Klarinet Archive - Posting 000311.txt from 2003/07

From: CBA <clarinet10001@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] accidentals
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 16:45:45 -0400

I would also say that, if ALL of the major composers of an era
use "courtesy accidentals" without calling them such in preface
of music or the forwards for the pieces, then it is common
practice for the accidental to be "assumed" to carry throughout
all octaves of that note in a measure, which would MAKE it
common practice, and would supercede the books anyway. That's
how theory of past time periods came into vogue, and became
common practice before it was documented by theory scholars.
Baroque composers CREATED the rules, and they were written down.
Otherwise, we would still be listening to Renaissance
compositions to this day, since all of the rules wouldn't
evolve. I have never used the two books you quoted from, so I
guess I am at a disadvantage for the references. I would say
that if composers put "courtesy accidentals" in some places in
their music...that when they DIDN'T put the extra "courtesy
accidentals," I would HAVE to assume that the accidental applied
to ALL octaves, and play accordingly.

Are there any MAJOR composer/composition examples showing where
the accidental application was NOT in the other octave, and was
MEANT to be a different pitch when in the different octave? If
there are no examples of this extant (for major composers, not
theorists,) common practice would actually make the examples of
text a moot point, since no composer worth his/her snuff would
think to actually LEAVE the other octave unadorned, and then
expect the performer(s) to conjure a different pitch in the same
measure. The accidental usage in the piece would have to be
explained, either in notes at the beginning, a footnote, or a
forward by the composer, and that in itself would tell the
performer that this was NOT common practice to assume that
different octaves were not affected by accidentals for the other
octaves.

I am willing to go with you that you have produced 3 references
about notes in different octaves not being affected by the
accidentals in the same measure. I had references to the
opposite (we actually discussed it ad nauseum in 20th Century
Harmony class in college as a fallacy for notes in different
octaves to be exclusive of each other for accidental
application, EVEN for 12 tone/serial composition.) I don't have
the books anymore in my possession (my parents still have these
books of mine from college in their attic, because I live in
Manhattan, and we are only allowed 5 books at a time in a NYC
apartment, otherwise, the apartments wouldn't be able to have
PEOPLE in them...LOL!)

I look forward to hearing of PRACTICAL applications of this
accidental thing. Again, I concede (without seeing the
references you gave) that there are people who have invoked this
erroneous rule to have a note in another octave and actually
have a performer play a different pitch, at face value, without
reference to the other octave accidentals. Composers have the
final say for a rule such as this. If all notable composers
actually carry accidentals from octave to octave in the same
measure, we just are 25-50 years behind it being written as part
of OUR contemporary theory, since practice does supercede book
theory from non-composers. The composers set the stage. When is
the supposed cutoff for the accidentals to apply to all octaves
in the measure? It would have to be AT LEAST past the time of
the Les Six movement, since they ignored such a transformation
of this practical application and would be subscribing to
Baroque/Classical/Romantic hand me down theory, which would have
utilized an applied accidental usage for every octave,
regardless of the octave it was written for in the measure. When
would the definitive change for this practice take place?

FYI...I have found NUMEROUS discussions on the web about written
music questions of the same type, plus a lot of music software
editing problems from similar rules/arguments. What is very
striking is that the people in the arguments who support the
"accidental doesn't apply to any octave but the one written"
can't produce examples to back their assertions, while the
people saying that the accidental carries throughout the score
measure for that written part can produce innumerable examples
of where accidentals are assumed to be for all octaves, and
where octaves that the composer DIDN'T want the accidental to
carry over the octaves, the composer NOTATED the difference, as
to say that they needed to represent that other octave
differently to be played differently.

AGAIN...I find this VERY intriguing, and I'm not trying to be
belligerent. I am just curious to know if a select few
theoretical prophets of the early 20th century made a decision
to change this procedure of accidentals applying to all octaves,
but composers still took refuge in the old traditions of keeping
the accidental application for ALL octaves. Were the theory
writers even heard? Could this be the musician's "prohibition"
where people *know* that they should *not* be able to apply the
accidental to all in the measure, but they write according to
the reasoning that they HAVE applied that accidental to all
octaves by writing it in one of the octaves?

For a night person, I am WAY too awake at this time of the
afternoon!

Kelly Abraham
Woodwinds - New York City
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--- Doug Sears <dsears@-----.net> wrote:
<SNIP>
> I believe your many counter-examples are all cases of
> "courtesy accidentals",
> to make sure there's no ambiguity, and could well have been
> put in
> parentheses. "Another common use of courtesy accidentals
> occurs when an
> accidental is canceled by an octave leap ..." -McGrain. From
> the responses so
> far, it looks like liberal use of courtesy accidentals is
> necessary to avoid
> misunderstandings.

Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org