Re: Melodies move by step in any form of music?

"Danny Schorr" <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> a écrit dans le message de news: 
2rs344lmahloah49rssplrecpha3sf70a1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 01:45:22 +0200, "Alain Naigeon" <anaigeon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>>"Danny Schorr" <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> a écrit dans le message de news:
>>pqm344pek263jl60pnan8kvr81k8vbm45q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> If you build a scale C-G-C, can you honestly say to yourself that when

>>> you
>>> move from C to G that nothing has been skipped?
>>
>>That's because we've heard so many things using the steps which are
>>missing in this scale.
>>But, forget it, and then it becomes clear : how could I skip an object
>>which isn't included in the set I'm moving in ?
>
> That type of thinking may work for mathematical and algebraic proofs (
I'm
> guessing - I'm not a math guy:-)) ,but for musical tone, the OTS of the
C
> note would have an E present fairly early; the G would have a D even
> earlier. Thus the perception that "something" is missing.

Ok, the fifth and the third are missing ; then this would be an argument
in favor of the theory of "harmonics".
I've tried to explain my problem, which is linguistic : leap = jump = skip
and then I have to skip *something*.
Our disagreement probably comes from the first '=' sign ; for some persons
it seems that leap means "large interval" - whatever large means.

-- 

Français     *==>     "Musique renaissance"     <==*     English
               midi - facsimiles - ligatures - mensuration
http://anaigeon.free.fr
| http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/anaigeon/
Alain Naigeon - anaigeon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 - Oberhoffen/Moder, France