of the two kinds of Alto Cadences (^4 - ^3 or ^4 - ^5, discussed at 10:14 in the video).
Question, the 43 voicing is correct if you use it as a spread voicing, because the fourth interval dissapears in this way (i.e. in the case of G = D bass, then B above that and G on top.) Thoughts?
An excellent presentation! Well done. What app have you used to create the presentation? I have been planning to create a video on harmonizing a chorale melody using thorough bass method vs. functional harmony.
With 8/3 or 8/5 chords can you double the 3rd /5th of the chord or only the 8tve? If we aren't allowed to doube anything except the root and if the largest interval between the top voices cannot be larger than an 8tv then the largest interval allowed between top voices is a 6th right? I know in the exercises you have 10ths but you agreed in one of my other comments that an interval of a 10th in the top voices would be too much.
Doubling the third or fifth does not break any voice leading rule in three-voice counterpoint, but doubling the bass tone is much more idiomatic. Even in four voices, it is most common to double the bass tone of a 5/3 triad. The only time one will commonly find doubled thirds and fifths in three voices would be in triple counterpoint, which is a topic I am going to cover soon. But you are right that, in practical terms, the rarity of this doubling means that the top voices will not typically move further apart than a sixth.
If the cantus firmus is in middle part, if we have to compose for upper part, should we count interval from bass or subject in middle part? Same doubt if cantus firmus in upper part, how to compose for middle part?
There are three harmonic intervals that must all be consonant in three voice writing: 1) between bass and inner voice 2) between bass and upper voice 3) between inner and upper voice. This is true no matter which voice takes the CF. But the interval between inner and upper voices may use the perfect fourth as if it is an imperfect consonance.
This is a silly question probably, but are sixths consonant by virtue of them being inverted thirds? If so, why are fourths not consonant by the same token? I mean, if fiths are consonant why aren't fourths?
Not a silly question, actually a great one. Some fourths are indeed considered consonant because they clearly sound like inverted fifths. Think of the arpeggiated ^1^5 ^1^5 of the oompah bass lines of waltzes, ragtime, or Johnny Cash. Those 6/4 chords while ^5 is in the bass don’t behave as dissonant chords because the bass voice is clearly arpeggiating through a consonant harmony, and the interval of a fourth with respect to the bass sounds like an inverted fifth (the “shadow” of the fifth, as Tinctoris put it). But these kinds of consonant fourths require a notion of prolonged harmony to make sense of them that falls outside of the scope of strict counterpoint, which is why they aren’t covered in counterpoint textbooks.
You mention that even augmented fourths between upper parts are counted as imperfect consonances. What does this mean for (diatonic) diminished fifths between upper parts? Are they also treated as consonances? If so, are they also considered imperfect? Superb video series by the way
In strict counterpoint, diminished fifths are considered a dissonance even between upper parts. I can't exactly explain why, but the exception about augmented fourths does not apply to their inversion. But in free composition, diminished fifths and augmented fourths are treated essentially the same.
I can audeate almost any piece of music after listening to it a few times, including full symphonies from memory. I've been able to do this for as long as I can remember. How rare is this ability? I have composed a number of three- and four-part fugues. I write them down with the help of the computer, as I'm not a fluent sightreader. As for these rules of counterpoint, they make sense to me now as you have explained them. For me, this was like learning a native language by listening to it as a young child, instead of being taught in English class. I compose natively, without knowing exactly why it sounds good. And, beyond that, I am now to the point where I can bend the rules and get away with it. Thank you for these exercises. They are simple enough that I can audeate them. I will try to learn all of this stuff properly.
I wonder if there are differences in the amount Musical Emotional Response that an audience would have to harmonic vs melodic styles. Although Fux says it’s a matter of style I think one could try switching between melodic focuses and harmonic focuses within a single piece to emphasize certain changes or get very specific macro patterns in the piece. Like using the harmonic focus to lead the middle voice to become the top melody (since the middle voice ascends), vs using the melodic focus to maintain the place of the middle voice.
It is interesting to see that Aloys and Joseph both used a repeated tone on the last few chords... please can you tell me what is the rule regarding this? Repeating tones is supposed to make for smooth voice leading but I understand that in counterpoint we want independence in the voices so we need to avoid using repeated tones yet this is what both Aloys and Joseph have done. What exactly is the rule here? Can we use two repeated tones in a row?
We can use tone repetitions sparingly, just like tone repetitions in two-voice first species. The difference is that with three voices, the ear can tolerate a little bit more of the oblique motion created by tone repetitions because there is simply more to listen to. When one voice is boringly standing still, the other two are probably keeping our attention. For the same reason, oblique motion is even more common in four voice chordal writing.
Ok thank you. If, for argument's sake, this had been a 4-part harmony exercise and not a counterpoint exercise then would it be encouraged to use more common tones?
@@armansrsa Yes, the more voices there are the more it will become necessary to use repeated common tones between chords (even in strict counterpoint).
Jacob Gran, I finished the videos on First Species Counterpoint. Here is a link to the well-temperament playlist: ru-vid.com/group/PL2Nv2B7540k8CVx5biQ0po4jbOIaSDiWJ
@Jacob Gran, I use Finale’s ARIA Player plugin to render the Garritan sounds. QUALITY SAMPLES The default for finale is to use the lower quality sounds to save your processing power. This is how you can select the better sounds: Midi/Audio -> Play Finale through Audio Units Then Window -> Score Manager -> Instrument List -> Under Device, select ARIA Player Under Sound, select Edit Player Select Instruments for each track Consider how the instruments may compliment one another. Also, the range of a sampled instrument makes a big difference. Low flutes are breathy, whereas med-high flutes are brilliant, and very high flutes may be piercing. Since samples are made at different dynamic levels and since dynamic level effects timbre, I normally choose quieter dynamics for sweeter tones and then boost the volume in the mastering. PANNING Pan instruments differently for a more realistic spatial effect. You can pan with the ARIA Player mixer but this will be overwritten by the mixer, so it is better to pan there. You can find the mixer under the Window menu. REALISTIC REVERB Convolution reverb is the result of taking the frequency response of a room/space to a frequency rich sound. The response is then applied to the sound. Convolution reverb is more beautiful and realistic to me than synthesized reverb. This is analogous to sampled sounds being richer than synthesized ones. Here’s how: ARIA Player -> Effects -> Select Convolution and deselect Ambience (synthesized reverb) -> Select your space to emulate. My favorites are the cathedrals, then the performance spaces. I normally increase the predelay slightly to give more clarity to the attack of sounds. HUMAN PLAYBACK Human playback helps with the phrasing. Selecting expressions such as “cantabile,” “rubato,” and “legato” helps the software interpret the music more as you intend. You can make these “hidden” if you do not want them to appear on a theory score. TUNINGS/TEMPERAMENTS Using more resonant temperaments increases the sound quality in general and realism of sampled instruments. My favorites are just intonation, 1/6-comma meantone, and Kirnberger III (well temperament) Here’s how: ARIA Player -> Settings -> Tuning -> Scala File -> Set EQ You can also slightly boost (about 3 dB or less) the EQ on the highest frequency bands to elevate the mood from the darker sound created by reverb. Raising the sound at 14,000 Hz and higher is called giving the music “air.” Here’s how: Midi/Audio -> Audio Units Banks & Effects -> Master Effects -> AUGraphicEQ Enjoy! I hope this helps. Thanks, Mark Lybarger-Monson, Ph.D. (in Music Composition from UCSB) www.ml-m.net
Are parallel 3rds or 10ths allowed in this excersize? Please see my example here ibb.co/wQmKV6K If you notice at the end there is a descending line in the alto part but the bass and soprano parts stay the same, is this allowed?
Parallel motion is more tolerable than usual the more voices are added, but what you have is sustained oblique motion. The outer parts repeat the same tones three measures in a row, which is a problem. I would change the third to last measure to a G major triad: bass leaps up to G, soprano leaps down to D. There is also a problem at the beginning of the exercise: parallel octaves between the bass and Cantus firmus. You should rewrite the beginning anyway since we don’t want to start an exercise in a state of voice crossing (CF shouldn’t be above soprano in first measure). Good work!
In your melodic style excersize you have a 10th in your 5/3 chord towards the end between C and E...isn't this wrong? I understood that the max is an octave between upper parts
Yes, as they say on Futurama, you are technically correct... the best kind of correct! I just didn't particularly care about that rule :). I consider it more like bad orchestration (for human voices) than bad counterpoint or voice leading, and the oblique motion clearly helps in this case, but I've come around and admit it is an error.
No, three part harmony can be composer in any three registers. The fourth part is usually a doubling of one of the three parts, or an additional note, which can also be placed in any register.
I redid the whole exercise, and I noticed at the end that I only have whole triads and no incomplete chords. Is this ok or should there be a mix of whole triads and "diads". Here is my excercise ibb.co/KmH2yK7
I do not agree that direct motion to a perfect consonance is forbidden in 2-part writing. It is more like the worst possible option you have. A bit like the voicing with an octave between the upper parts. Yeah, you caaaan do it, but why would you without being forced by some circumstances? Also, the metric position and length paly a role. Moving directly into an octave on the 2 quarternote of a melisma is way less of a problem than if that octave is a brevis.
I wonder how important all this stuff is, it seems like nitpicking elitism and gatekeeping. I mean you can figure a lot of stuff out intuitively but I guess the purpose of this is to avoid certain sounds and come up with a perfect, polished product, void of dissonances, whether real or imagined. Surely it will serve a purpose if the aim is to compose very restricted, tonal music which I guess can yield beautiful results with sort of medieval, archaic, even timeless qualities.
I'm sorry, but I can't seem to find where these parallel fifth are. The base and alto only move in similar motion twice, and neither one is parallel fifths.
