Re: What's the relation****p between scales and chords?

On Feb 28, 10:15 pm, i...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (paramucho) wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:05:15 GMT, "Steve Latham" <llat...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >"LJS" <ljsche...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>news:1cd28ac4-e8c5-4141-8325-3c29716c714d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Feb 28, 12:41 pm, "Steve Latham" <llat...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>> "Joey Goldstein" <nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> >>>news:fq51it$757$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >>> > Meanwhile, did someone up-thread say that Piston used upper case
RN?
> >>> > Did he write out chord quality too? Or was the student expected to
> >>> > interpret "II" as being a minor chord based on the active key?
>
> >>> Schoenberg used non-case sensitive numerals. One is expected to know
the
> >>> quality in the key. Alterations (like minor iv in Major) have to be
> >>> appended.
>
> >> Thanks for the sup****t Steve.
>
> >Actually, I was sup****ting Joey's assertion that Piston most likely
uses
> >UC/LC.
>
> Piston 1948 uses all-UC.
>
> Piston and Piston/Devoto 1983 use all-UC.
>
> There is an even later edition which I haven't seen, around 1987.
>
> >> Yes Schoenberg would probably have used the UC/RN similar to Piston.
>
> >He does.
>
> Where?
>
> Certainly not in STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONS OF HARMONY, 1948.
>
> >I
> >> would think that this would have been the norm when he was still
> >> stretching the limits of functional chromaticism and without looking
> >> up the time line, Schoenberg may have gotten that from Piston or they
> >> both may have gotten it from the same source.
>
> >Umm, Schoenberg wrote his in 1910, Piston in 1941.
>
> I guess you're referring to his Harmonielehre, 1911. Have you seen the
> original or a facsimile? There's a facsimile of his table of key
> relation****ps in THE CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF MUSIC THEORY where he uses
> UC/LC for his regions, e.g. "SD" and "sd", but that's a different
> kettle of fish, and he uses the same kind of chart in the 1948 book
> mentioned above.
>
> The 1948 Piston I have is certainly all-UC. Have you seen the 1941
> edition?
>
> Since we seem to be taking a trip down memory lane:
>
> a) Prout, from around 1900, does use UC/LC.
>
> b) The translation of Schenker's HARMONY from a little later uses
> all-UC.

As I explained in my last post, none of this is relevant to my
position as the UC modifier/extension system stated is not related to
either of these.

>
> That said, I think I'd like to have some of whatever it is that you
> guys are smoking...

That would be a welcome relief!