In the current issue of Guitar and Bass magazine some examples are given of 
what (the author thought) Les Paul might play in certain circumstances.  One 
of the examples shows a 'double-stop' F# and C over an A bass note and 
quotes an underlying chord of Am.  The author calls this a diminished fourth 
interval.

I'm no expert on 'spelling' of notes in chords and scales but I would have 
thought F# is a diminished fifth above C in the scale of C, and if that's 
the case how does it become a diminished fourth in the scale of Am?

I appreciate that C is the third and F# the sixth degree of Am, and the 
separation between them is a major third if no reference is made to the 
underlying key.  The entry in Wikipedia 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminished_fourth didn't really help, other 
than to confirm that a diminished fourth interval has the same number of 
semitones as a major third!

Any _clear_ explanation of this would be most welcome.

Chris

On Oct 2, 5:56 pm, "christofire"  wrote:
> In the current issue of Guitar and Bass magazine some examples are given of
> what (the author thought) Les Paul might play in certain circumstances.  One
> of the examples shows a 'double-stop' F# and C over an A bass note and
> quotes an underlying chord of Am.  The author calls this a diminished fourth
> interval.
>
> I'm no expert on 'spelling' of notes in chords and scales but I would have
> thought F# is a diminished fifth above C in the scale of C, and if that's
> the case how does it become a diminished fourth in the scale of Am?
>
> I appreciate that C is the third and F# the sixth degree of Am, and the
> separation between them is a major third if no reference is made to the
> underlying key.  The entry in Wikipedia didn't really help, other
> than to confirm that a diminished fourth interval has the same number of
> semitones as a major third!
>
> Any _clear_ explanation of this would be most welcome.

OK. A fourth of any kind is the interval between two notes in a scale
that
are FOUR notes apart. For example, let's take C major:

C D E F G A B C

So, C to F is a fourth.
    D to G is a fourth
    E to A is a fourth
    F to B is a fourth
    G to C is a fourth
    A to D is a fourth
    B to E is a fourth

Note that they're all *perfect* fourths, with one exception, F to B -
the
rest areall 5 semitones - F to B is six semitones, which makes it an
augmented fourth.

Let's take A harmonic minor:

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

They're all perfect fourths, except D-G# and F-B which are augmented
fourths,
and... G# to C... which is only FOUR semitones. And that's a
diminished fourth.

Note that you could call it Ab to C, which is a major third. And yes,
a major
third and a diminished fourth have the same number of semitones. But
when you
list the notes in a scale, you're only supposed to have one of each
letter,
and the rest is done with accidentals. The reason we call it a fourth
of
whatever kind is that it spans four notes in the scale.

Diminished Fourth Interval ?....
latest bestselling blockbuster from Freddie Forsythe ?

C.

On Oct 2, 5:56 pm, "christofire"  wrote:
> In the current issue of Guitar and Bass magazine some examples are given of
> what (the author thought) Les Paul might play in certain circumstances.  One
> of the examples shows a 'double-stop' F# and C over an A bass note and
> quotes an underlying chord of Am.  The author calls this a diminished fourth
> interval.

Must be a typo - that's a diminished fifth. Or an augmented fourth.
When it's unclear whether you're dealing with a larger-than-normal 4th
or a smaller-than-normal 5th (as in this case) it's always safe to
hedge your bets and call it a tritone :)

That's a common trick in jazz, blues and funk... over the A minor
chord, those two notes function as the major 6th (F#) and the minor
3rd (C) suggesting the Dorian mode. It's essentially a tiny Am6 chord.

As for an *actual* diminished 4th, Penfold has already mentioned the
best example I could come up with... from the 7th to the 3rd of the
melodic or harmonic minor scale.


adrian

Oh, not only does the F#/C diad over A suggest the Dorian mode and
form an Am6, it also forms a D7/A.


adrian

"Penfold"  wrote in message 
news:6853ee2b-4e3e-4f6c-9b01-4ec90fe50a88@g19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 2, 5:56 pm, "christofire"  wrote:
> In the current issue of Guitar and Bass magazine some examples are given 
> of
> what (the author thought) Les Paul might play in certain circumstances. 
> One
> of the examples shows a 'double-stop' F# and C over an A bass note and
> quotes an underlying chord of Am. The author calls this a diminished 
> fourth
> interval.
>
> I'm no expert on 'spelling' of notes in chords and scales but I would have
> thought F# is a diminished fifth above C in the scale of C, and if that's
> the case how does it become a diminished fourth in the scale of Am?
>
> I appreciate that C is the third and F# the sixth degree of Am, and the
> separation between them is a major third if no reference is made to the
> underlying key. The entry in Wikipedia didn't really help, other
> than to confirm that a diminished fourth interval has the same number of
> semitones as a major third!
>
> Any _clear_ explanation of this would be most welcome.

OK. A fourth of any kind is the interval between two notes in a scale
that
are FOUR notes apart. For example, let's take C major:

C D E F G A B C

So, C to F is a fourth.
    D to G is a fourth
    E to A is a fourth
    F to B is a fourth
    G to C is a fourth
    A to D is a fourth
    B to E is a fourth

Note that they're all *perfect* fourths, with one exception, F to B -
the
rest areall 5 semitones - F to B is six semitones, which makes it an
augmented fourth.

Let's take A harmonic minor:

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

They're all perfect fourths, except D-G# and F-B which are augmented
fourths,
and... G# to C... which is only FOUR semitones. And that's a
diminished fourth.

Note that you could call it Ab to C, which is a major third. And yes,
a major
third and a diminished fourth have the same number of semitones. But
when you
list the notes in a scale, you're only supposed to have one of each
letter,
and the rest is done with accidentals. The reason we call it a fourth
of
whatever kind is that it spans four notes in the scale.



* Thank you for going to the trouble of posting this, but somehow you've 
changed the interval I was asking about from [F# and C in Am] to [G# and C 
in Am].  In the example given in the magazine the F# was above the C so, 
counting notes upwards from C in your harmonic minor scale wouldn't that 
make the interval to F# an augmented fourth?  There are six semitones 
between them.

* I guess it's possible the magazine article was in error.  Please excuse 
the absence of quotation marks '>s' above; Outlook Express does that with 
some posts, hence my asterisks here.

Chris

"Adrian Clark"  wrote in message 
news:fe99ade3-1363-44a3-8a38-9436b9e4d409@l9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> Oh, not only does the F#/C diad over A suggest the Dorian mode and
> form an Am6, it also forms a D7/A.
>
>
> adrian


Thanks for this, and your previous posting.  It did seem like the magazine 
had it wrong, but it's a bit worse than a typo: 'diminished fourth' appears 
in the heading and twice in the text under the example!  I'd expect the mag 
has already received a bundle of e-mails on the topic.

Chris

>* Thank you for going to the trouble of posting this, but somehow you've
> changed the interval I was asking about from [F# and C in Am] to [G# and C
> in Am].  In the example given in the magazine the F# was above the C so> counting notes upwards from C in your harmonic minor scale wouldn't that
> make the interval to F# an augmented fourth?  There are six semitones
> between them.
>
> * I guess it's possible the magazine article was in error.  Please excuse
> the absence of quotation marks '>s' above; Outlook Express does that with
> some posts, hence my asterisks here.

Am is A B C D E F G A - so the C to F is a fourth, and it's a perfect
fourth.
If you sharpen the F to F#, it becomes an augmented fourth (and yes,
the
magazine is evidently on crack!). You can also think of it as
flattening the
G to Gb, which would be a diminished (rather than perfect) fifth

The difference is in intent, as much as anything, i.e. you're
consciously
sharpening the fourth, rather than flattening the fifth.

"Penfold"  wrote in message 
news:9939e7f0-8091-489c-8fc4-0ea7d228932a@e8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>* Thank you for going to the trouble of posting this, but somehow you've
> changed the interval I was asking about from [F# and C in Am] to [G# and C
> in Am]. In the example given in the magazine the F# was above the C so,
> counting notes upwards from C in your harmonic minor scale wouldn't that
> make the interval to F# an augmented fourth? There are six semitones
> between them.
>
> * I guess it's possible the magazine article was in error. Please excuse
> the absence of quotation marks '>s' above; Outlook Express does that with
> some posts, hence my asterisks here.

Am is A B C D E F G A - so the C to F is a fourth, and it's a perfect
fourth.
If you sharpen the F to F#, it becomes an augmented fourth (and yes,
the
magazine is evidently on crack!). You can also think of it as
flattening the
G to Gb, which would be a diminished (rather than perfect) fifth

The difference is in intent, as much as anything, i.e. you're
consciously
sharpening the fourth, rather than flattening the fifth.


* Thanks.

Chris

christofire wrote:
> "Penfold"  wrote in message
> news:9939e7f0-8091-489c-8fc4-0ea7d228932a@e8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>> * Thank you for going to the trouble of posting this, but somehow
>> you've changed the interval I was asking about from [F# and C in Am]
>> to [G# and C in Am]. In the example given in the magazine the F# was
>> above the C so, counting notes upwards from C in your harmonic minor
>> scale wouldn't that make the interval to F# an augmented fourth?
>> There are six semitones between them.
>>
>> * I guess it's possible the magazine article was in error. Please
>> excuse the absence of quotation marks '>s' above; Outlook Express
>> does that with some posts, hence my asterisks here.
>
> Am is A B C D E F G A - so the C to F is a fourth, and it's a perfect
> fourth.
> If you sharpen the F to F#, it becomes an augmented fourth (and yes,
> the
> magazine is evidently on crack!). You can also think of it as
> flattening the
> G to Gb, which would be a diminished (rather than perfect) fifth
>
> The difference is in intent, as much as anything, i.e. you're
> consciously
> sharpening the fourth, rather than flattening the fifth.

It always impresses me that you guys actually know this shit!
I'm strictly pentatonic. I can mix up the major and minor stuff during a 
solo but thats about as technical as I get.
*impressed*

-- 
'91 MkII Golf GTi 8v
'05 Polo FSi
www.facebook.com/tomscotland

On 3 Oct, 01:22, "tomScotland"  wrote:

>
> It always impresses me that you guys actually know this shit!
> I'm strictly pentatonic. I can mix up the major and minor stuff during a
> solo but thats about as technical as I get.
> *impressed*
>
> --
> '91 MkII Golf GTi 8v
> '05 Polo FSiwww.facebook.com/tomscotland

I'm with Tom on this one. If I think too hard about notes my brain
hurts.

"Penfold"  wrote in message 
news:9939e7f0-8091-489c-8fc4-0ea7d228932a@e8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...

>>The difference is in intent, as much as anything, i.e. you're
consciously sharpening the fourth, rather than flattening the fifth.<<

A lot of these things make most sense when writing them in manuscript. The 
key signatures have already adjusted the pitches of the notes falling on the 
respective line or space, so it's worth witing the notes down on a stave, in 
the given key, to see which notes are already dealt with and which need 
further sharpening, flattening or naturalling. It doesn't alter what the 
absolute intervals are, just whether a note is best expressed as sharpened 
or flattened in context.

The Ralph Denyer 'New Guitar Handbook' is still good for retrofitting theory 
and checking up on odd bits like this.

icarusi
--

remove the 00 to reply

"icarusi"  wrote in message 
news:7PGdnejKyLZrWFrXnZ2dnUVZ8lGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
> "Penfold"  wrote in message 
> news:9939e7f0-8091-489c-8fc4-0ea7d228932a@e8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>
>>>The difference is in intent, as much as anything, i.e. you're
> consciously sharpening the fourth, rather than flattening the fifth.<<
>
> A lot of these things make most sense when writing them in manuscript. The 
> key signatures have already adjusted the pitches of the notes falling on 
> the respective line or space, so it's worth witing the notes down on a 
> stave, in the given key, to see which notes are already dealt with and 
> which need further sharpening, flattening or naturalling. It doesn't alter 
> what the absolute intervals are, just whether a note is best expressed as 
> sharpened or flattened in context.
>
> The Ralph Denyer 'New Guitar Handbook' is still good for retrofitting 
> theory and checking up on odd bits like this.
>
> icarusi
> --


An aspect that catches me out from time to time is the principle of only 
stating accidentals once or twice and then not bothering thereafter, 
presumably on the basis that all subsequent notes in that position on the 
staff have the same amount of sharpness or flatness applied.  Cubase (5.1) 
appears to do this in its version of scoring.  Is this a well known 
principle, or something Steinberg made up (or dredged up from antiquity)? 
It seems like a recipe for confusion for simple-minded guitarists trying to 
work from notation.

Chris

"christofire"  wrote in message 
news:Jpedncl--MsPVFrXnZ2dnUVZ8o-dnZ2d@bt.com...

> An aspect that catches me out from time to time is the principle of only 
> stating accidentals once or twice and then not bothering thereafter, 
> presumably on the basis that all subsequent notes in that position on the 
> staff have the same amount of sharpness or flatness applied.  Cubase (5.1) 
> appears to do this in its version of scoring.  Is this a well known 
> principle, or something Steinberg made up (or dredged up from antiquity)? 
> It seems like a recipe for confusion for simple-minded guitarists trying 
> to work from notation.

AFAIK accidentals only last for a measure with a few exceptions.

icarusi
--

remove the 00 to reply

On Oct 4, 1:32 am, "icarusi"  wrote:

> AFAIK accidentals only last for a measure with a few exceptions.
>

Yeah, that's the usual approach - any accidental applies until the end
of that bar (unless it's contradicted beforehand). I've seen some
atonal scores, though, where the instruction "accidentals apply only
to the note marked" is at the start.


adrian