Ask Roberto - Beyond Theory

[Roberto]

Hello, I thought I would post something about this. Wischi and I spent some time looking over this sequence that he likes out of the 4th etude of Chopin's opus 10 - the C# minor etude that alot of people will be familiar with.

I thought this sequence was interesting enough and not obvious enough that I might post it here so that everyone can take a look at it.

The sequence in question goes from the 3rd bar shown here (starting on that D E# B E# chord), to the 2nd bar on the second system (the F## chord, and what happens right after that).

Looking at those two chords in context... the first is an E#dim7 chord in 3rd inversion, and the chord that this sequence moves towards is a F##dim7 chord.

Look at all the notes of both chords, and you get two distinct tetrachords:

E# G# B D and F## A# C# E

The interesting thing is what Chopin does with that sequence of falling gestures that start on the 2nd beat of bar 3... here, he has combined both tetrachords to create an effect of sorts... this effect is a symmetrical effect which is sending him towards that second chord (the F##dim7)... the interesting part is that the two tetrachords together form the half whole octatonic scale (H-W diminished scale to some).

Look:

E# F## G# A# B C# D E

This allows chopin to set up these moments of ambiguity, where the harmony is unfocused. Looking at it in the larger context of the piece, you can see that what Chopin is really doing is moving towards the V/V (Dominant of the Dominant) by employing this octatonic sequence.

In C# minor, the V7 chord would be a G#7 chord... Chopin takes this octatonic sequence and sends the harmony spiraling towards F##dim7... once that chord arrives, the first note that breaks the octatonic cycle is D# (notice it is not part of the E# octatonic set)...

Notice that now, harmonic function has been restored for a split second, and the music is possibly trying to move towards G#7 via its dominant (D#7)...

The D# has restored harmonic function by allowing us to hear the preceding F##dim7 chord as part of D#7...

Like so:

F##dim7 = F## A# C# E

D#7 = D# F## A# C#

Combining both chords, you get D#7 b9, in context, the V7/V which will likely lead to G#7 and back to C# minor. (It in fact will do just that after another sequence of tonal ambiguity).

In fact, this octatonic sequence is a way for Chopin to superimpose an octatonic set against a diatonic one - ambiguity of the symmetrical set, against the possible function implied in diatonic sets.

I will add some more later, and can clarify anything that is not understood.

**Here is the piece, the sequence is at :41 sec.

[Matt B]

Thanks for this Roberto, it does make sense, although it'll still take a while to wrap my heas around it fully.

Whats a good youtube performance of the piece? And where about in the piece is this bit?

[Blackorchidx]

Thanks for the post, it took me a few reads and a few tinkerings at the piano to see what is going on, it is also in a key i'm pretty comfortable with too since I learn all my scales off of C# whether it be guitar or keys,
It is really interesting and somewhat of what we spoke about in Liszt's sonata, leading you to believe it is tonic, then throw in something different.

This method of super imposing, is it much the same kind of ideas that is going on in Ligeti's Lontano?

[Roberto]

The Liszt sonata example I mentioned was a bit different, as by the end of the piece (last page) you start to hear B phrygian (and B phrygian dominant) as the tonic area of the piece. There is some great stuff going on in that last page, I love that ending!

As for the Ligeti, I would say no, that it is not the same type of superimpositions going on in the chopin. Lontano in fact has a pretty simple melodic line which is being superimposed on top of itself (like fractals forming out of nowhere)... it is what essentially amounts to a mensuration canon. Ligeti then brings out what he wants via his masterful orchestration, and by how he deforms and reconstructs the density of the material presented.

The Chopin here is more about moving from symmetrical to non symmetrical gestures, if you will... from the octatonic to create these blurs, to the diatonic, giving tonal function a more precise direction.

*Interestingly enough, that type of gesture in the Chopin (the octatonic flurry)... that can actually resolve out into any key, this is what causes the ambiguity for the most part... that the symmetry of the octatonic scale can lead you anywhere the composer wants to go.

Thanks for the post, it took me a few reads and a few tinkerings at the piano to see what is going on, it is also in a key i'm pretty comfortable with too since I learn all my scales off of C# whether it be guitar or keys,
It is really interesting and somewhat of what we spoke about in Liszt's sonata, leading you to believe it is tonic, then throw in something different.

This method of super imposing, is it much the same kind of ideas that is going on in Ligeti's Lontano?

[Charlie Shaughnessy]

Allan sees chords in a really simple way, actually. He says he sees them all from different families, which just means he sees chords as different interval combinations. I've grown to understand how he sees them because it makes a lot of sense. It's just his way of classifying chords that we don't have normal names for (like drop2 and drop3 voicing on guitar, only he has lots and lots of them).

As far as his chord playing during improv being pan-diatonic, I'm not 100% sure of that. I think his ear for dissonance and consonance is just a lot different than most people. He has stated in interviews that he threw out the ones he didn't like, so that insists there are plenty of voicings he doesn't use because they suggest a certain kind of sound that is unappealing.

The chord book I started writing a long time ago uses a lot of these same ideas for making chords for composition. When I was working with David Tronzo at Berklee, he explained it and understood it pretty well, that a certain chord "shape" on guitar (or interval relationship on paper) belongs to a different classification from a different chord shape. There are some cool ways you can write music using just two families in different key centers that I explain but the book is on hold for now.

The reason most people think its so complex is because they haven't categorized the chord shapes, and they haven't retained enough in their memory. Once you are able to establish a sort of library of chords that you can practice, it becomes a lot more approachable.

[Blackorchidx]

Any chance of seeing your chord book Charlie, or even releasing it?

[Roberto]

I know for sure that Allan is not thinking of what he is doing as being pandiatonic... still, most of what he does leads itself to BEING that anyway.

Allan sees chords in a really simple way, actually. He says he sees them all from different families, which just means he sees chords as different interval combinations. I've grown to understand how he sees them because it makes a lot of sense. It's just his way of classifying chords that we don't have normal names for (like drop2 and drop3 voicing on guitar, only he has lots and lots of them).

As far as his chord playing during improv being pan-diatonic, I'm not 100% sure of that. I think his ear for dissonance and consonance is just a lot different than most people. He has stated in interviews that he threw out the ones he didn't like, so that insists there are plenty of voicings he doesn't use because they suggest a certain kind of sound that is unappealing.

The chord book I started writing a long time ago uses a lot of these same ideas for making chords for composition. When I was working with David Tronzo at Berklee, he explained it and understood it pretty well, that a certain chord "shape" on guitar (or interval relationship on paper) belongs to a different classification from a different chord shape. There are some cool ways you can write music using just two families in different key centers that I explain but the book is on hold for now.

The reason most people think its so complex is because they haven't categorized the chord shapes, and they haven't retained enough in their memory. Once you are able to establish a sort of library of chords that you can practice, it becomes a lot more approachable.

[Matt B]

I think the basic idea of what he's doing is incredibly simple, but the gap between the basic principle and how far he's developed his approach over the years is huge. So like Charlie said, most people don't put the work in to develop there chord vocabulary. There's no quick fix, no 'play like Holdsworth with these simple easy steps/chords. You've just got to put the work in.

[Blackorchidx]

roberto, any chance of talking a bit on micropolyphony?

I know ligeti was big on it and you know a great deal on it, so could you take an example and the break it down?

thanks

[Roberto]

About micropolyphony:

The easiest way to think of it is when you have such a dense number of lines (with some sort of independence from one another) happening in a section or piece, to the effect that one can no longer hear individual lines - now only the mass effect of the by product of all lines is heard as a singular texture... which can then be moved via orchestration (color/texture)

That is pretty much the idea... which can be applied in a variety of ways.

Here are a few:

Xenakis - Metastaseis



Here, the entire string section starts off on an unison G... the micropolyphonic effect is the glissandi that is notated to move at different ratios. They start at different moments, move in different tempo ratios to one another, and create an orchestral blur that cannot be "understood" by the ear as individual motions - only as a singular moving texture.

Ligeti - Lux Aeterna



Here, Ligeti applies the technique is a slightly different manner. There is a relation to how fractals generate new versions of themselves... likewise, here material is mirrored against itself in a manner in which the ear can no longer hear it as the "same" material... the entrances and how the single line moves (and is re-generated) create the effect. In reality, this entire 1st page only contains 1 line.

F F F E F G F# G F (Eb Ab)... in reality... this is a mensuration canon... a canon which is reflected against itself... at such a slow tempo, and at so many levels, that you are forced to hear it as one moving color...

My own work: "...figures at the base of a crucifixion"

*removed*

Here things verge on the micropolyphonic... some parts of the texture come together to form color/texture, other "signals" relate to important musical structures which have appeared before in the work... even those signals are distorted via their orchestration. So there is a mix of what becomes color/texture, and what propels elements of the music forward which are heard as signals to the large form of the piece.

Hope these examples shed some light on the question, I know I have not been TOO detailed. Maybe I can go even more in depth later, with more examples.

roberto, any chance of talking a bit on micropolyphony?

I know ligeti was big on it and you know a great deal on it, so could you take an example and the break it down?

thanks