Mixing
Why is there both a sharp and a natural sign in parentheses before this note?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
On Andre Gedalge's Traite de la Fugue book, there is this example, where before the F note, there is both a natural and a sharp sign.
Which one do I choose? And why did the author include both of them?
(there is no key signature)
theory accidentals
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
On Andre Gedalge's Traite de la Fugue book, there is this example, where before the F note, there is both a natural and a sharp sign.
Which one do I choose? And why did the author include both of them?
(there is no key signature)
theory accidentals
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
This is the Greek translation, so is it possible it's a mistake?
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
What is represented by the separate systems? Different solutions for the same task? Obviously the parentheses can't be courtesy accidentals, and the only alternative I can imagine is choose either one, or alternate between all of them. If this is somehow related to a minor scale, it might be the difference between standard and harmonic minor, but example 3 looks quite chromatic.
– guidot
6 hours ago
What is the context of this example?
– Richard
6 hours ago
@Richard there really isn't any context. These are just examples of Subjects with their answers (the answers are on the right, not shown on the pic)
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
2
Check the header. Flat?!
– Tim
5 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
On Andre Gedalge's Traite de la Fugue book, there is this example, where before the F note, there is both a natural and a sharp sign.
Which one do I choose? And why did the author include both of them?
(there is no key signature)
theory accidentals
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
On Andre Gedalge's Traite de la Fugue book, there is this example, where before the F note, there is both a natural and a sharp sign.
Which one do I choose? And why did the author include both of them?
(there is no key signature)
theory accidentals
theory accidentals
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
edited 11 mins ago
rrauenza
1853
1853
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
asked 6 hours ago
Shevliaskovic
19.8k1372157
19.8k1372157
This is the Greek translation, so is it possible it's a mistake?
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
What is represented by the separate systems? Different solutions for the same task? Obviously the parentheses can't be courtesy accidentals, and the only alternative I can imagine is choose either one, or alternate between all of them. If this is somehow related to a minor scale, it might be the difference between standard and harmonic minor, but example 3 looks quite chromatic.
– guidot
6 hours ago
What is the context of this example?
– Richard
6 hours ago
@Richard there really isn't any context. These are just examples of Subjects with their answers (the answers are on the right, not shown on the pic)
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
2
Check the header. Flat?!
– Tim
5 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
This is the Greek translation, so is it possible it's a mistake?
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
What is represented by the separate systems? Different solutions for the same task? Obviously the parentheses can't be courtesy accidentals, and the only alternative I can imagine is choose either one, or alternate between all of them. If this is somehow related to a minor scale, it might be the difference between standard and harmonic minor, but example 3 looks quite chromatic.
– guidot
6 hours ago
What is the context of this example?
– Richard
6 hours ago
@Richard there really isn't any context. These are just examples of Subjects with their answers (the answers are on the right, not shown on the pic)
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
2
Check the header. Flat?!
– Tim
5 hours ago
This is the Greek translation, so is it possible it's a mistake?
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
This is the Greek translation, so is it possible it's a mistake?
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
What is represented by the separate systems? Different solutions for the same task? Obviously the parentheses can't be courtesy accidentals, and the only alternative I can imagine is choose either one, or alternate between all of them. If this is somehow related to a minor scale, it might be the difference between standard and harmonic minor, but example 3 looks quite chromatic.
– guidot
6 hours ago
What is represented by the separate systems? Different solutions for the same task? Obviously the parentheses can't be courtesy accidentals, and the only alternative I can imagine is choose either one, or alternate between all of them. If this is somehow related to a minor scale, it might be the difference between standard and harmonic minor, but example 3 looks quite chromatic.
– guidot
6 hours ago
What is the context of this example?
– Richard
6 hours ago
What is the context of this example?
– Richard
6 hours ago
@Richard there really isn't any context. These are just examples of Subjects with their answers (the answers are on the right, not shown on the pic)
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
@Richard there really isn't any context. These are just examples of Subjects with their answers (the answers are on the right, not shown on the pic)
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
2
2
Check the header. Flat?!
– Tim
5 hours ago
Check the header. Flat?!
– Tim
5 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
8
down vote
Since these are sample fugue subjects, here is my take:
Because these are all examples of motion from scale-degree 5 up to scale-degree 1 in the key of C, they seem to be showing that, in choosing a lower neighbor to G, you can have either F or F♯. Since using F♯ in no way alters the local tonality, you are welcome to use either option.
One reason why this is important to show is that, since these subjects begin with scale-degree 5, they require tonal answers (not real answers). This lower-neighbor motion from the G will result in the same tonal answer, which (I'm guessing) is one rationale for having the examples presented in this way.
In some other fugal circumstances—like if these were countersubjects or some other extra contrapuntal material—you may want to shy away from using F♯ if you want to make it extra clear you're in tonic and not moving to the dominant.
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
This is usually done when a double sharp gets lowered back to a sharp.
Like for instance, when you are in a# melodic minor and the Leading Tone note gets raised from the G# in the key signature up to a Gx, now when the descending natural minor form is used now this Gx needs to go back to a G#, so one of the forms of notation for this would be a natural sign followed by a sharp sign.
You also get the notation where just a single sharp is used, but this is ever so slightly ambiguous. I do prefer the notation with the natural sign.
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
2
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
2
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
2
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
8
down vote
Since these are sample fugue subjects, here is my take:
Because these are all examples of motion from scale-degree 5 up to scale-degree 1 in the key of C, they seem to be showing that, in choosing a lower neighbor to G, you can have either F or F♯. Since using F♯ in no way alters the local tonality, you are welcome to use either option.
One reason why this is important to show is that, since these subjects begin with scale-degree 5, they require tonal answers (not real answers). This lower-neighbor motion from the G will result in the same tonal answer, which (I'm guessing) is one rationale for having the examples presented in this way.
In some other fugal circumstances—like if these were countersubjects or some other extra contrapuntal material—you may want to shy away from using F♯ if you want to make it extra clear you're in tonic and not moving to the dominant.
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
add a comment |Â
up vote
8
down vote
Since these are sample fugue subjects, here is my take:
Because these are all examples of motion from scale-degree 5 up to scale-degree 1 in the key of C, they seem to be showing that, in choosing a lower neighbor to G, you can have either F or F♯. Since using F♯ in no way alters the local tonality, you are welcome to use either option.
One reason why this is important to show is that, since these subjects begin with scale-degree 5, they require tonal answers (not real answers). This lower-neighbor motion from the G will result in the same tonal answer, which (I'm guessing) is one rationale for having the examples presented in this way.
In some other fugal circumstances—like if these were countersubjects or some other extra contrapuntal material—you may want to shy away from using F♯ if you want to make it extra clear you're in tonic and not moving to the dominant.
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
add a comment |Â
up vote
8
down vote
up vote
8
down vote
Since these are sample fugue subjects, here is my take:
Because these are all examples of motion from scale-degree 5 up to scale-degree 1 in the key of C, they seem to be showing that, in choosing a lower neighbor to G, you can have either F or F♯. Since using F♯ in no way alters the local tonality, you are welcome to use either option.
One reason why this is important to show is that, since these subjects begin with scale-degree 5, they require tonal answers (not real answers). This lower-neighbor motion from the G will result in the same tonal answer, which (I'm guessing) is one rationale for having the examples presented in this way.
In some other fugal circumstances—like if these were countersubjects or some other extra contrapuntal material—you may want to shy away from using F♯ if you want to make it extra clear you're in tonic and not moving to the dominant.
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
Since these are sample fugue subjects, here is my take:
Because these are all examples of motion from scale-degree 5 up to scale-degree 1 in the key of C, they seem to be showing that, in choosing a lower neighbor to G, you can have either F or F♯. Since using F♯ in no way alters the local tonality, you are welcome to use either option.
One reason why this is important to show is that, since these subjects begin with scale-degree 5, they require tonal answers (not real answers). This lower-neighbor motion from the G will result in the same tonal answer, which (I'm guessing) is one rationale for having the examples presented in this way.
In some other fugal circumstances—like if these were countersubjects or some other extra contrapuntal material—you may want to shy away from using F♯ if you want to make it extra clear you're in tonic and not moving to the dominant.
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
edited 1 hour ago
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
answered 6 hours ago
Richard
32.5k671137
32.5k671137
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
This is usually done when a double sharp gets lowered back to a sharp.
Like for instance, when you are in a# melodic minor and the Leading Tone note gets raised from the G# in the key signature up to a Gx, now when the descending natural minor form is used now this Gx needs to go back to a G#, so one of the forms of notation for this would be a natural sign followed by a sharp sign.
You also get the notation where just a single sharp is used, but this is ever so slightly ambiguous. I do prefer the notation with the natural sign.
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
2
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
2
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
2
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
This is usually done when a double sharp gets lowered back to a sharp.
Like for instance, when you are in a# melodic minor and the Leading Tone note gets raised from the G# in the key signature up to a Gx, now when the descending natural minor form is used now this Gx needs to go back to a G#, so one of the forms of notation for this would be a natural sign followed by a sharp sign.
You also get the notation where just a single sharp is used, but this is ever so slightly ambiguous. I do prefer the notation with the natural sign.
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
2
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
2
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
2
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
up vote
7
down vote
This is usually done when a double sharp gets lowered back to a sharp.
Like for instance, when you are in a# melodic minor and the Leading Tone note gets raised from the G# in the key signature up to a Gx, now when the descending natural minor form is used now this Gx needs to go back to a G#, so one of the forms of notation for this would be a natural sign followed by a sharp sign.
You also get the notation where just a single sharp is used, but this is ever so slightly ambiguous. I do prefer the notation with the natural sign.
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
This is usually done when a double sharp gets lowered back to a sharp.
Like for instance, when you are in a# melodic minor and the Leading Tone note gets raised from the G# in the key signature up to a Gx, now when the descending natural minor form is used now this Gx needs to go back to a G#, so one of the forms of notation for this would be a natural sign followed by a sharp sign.
You also get the notation where just a single sharp is used, but this is ever so slightly ambiguous. I do prefer the notation with the natural sign.
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
answered 6 hours ago
Neil Meyer
8,54222548
8,54222548
2
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
2
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
2
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
2
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
2
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
2
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
2
2
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
But there are no previous bars, so as to imply something like that and there isn't a key signature either
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
It could be an excerpt of a piece where this happened and the formatting was kept.
– Neil Meyer
6 hours ago
2
2
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
This certainly is the normal use of such a sign, although it appears there wasn't an Fx to cancel. +1.
– Tim
5 hours ago
2
2
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
No, then they would have been together in the same parentheses. Together with the fact that there is no previous bar I see no reason to invent a preceding double sharp. It’s highly unlikely this is an excerpt since it’s part of a list of examples of moving from dominant to tonic. Even if it were an excerpt, Baroque fugue has zero instances of where it makes sense to write f double sharp just a bar before such a clear c major.
– 11684
2 hours ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
I prefer the notation with only a sharp sign. I generally think we would be better off if courtesy accidentals were never written. This kind of stuff is basically boilerplate – it's only needed because musicians expect that a removal of an accidental comes with a courtesy, thus they'll get confused when none is there, thus orchestrators will write courtesies, thus musicians expect that a removal comes with a courtesy... (But +1, since this is indeed commonly done.)
– leftaroundabout
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f75486%2fwhy-is-there-both-a-sharp-and-a-natural-sign-in-parentheses-before-this-note%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
This is the Greek translation, so is it possible it's a mistake?
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
What is represented by the separate systems? Different solutions for the same task? Obviously the parentheses can't be courtesy accidentals, and the only alternative I can imagine is choose either one, or alternate between all of them. If this is somehow related to a minor scale, it might be the difference between standard and harmonic minor, but example 3 looks quite chromatic.
– guidot
6 hours ago
What is the context of this example?
– Richard
6 hours ago
@Richard there really isn't any context. These are just examples of Subjects with their answers (the answers are on the right, not shown on the pic)
– Shevliaskovic
6 hours ago
2
Check the header. Flat?!
– Tim
5 hours ago