Enharmonics/chord spelling/real sound of chord

[stillofthenight]

Look at where I circled in red. I was trying to see what chord it is and had to think of the G# as Ab because in that case it would spell a D diminished chord and certainly sounds like one. Why then, did Chopin write in the G# note. Why couldn't he just write in Ab so the chord can be seen in the spelling and staff easier?

Also the C up in the treble would make it a fully diminished D chord.

If you just went by what was written it would spell F, G#,D,C and there looks to be no triad that could be spelled...only if you think of the G# as an Ab though.

Also it looks as though there is the interval of a second from the bottom two voices but it actually does not sound like one because of the F natural and G# which makes a minor 3rd interval.

I have run across other instances of this sort of thing in other pieces as well.

[dima_76557]

Why then, did Chopin write in the G# note. Why couldn't he just write in Ab so the chord can be seen in the spelling and staff easier?

IMHO, most likely because Chopin doesn't want us to analyse every chord in a classical way. Instead, he wants us to define the essential standard chord functions, hold on a bit and listen to where this or that particular chord wants to go. Then play the next chord as written and see (hear) that what we expected doesn't happen and we are left with wonder. What Chopin does is in service of high poetry. Instead of trying to fit every chord into classical schemes, try listening to this piece as an exercise in voice leading.

[Bob]

It's always 'write it out so it's easier to understand' vs. 'write it out so it's easier to perform.'  Composers have to make a decision on which direction to go.


I know there are more analyses out there.  I'm looking it now, but I'm getting tired of it.  It could be that Chopin has it written out so the function is easier to understand but we're not seeing it immediately.  Something like the top part of a V7 or a substitution.  I don't remember what the proper form is for a first inversion dim to V7.

[nystul]

I think that it must be spelled with G# because the following chord demands a G#.  The chord spelled D,F,Ab,C is D half-diminished, but the most common resolution of that chord would be to Eb major.  In that case the Ab leads to G in the resolution.  Here the G# appears to be anticipating the next chord where the G# becomes consonant.  If it were tied across the bar line, this would be more obvious, but the effect is the same.

[nyiregyhazi]

Look at where I circled in red. I was trying to see what chord it is and had to think of the G# as Ab because in that case it would spell a D diminished chord and certainly sounds like one. Why then, did Chopin write in the G# note. Why couldn't he just write in Ab so the chord can be seen in the spelling and staff easier?

Also the C up in the treble would make it a fully diminished D chord.

If you just went by what was written it would spell F, G#,D,C and there looks to be no triad that could be spelled...only if you think of the G# as an Ab though.

Also it looks as though there is the interval of a second from the bottom two voices but it actually does not sound like one because of the F natural and G# which makes a minor 3rd interval.

I have run across other instances of this sort of thing in other pieces as well.

I hate to break it to you, but it's you who misunderstood harmony not Chopin. All diminished 7th chords must be written with a second somewhere. They cannot all be notated in thirds. Your false impression of a single correct spelling is one of many ways of writing it correctly. The 2nd (in terms of letters) can correctly go between any two of the notes. In this case, it would be stupid to write A flat. The chord is a double suspension that resolved to E7. The C is implied as a suspension back to the B (ie it's HALF diminished aka the Tristan chord and not "fully diminished") but when this goes back to the note of the dimisinished 7th,the bass has already gone too. Although never struck, it's in an implied diminished 7th notated in the most logical manner possible.

[stillofthenight]

All diminished 7th chords must be written with a second somewhere.

In that sense, you would be referring to inverted 7th chords? I am just getting into analyzing simple pieces so all I try to do is order the pitch collections into some sort of chord...if I become stumped as in this case I usually just forget about the key and everything and just call it what it is in terms of the isolated chord in its pure form. So in the 3 note pitch collection in the bass I came up with the intervals of a minor 3rd and a major 6th from the root of F. And it sounds like an fully diminshed F chord. So I just go by what it sounds like. I am not very experienced with transcribed music and instances like this such as why an Ab wasn't written.

[nyiregyhazi]

In that sense, you would be referring to inverted 7th chords? I am just getting into analyzing simple pieces so all I try to do is order the pitch collections into some sort of chord...if I become stumped as in this case I usually just forget about the key and everything and just call it what it is in terms of the isolated chord in its pure form. So in the 3 note pitch collection in the bass I came up with the intervals of a minor 3rd and a major 6th from the root of F. And it sounds like an fully diminshed F chord. So I just go by what it sounds like. I am not very experienced with transcribed music and instances like this such as why an Ab wasn't written.

Sorry, but you haven't grasped the point here at all. A flat is in no way more correct than g sharp. I have no idea what has led you to believe that the single possible spelling that you prefer is the only correct one. Quite simply, it isn't. Ive never heard anyone suggest that the inversion should have any bearing on how to write it. The f is not even suggestive of a tonic, but of a suspension against an implied E. If you want to understand this, you need to go back to the drawing board when it comes to imagined "rules" because the ones you are basing this on do not exist.


PS there's not even such thing as inversion in a diminished 7th. It's a deliberately ambiguous chord that can lead to many places. The low note need not be a harmonic centre and very rarely is, if ever. If you take the idea that any diminished 7th is an implied 7th with a minor 9th over a missing bass, the real harmonic centre is one of four notes, which is not actually played. The resolution is what reveals which one was implied as the centre. Here it was E. The primary rule about notation is that it should resolve logically. As this resolved to e7 it needs a g sharp. It's basically a suspension over an implied E, not a chord that is harmonically centered on F in any respect. You're both starting from a red herring and making false assumptions that the lowest note must define a single way of writing a diminished chord.

[nyiregyhazi]

I see what you meant now about the inversion- if you're thinking of d diminished in inversion. But you're ignoring the treble. The melody makes it half diminished and it tries to pass to a diminished seventh, although the bass has already resolved before the chord ever occurs. But context always takes precedence in all situations  diminished 7th or not.

If a diminished seven always had to operate based on 1st 3rd 5th and seventh, the only correct way to write one on d would be d f a flat c flat. That would be a dumb way to write the chord most of the time. Either a flat or g sharp is fine and b makes more sense than c flat in most keys, especially sharp keys. Context always takes precedence- not artificial rules.  

PS sillier still would be starting on F, which would demand both the c flat and an e double flat rather than d, topreserve a 5th and 7th being lowered. Diminished 7th can be notated however, as it gets too stupid to start from the regular intervals and diminish them all. You write the notes as is convenient and logical.

[stillofthenight]

Ok and one more thing that sort of goes off topic. In my textbook it says that an A2 is a dissonant interval. How is this possible? The A2 is sonically equivalent to a m3 and both span 3 half steps. And I know a m3 is an imperfect consonance so shouldn't the A2 be as well?

[nyiregyhazi]

Ok and one more thing that sort of goes off topic. In my textbook it says that an A2 is a dissonant interval. How is this possible? The A2 is sonically equivalent to a m3 and both span 3 half steps. And I know a m3 is an imperfect consonance so shouldn't the A2 be as well?

In this case, the principle is about tension to resolution. D sharp from c is usually going to resolve to E and this is a tension. E flat is the normal interval, not something that would be expected to resolve.

[keypeg]

One problem with diminished 7ths has to do with how it is taught.  You get the one version, built up from the bottom note, in stacked thirds.  Then you are taught to do "inversions" of that diminished chord.  The "same" chord with different note names is treated as a different chord, when it is the same dim7 with a different spelling.  What is left out completely in these rudiments courses is musical context, the thing that Niyireghazi just mentioned.

In regards to "dissonance", the definition of what is dissonant changes by time period and I suspect by theoretician.  I have not heard of an aug2 being called a dissonant interval (it may well be), but I have seen it in positions where it needs to resolve.  Spelling is tied to function.  Understanding function helps us to play.  For example, if you know that the D# wants to move to E, while an Eb wants to stay put, that helps you play.