Consonant and Dissonant Intervals

[Bande]

Hiya!

Recently I found something interesting in a basic-theory book. I started to read it, and found this at the intervals part:

The guy says:
There are perfectly consonant intervals, such as: 1, P5, P8
There are partially consonant intervals, such as:M6, m6, M3, m3
There are dissonant intervals: m2, M2, P4, m7, M7 and ALL the diminished and augmented intervals

Now: the first thing that I don't agree with is that in my opinion P4 isn't dissonant. I'd call it partially consonant. Ok, no problem.

But he says: ALL the diminished and augmented intervals... well, i know that e.g. diminished 6th and P5 aren't the same, but they're the same pitch! So What? P5 is perfectly consonant, but its equivalent, diminished 6th is dissonant? ????

And one more thing (maybe a very stupid thing): P4 is actually the complementary interval of P5. So why is P4 called dissonant and P5 not?

...am I asking something stupid again?

[=Bob=]

The books I have ("Harmony", Walter Piston and "Tonal Harmony", Stefan Koska) say the P4 is only dissonant as a lone interval, but not usually considered dissonant when constructed as part of a chord of 3 or more elements, especially in a first inversion triad. Since we're using a tempered scale in conventional harmony/theory, I do not believe any enharmonic equivalent to a Maj3, P5, P8 or Maj/Min6 etc, should be considered dissonant. Maybe just a slip-up on the writer's part.
=Bob=

[SeattleRuss]

"Dissonance is in the ear of the beholder."
- Sum Gai

[Los Boleros]

I learned that the Fourth, the fifth and the octave are all perfect consonant intervals. Perfect because they do not change in a major or minor scale, consonant because they have a feeling of completeness and stability. A P4 and a P5 are basically the same interval therefor they are both consonant.

[=Bob=]

Originally Posted by Los Boleros

I learned that the Fourth, the fifth and the octave are all perfect consonant intervals. Perfect because they do not change in a major or minor scale, consonant because they have a feeling of completeness and stability. A P4 and a P5 are basically the same interval therefor they are both consonant.

Dissonance and consonance are terms that were coined by the modal music theorists. The tuning then was not tempered, in fact tuning did not become standardized until the 20th century. So it's difficult to define those terms in a cross-century sense. But back then a p4 was not considered consonant and I'm inclined to believe it was because of the non-tempered tuning. The terms continued to be used as music changed and so the terms have changed a bit too. I just tend to go with the historic definitions...
=Bob=

[Mateo150]

May want to check out this article

http://www.ibreathemusic.com/article/94

The 4th is the basis of his analysis... if the chord has the 4th...for example an F note in the key of C... then its unresolved or dissonant (not sure if those words are completely interchangable)....

The way that Los B mentioned them, I read a mention for that in Gunthers Modes article, i think perfect intervals, but I haven't really read through that

[Los Boleros]

Originally Posted by =Bob=

Dissonance and consonance are terms that were coined by the modal music theorists. The tuning then was not tempered, in fact tuning did not become standardized until the 20th century. So it's difficult to define those terms in a cross-century sense. But back then a p4 was not considered consonant and I'm inclined to believe it was because of the non-tempered tuning. The terms continued to be used as music changed and so the terms have changed a bit too. I just tend to go with the historic definitions...
=Bob=

If you go with the historic definitions, then you are dated. Remember that back then, they believed the diminished to be evil and it was avoided.

Here's what the Virginia Tech Music Dictionary says about the word Consonant

An accord of sounds sweet and pleasing to the ear as opposed to dissonance. Perfect consonances are the perfect fourth, fifth, and octave, imperfect consonances are the major and minor thirds and sixths.

So acording to that, Consonanse means sweet and pleasing to the ear. I do believe that a fourth falls under that category.

[=Bob=]

I don't believe I am dated. The problem is that there are still some modern references that state that the p4 is only consonant when it is included in a 1st inversion. I try to think about all the possibilities, but unfortunately, all information doesn't agree. So a little controversy is good. I think it just points out a tolerance that modern music enjoys.
=Bob=

[Los Boleros]

Originally Posted by =Bob=

I don't believe I am dated. The problem is that there are still some modern references that state that the p4 is only consonant when it is included in a 1st inversion. I try to think about all the possibilities, but unfortunately, all information doesn't agree. So a little controversy is good. I think it just points out a tolerance that modern music enjoys.
=Bob=

We obviously are not talking about the same thing it seems. I am reffering to a perfect fourth interval, not a chord. The relationship between two notes does not have inversions, only octaves.
Don't take offense to the "dated statement" Most of my theory I learned by studying Counterpoint by Fux and Harmony by Twaicoscki. (forgive the spelling) Many of my theories are also dated. but compared to your referenses, mine is modern.

[=Bob=]

Originally Posted by Los Boleros

We obviously are not talking about the same thing it seems. I am reffering to a perfect fourth interval, not a chord. The relationship between two notes does not have inversions, only octaves.
Don't take offense to the "dated statement" Most of my theory I learned by studying Counterpoint by Fux and Harmony by Twaicoscki. (forgive the spelling) Many of my theories are also dated. but compared to your referenses, mine is modern.

No offense taken... I'm just pointing out that there are even modern references that state that the P4 as an interval by itself is dissonant, and that as a member of a chord, particularly as a 1st inversion, the P4 is then considered consonant. Simple, just that not all references agree.

I just think it's important to note that the definition of consonance and dissonance originates in modal music, which causes the problem in the first place. It is common for the definitions to slide around. But the actual meaning of the terms "consonance" and "dissonance" depend on the musical period. It's not a matter of being modern, it's a matter of fitting the time....
=Bob=

[Zatz]

Originally Posted by Bande

There are perfectly consonant intervals, such as: 1, P5, P8
There are partially consonant intervals, such as:M6, m6, M3, m3
There are dissonant intervals: m2, M2, P4, m7, M7 and ALL the diminished and augmented intervals

Only tritone is not on the list (within 1 octave) so the phrase "ALL the diminished and augmented intervals" sounds too loud here

Originally Posted by Bande

Now: the first thing that I don't agree with is that in my opinion P4 isn't dissonant. I'd call it partially consonant.

Yea - can't agree with that either.

Originally Posted by Bande

i know that e.g. diminished 6th and P5 aren't the same, but they're the same pitch! So What? P5 is perfectly consonant, but its equivalent, diminished 6th is dissonant? ????

Never heard of "diminished 6th" before... If it's enharmonic equivalent of P5 then similarly would "diminished 2nd" stand for the root???

I agree with SeattleRuss - the feeling of dissonance is a subject of psychoacoustic study. It's hard to implement a universal 'measure of dissonance' though there are several approaches that work in some cases. You might consider frequency ratios, overtones overlapping, different registers, width of interval etc to explain dissonance - very interesting topic btw.

[Los Boleros]

Originally Posted by =Bob=

No offense taken... I'm just pointing out that there are even modern references that state that the P4 as an interval by itself is dissonant, and that as a member of a chord, particularly as a 1st inversion, the P4 is then considered consonant. Simple, just that not all references agree.

I just think it's important to note that the definition of consonance and dissonance originates in modal music, which causes the problem in the first place. It is common for the definitions to slide around. But the actual meaning of the terms "consonance" and "dissonance" depend on the musical period. It's not a matter of being modern, it's a matter of fitting the time....
=Bob=

Kool, It's nice having you aboard Bob.

I would like to point out that according to my material, the only Dissonances are:
The second and the seventh (both major and minor 7th).

This can be proved with the ear.

Here again, a second interval in one direction is also a seventh in the other direction. (Same as 4/5 and 3/6 and I guese you could say 1/8)

The term perfect mearly states that the interval does not change for major or minor. This is why the third and the sixth are considered imperfect consonances. (cause they are diminished by a half step in the minor scale)

Now IMHO, there is another word I use, and that is Tention. When use this word, I am reffering to anything other than 1,3,5. (Sometimes the seventh falls under this category but sometimes not) This is mearly my own phylosophy that I use in teaching Improvisation to my students. Sort of a note by note analysis of melody.

[=Bob=]

The original meaning of dissonance only meant that it was unstable, needed to resolve or otherwise something that could not indicate a finality. In modern times it is being used to mean harsh sounding or bad, as the psychoacoustic studies indicate. For example, these studies consider the p4 as consonant:

http://www.avatar.com.au/courses/PPo...e/percept.html

http://www.schenkerguide.com/consona...issonance.html

It's always been problematic to use the same words and redefine them as perceptions and tolerances change. But it happens, such as with the acceptance of the tritone. Rock today is not Rock of the 60s. Melodic Minor today is usually considered a minor scale with major versions of 6 and 7, but historically there were ascending and descending versions. This makes discussion difficult if we don't consider the period. I expect all of these terms to change even more over time. I just think it's necessary to consider the whole picture.
=Bob=

[Mateo150]

I kinda think the minor sixth is a little dissonant, its semi consanant and semi dissonant.... also depends on the rest of the context as well i guess...(such as ascending and descending)...

also, types of sounds, whether developed through the scolding voice of a parent or the jovial "peek-a-boo" phrase... these are typically ingrained cultrually and at a young age. Most cultures share lots of intonation/frequencys of say a happy saying. But I'd say it all makes a difference, especially with consanance and dissonance, I mean, compare Eastern and Western music. I think some Eastern music features lots of dissonance, but maybe that just cuz I'm American and english speaking.