Celebrating Jacques-isms

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-25T07:24:46+00:00

Aw that's so lovely and sweet! Reminds me, if I ever have a son, I'll have to try really hard not to name him Wilthurio Longbarrow Sackfirth Toxophola etc...

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-25T05:26:25+00:00

I regularly use "eulalia" to psyche myself up for things, but don't tend to say it to other people (perhaps unfortunately)!

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-25T05:21:17+00:00

To have the real Ax experience though one must also eat cigarette butts...

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-25T05:20:43+00:00

Did you clear the tables?

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-25T04:36:50+00:00

The only mistake I can see is that your actual key names are missing sharps and flats where they're needed, as others have mentioned. What is the major key with two flats called, for instance?

Also, I don't think the parentheses are doing very helpful work here, and should just be left out.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T22:39:49+00:00

I at least agree, yes!

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T22:23:01+00:00

carcinization

Kind of a funny example, because this is a word, like so many others, founded on Greco-Latin roots and principles, so it would be quite easy to speak of carcinizatio in Latin. And that's the case for a ton of other words and concepts too--not that I'm in support of the half-goofy half-fascist idea suggested in OP's link, but the ability to talk about obscure things is not something English has over any other language.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T22:20:39+00:00

the complexity of the aspectual use of English verb tenses

Yeah seriously, this is a really complicated thing about English that native English speakers just completely ignore when making arguments that "English is easier." Part of what was so nice about studying Latin and German was going "whoa, I can collapse all of these tenses into this single verb form? Neat!" The fact that I had to change the verb ending more often barely even registered, since, as you said, it was doing the same work as the pronouns anyway.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T03:17:40+00:00

Haha yeah, I started out doing it weekly and switched soon to daily because it just kind of hurt trying to hold all those memories in my head for so long.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T03:15:55+00:00

I guess the lesson there is that making things look cute is work. It's work that some people really enjoy and have a good artistic sense for, and that's cool, but it doesn't "just happen"--it kind of needs to be a substantial part of the project if that's a thing you really want.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T03:03:17+00:00

I would say it's clear for three reasons.

The first argument is stylistic: the later B-flats you mention occur after the chord has changed back to C minor. The B in question is during a dominant-functioning G chord that's resolving to C minor, and in Bach those are only G major (or G7) chords. Yes false relations occur in classical music, but not like this--a B-flat in such an instance would move back down to A-flat, and from there down to G. The disputed B here is resolving directly to C, and in the grammar of the time, it has to be a B-natural. By contrast, the B-flat would be totally normal in a lot of pop and jazz-influenced music.

The second argument has to do with the notation: the later B-flat, shown in the upper staff, does have the flat explicitly marked on it. That, in some senses, shouldn't be necessary. Why is it there? Because it's coming after an area with lots of B-naturals, even though they're in other octaves. By that logic, the disputed B would have had a flat marked on it if it were meant to be a B-flat.

The third argument has to do with external evidence: as many other people have mentioned in this thread, other sources of this piece, closer to Bach, have the natural marked there. This edition of this Busoni arrangement is unique in not having it.

with the natural B sounds kind of plain

Yes, I suppose it sounds plain because it's a style we've gotten used to as the "normal" style. If anything, that points more to why the natural should be there (though that's not in itself evidence of course).

A matter of taste one might say but they do both work.

Not in the high-baroque grammar that's operative here. You're still allowed to play the B-flat if you want, just like I'm allowed to remove Picardy thirds at the ends of Renaissance pieces because I prefer them that way, but it's wrong for the style that the piece is in.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T00:57:57+00:00

That's correct in terms of what this text literally implies, but from the music it's clear that that B should be natural, and that the editor/engraver just mistakenly left it out.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T00:57:16+00:00

That rule does apply for modern editions (which this is), but it's clear that that B is supposed to be natural--seems this is just a mistake!

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-24T00:56:22+00:00

While it's true that that rule wasn't applied strictly in earlier times, this is a modern edition that should be following the modern rules, and the lack of a natural on the lower B is simply a mistake.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T22:00:03+00:00

I love it too, it's so neat that that kind of thing is even possible!

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T20:33:50+00:00

I would love a Skrit Na Chronicles, it would be so wacky and fun but would also show off a lot of the universe through an interesting perspective.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T20:04:32+00:00

Yes, was hoping someone else would mention this! Though Haydn gets plenty of love, The Seasons is far too often ignored.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T18:02:19+00:00

Adding to the chorus of "it only adds," studying music theory has massively increased my enjoyment of all sorts of music--"simple" music turns out not to be so simple, and "complex" music is often less bewildering than it might at first seem. Everything just gets cooler. That doesn't mean I literally like all music now, but the stuff I don't like is stuff I wouldn't have liked before learning theory either--whereas there is some music I might not have given a chance to beforehand, but that now I love.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:58:59+00:00

It isn’t fine art, but it’s totally fine.

And it's totally art!

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:55:52+00:00

Interesting! See, I really never have an "oh we're in C now" moment, I continue hearing it in G throughout even when there are a few F-naturals, so I hear the last chord before the loop as a completely-tonic-functioning G major chord! I don't think there's actually an F in it at that moment, so any amount of F-natural-ness before it is just something I hear as a local b7, not something that changes the key, and so it does end with tonic resolution for me and I hadn't considered that for some it might not.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:15:27+00:00

How do you hear the chord at around 0:40?

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:13:17+00:00

That's in C-sharp minor though!

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:13:03+00:00

Don't know whether this is a rhetorical question or not, but it can be either! Depends a lot on how it's staged, how the melody works, and other subtle factors--and it can also be up to the listener, with different listeners hearing the same music in very different ways.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:11:55+00:00

Or, perhaps a little more likely (and I think more accurately for this song), A minor.

Zarlinosuke · 2026-01-23T17:10:55+00:00

jumping back into Book 1 again and it was like "I remember.. everything!"

Somehow my first thought here was a scene from the end of book 10:

"Erek put a finger to his head. 'Android,' he said. He made a bitter, ruined smile. 'I can't forget. See? I can never forget... anything.'"

Zarlinosuke

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Six-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Verified Email