Jump to content

Harmonizing Hungarian minor scale


Recommended Posts

Hey there,

 

I have a question concerning harmonizing exotic scales. My understanding of musical theory is only of intermediate level, so I might say some stupid things (bear with me).  I followed the explanation on this website: http://www.lotusmusic.com/lm_harmonize-scales.html

 

When I look at the modes layed out in the final result (see picture in attachement), the 4th mode gives you a D#sus9#5 chord, it is the only example that doesn't consist of a two thirds, but instead of a second, and a minor third.

 

So.. my question is, why is the 4th chord an exeption on the general rule of composing chords of thirds? The only thing I can understand is that, IF you compose if of thirds, you'd actually get an Fmaj7 chord, which might be why this exception is here..?

 

Thanks for your time!

hun.jpg.bad76310b16ee859a53079e006e2f3fb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand your question, it would be an exception because the Hungarian scale itself has that odd D# in A (and has D#-E-F as its 4th, 5th, and 6th notes respectively). If you then spell out the chord notes implied by the scale, you go to F when D# is the tonic of the chord.

I guess you'd throw out the "rule" about composing chords in thirds because you are using a Hungarian scale, which does not adhere to Western notions of harmony.

Hungarians probably came from central Asia in about AD 900, so the music is presumably influenced by their origins there as well as, perhaps, their many years of subjugation by Turkish overlords within the Ottoman Empire. My very limited knowledge of music theory suggests that when you arrive in Asia Minor, the "rules" of Western music theory no longer apply. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I figured. Thanks a lot :)

 

I asked a teacher in musical theory here on the university, and he said it would have probably made more "western sense" if you'd have

D#-f-a-c on the 4th mode, but that there is no real equivalent anyway since, obviously, the intervals do not allow you to make a chord of thirds here.

 

Thanks for the help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and it might also be said that [all ...?] such "ethnic scales" have "more than a little to do with" trying to shoe-horn their musical traditions into our (Western ...) sense of "scale."  (After all, our "Western™, Equal-Temperament™" perspective of the Sonic Spectrum is most-certainly not(!) the only one that is, nor that ever was.)  "Ethnic scales," in "Western" music, are [fairly understood to be ...] approximations of what the actual ancient musical tradition sounded like.

 

(If you want to go on a sort-of "acid trip" [no(!) disrespect intended!] of Musical Possibilities, have a serious listen to Hindu/Indian music, and learn how they approach "the same (sic ...) thing ...!")

 

And so, if you have by-choice adopted a certain "scale," you should always allow your musical decisions to give preference to that scale, so that your music, at the end of the day, will "sound (well, sort of ...) Hungarian."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

As people have mentioned, this Hungarian scale was most likely not conceived of with the rules of Western harmony as a priority. It almost certainly developed from melodic intentions, as it's interval vector is similar to scales/modes used in Indian and Arabic and Rom music as well. 99.9% of harmony as we know it, comes from the Western theories of music, something like the Hungarian scale, with its roots in melodic expression, doesn't really give a damn about harmony. Of course it is totally interesting and absorbing to superimpose Western harmonic frameworks overtop of non-western musical tools, but we can't always a expect a clear cut answer. 

I personally think it is beautiful that if you were to move up the scale, playing the chords from each degree, you would arrive on a chord with no 3rd. That is a beautiful sound. And it might be wonderfully useful in parallel motion for a composition. 

I would suggest that the spelling of the chord should be D#sus2,#5. As the '9' in your original spelling suggests an upper structure. Hence the 9, as it is a step above 8 (octave). Where as this chord, has double flatted 3rd, (which of course is a 2nd), so it should be noted that it within the octave if you were to spell the chord out traditionally. 

As well, in common practice chord symbol notation, 'sus9' implies that the 4th degree replaces the 3rd, and that there is a 9 on top. Sus, in general, implies the suspension of a 4th over the 3rd. 

So to make it clear, I would say sus2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...