Music Theory @ MindSay

I do an unfortunate amount of supplementing for my written and aural theory classes.  My "philosophy" about textbooks is this - they should be useful for instruction and learning.  Students should be able to turn to their textbooks outside of class to learn MORE than what was given to them in class.  Music theory textbooks should have lots of exercises that trigger, enhance, and synthesize kinesthetic, aural, and visual learning patterns.  Well, I could go on and on . . . on this tangent . . . so I'll get to my point.

 

Music Theory Texbooks I like:

• Kostka & Payne - Tonal Harmony:  We used this at Rice University, and it served me well as a student.  It continues to serve me well as a teacher.
• Roig-Francoli - Harmony in Context:  If you prefer to teach music theory from a "historical" pedagogical perspective, this is the book you should use!  Contact McGraw-Hill for a review copy (sorry students, you cannot apply for a review copy).
• Benjamin, Horvit, Nelson - Music for Analysis:  Most textbooks only provide 4-8 measure "snippets" of literature examples.  Most students need to see more of the musical example for the concepts to make sense.  (I don't like the accompanying CD for this book because individual examples don't always get their own "track".)

Aural Theory/Perception Texbooks I like:

• Krueger - Progressive Sight Singing:  The title is inaccurate . . . this is much more than a sight singing book.  This is a very good aural theory/perception textbook, and I will likely make it mandatory for my section of aural perception next year.
• Kazez - Rhythm Reading:  Because if you don't get rhythm . . . you won't get music!
• Other books I turn to less frequently include Benward & Kolosick's Ear Training: A Technique for Listening (which is not useful for self-study) and Mayfield's Theory Essentials, vol. 1.

If anyone reading this has recommendations, please leave a comment!  I'm a new textbook junkie.

The class plan for Tuesday, February 13 included:

 

1.  Pentachord exercise in major mode (sing on numbers)

Keep in mind the type of triad that occurs naturally on each scale degree in major (I, ii, iii, IV, etc.)

 

2.  Canons in major (Krueger, 199)

Canon melody sung alone = monophonic texture

Canon sung in "parts" = polyphonic texture

 

3.  Minor mode melodic 3rds exercise (1-2-3, 2-3-4, 3-4-5, etc.)

Practice in natural and harmonic minor modes

This should lead to proficiency in the minor mode pentachord exercises (Krueger), so if you have trouble with the pentachords, start with THIS exercise

 

4.  Canons in harmonic minor (Krueger, 215-217)

As you can see, I've changed my mind.  I will do some blogging here specific to music theory.  In particular, I will use this tool to communicate MUS138 Aural Perception assignments to the class.  I never seem to remember to announce homework assignments and practice suggestions to my class until you've already walked out the door . . .

 

So, I have a use after all for MindSay . . . at least for now.

I have R in two of my classes. He's definitely a character in both.

Today, in theory, more music analysis. A brief five-measure blurb (J.C. Bach) is played, while we're studying the printed music on our pages. Our instructor asked us to describe what was present in the first measure. R immediately informed him that it was a twinkle, amusing us greatly.

After we'd finished that particular bit (R found two more twinkles in it), I called across the room,

"So, is a twinkle a major trill, or any trill?"
"Y'know what? It's anything by J.C. Bach. That guy's a whole lot of twinkle right there. And not good twinkle - that's bad twinkle."

You'd probably have to be a music major to get the bit about J.C. Bach (not to be confused with J.S. Bach), but anyone can see that there must be a difference between good twinkle and bad twinkle.

Ah, how I enjoy R's commentary.

One of my classes is Survey of Music - it's pretty much the SCC version of Music Appreciation. It's one of those courses everybody has to take, so we've got a combination of people who are definitely into music, and those who haven't a clue what a quarter note is, and a teacher who has to find a way to bring this all together.

Teacher's name is David. Part of having all of your classes in the same department is that you don't have a whole lot of variety in your instructors. Mine are David, Brian, and Scott...and my Logic teacher, whose name I have yet to need a reason to recall. She's nice.

I sit next to Ashley - we have Theory together as well. I'm a transitory music major, she's a double-major in music and theater, but that's about the extent of our relationship. Nice girl.

So, David's trying to coach the 'generals' half of the class to a level where we can all make common progress together. This means that the first few weeks are just a review of the basics. I appreciate this in another fashion - anytime someone's presenting material I already know, I just compare teaching styles, seeing what works and what doesn't. There's constantly something to be learned, and with David, there's an underlying amusement to much of the class.

Today, for example. We were trying to define the concept of 'pitch'.

"So, using the childhood pictoral images, we say..." he plays C8, turns to the class with hands outspread, "...like a bird." Understanding briefly flits around the room. "In contrast, we have," he plays A0, turns back with a questioning expression, "like a..."

Ashley and I, "...walrus."

I'm not sure how we came up with that, but I think I like this girl. I believe we have choir together as well. In general, I like my classes quite a bit. I think, for the sake of amusement, I will post my schedule here later. I had to make a table out of it in Word - it was the only way I could organize everything. At the time, I was just trying to figure out what my maximum availability could be for work, so...I don't actually work as much as it says I do.

But, yes. Walruses sing in the first octave of the piano.