Mikrokosmos, BB 105, Vol. 1: No. 17 Contrary Motion (1) - Can't understand the structureDistinguishing intervalsBartok Mikrokosmos Book 3, no. 70Sun-Ra's harmonies and intervals for the laypersonWhat is the left hand doing in classical music?Why does this tune sound “Bluesy” and yet doesnt belong to the blues scale“The intervals considered dissonant have changed since the 'Middle Ages'”; How so?The sudden switch from C major to C minor in Wake me up when September ends and a Solo Acoustic versionHow to define “simple” when considering consonance and interval ratiosSuper fast scales and octaves, How?Lower interval limits

Bash - Execute two commands and get exit status 1 if first fails

How to prove the emptiness of intersection of two context free languages is undecidable?

Schwa-less Polysyllabic German Noun Stems of Germanic Origin

How do we explain the use of a software on a math paper?

Can dirty bird feeders make birds sick?

Way of refund if scammed?

If the Charles SSL Proxy shows me sensitive data, is that data insecure/exposed?

What city and town structures are important in a low fantasy medieval world?

Is there any mention of ghosts who live outside the Hogwarts castle?

Separate the element after every 2nd ',' and push into next row in bash

Does the fact that we can only measure the two-way speed of light undermine the axiom of invariance?

Hotel booking: Why is Agoda much cheaper than booking.com?

Vehemently against code formatting

Is there a way to generate a mapping graph like this?

Does George B Sperry logo on fold case for photos indicate photographer or case manufacturer?

How could Dwarves prevent sand from filling up their settlements

How to use Screen Sharing if I don't know the remote Mac's IP address

Best practice for printing and evaluating formulas with the minimal coding

Don't understand notation of morphisms in Monoid definition

1950s or earlier book with electrical currents living on Pluto

Does a windmilling propeller create more drag than a stopped propeller in an engine out scenario?

How is dynamic resistance of a diode modeled for large voltage variations?

What quantum phenomena violate the superposition principle in electromagnetism?

Keeping the dodos out of the field



Mikrokosmos, BB 105, Vol. 1: No. 17 Contrary Motion (1) - Can't understand the structure


Distinguishing intervalsBartok Mikrokosmos Book 3, no. 70Sun-Ra's harmonies and intervals for the laypersonWhat is the left hand doing in classical music?Why does this tune sound “Bluesy” and yet doesnt belong to the blues scale“The intervals considered dissonant have changed since the 'Middle Ages'”; How so?The sudden switch from C major to C minor in Wake me up when September ends and a Solo Acoustic versionHow to define “simple” when considering consonance and interval ratiosSuper fast scales and octaves, How?Lower interval limits













4















Can somebody explain how the harmony works in this piece?



It seems that the right hand plays on C key and the left hand alternates between G and D.



Why when played in opposite direction do the intervals sound consonant?



enter image description here










share|improve this question




























    4















    Can somebody explain how the harmony works in this piece?



    It seems that the right hand plays on C key and the left hand alternates between G and D.



    Why when played in opposite direction do the intervals sound consonant?



    enter image description here










    share|improve this question


























      4












      4








      4








      Can somebody explain how the harmony works in this piece?



      It seems that the right hand plays on C key and the left hand alternates between G and D.



      Why when played in opposite direction do the intervals sound consonant?



      enter image description here










      share|improve this question
















      Can somebody explain how the harmony works in this piece?



      It seems that the right hand plays on C key and the left hand alternates between G and D.



      Why when played in opposite direction do the intervals sound consonant?



      enter image description here







      theory scales intervals






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 1 hour ago









      Richard

      47.1k7114201




      47.1k7114201










      asked 1 hour ago









      xvanxvan

      2205




      2205




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          Try to think of this piece less in terms of harmony and more in terms of counterpoint. In other words, try to think of this piece more in terms of the horizontal musical lines that are written instead of the vertical harmonies that are the byproducts.



          You'll notice that the "keys" of each hand are related by fifth. The right hand at the start is "in C," but the left hand, on account of the F♯, is "in G," a key a fifth higher than the right hand's C. In my opinion, the right hand in m. 5 is now "in G" (even though there's no F♯) because it's an exact transposition up a perfect fifth of the first four measures; now, the left hand is "in D."



          And notice that the intervals aren't always consonant. The first two beats of m. 2, for instance, are a dissonant seventh and dissonant ninth!






          share|improve this answer






























            0














            Maybe 'sound consonant' is the wrong description. If you linger on many of the intervals in this piece - the 4th, 5th and 6th notes, and their equivalents in the next phrase for instance, they are demonstrably dissonant. But Bartok is demonstrating that strong melodic lines can make dissonances acceptable - or, rather, irrelevant. He's not abandoned tonality, there are definite tonal centres of C, G then C again. But he's exploring structures not based on tonal harmony.



            Bartok (and Stravinsky) avoided complete atonality and demonstrated that music could enter the 20th century without discarding EVERYTHING that had gone before. For which I admire and salute them.






            share|improve this answer























              Your Answer








              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "240"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader:
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              ,
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f84992%2fmikrokosmos-bb-105-vol-1-no-17-contrary-motion-1-cant-understand-the-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              4














              Try to think of this piece less in terms of harmony and more in terms of counterpoint. In other words, try to think of this piece more in terms of the horizontal musical lines that are written instead of the vertical harmonies that are the byproducts.



              You'll notice that the "keys" of each hand are related by fifth. The right hand at the start is "in C," but the left hand, on account of the F♯, is "in G," a key a fifth higher than the right hand's C. In my opinion, the right hand in m. 5 is now "in G" (even though there's no F♯) because it's an exact transposition up a perfect fifth of the first four measures; now, the left hand is "in D."



              And notice that the intervals aren't always consonant. The first two beats of m. 2, for instance, are a dissonant seventh and dissonant ninth!






              share|improve this answer



























                4














                Try to think of this piece less in terms of harmony and more in terms of counterpoint. In other words, try to think of this piece more in terms of the horizontal musical lines that are written instead of the vertical harmonies that are the byproducts.



                You'll notice that the "keys" of each hand are related by fifth. The right hand at the start is "in C," but the left hand, on account of the F♯, is "in G," a key a fifth higher than the right hand's C. In my opinion, the right hand in m. 5 is now "in G" (even though there's no F♯) because it's an exact transposition up a perfect fifth of the first four measures; now, the left hand is "in D."



                And notice that the intervals aren't always consonant. The first two beats of m. 2, for instance, are a dissonant seventh and dissonant ninth!






                share|improve this answer

























                  4












                  4








                  4







                  Try to think of this piece less in terms of harmony and more in terms of counterpoint. In other words, try to think of this piece more in terms of the horizontal musical lines that are written instead of the vertical harmonies that are the byproducts.



                  You'll notice that the "keys" of each hand are related by fifth. The right hand at the start is "in C," but the left hand, on account of the F♯, is "in G," a key a fifth higher than the right hand's C. In my opinion, the right hand in m. 5 is now "in G" (even though there's no F♯) because it's an exact transposition up a perfect fifth of the first four measures; now, the left hand is "in D."



                  And notice that the intervals aren't always consonant. The first two beats of m. 2, for instance, are a dissonant seventh and dissonant ninth!






                  share|improve this answer













                  Try to think of this piece less in terms of harmony and more in terms of counterpoint. In other words, try to think of this piece more in terms of the horizontal musical lines that are written instead of the vertical harmonies that are the byproducts.



                  You'll notice that the "keys" of each hand are related by fifth. The right hand at the start is "in C," but the left hand, on account of the F♯, is "in G," a key a fifth higher than the right hand's C. In my opinion, the right hand in m. 5 is now "in G" (even though there's no F♯) because it's an exact transposition up a perfect fifth of the first four measures; now, the left hand is "in D."



                  And notice that the intervals aren't always consonant. The first two beats of m. 2, for instance, are a dissonant seventh and dissonant ninth!







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 1 hour ago









                  RichardRichard

                  47.1k7114201




                  47.1k7114201





















                      0














                      Maybe 'sound consonant' is the wrong description. If you linger on many of the intervals in this piece - the 4th, 5th and 6th notes, and their equivalents in the next phrase for instance, they are demonstrably dissonant. But Bartok is demonstrating that strong melodic lines can make dissonances acceptable - or, rather, irrelevant. He's not abandoned tonality, there are definite tonal centres of C, G then C again. But he's exploring structures not based on tonal harmony.



                      Bartok (and Stravinsky) avoided complete atonality and demonstrated that music could enter the 20th century without discarding EVERYTHING that had gone before. For which I admire and salute them.






                      share|improve this answer



























                        0














                        Maybe 'sound consonant' is the wrong description. If you linger on many of the intervals in this piece - the 4th, 5th and 6th notes, and their equivalents in the next phrase for instance, they are demonstrably dissonant. But Bartok is demonstrating that strong melodic lines can make dissonances acceptable - or, rather, irrelevant. He's not abandoned tonality, there are definite tonal centres of C, G then C again. But he's exploring structures not based on tonal harmony.



                        Bartok (and Stravinsky) avoided complete atonality and demonstrated that music could enter the 20th century without discarding EVERYTHING that had gone before. For which I admire and salute them.






                        share|improve this answer

























                          0












                          0








                          0







                          Maybe 'sound consonant' is the wrong description. If you linger on many of the intervals in this piece - the 4th, 5th and 6th notes, and their equivalents in the next phrase for instance, they are demonstrably dissonant. But Bartok is demonstrating that strong melodic lines can make dissonances acceptable - or, rather, irrelevant. He's not abandoned tonality, there are definite tonal centres of C, G then C again. But he's exploring structures not based on tonal harmony.



                          Bartok (and Stravinsky) avoided complete atonality and demonstrated that music could enter the 20th century without discarding EVERYTHING that had gone before. For which I admire and salute them.






                          share|improve this answer













                          Maybe 'sound consonant' is the wrong description. If you linger on many of the intervals in this piece - the 4th, 5th and 6th notes, and their equivalents in the next phrase for instance, they are demonstrably dissonant. But Bartok is demonstrating that strong melodic lines can make dissonances acceptable - or, rather, irrelevant. He's not abandoned tonality, there are definite tonal centres of C, G then C again. But he's exploring structures not based on tonal harmony.



                          Bartok (and Stravinsky) avoided complete atonality and demonstrated that music could enter the 20th century without discarding EVERYTHING that had gone before. For which I admire and salute them.







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered 34 mins ago









                          Laurence PayneLaurence Payne

                          39k1974




                          39k1974



























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded
















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid


                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f84992%2fmikrokosmos-bb-105-vol-1-no-17-contrary-motion-1-cant-understand-the-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Log på Navigationsmenu

                              Wonderful Copenhagen (sang) Eksterne henvisninger | NavigationsmenurSide på frankloesser.comWonderful Copenhagen

                              Detroit Tigers Spis treści Historia | Skład zespołu | Sukcesy | Członkowie Baseball Hall of Fame | Zastrzeżone numery | Przypisy | Menu nawigacyjneEncyclopedia of Detroit - Detroit TigersTigers Stadium, Detroit, MITigers Timeline 1900sDetroit Tigers Team History & EncyclopediaTigers Timeline 1910s1935 World Series1945 World Series1945 World Series1984 World SeriesComerica Park, Detroit, MI2006 World Series2012 World SeriesDetroit Tigers 40-Man RosterDetroit Tigers Coaching StaffTigers Hall of FamersTigers Retired Numberse