Talk:Consecutive fifths

message: How about "consecutive interval", its plural, or "consecutive fifths and octaves" suggested above? Hyacinth 01:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [First: Many thanks, Hyacinth.] I myself would still go with "Consecutive fifths and octaves", since consecutive intervals broadly are not the topic. Then we could also have a redirection from "Consecutive fifths" to go with the redirection I have already put in place for "Consecutive octaves". See also, by the way, redirections I have done for "Hidden consecutives" and a couple of other things phrases like "Parallel octaves", etc. Noetica 05:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about unisons? Hyacinth 00:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ha ha! Unisons? They are almost completely covered by anything we could say about octaves, in this context. A small passing mention, with yet another redirect or two, from "Parallel unisons" and "Consecutive unisons", perhaps. "Hidden unisons"? I'd be very surprised if that were ever needed. (The inevitability of crossing parts in cases of consecutive unisons might be touched on, I suppose.) Of much more pressing importance is the matter of how inessential notes fail to remove, but may introduce, consecutives (standard or hidden), and mention of the fact that practice varies from period to period and composer to composer. (We can find camouflaged consecutive fifths and octaves in Mozart and Haydn, for example.) And then there is the matter of consecutives being more acceptable when there are other constraints, such as between inner parts when writing for many parts, or between some parts in the accompaniment and the accompanied solo line. I might get around to writing something on these matters. Noetica 02:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Not all consecutive fifths are parallel! A fifth followed by a twelfth is still consecutive fifths, even though contrary motion is used, and the same is true in reverse. Likewise, an octave followed by a unison is still consecutive octaves, and vice-versa. The ear will hear the consecutive fifth or octave regardless of whether it is parallel or not.
Further, when teaching music theory, it is dangerous to use the term “parallel” in explaining the concept, because it may cause the student to overlook consecutive fifths and octaves with contrary motion when she is checking her work.
In conclusion, consecutive fifths should not be “also known as parallel fifths.” Felicity4711 (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The concept is traditionally taught under the name "parallel fifths" referring to the function of the apparent sonority, not necessarily the relative motion between voices. "Consecutive fifths" doesn't really mean anything and IMO it is the misnomer. Going from d5 to P5 is mandatory from vii dim7 up a step for instance. The purpose of the concept of avoiding parallel fifths is to retain voice independence and contrapuntal style which true parallelism would go against. Therefore, contrary motion between 5ths and 12ths is much less noticeable, and less important. Ormaaj (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ‘Parallel’ Is a Misnomer! 

message: I can't believe there is no article on horn fifths, nor are they discussed in this article. This is an important concept, especially for historical reasons which should really be mentioned.
For those who don't know what this is, it is a traditionally acceptable sonority under certain circumstances involving parallel fifths. It originates from the nature of the ratios of available pitches on natural brass instruments. Ormaaj (talk) 14:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added two paragraphs on horn fifths. Note that horn fifths are not an example of parallel (consecutive) fifths, but rather of direct fifths.--Stuart2135simon (talk) 15:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horn fifth 

message: Would the employment of guitar power chords in popular music count as the use of consecutive fifths? 75.66.80.108 (talk) 02:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but notice that with power chords there is no intention to have independent voices. Notice the example of Haydn imitating hurdy-gurdy drone's (a popular music style in which homophonic chordal accompaniment rather than polyphony was used). Hyacinth (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are power chord riffs consecutive fifths? 

message: Why is the diagram on Hidden [consecutive] fifths displayed at the top of the article, when it would be more relevant near the appropriate heading?
Where are the "abounding" consec. 5ths in the Toccata and Fugue in D minor? I can only see consecutive 4ths. You should give measure references or delete this claim.
You have a link "(See below  for later developments.)" which doesn't go anywhere. I should think some reference to the ubiquity of consec. 5ths in jazz, rock, etc, should be mentioned. Chord sequences such as Cmaj7, Em7, Ebm7, Dm7 played in parallel are stock in trade for jazz players, with consec. 5ths abounding. Gerry246 (talk) 01:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I fear the diagram should not only be moved, but also re-captioned. It illustrates hidden fifths (two parts moving by similar, not contrary, motion towards a fifth), but does not illustrate consecutive fifths (two parts moving by similar or contrary motion from a simple or compound fifth to another simple or compound fifth), as it would if the lower note of the first dyad were an A or the upper note a G. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, on further thought it doesn't even illustrate a hidden fifth, or at least not a "forbidden" hidden fifth, as the upper voice moves by step. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagram 1, Bach and || 5ths, use in jazz 

message: The article attributes the first proscription of consecutives to Johannes de Grocheo. However, Drabkin in Grove attributes it to Johannes de Garlandia, although Baltzer in her article on him refers to the Optima introductio in contrapunctum pro rudibus as merely "edit[ed] ... under Garlandia's name" by Coussemaker. What is the source for de Grocheo in this context? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:15, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Johannes? 

message: *The strict avoidance of consecutive fifths is one of the major reasons some musicologists doubt whether Johann Sebastian Bach composed the famous Toccata and Fugue in D minor. Bach was an accomplished composer, highly skilled at avoiding consecutive fifths, but the toccata abounds with them. However, more recent arguments suggest this is not the case at all, and that the Toccata was written by Bach but written for violin and transcribed for organ.
The above text was removed as unreferenced. Since it was hoped that it could be re-added I have moved it here so people may actually see it so that could actually happen. Hyacinth (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thinking, thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed

message: Why and where does this article need additional citations for verification? What references does it need and how should they be added? Hyacinth (talk) 17:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Tag removed. Hyacinth (talk) 04:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional citations

message: It's only the way it is approached that is unusual (D and F held on from a B major chord, with the bass descending chromatically to A and the D being then interpreted as E, then resolving normally to V7 of C major to lead into the recapitulation). Double sharp (talk) 14:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is so unusual about the resolution of the German sixth in Mozart's Jupiter? 

message: This section:
" A positive organ having this configuration has been reconstructed recently by Van der Putten and is housed in Groningen, and is used in an attempt to rediscover performance practice of the time."
seems to go a bit too out-of-its-way to mention van der putten (who?) in particular and his/her quest to "rediscover performance practices of the time". Seems a bit of a tangent as far as the actual subject matter of this article is concerned. I'm no wiki expert (sure that's obvious) but just as a casual observer this stood out like a sore thumb and doesn't seem to fit the tone I normally associate with wiki articles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.219.85 (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Van Der Putten