Intervals larger than an octave

I just took a music theory 1 proficiency test (since my college doesn't take that AP credit), and there was one question on there that I just had no clue about. It was something like "What is the name for intervals larger than an octave?" I just put down "really big" and continued on, but I'm curious as to what the real answer might be. Anyone?

Uh... a compound interval?

Uh. . . yeah.

Okay, that works. I guess I just never learned that. Thanks.

The interval above an octave is called a natural compound fifth. It's most commonly used in Wagner's Lohengrin.

The interval above an octave is called a natural compound fifth. It's most commonly used in Wagner's Lohengrin.

actually, there's more than one interval above an octave... so "it's called a natural compound fifth" is an error of omission.

And technically speaking, the interval "above the octave" is the 9th. At least if one is refering to the interval immediately above said octave. The subsequant intervals are 10th, 11th, etc...

Compound intervals are found in just about ALL music. It only depends on which intervallic relationship you are examining. Trust me on this, Wagner does not have any merit here.

I find that this is a dead silly question for any test... I mean the usefulness of the answer is totally trivia and stupid. (Other than that I agree with QCC on everything else he says)

It was probably just to get the score up to an even 50 or something.

Natural compound fifth, 5c, ninth, same thing. Though the correct way to compose is to transcribe the segmented interval, so it's most commonly called a natural compound fifth and used in this way too (compounding the fifth). A ninth is simply just a second. A natrual compound fifth has a greater meaning rather.

Wagner's natural 5c is the most recognized vestige in parallel lyric. Lohengrin melodic lines form the basis on tritonal chord structures. They're segmented as 5cs and up the scale to 4cs (compound fourths). And then to fill in the empty chords, there are what you call dischordant compounds.

Originally posted by Qccowboy:

actually, there's more than one interval above an octave... so "it's called a natural compound fifth" is an error of omission.

Feel free to add your own input, yet don't divest me or even interpose if you are however ill-advised in this area of expertise. Seriously, I'm critically stressing this.

Must you always drag Wagner into things? :P

Must you always drag Wagner into things? :P

That's like asking "Must you never drag Wagner into things?" Wagner's not troubling you, so why are you denying his expanse onto the principles of music? If he wasn't commending more than a chromatic octave, I might be taking advice from the next person who had.

It's common that you're asking questions, too and legitimately acknowledgement can come a long way, you know.

Feel free to add your own input, yet don't divest me or even interpose if you are however ill-advised in this area of expertise. Seriously, I'm critically stressing this.

OUCH!

Sorry.

I will give you 10 different options for OTHER intervals other than the 5c above the octave and you name them if you please:

1. C-C#

2. C-D

3. C-Eb

D. C-E

etc...

Assume that there is an octave apart those 2 notes, and the indicated interval. A compound interval then! :D

Now, if you can name them with the "fifth" word inside, I'll give you a cookie!

Cause I'd say it's a...

1. 8th augment (or 9th minor for different spelling)

2. 9th maj. (or octave + tone)

3. 10th min. (or octave plus 3rd min.)

4. 10th maj. (or octave plus 3rd maj.)

What about you then? Honestly cause I'm not 100% sure I understand your previous post. How would you call the C-E (for example) with 5ths?

How would you call the C-E (for example) with 5ths?

Generally it's a third, subsequently for chromatic developments with chords reaching past the octave scope, such as in the Lohengrin melodic lines, a third above the bar would reduce to a natural compound fourth being the seventeeth progression in the C scale: the octave to E will structure or compound with whatever natural note in the chord you are using (accordingly the name, natural compound), aside from changing from a C to an F, or a root to a fourth. F hence fourth (C-F).

:whistling:

Generally it's a third, subsequently for chromatic developments with chords reaching past the octave scope, such as in the Lohengrin melodic lines, a third above the bar would reduce to a natural compound fourth being the seventeeth progression in the C scale: the octave to E will structure or compound with whatever natural note in the chord you are using (accordingly the name, natural compound), aside from changing from a C to an F, or a root to a fourth. F hence fourth (C-F).

I'm sorry but I've lost you completely. And to say that I'm ignorant in music... :O

But really, I honestly don't understand what you're talking about. Plus I don't see a point to the Lohengrin melodic lines really (as a reference). chromatically C-E is 16 semitones, but I've never ever heard anyone use that name. Plus, even in chromatic music, unless you are on paper and dealing with numbers alone, I really can't see someone shouting "Play 18 semitones"...

Sorry, but really, can you explain it a bit better. The C-F in the end?

Mind you that it may be a language barrier, but still I'm interested to see what you're saying.

Plus I don't see a point to the Lohengrin melodic lines really (as a reference).

Did you play some of these lines before divesting them?

Alright, I'll try to tone down my language and be as basic as possible. ;) No one really says play 18 semitones! In the score the composer would usually write a side note of 3dc to himself above the fourth which would explain the dischordant compound of the fourth as you would know it, resolving to either a diminished fifth or a third. The compound is the fifth or the resolve is the third, hence a 3dc. Stravinksy composed "Capriccio for Piano and Orchestra" using Wagnerian theories of the same 3rd discord compounds, which he called 3-D chords. It's easier to understand if you make a broad map in your head and examine to where all the natural notes of the C major scale can possibly direct dischordant (discordant) attention. That's how these maps of music came about. By generally ruling out the dischords. It's a pretty long process. But hey, no one asked Wagner to write so technically, and proficiently that is why his harmonies are so beautiful. I'm still working through the long process myself. :thumbsup:

Rachmaninoff was also a genius of this map... and Liszt loved working around it on and off with his best pieces of piano work. Most of these amazing piano players had much to thank Wagner for.

Please watch your tone when talking to other forum members.

To say "Alright, I'll try to tone down my language and be as basic as possible" to Nikolas is a great insult.

Remember that not everyone on this forum is a child, or younger than you, or has less musical experience than you.

I also have never heard of any of this before. At least not expressed in this way.

Where did you get your music degree, again? I'm curious as to where they teach this theory.

Either you are expressing it unsatisfactorily, or it's balderdash, because it makes no sense to me.

Right now, you sound like someone who is putting together a bunch of big words and trying to win an argument through obfuscation - "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullsh**" as my father used to say.

I have to admit that my early musical studies were not in English, so that might explain why the terminology seems strange and nonsensical to me.

What you are writing implies that Wagner (and others) based their harmony on the resolutions of the external intervallic relationships of chords.

While there might be some truth to this, it barely scratches the surface of the actual movement of material within a harmonic passage. I believe you are missing the larger part of the material by attempting to reduce this to a question of "intervallic resolution".

Let's be clear about one thing: a 4th (compound or not) would not "resolve to a diminshed 5th". The dissonant interval of the two here is not the 4th but the diminished 5th. The diminished 5th (augmented 4th) carries the greater weight of accoustical dissonance.

I call bullsh** on the whole Wagner gibberish. Been digging in Tumababa's chocolate barrel? :cool:

I'm quite interested in what Rkmajora has to say (although I don't understand a word), but the way he says it annoys me...

I call bullsh** on the whole Wagner gibberish. Been digging in Tumababa's chocolate barrel? :cool:

AH! I was wondering why it seemed lighter! :w00t:

I see what's happened here. Rkmajora, clearly brilliant, is trying to explain his point. What he is trying to say is obviously above the understanding of Michel and Nikolas, as they only possess meagre Master's Degrees, and are definitely uneducated and ignorant when compared to the genius of Rkmajora.

So guys, just give up, because Wagner is better than all of you.

Ohhh..... why didn't they just say so?

Besides which, even Google can't tell us what a "natural compound fifth" is. I am, however, finding some fascinating material from the Fifth Soviet-Indian Symposium on the Chemistry of Natural Compounds. :w00t:

Feel free to add your own input, yet don't divest me or even interpose if you are however ill-advised in this area of expertise. Seriously, I'm critically stressing this.

hahahahaha

sorry... the word "expertise" struck me as particularly funny.

where did you get your music degree, in a box of Corn Flakes?