PART TWO

Two-Voice
Counterpoint

Chapter 1 At a the ear would have to collect the interval succession 8 —4 into a sum
—D—
comprising B F, and at b, the succession 8 7 5 into a — — sum comprising

The First Species: D—Ffi — (A) — C with

equilibrium of all
a passing tone
vertical
E in the cantus firmus; obviously the
combinations would thereby suffer considerably.
case two, and in the second case as many as three,
Note Against Note Specifically, in the first
harmonic events would be dominated entirely by a single tone: B at a and D
at b; only with reference to these tones could the motion of the voices be
consistently generated and securely understood.
It comes down consonant interval speaks for itself; it rests in
to this: the

its euphony, signifying by both origin and end. This is not true of the
itself
General Aspects
dissonance, whose presence always requires further justification; far from
resting at peace in itself, the dissonance instead points urgently beyond itself,
The concept of counterpoint
§1.
it can be understood only in relation to — that is, by means of and in terms
of— a consonant entity, from which follows that the consonant entity alone
0 ™ P aCed 3b0Ve
‘
“ be ‘° W lh£ CanlUS firmus is •>* and end for the dissonance.
signifies origin
it

iuZtint In this sense, consonance manifests an absolute character, dissonance, on

h a S in
treatae „, iff f ‘T“ t
ta,clure naturall >'
P rese " ls “h-Bons whose the contrary, a merely relative and derivative one: in the beginning is

“Ilf j
“ dK,rable ‘““ng-ground fo, refinement of the student's consonance! The consonance is primary, the dissonance secondary!
This implies, however, that the dissonance must first be justified (specifi-
cally, through a consonance), while the consonance, sustained by its
§2. The permitted intervals
euphonious character and therefore less dependent, needs no justification
beyond itself. But how— and this is the question for the moment— could we
In this species only consonances may be used. adduce proof of the necessity of a dissonance in a contrapuntal exercise, which
h r haS t0 d ° exclusive|
i0
„J ;7f !? ? y with the nature of the situation lacks the control and motivation of scale degrees? [Lacking any such proof,]
we must, in exercises of the first type to be considered, avoid the dissonance
monv §84f.) Jnd
mony, T °
and of any richer contrapuntal
f the absence ° f SCale
de ^ rees ( Har~
movement, the first species lacks as insupportable, and base all vertical sonorities only on consonance, which,
the power to clarify the true sense
of dissonances. to the extent that grounds for the justification of dissonance are absent, always
USe ° f SSOna CeS ' ° n tHe contrar foundation of simul-
y> would necessarily lead to the represents in itself the first principle, the first logical
«fJl t
establishmentt
ofrt r
larger harmonic units, as the
following examples illustrate:

JIO
112 TWO-VOiCE COUNTERPOINT
r The First Species: Note Against Note 1 J 3
We shall see later how, above an explicitly sustained tone of the cantus
firmus (and that
speak, and at least permits us to make the necessary detour by way of the
is the essential difference between the present situation and
fifth; but in the vertical direction, the simultaneity of attack of
the two voices
the ones to be encountered further on), under certain circumstances dissonant
unfortunately simply makes impossible to sense the corresponding original
sounds as well may occur in passing; but regardless of the outward appearance it

of such situations, the principle “in the beginning is consonance!” will always
fifth ahead of time. The simultaneity that characterizes the vertical direction
is a fait accompli in the face of which we cannot but arrive too late at a
hold true without qualification.
perception of the fifth. From this it follows that at the instant in which two
Free composition alone can dispense with an actual distinct extension in
tones sound together in the interval of a fourth, just this fact of simultaneity
time of the organizing tone (such as is provided by the cantus firmus in the
forms an obstacle, and indeed an abrupt one, to any approach
and posit only ideal tones that can be expected-'
exercises of the later species) to the
pejfection of the boundary-interval as it is manifested by
to bear the burden of dissonances. Yet these ideal tones certainly are so the fifth, even by
way .of a detour. Since the effect of perfection (as shown by the fifth) is not
completely present in our consciousness that they can, in this sense, again be
described as actual. First and foremost in free composition to be attained, even after the fact, we can only content ourselves with
it is the scale
investigating— at least after the fact— whether the vertical fourth actually strove
degrees that have their own secret law of progression (
Harmony , §76f.), and
to represent the inversion of an original fifth and in this sense
precisely our intuitive familiarity with that law of progression makes plausible also to form
the boundary-interval, or perhaps something different; for a vertical
the assumption of those ideal tones that lie outside the realm of actual voice fourth,
just because it is barred from- expressing the triadic boundary
leading. with absolute
clarity— a deficiency which, as we know, must immediately transform the
Regardless of all the freedom of free composition, even there the first

principle of the theory of counterpoint— “In the beginning is consonance!”—

perfect consonance into a dissonance! — , can also represent a suspension or an
has practical significance: even in free composition, that which, as dissonance, accented passing tone of dissonant character.

cannot and may not be substantiated, must be placed upon the foundation of A two-voice model may serve at first to illustrate vividly the uncertainty
that attends the vertical fourth: the fourth [in a given case] the boundary-
consonance [FrC., §170]. If only the composers of today could at last under- is

interval of a triad, as at a in the following example, or a suspension

stand how utopian it is to believe that the nature of our senses could ever grant as at b,
or an accented passing tone as at c?
the dissonance an equal birthright alongside consonance! The two of them,
consonance and dissonance, cannot have the same role; that is assured by the
Example 152
basic law of nature in general: never to form a thing twice in the same way!
a) boundary b) suspension? c) accented oassinp tone?

§3. Why the fourth is prohibited in the vertical direction

Although we have counted as consonances, as they are used by melody in

the horizontal plane, the intervals and 4 as perfect, and 3 and 6 as
8, 5,

imperfect (Harmony, §73 and above, Part l. Chapter 2, §10), in the vertical
To put it differently, the doubt attendant on the vertical fourth about whether

direction a single exception must be made. Specifically it is the fourth which

it pretends to be an inversion of the fifth and, as such, a perfect consonance,
or whether it is merely a suspension or something similar,
here, in the vertical direction, must count as a dissonance, and which is arises from the
following: the simultaneity of the two tones that form
therefore prohibited altogether. the fourth prevents an
The expression of the character of the boundary-interval (which
reason for this prohibition is the following. As we learned in Part 1,
can also be
Chapter intrinsic to the fourth) with the same absoluteness and
2, §13, the fourth, as a boundary-interval of the harmonic triad, is perfection as it is
inferior to the fifth as original boundary-interval characteristically expressed by the fifth. But here in this new [vertical] situa-
in that it is gained only
through the of inversion, therefore by a secondary method.
tion,where uncertainties about whether the fourth is not perhaps a suspension
artifice As an
inverted boundary-interval, it calls attention immediately to the fact that it
or the like —
uncertainties that were unknown, indeed impossible, in the
horizontal direction—, this lesser degree of perfection must at once become
lacks the perfection, of the fifth; moreover, it is the situation of the vertical the
cause that demotes the fourth in this case (but note well: only
direction, so essentially different from that of the horizontal line, that causes as an
the lack of perfection suddenly to effect a real distortion, while the exception!) to the rank of a dissonance.
same lack
in the horizontal direction Conversely, to pursue the problem of the fourth, follows that the fourth
could not necessitate a prohibition. In the horizon- it

tal mentioned in the passage-cited above, the succes-

direction specifically, as
immediately realizes its original potential as a consonance once
it is relieved

of the pressure of (boundary-interval) competition with the

sive occurrence of the melodic tones gives our musical perception time, so to fifth— that is, once
its character as a boundary interval at least
stands no longer so strongly and
114 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

exclusively in the foreground. This is the case, for example, when in a setting
for three or more voices the fourth does not appear as the lowest interval (in
which case the old uncertainty would flare up once again), but rather in the
upper voices. For example:

Example 153

For in this situation, heard upward from the bass, the first effect at a is that
of a third, E — G, and after it a sixth E — C; and at b a third, C—E, a fifth,
C G, and finally an octave, C — C.
no case do the fourths stand any longer
In
in the foreground, least of all as excessively obtrusive
boundary intervals.
To put it still another way: the quality of being a dubious boundary-in-
terval of second rank, which attends the fourth even in the cases cited above,

is completely redeemed by the more penetrating and more

unambigous effects
of the intervals formed against the lowest voice.
The deficiency of the fourth as a boundary-interval in comparison with
the fifth in this situation, incidentally, is so unobtrusive that even the
augmented fourth must be allowed here; for example:

Here, specifically, our harmonic sense expects at the second quarter of bar
2 after the F 7 (representing VI) a falling fifth to Bb (representing II); and even
if the latter harmony is expressed only through the inversion with the fourth
Example 154
[i.e., the ^-position] — in other words, less perfectly — ,
our feeling for scale degrees
is nevertheless, by virtue of its logic and strength, fully able to deal quickly
with the imperfection of the boundary-interval and with the moment of
uncertainty (about whether it actually is a boundary-interval or not), and to
decide that here the fourth is intended exclusively as the inversion of the fifth.
The sarfie holds true in the following bar with respect to the falling fifth
— —
Eb Ab (V I) at the second quarter, which, in the light of what has preceded,
—-especially in consideration of the fact that' the disagreeable juxtaposition of we hear as nothing other than a fifth Ab~Eb within the tonic triad [FrC.,
the tones B and F in the same diatony (see Harmony, §§17, 18, 58, and 65) §§244-245]. Compare Harmony, Example 55, bars 3-4, and Example 88, bars
makes occasional encounters of the two tones in counterpoint (especially of 17, 18, and 19!
more than two voices) simply unavoidable. Obviously the motion of the lowest voice gains fluency precisely by
avoiding the fifth-leap at the change of harmony and by taking advantage
instead of the ^-position of the new scale degree. Thus the bass is spared the
In composition, of course, the scale degrees provide a point of
free necessity of a strong leap, and provided with a more
it is restful movement;
reference for quicker and easier orientation regarding the character of the and free composition favors the ^-position for reasons of economy also in
fourth as lowest interval. For example: situations like the following:
116 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note

Example 156 Here, scale degree V of Eb — which, incidentally, made

is explicit by the. two
a) Wagner, Tristan und Isolde, Act III
flanking octaves Bb l
and Bb — consigns the fourths that are apparently the
lowest intervals to a higher position, where they move through as permissible
passing events above the root Bb.
Although lacking such a clear fundamental tone, similar fourths wPlich
appear in the following example are also supported by scale degrees, which
our consciousness posits as a foundation for the changes of harmony:
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT Note Against Note
The First Species:

thirty-second notes c# 2 and d 2 ;

in particular, the c# 2 , in its tiny slot, sounds
like a final parting glance which does not completely succeed in attaining the
object of its longing, the harmony of the dominant.
A similarly ingenious construction with a {[-chord in Schumann’s
Waldszenen no. 1, eighth bar from the end, may be compared with this.

In Fux, Chapter XVII, p. 38ff., we read:

— just these uncertainties are especially well suited to provide tension in an

introduction. [Example 162] by no means contains the fourth, but
\$ho can fail to see that
In bar 3 of the following example: [rather] the fifth and octave? For intervals are to be measured with reference
to the bass note [ Grundton ], not the middle components. But if one under- . . .

Example 161 stands the fourth, which derives from the arithmetic division [see example 163],

Beethoven, Symphony No. then 1 fail to comprehend how such a thing could be included among the
9,
consonances.

Example 162
Fux I, 2

Example 163
D minor:
Fux I, 4

the logic of scale-degree progression impels us to assume at the second

quarter— especially after the raised IV (C# )— only the V; thus we first want to

hear the fourth as a suspension to the third:

Anyone [who did would have was regarded consonance

D minor:
AV by tfte
so]

division of the octave), but also in practice.

to believe that

I
it

ancients not only in concept (because the interval originates in the direct
will not dispute
as a

it if someone
chooses to make this claim; but the practice of so many centuries appears indeed
But surprisingly, the expected resolution is withheld, in spite of the fact that to speak against such a conclusion, and we must proceed in accordance with
the double basses in bar 4 have the opportunity to sound the dominant tone that practice; because experience now teaches that the employment of the fourth

once again; instead there follows, at a single stroke, the tonic. Was the fourth in no way deviates from that of the other dissonances' in that it likewise is
not a suspension, then, and was the scale degree to be understood as I rather introduced only as a syncopation or by means of a ligature. The fourth certainly

than V? In any event, it is only the fourth that can pose such riddles when sounds less strident than the. other dissonances, and is more tolerable to the ear;
yet the sense of hearing is not completely gratified in perceiving the interval,
it appears as the lowest interval. As we look at the events in retrospect from
for example:
the vantage point of the final goal, we cannot deny having heard scale degree
V before the tonic, and therefore we must assume an elision of the expected
resolution (Jj); nevertheless it —
remains true that is, at least up to the decisive Example 164
moment — that the tension of the fourth alone was the precondition for our
Fux 1, 5
expectation and our deception. (Observe at the same time how Beethoven, at
the beginning of the last bar in the above example, tries at least belatedly to -o-

satisfy our frustrated expectation of the dominant by means of the two modest
 SEE

With what delicate language Fux pries at the deeply buried mystery of the This phenomenon can be explained as follows: we view the lowest voice of
^
fourth-turned-dissonance: he refers to the doubt about whether the fourth in the ^chord as the basis ( Grund ) upon which the higher voices are constructed, and
situation under consideration is not merely the inversion of the fifth, a we measure the [remaining] tones from this basis. Now if we add to a fourth a
doubt that is
held to be the reason the ear still is “not completely gratified.” But how insecure
and third,lower tone that is consonant with the two tones of the fourth (thus either
timid the conclusions he draws therefrom! the lower o’ctave or the lower sixth of the upper tone of the fourth), then the
Let us hear Bellermann on the subject (p. 128ff.): ear hears in the first case, measuring from the bass, a fifth and an octave, and
in the second case a third and a sixth; and the fourth that lies between the
III. In this third class, which stands as though between the consonances and
dissonances,we include the upper voices appears to vanish completely,
perfect fourth and the tritone along with the
diminished fifth. As we saw earlier, the first of these, the perfect fourth, as
Such a disappearance of a dissonance through an added bass tone occurs,
inversion of the perfect of course, only in the case of the fourth, which by very nature actually a
fifth, is to be counted among the original intervals, and its is

stands in the simple vibration consonance. 2

ratio of 3 A, while the other two intervals
originated only indirectly and exhibit the most complex vibration ratios Here
in the interrupt Bellermann and ask, in reference to all of this, just the following: why,
I
diatonic scale (namely 32:45 and 45:64); nevertheless all three will be treated then, was the fourth described as a dissonance in two-voice counterpoint? Bellermann
in
certain cases to be discussed later as imperfect consonances, and appe'ars not to notice that he has in the meantime simply assumed and proclaimed
in other cases,
in contrast, as authentic dissonances. For the sake of clarity,
I shall here discuss the transformation of the fourth to a dissonant state as a fait accompli, without having
the intervals in question individually: demonstrated it; and when, in conclusion, he arrives at the statement quoted above
(a) The perfect fourth is always a dissonance in two-voice counterpoint: that the fourth is“by nature actually a consonance,”' then his initial principle, “the
perfect fourth is always a dissonance in two-voice counterpoint," makes no sense at
Example 166
all. What, then, has Bellermann demonstrated? Nothing except that the fourth ceases
to be a dissonance not the lowest interval; but this presupposes that he would
if it is

have been obliged earlier to demonstrate that the fourth begins to be a dissonance
exactly when it occupies the lowest position. Just this, however— the most important
thing of all — is missing in Bellermann's discussion of the problem.
Bellermann continues: “It is a different matter, on the other hand, when two upper
voices stand in a truly dissonant relationship, for example that of a second or seventh.
These intervals, because of their very complex vibration ratios and because they are
actually dissonances, can never go unnoticed by the ear.” Unfortunately
I must
interrupt Bellermann again: it is completely unwarranted to make so essential a
distinction between a fourth and any other dissonance between the upper voices, since
even in cases like these:

Example 169

It appears as an imperfect consonance, however, when it is produced by two

inner or upper voices. If we add to those tonal combinations above [in Example
I67J a lower consonant tone, then, the fourth between the inner or upper parts we hear primarily, in relation to the bass, at a the fourth and fifth rather than the
losesits dissonant quality and becomes an imperfect consonance: fourth and second, and at b the fourth and third rather than the fourth and seventh.
122 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note 123

The truth is, rather, that when a dissonance crops up between two upper voices, of the sixth, its interpretation as an interval by inversion is the more plausible,
such
as the second or seventh in the above examples, the dissonant quality of these intervals while the fourth, on the contrary, is more easily heard as dissonant than as
in the upper voices is due less to their own nature than to the fact inversion of a consonant interval. This becomes evident we consider the two
that they cannot if
both be accommodated by the same triad. It is only intervals in isolation.
because a fifth and a fourth
cannot both at the same time be components of the same triad If we play a major or minor sixth, we immediately hear it as the inversion
that they dissonate
against each other in the upper voices as well, and, of a minor or major third, thus as an undoubtedly consonant interval. Any
depending on register, form
sometimes a second and sometimes a seventh. But it is clear that different interpretation (perhaps as a suspension preceding a fifth)
would have
this is completely
insignificant in comparison to the more important fact that a tobe forced upon our perception by the context in which the sixth occurred; it
tone is dissonant
precisely in relation to the bass,
and in comparison to the question of exactly how it would arise only if, for one reason or another, we were to find the first
isdissonant with the bass; and thus, in regard to Bellermann’s interpretation inadequate. The ear has for the consonant interpretation of the
argument, the question
remains open of why the fourth is a dissonance only when sixth what legal scholars call praesumtio juris the sixth counts as consonant
it is the lowest interval,
since it is no longer dissonant when it appears among until convincingly proven otherwise.
the upper voices; and there is it is

no point in considering the precise identity of the interval in The opposite applies to the perfect fourth. If we hear that interval in and
question, whether
consonant or dissonant, whether a fourth, second, or seventh. for itself, we do not at first think of the inversion of the fifth; instead, we
Concerning the augmented fourth, finally Bellermann states immediately hear a suspension preceding a (major or minor) third. The har-
(p. 129): “the aug-
mented fourth (the tritone), however, together with its inversion, monic sense presumes it to be dissonant, and we admit the consonant inter-
the diminished fifth,
both of which will be discussed later, form a characteristic pretation only when the context compels us to do
exception to the foregoing so.
observations." And on p. 130: Thus the old controversy of whether the fourth is to be regarded as a
(b) The tritone and its inversion, the diminished
consonance or a dissonance is definitively settled. On the purely acoustical side,
fifth, were used by the early
:i the fourth is a consonance, and indeed exclusively a consonance. But this
composers only in rare cases as actual dissonances on the arsis.’
Between . . .

two inner voices, however, or between an inner voice and acoustical concept of consonance is of no concern at all to the musician as
the upper voice, both
intervals occur relatively frequently, and then, like
such. With respect to harmony, the fourth can be either consonance or dis-
the perfect fourth, they have
the rights of an imperfect consonance. The bass tone sonance, depending on whether the ear interprets it as inversion of the perfect
that accompanies them,
however, must stand in a consonant relation to each of
fifth or as (upper) embellishment to the major or minor third (or possibly also
their tones. Accordingly’
there is but one type of combination in which they as lower embellishment to the perfect fifth). The characteristic of the musical
are usable, namely:
effect of the fourth, however, resides in the fact that its interpretation as

Example 170 embellishment — especially, indeed, in the case of the isolated fourth — is the more
obvious. This, then, is the reason for the old contrapuntal rule that in hvo- voice
strict counterpoint the fourth is always to be treated as a dissonance.' 1

In regard to an interpretation so far superior to, for example, Bellermann's, I am

really sorry not to be able to affirm that, as the authors claim, the old controversy has
Ihe authors R Louis and L. Thuille approach the problem of the fourth as a been definitively For just the most profound level at which their interpretation
settled.

transient dissonance with incomparably more acute sensitivity in their Harmonielehre. arrives is need of further independent clarification. It is not enough to say
itself in

We read in §14 (p. 34ff.):

'
that our “harmonic sense presumes the fourth to be dissonant" because “its interpreta-
tion as embellishment— especially, indeed, in the case of the isolated fourth— is the more
Sixth and fourth, in and for themselves, are nothing but undoubtedly consonant obvious," regardless of the fact that, as the Haydn example [155] above has shown,
intervals; they are such, however, only to the extent and under
the condition thispresumption is only a conceit which sometimes even vanishes under the strength
that they appear in the guise of inversions of the third or
fifth respectively. The and overriding power of the scale degrees (which can indeed substitute a different
reason is that for the ear, which perceives harmonically,
it is not the consonant
presumption). Just for this reason, the first task would be to explain why one
interval that is primary, but the consonant chord (the triad). Perfect octave, interpretation is more obvious
our perception than the other. That the two authors
to
perfect fifth, and major and minor third are consonant
intervals to musicians themselves sensed this basic flaw in their argument is proven best of all by the fact
only because they are constituents of the major or minor triad; the
contrary that they sought an answer to the fundamental question. They make this known in a
proposition— that the consonance of the major and minor triad might derive from footnote (pp. 36-37):
an assemblage of “consonant intervals”— is incorrect.
If harmonic context must always decide whether Treatment of the question of why the fourth and sixth differ so thoroughly in
the intervals of fourth and ,T
sixth in a given case are to be regarded as inversions, and respect to their consonant or dissonant interpretation actually does not belong
therefore as consonant,
or as embellishments (suspensions or passing tones), and therefore to the domain
of our considerations. Yet it should be indicated at least briefly
dissonant,
an important distinction between the two intervals is immediately revealed that here an element enters the picture which indeed does not count as a
when
we compare them with respect to this dual nature that they possess. In the case primary feature (as was believed earlier) but perhaps as an important secondary
124 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The First Species: Note Against Note 125
one under certain circumstances the judgment of consonance and dis-
for
sonance: specifically, the degree of agreeability (that is, of
“euphony”) of intervals. Thus from the most perfect identity of pitch-class and specific pitch, as
It can be verified that, all else
being equal, an interval will more readily be heard represented by the unison, the path leads to the offspring of the overtone
by the ear as a consonance the more euphonious it is. Now series: to the octave, which, alongside differentiation of pitch,
of all the usual still repeats the
consonant intervals, the perfect fourth sounds decidedly the least agreeable, and
and pitch-class; further, to the fifth, which shows differentiation of both pitch
in any case far more disagreeable than the major and minor and and pitch-class, but which on the other hand establishes the
sixth, this’ may final and
well be the cause of the difficulty of its interpretation as a consonance. unsurpassable boundary of consonance in relation to the fundamental.
To this, however, I believe that only the following
answer was to be given: only the By virtue of its differentiation of both pitch-class and pitch, the fifth also
imperfection of the fourth as a boundary interval should be provides the bridge to the imperfect consonances:
taken into consideration
and cited as the reason the ear must experience doubt about the meaning of a fourth
that occurs as the lowest interval — doubt which alone, for an otherwise perfect con-
i) 3,
sonance, would have to suffice in this situation to judge
the fourth as dissonant. A (e) 6.
discussion of the sixth cited by the authors in this connection,
however, is the subject
of the following paragraphs.
•The imperfect consonances likewise show differentiation of both pitch-
class and pitch in relation to their bass notes; but they are distinguished from
the fifth in that they are not boundary intervals and therefore are unable to
§4. More detailed differentiation among the permissible consonances demarcate the harmonic content of a bass note. Rather, they form the content
of a triaddemarcated by means of a fifth, and therefore it is not possible to
The unison materializes with full clarity only in counterpoint of two determine from these intervals alone the specific triad of which they form the
voices specifically, as the coincidence of two different voices in respect
to the content. For example, does the third at a in
absolute as well as relative pitch placement (Hohe) of a tone. 5
Example 171 belong to the triad
While it can at b or that at c?
be accepted in the horizontal direction, if at all, most propitiously
in the form
of a- tone-repetition— and this not in the cantus firmus itself, Example 171
but, as we shall
later, see, only in the added voice
, —
here, in the vertical direction, it is for the
first time a real and independent interval, in spite of the fact that it clearly
remains foreign to the overtone series.
By contrast it the overtone series
itself that provides valuable implica-
is

tions for practice in

regard to the other consonances. (Compare also the
pertinent remarks in Part 1, Chapter 2, §§11-15.) The overtone be sure, presents us with the major third, and in
series, to

It the overtone series that affirms that the octave is the most perfect
is
this sense it assumption that the third C
also evokes the E of Example 171 —
interval, since it manifests identity of pitch-class (Ton) might best be counted as part of the fundamental C. Yet it is impossible to
coupled with differen-
tiation only in pitch (Hohe). —
do better than such an assumption especially in the case of the minor

After the octave comes the fifth, somewhat less perfect at the outset in
thirdl — and to gain so secure a foundation as for the perfect consonances. The
that it no longer represents merely same applies to the sixth, except that the latter, unlike the third, is not even
a repetition of the
fundamental but rather
sets a new tone against it. Yet this new tone expresses
ratified by the overtone series itself, but is to be regarded only as the inversion
most perfectly a new
property— specifically, by forming the ultimate boundary of the triadic of the third.
juris-
diction ( Dreiklangswirkung of its fundamental tone. That We
may now be inclined to ask, however, why the sixth, like the fourth,
) is: since the fifth

belongs to its fundamental as a boundary in such a way that there should not be prohibited in two-voice counterpoint because of its simultaneity
is nothing
“beyond” it without violating [the properties of] unity and consonance, 6 and the consequences resulting from it; after all, it too is an inversion— namely,
of the' third.
perfection is achieved in the fifth— albeit in a sense different [from that of the
octave]— precisely by virtue of this unsurpassability.
The answer is this: first, in the case of the sixth the boundary-interval

The hierarchy, or valuation, of the perfect consonances, then,

problem does not come into consideration at all, so that the other issue of
is as follows:
the detour (specifically, in this case, through the third) is not complicated, as

(a)
was the case with the fourth, by the more important boundary-interval
1,
question. Clearly, the latter issue must be of greater import, because it has
(b) 8,
the final say regarding the possible consonant content and thereby provides
(c) 5.
the very raison d'etre for the third as an interior consonance.
126 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note \27
Secondly, the sixth, like the third,
only an imperfect consonance, and,
is
§5. The three types of relative motion of voices
as such, is by origin every respect than the perfect fourth.
less sensitive in

That is, while the fourth (see §3 above) possesses"such purity and perfection Two voices can move in any of three different ways in relation to one another;
that any mutation causes it to slip immediately into a state of dissonance specifically:
(diminished or augmented fourth), the imperfection of the third makes more
it I. '
Similar motion (motus rectus), where both move in the same direc-
tolerant. Both major and minor thirds retain their ’character as consonances; tion— that is, both upward or both downward; for example:
precisely for this reason, the process of inversion must cause less 2.
damage in
the case of these intervals. Indeed, one might say that the imperfection of the Example 172
third does not suffer when, by inversion into a sixth, it becomes even
a degree
more imperfect.
For two-voice counterpoint, then, the practical use of both imperfect
consonances, all intrinsic differences between them notwithstanding, is per-
mitted without restriction, even 3.
if forthe purposes of doubling in three- or Contrary motion (motus contrarius), where the voices proceed in dif-
four-voice counterpoint, as we shall see later, the third, for the reason just ferent directions; for example:
presented, is in principle accorded that priority over the sixth [Part 4, Chapter
which Example 173
I,
§1] is its due as a better interval.
Finally should be stressed here that the inversions under consideration,
it

the fourth and the sixth, are to be understood only in the sense of the
voice
leading of contrapuntal practice— thus in contrast to the inversions taught
by
the theory of harmony in an abstract way relative to the meanings of scale
degrees. Thus entirely
And finally,
it is inappropriate for the theory of harmony, in
presenting the chord of the !}, to abjure the fourth as a dissonance. Rather, it
Oblique motion (motus obliquus), where one voice sustains, while the
is the task of harmonic theory merely to elucidate the phenomenon in other moves in either direction; for example:
question purely conceptually first of all as a possible derivative of another,
Example 174
fundamental and original, phenomenon, with which the ^-chord in that case
must share the position and significance of a scale degree.
Thus the theory of harmony, to return to the Haydn passage in §3 above,
Example 155, has only to teach that the ^-chords in bars 2 and
3, to the
extent that they represent inversions (in accord with the demands of the
scale
degrees) rather than suspensions, do indeed form inversions of the triads on
§6. The prohibition of similar motion to perfect consonances in
Bb and Ab respectively, and therefore share with those triads the significance two-voice counterpoint
of scale degrees.

The consonances unison, octave, and fifth must not be approached by similar
After the foregoing observations on the sixth (cf. must, therefore, respond here motion in the exercises of two-voice counterpoint.
§3), I

to Messrs. Louis
sixth,
and T huille that, whatever presumption one may have about the The restriction applies in two-voice writing — and only there — to all cases,
it isnot permissible to view that interval as turning into a dissonance, not even regardless of whether the preceding interval is (I) another perfect consonance
when it occurs in the form of a suspension. There exist, indeed, consonant syncopations or (2) an imperfect consonance.
and suspensions (see Chapter 4), and this may be the best point of departure In
for the first case, incidentally, it makes no difference whether the two
judging the different natures of fourth and sixth: only because the fourth otherwise
is perfect consonances have the same name, as here:
perfect, it must become really dissonant once it no longer has that perfection, as is
the case in two-voice counterpoint when appears as the lowest interval. Example 175
it The sixth,
however, even when no longer an inversion but rather a suspension, still retains
it is

its character as a consonance —

an imperfect consonance to be sure, which, incidentally,
is what it has been from the very beginning. Therefore
it is at least insufficiently

cautious when the cited authors write: “The sixth counts as consonant until it is
convincingly proven otherwise.”
 > .

128 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

The First Species: Note Against Note

or different names, as here:

compels us to translate the contrary motion back into simple parallel motion
as shown, and it follows that at least in the exercises of
Example 176 two-voice counterpoint
we should avoid even such contrary motions (which are known as antiparal-
5 1 5 '8 8
lels) to perfect consonances. Such avoidance is
facilitated by the fact that a
moderate distance between the voices, so long as it is actually observed (see
§24 below), will exclude any opportunity for such antiparallels, which, as

etc.
Examples 178 and 179 show, require such a large separation.

In the second group, obviously, no such distinction exists: §7. On the nomenclature of the prohibited similar motions

Example 177 Because, as I shall presently show, the old theory unfortunately misunderstood
the true reason for the prohibition, it characterized the cases in Example 175
as “open" octave- or fifth-successions, in contrast to all others (those in
Example 176 as well as in Example 177), which it designated “hidden"
At the outset
successions. let us agree at least that instead of a variable
nomenclature— one speaks, example, of “parallels” in general, of “similar”
for
and “unequal-similar” motion, and finally, most frequently, of “open” and
“hidden” successions— it is perhaps most correct (if, unfortunately, not
also
shortest) for the sake of consistency to speak only of parallel unisons, octaves,
or fifths, and (in preference to “hidden” successions) of nonparallel similar
motion (which is understood as referring to progression to the unison, octave,
or fifth).

1 say “for the sake of consistency” because in the case of so-called hidden
successions it is very misleading to speak of actually “parallel”
motion, a
designation which, in the strictest sense, correctly applies only to the “open”
successions.
But one could, while completely avoiding the older nomenclature, speak
of “similarly-named unison-, octave-, or fifth-successions” and (instead of
or:
nonparallel similar motion) of “similar nonparallels.”

Example 179
§8. The reasons for the prohibition of similar motion to the perfect
5 5 consonances in general

The prohibition of similar motion to the perfect consonances in exercises of

two-voice counterpoint is based in general on several discernibly different but
simultaneously operative reasons:

First, the nature of the perfect consonances (as emphasized in §4 of this

etc.
chapter), which is to provide either identity of tone or boundary of the
harmonic content;
the inversional character of the fourth- and sixth-leaps (cf. Part 1, Chapter 2,
Second, the character of similar motion in general and how it differs from
§§13 and 15) is set in sharper relief in accordance with the ear’s heightened
oblique and contrary motion; and finally
sensitivity, just here in the realm of two-voice writing, to ways of approaching
Third, the original meaning of polyphony in general,
perfect consonances. (The reasons be discussed in the
for this sensitivity will

following paragraphs.) Add to this the fact that, as a result, our instinctual
to which it should be added that in individual cases sometimes one and
sense of the original intervals (fifth and third rather and fourth and sixth)
sometimes another of these factors will predominate.

—nt*
1 30 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The First Species: Note Against Note 131

The first factor, which concerns the harmonic boundary, has already been
But why would the voices be allowed, above all as matter of general principle,
discussed.
to seek out consciously a fault of this kind?
The second factor, similar motion, is to be interpreted in its psychological
effect as a kind of agreement between the two voices to strive toward a
§ii v Nonparallel similar motion to perfect consonances
common goal; in this respect it contrasts with oblique and contrary motion,
whose differentiation of direction acts, conversely, to rule out such agreement.
The third and last of the points mentioned implies that if two-voice
Similar motion, which we have just interpreted as the common agreement of
two voices to strive toward a common goal, and have therefore recognized as
counterpoint is to have any meaning at all, the second voice, like the first,
the compromising element that contributes to the prohibition of parallel
must be individual — that is, must have an independent course.
perfect consonances, operates in an equally compromising manner non-
To make clear the application of the above rules to specific cases, I now for
parallel similar progressions to perfect consonances— thus, for similar motion
proceed to investigate them in order, beginning with the parallel successions.
from non-unisons, non-octaves, and non-fifths to unisons, octaves, and fifths.

§9. Unison- and octave-parallels — and 8 — 8) To invoke here the older terminology of so-called “open” and “hidden”
(1 l
successions— interpreting it differently, to be sure, from the way it was originally
The exclusion of unison- and octave-parallels as successions of the two unisons
conceived —we could say that through similar motion even the so-called hidden
or octaves rests mainly on the third reason cited above — that on the simple
is,
succession is really turned once again into an open one:
“open,” however,
only in the sense of the agreement, made manifest through similar motion,
understanding that the added counterpoint must never be a mere repetition
of both voices to reach the same goal.
•of the first voice, whether in unisons or in octaves.
Nonparallel similar progressions, then, like the true parallels, remain
It is self-evident, however, that the other reasons also support this restric-
categorically forbidden in two-voice counterpoint.
tion.
But
if similar motion contributes to the bad sound and resulting inadmis-

§i0. Fifth-paralleh (5 - 5) sibilityof non-parallel similar progressions in two-voice counterpoint, it is

nevertheless completely unnecessary to give credence to that older theory
which tried, in a manner most complicated and at the same time naive, to
With fifth-parallels, however, I believe that the first two reasons stand in the
reduce the “hidden" successions to “open” ones in order to exclude them.
foreground.
To find ample cause for this restriction, one need only consider the effect
The older theory 7 labored under the delusion of the need to fill in the leap
of the one voice with a so-called diminution, so that a tone appeared which
of a direct transition from one harmonic entity so explicitly bounded as a
then actually formed an open succession with the other voice:
fifth to another equally bounded entity, especially in two-voice counterpoint,
where, in the interest of stronger motivation [to move forward] (about which
Example 181
more detail will be provided in §22), any such boundedness is to be avoided
wherever possible. So far the first reason.
If the fifth is approached through oblique or contrary motion, as for

example:

The designation “hidden” succession has to do with the fact that therein
Example 180
a true “open” succession was allegedly concealed. Such glaring hiatus
a
between the artistically correct perception of a necessary prohibition, and a
grotesque and forced justification of correct instinct!
The interpretation was so contrived that
it has long been easy to make

fun of unnatural ness. 8 But what was the point of ridicule without the
its

proposal of a more satisfactory explanation, which would have been accom-

then, at least, it though the two voices have arrived at the
sounds as
panied by a more satisfactory nomenclature? Certainly, it appeared easiest of
undesirably bounded by accident, so to speak. Such
entity of the fifth merely
simply to rescind altogether the prohibition of hidden progessions (as has
a coincidence is less propitious, however —
and this is the second aspect in the — all

been done in many quarters)— a solution that would necessarily have

case of similar motion, which (see §8 above) here can only signify completely
eliminated the question of nomenclature. But artistic instinct, which always
conscious pursuit of that faulty succession of undesirably bounded entities.
felt the need for the prohibition, has proven correct to this day, and all
that
m TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The First Species: Note Against Note J 33

can be done about it — which certainly is so very difficult — is to formulate the fifth’s perfection to forget about its boundary effect in counterpoint itself, and
artistically correct reason for in convincing language.
it
how little the fifth is therefore suited to fill out the counterpoint by successive
usage — that is, fifth by fifth — and to “double” in fifths. Finally a freshened
sensitivity led to the insight that if the fifth provides the boundary of the
§12. Refutation of the claim that octave- and fifth-parallels manifest sound, this effect, which is certainly unwelcome in the contrapuntal setting,

the same doubling-principle at least should not be produced by similar motion— that is, through mutual
agreement of both voices. And thus there arose the restriction a kind of “rule —
The attribution of such special reasons for the injunction in two-voice of battle” for the warring thirds, sixths, and fifths— that in two-voice counter-
counterpoint against octave- and unison-parallels on the one hand, and point the fifth should not be approached in similar motion. Through this
fifth-parallels on the other, must here, however, be more precisely grounded well-grounded fifth-restriction— its first written formulation can perhaps be
from the historical standpoint as the definitive solution of the problem of ascribed to Johannes de Muris in the fourteenth century expression was given —
parallel motion. once and for all to the artistic
awareness that a succession of fifths could never
As is known, the first experiments of polyphonic music began with
well again be understood and heard from the standpoint of mere “doublings”; that
the addition to a given melody of parallel motion precisely in fourths and rather, whether for purposes of explanation and justification or only with the

fifths (so-called organum). From this one might be tempted to conclude that aim of cultivating better hearing, only the standpoint of voice leading— and,
the poor effect of extended fifth-successions had been perhaps only a conceit to be sure, a thoroughly concrete voice leading reelle Stimmfiihrung)— is to
(

of later epochs, since in earlier ones, as is historically documented, a contrary be given consideration.
practice was doubtless the norm. There are, then, no true fifth-“doublings” (however much the external
.
The actual fact, however, is different. In that early period there existed as appearance of the music may suggest their presence); but there are, on the
yet no artistic experience of polyphony whose correct interpretation would other hand, doublings in unisons and octaves. One must therefore altogether
have been the only possible basis for a true theory of art— theory, indeed, can avoid such terminology in relation to fifths, if only to protect the ear from
only follow art, interpreting and abstracting—; therefore theory, or what was at incorrect ways of hearing. Thus even in a case like the following often-cited
that time considered theory, had on the contrary to establish the first one by Beethoven:
guidelines for practice. And since theory was certain that the fifth is a perfect
Example 183
consonance, it was naive enough to set as a guideline the simple doubling of
the melody can perfection upon perfection (so theory
in fifths or fourths: Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 53,

reflected) produce anything other than a perfect effect? Thus the practice of
organum was based on fifth-successions, which could be called actual fifth-
—
doublings “doublings” specifically in the same sense in which we speak today
of octave “doublings.” But the teachings of theory in this respect were soon
revealed to be completely inartistic and flawed, for the specific reason that
theory, trapped as it was in its purely speculative view of the perfection of the
fifth, had no artistic notion that value and beauty of effect in the combination
of voices issued from sources other than merely those of perfect intervals. And
when the practice of the ensuing period in fact — partly perhaps the in mere
quest for variety, but also partly from correct instinct — began
artistic to mix or, to mention a still more pungent example, in the following case:
thirds and sixths into the setting and fourths, it
along with fifths was the
contrast of the intervals, emerging for the first time, which exposed their true Example 184
nature in the service of voice leading. Exactly the contrast to thirds and sixths Chopin, Mazurka Op. 30 No. 4
made composers notice how bounded in effect was the sound of the fifth even —
a single fifth, but especially in a succession of fifths! And also, contrariwise,
how the fifth revealed the nature of the third and sixth — specifically the fact
that they, far from lending a bounded quality to the sound, rather, through
their equivocality Mehrdeutigkeit ), provided the stimulus for forward motion.
(

And just here, in the hustle-and-bustle of thirds, sixths, and fifths, it was
gradually recognized how detrimental it would be merely on the basis of the
 The First Species: Note Against Note i 35

Example 185

could also be criticized for its lack of unity of harmony.

Hauptmann undoubtcdlv
sensed the harmonic boundary provided by the fifth,
but was himself unable to give
more felicitous expression to that perception. In addition, like
ail theorists, he commits
the fundamental error of testing the reasons for the prohibition
applicable to two-voice
counterpoint just in the domain of free composition, where
they have long since ceased
to be operative in a pure and unmodified form.
So much more legrettable, then, is the regression by H. Riemann. who has recently
propagandized in favor of regarding the reasons the
for prohibition of parallel
successions as exactly the same for both octaves and fifths. He states expressly 0

Octave-parallels, as a denial of the independence of the voices,

are unstylistic and
false; fifth-parallels too are faulty
for the same reason." Further on, he elucidates more
T r T precisely:

A voice that repeatedly presents the octave-tones of the

other voice is only a
reinforcement of the sound of that second voice; it is not a
different voice. And
a voice »that moves in parallel fifths or twelfths with
a second voice also still
blends much too completely with the latter to be regarded
as an independent
one must not speak of mere fifth-“doublings”; and we will see later in which voice.
manner such voice leadings were arrived at by the composer and are to be
Thus, in orderto account for the fifth-prohibition by the same
understood by the listener.
reason as for the
octave, he formulates the hypothesis-attractive in »self-of several
different degrees of
blending, according to which he attributes to the octave
the strongest, to the fifth what
It is highly regrettable that the lesson which so clearly teaches to artists and might be called an intermediate (note the expression
"still blends much too com-
theorists the development of our art has not (unfortunatelyl) been better understood
pletely”), and to the third— the major third of
course— the weakest degree of blending.
in its essence. In particular, the milieu of the first prohibition has been overlooked— that Concerning the third, he says: “The fifth overtone, the tone that
is,the fact that the experiences which had to lead to the prohibition first occurred in produces the third,
is too weak in sound for
us to overlook its independent production [in polyphonic
the domain of a counterpoint of actually only two voices, and in a terrain where the
contexts] and perceive parallel thirds too as mere
doubling.”
setting, though free composition, resembled very closely a primitive exercise in our As is evident, he bases the hypothesis on the phenomenon
of the overtone series,
two-voice [strict] counterpoint. Only in two-voice vocal counterpoint could the effects
which, incidentally, he clearly acknowledges: “The
auxiliary voices on the organ give
of the parallels be perceived at all in their absolute purity, and thus, on the obvious proof that sonic reinforcement throughout
contrary — and this precisely is the important point of the historical experience! — the parallel octaves, twelfths, and in general all
entire compositions by means of
pipes that correspond to the overtones is
prohibition, with its absolute stringency and its true justification, applied only to possible and of good effect.” And thus he arrives
at the following statement:
two-voice counterpoint. By no means is one allowed, however, to evaluate also the
later polyphony in exercise and in free composition with reference But certainly neither parallel octaves not parallel fifths sound bad
to the prohibition in themselves;
that rightly applies of only to the bicinium of free composition of that [early] therefore intentional octave-doublings (sonic
first all reinforcement by added octaves)
epoch, and thereby discover contradictions where none existed. ate always good and completely permissible in
orchestral writing, but they lie
It redounds to the credit of M. Hauptmann that he provides at least an inkling of completely outside the domain of counterpoint in four real
voices; reinforcement
the truth in his Harmonik und Metrik ‘The reason by parallel fifths (or twelfths), too, is
for the poor effect ... is not the not infrequent in full-textured keyboard
same in the two cases [of octaves and fifths]: the fifth -succession lacks unity of [playing] or in full orchestral writing, but it is never to be regarded
as teal voice
harmony, and the octave-succession variety of melody.” 9 The best feature of this leading

formulation without doubt is the recognition that the reasons for the prohibition of There we have it, then. Even parallel fifths, according to Riemann, arc scarcely
fifth-and octave-parallelisms are indeed different. It should be noted, however, that anything other than tonic reinforcement (like the octave), a doubling voice, so to speak,
the “unity of harmony” mentioned in connection with fifth-successions is an empty as in mixture stops on the organ.
phrase. Although apparently pointing in the right direction, the expression goes too This would take us back to the beginning [of art], and all evolution in artistic
far, since a voice leading such as the following: practice and, following it, artistic theory since the establishment of the prohibition of
136 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note 137

parallels would prove to be completely misunderstood! And all of this stems only from To what should Riemann's student adhere when he turns his efforts to free
the fact that the origin of the prohibition, as history teaches was not grasped in its it, composition? To the prohibition or to the license— where both
fundamental situations
relationship to musical phenomena. Riemann too is naive enough to try to understand are so indefinitiveiy defined?
this prohibition as completely absolute; he too claims that it must either be enforced Rl * manns ies not on ly
err0r
*?. ^ in having represented fifth-successions
as
or be rescinded in an absolute fashion. Since this position, however, will obviously doublings, in spite
of the fact that he himself incautiously quotes different
types of
have to founder on the contradictions inherent in the differences of situation (i.e. the fifth-successions that are said not to be doublings,
and that accordingly he ignores the
distinction between two-voice counterpoint as opposed to that of three or more voices, history of the beginnings of polyphony, which
has long been able to forestall the
as well as between an exercise and free composition), it is understandable that reappearance of such a false and discredited interpretation.
Of far greater detriment
Riemann speaks vaguely and timidly in part of orchestral and full-textured keyboard in his case, rather, is the ignorance of
purely artistic and psychological perceptions,
writing, and in part of school exercises, and thus — by constantly shifting the foundation and the forcible imposition upon art of natural phenomena—
here, in particular, once
of the prohibition — is all the more unable to arrive at a definitive solution, but instead again the results of the overtone series. In Harmony
(§§10, 19, etc.) 1 have already
offers only a formulation that is itself so much more in need of clarification: called attention to the unfortunate consequences
that necessarily accompany the effort
to abstract art in its total content only from the overtone
Even in cases of parallel fifths, today we are more permissive and allow them series. I called instead for
an understanding that nature’s suggestion, as it is found
to pass by without admonition if they are covered up by means of contrary in the overtone series, was
taken over by artists only up to a certain limit, while
motion or dissonances — that is, if the ear is compensated for the decrease in
have, with complete originality, worked out artistic
from that limit forward they
textural richness (for the parallel voice disappears, so to speak, for the duration elements to which they [alone]
hold title— elements which then, certainly, once
of the parallel motion) by alternative sources of interest. Parallel fifths between again flow back into nature, but only
at the very end and only the most exalted sense. 11 Riemann’s error lies
in
real voices, however, remain a stylistic error under all circumstances; they are completely
ex P°sed Precisely here, where, in his treatment
to be banned without exception from all school exercises. If the teacher neglects - of the parallel-fifths prohibition, he
again takes refuge in the overtone series in order to derive
to develop and intensify the natural sensitivity in his young charges for such the concept of blending-
gradation mentioned above. For if the overtones really
offenses against purity of counterpoint, he must not be surprised if they are only components of an
indivisible sonority, and if, therefore, the [tones
completely run amok. comprised by the] sounds known as
organ mixtures are in this sense once again only
elements of a single tone and can
Such a miserably confused and at the same time naive muddle! In school exercises claim no independent existence whatever— their dependency
is expressed already in the

the student is to avoid successions of perfect fifths — because (so Riemann claims) they terms “over-,” “partial-,” or “aliquot-tones”-,
then it is clear that that palpable tone
are, like octave-successions, merely reinforcements. Elsewhere than in school exercises, which the contrapuntal voice places against the cantus firmus
as fifth (or as octave or
however — specifically in free —
composition , according to Riemann, “parallel fifths third) is never truly identical to such an overtone.
Rather, the tone of the contrapuntal
between real voices" indeed remain under all circumstances a "stylistic error,” yet the voice in itself represents another independent tone-phenomenon
that carries its own
composer may use them as a “reinforcement” and only as such. Doesn’t the truly most overtones on back, so to speak, exactly like the cantus-firmus tone
its
against which it
important issue still need clarification by Riemann? He would have to explain the sounds (“an unhappy Atlas, who must carry a world,
a whole world" of overtones). 12
following: first, how exactly it could be determined whether a given case represented Each of the two tones is, accordingly, an independent tone—
the cantus-firmus tone as
a well motivated "reinforcement” or only a true and unintentional contrapuntal and well as that of the counterpoint, which forms the
fifth; both have their own overtones,
“stylistic" error (this is the point most often addressed in assessments by critics!); absolutely necessary to their tone-production-two
infinite columns of tones, so to speakj
second, howhappens that reinforcements with fifths occur so
it relatively infrequently which are completely different and fundamentally have nothing
in common. Consider
in comparison- to those with octaves; and finally, third, how to reconcile with the too the fact that even octave doublings, which according
to Riemann manifest the
license of fifth-reinforcements the far greater number of [parallel] fifth-successions that strongest degree of blending quality, nevertheless
always signify once again only an
Riemann himself would never describe as mere reinforcements, but which he would encounter of two completely independent voices, and that
the independence of the
nevertheless tend to judge in a more “permissive” way and “allow to pass without octave-tone is sensed clearly not only in orchestral writing
but also— we need only think
admonition” (compare the above quotation). of couplings— on the organ itself. There is, therefore,
a quite essential difference between
Are there, then, perfect fifth-successions of a different nature, successions that are the organ mixture, which is completely integrated
into the sound of a single tone, and
permitted and do not within the purview of the principal criterion of the an incarnate, independent tone which, activating its
fall own mixture, sets itself against
intermediate degree of blending? Are those exceptions, one must ask? Or do they lie the cantus-firmus tone as a fifth. For if the fifth in the added voice were
little more
within the purview of a different criterion? If so, then why has Riemann applied the than an organ mixture— the third overtone of the cantus-firmus tone—, then it would
criterion of mere doubling [valid for octave-successions] also to fifth-successions? If be possible to heap upon a given tone a whole world
of the most indefinable tones
there are open fifth-parallelisms that are permitted and are not to be considered under the label of mere reinforcement, and still expect the sound
of the counterpoint
doublings, what is the point of the prohibition at all? Or, if all parallel fifth-successions to follow a satisfactory course. In short,one should be able to copy literally what the
are permitted in free composition anyway, isn’t the prohibition in the last analysis overtone series prescribes (thus [for example] the ninth and
fifteenth partials as well),
really only a form of intimidation, whose sole purpose to make students quake (such and the voices would nevertheless have to produce only the
effect of doubling! And
naive method!) before the supremacy of the “prohibiting” teacher? yet, as I see it, such a reinforcement-mannerism
and -mania would even offend much
138 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note 139

more acutely than the modern mannerism of alleged polyphony, which already Example 186
produces a ghastly state of chaos. Taking its unfair advantage only from a frenetic and
obfuscating tempo and, to no lesser degree, also from a misconception of the passing
[dissonance], that polyphony already burdens almost every tone with a seventh — but,
note well, the seventh that belongs to the [tonal] system, thus a phenomenon
completely different from the seventh partial. {See Harmony, §10). Yet this procedure
does not, as one would have to expect on the basis of the theory [of Riemann] discussed
above, represent itself as mere “reinforcement," but rather, haughtily and pretentiously,
as true voice leading, in short: “polyphony.” While the error of the modern artist, who
unfortunately has only a decayed instinct left for his creative work, can often be are to be prohibited as contradicting the independence of the voices; and the
demonstrated to be bad, 1 mean objectively bad — for example, in its overestimation of
same applies to all motions from the fifth to the twelfth and vice versa
the capacity of a scale degree or failure to understand the technique of the passing (including also the octave-expansion of the twelfth, i.e., the 19th):
tone, etc. (cf. Harmony, §89) , —
it would be impossible, in spite of one’s complete distaste

for it, to fend off a way of composing which, invoking nature or the overtone series, Example 187
moved in the most bizarre doublings.

Although the tone of the added voice which relates to the cantus-firmus tone as

its octave or fifth is therefore not identical to the second or third partial, the consonant
relationship of the two independent tones, and accordingly the specific quality of the
resulting consonance (i.e., that of the octave or the fifth), nevertheless rests on the
foundation of the overtone series, albeit in a sense different from that assumed by
Riemann. With all of the independence of the two tones forming the octave or
fifth —
each tone carrying the bequest of its own world of overtones—, it is none other UnfortunatelyRiemann succeeded in intimidating later theorists as well, and thus
than Nature who confirms, according to the standard established by the meaning of the Harmonielehre by R Louis and L Thuille already contains the suggestion of at
octave and fifth within the overtone series, their consonant relationship and its least a compromise between the points of view of Hauptmann
and Riemann. There,
character. In other words: since the second partial represents identity of pitch-class on p. 376, we read:
together with differentiation of pitch, while the third partial yields the last tonal
15
If it were therefore decided to accept the Riemann explanation of the poor effect
boundary (Grenzton) of the comprehensible consonant space in the form of a tone
of parallel fifths as such, we nevertheless consider it necessary to invoke the
that differs in both pitch and pitch-class, this characteristic is preserved even when
Hauptmann viewpoint at least as an auxiliary theory if we want to be able to
one completely independent tone sounds against another in such a way that either (1)
V evaluate the actual occurrence of parallel fifths in a harmonic context. Accord-
identity of pitch-class together with differentiation of pitch, or (2) a final consonance-
ingly, the prohibitionmight be formulated thus: because of the high degree of
boundary together with differentiation of pitch-class is produced. Or, to quote the
blending quality of their intervallic relationship, parallel perfect fifths (as also,
presentation in Harmony, p. 29, §14:
to a lesser extent, parallel major thirds) can under certain circumstances produce
Which two tones are most naturally related? Nature has a very poor effect. This happen,
To the question: will specifically, if this type of progression
occurs
already given her answer. If G, for example, has revealed itself as the most potent in the direct succession of two chords that bear no mediating relationship to

overtone emanating from the root tone C, the potency and privilege of this close one another [etc.]. 14
relationship is preserved also in those cases where, in the life of a composition, To summarize all of the foregoing, we find that as errors in the theoretical
C meets G
an independent root tone: the ancestor, so to speak, recognizes
as justification of the prohibition of parallel the following should be cited: (1)
fifths,
the descendant. We shall call this primary and most natural relationship misunderstanding of the initial artistic experiments in contrapuntal writing that led
to
between two tones the fifth-relationship. the prohibition —
that is, the thoroughly inadequate appreciation of the fact that the
prohibition originally arose in the domain of counterpoint
It remains to be mentioned that Riemann uses the hypothesis of blending-grada- for only two voices, where
it indeed still remains in full force up to the present time;
and, finally, (2) evaluation
tions also to support the prohibition of antiparallels, as follows:
of free composition in terms of prohibitions that originally apply only to exercise-situa-
The prohibition of octave- and fifth-successions must, however, be generalized tions.

and sharpened by comparison to the formulation in which it has been handed With our discovery of the fact that the prohibition of parallel octaves and that of
down to us; for since unison, octave, and double-octave are not significantly parallel fifthsstem from two entirely different causes, which can be evident in their
distinguished from one another with respect to degree of blending quality, and full purity only in two-voice counterpoint, we have indeed
accomplished all that is
since the same holds true of fifth and twelfth, all motions from the unison or necessary for the time being for the first species of two-voice counterpoint.
We shall,
octave to the double-octave and vice versa: however, following our established custom, [now] provide a deeper glimpse into
140 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note 141

counterpoint of more than two voices as well as into free composition, and illuminate stand P oint of the higher law of independence,
h it will be altogether
how the situations that occur in both affect the application of the prohibition.
appropriate
10 include nonparallels into the bargain,
Nevertheless, we shall of course initially proceed in this only so far as is necessary to | .recedes into the background in the face of
especially as their poor effect surely
the increased prominence of the
understand the problem in a general way, and therefore reserve a more detailed
effect achieved precisely by means of the good
treatment for the proper occasions. line. We shall see later (Part
Copter 1, §22)— just to give at this point a preliminary glimpse— how
t'.’ in
three-voice counterpoint various
§13. First introduction concerning the influenceof strict counterpoint in t factors produce altogether new, stronger
more than two voices on the prohibition of similar motion Reflects, which under certain circumstances are able to
suppress the ef-
-r< feet— always poor in itself— of nonparallel similar motion.
Such factors include:
The birthplace of the problem is, as we have seen, two-voice counterpoint M 1) satisfaction of the requirements of melodic fluency in the form
^intervals (best of all the smallest, the second);
of smaller
The latter calls attention for the first time to the inevitable consequence that (2) emphasis on contrary motion
[of the voice not involved in the similar
(1) the succession of two unisons or octaves destroys the character of the added motion]; and finally (3) the advantage
counterpoint as an independent voice, and the succession of two fifths |
provided by a rich-sounding, complete triad.
(2)
means an unpleasant clash of two entities that are harmonically bounded with hour-voice counterpoint, in turn-and, to be sure,
again by reason of the
the same degree of severity. Two-voice counterpoint reveals, moreover, that p:really numerous and new difficulties attendant on the increased
number of
these effects are caused not by the nature of perfect consonances alone, but ^voices—, necessarily must admit nonparallel similar
motions even under cir-
also by [the quality of] similar motion as such. Now would certainly not |-cumstances in which three-voice counterpoint still
it adheres strictly to their
make sense, just as we are striving to learn how one voice to be led prohibition. Four-voice writing brings with it
is as an inevitable consequence
independently against another, to seek out the same time that |hc necessity that nonparallel similar motion
at effects be subject to still less stringent
eliminate this independence or even impair the good simultaneous sound of limitations than those required by three-voice counterpoint.
the two voices. Therefore fully in order for the theory of wo- voice But contrapuntal doctrine does not admit
it is f at the same time into its
counterpoint, striving to reconcile intent and result of in the proper environs also parallel motion of unisons,
first all octaves, and fifths. These instead
domain of two-voice exercises, to establish the prohibition discussed above remain prohibited, always and everywhere, in both
its three- and more-voiced
just in this area— and this, to be sure, without discriminating between whether str counterpoint, and, indeed, by reason of the effects
' ct
\ cited earlier, which
the progression to the perfect consonance takes place in parallel motion or other factors of the settingremain too weak to cancel completely under the
only in nonparallel similar motion. given limited circumstances of the cantus
firmus.
one knows, however, that this prohibition is to be understood only as a
If I
,l nally
.’
may
not be unin{ eresting to mention here that the
prohibition
i!
product of the intent and the situations of two-voice counterpoint, then one of( all 1
similar motions to perfect consonances remains from the
outset so
will naturally avoid from the outset the error (already censured in the completely tailored to the first species of two-voice
counterpoint that one
foregoing paragraphs) of regarding the prohibition also as an absolute could (assuming that one wished to) dispense,
for this first species, with any
one— that is, as a prohibition which, outside the domain of two-voice counter- further conceptual differentiation among the prohibited similar motions. 15 For,
point, would also invariably have to regulate multiple-voice counterpoint as as ,s evident,
bottom only the situations of the other species of
it is at
S
weil as free composition. be found, on the contrary, that more complex
• two-voice counterpoint— for complete clarity,
It will however, those of three- and
situations, to the extent that they demand own solutions, cannot satisfy four-vo.ee counterpoint (still leaving free
their composition out of considera-
the stringency of that prohibition; especially when the new factors that enter tion)— which, to the extent that they already tolerate
j
and even require a certain
more urgently need type ol similar motion to perfect
in such situations also introduce exigencies that far consonances, now compel the theorizing
artist for the first time to put a notch,
satisfaction. in the form of a first conceptual
Thus even three-voice [strict] counterpoint — here I bypass for the moment differentiation, into this prohibition that originates
in two-voice counterpoint
the situations encountered in the second, third, and fourth species of two-voice and continues to apply there without exception.
Thus, what was not at all
counterpoint with their new differentiations — must at least in principle admit
p
necessary in the
first species of two-voice counterpoint
automatically becomes,
in subsequent species, a necessity
the nonparallel similar motions (the so-called hidden progressions) if it is to ,
created by the new situations, so that
accomplish its central purpose of setting two voices against the cantus firmus undamentally one would have to draw the boundary between
actual parallels
melodic independence. For, often enough, melodic fluency and merely nonparallel similar motion in the
in a state of true
| second species of two-voice
of the line itself (as precisely the chief characteristic of such independence of counterpoint at the earliest, so as to carry the two
| types forward from that
voices) will doubtless require that the voice include in its path exactly a tone p° mt on as permanent categories of similar motion.
i|
with which such a nonparallel similar motion is associated. Thus, from the
k i
•
^ Ut a,S0 3part k° m any P articu,ar method of systematic presentation of
Ig-ths problem, it nonetheless remains of essential significance for the under-
M2 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note 143

standing and evaluation of the prohibition to grasp the facts of the matter as consonances. This observation also explains, in different words, the fact that
outlined above: specifically, that the first species of two-voice counterpoint has with every octave- or fifth-parallelism, with every nonparallel similar motion
established the prohibition in its domain as absolute, and that the differen- < in all situations (even those of free composition), the knavery of the associated
tiation of the prohibition enters the scene organically only with the differen- T effect returns and lurks in wait for us — just as though free composition were
tiation of situations. only an exercise of two-voice counterpoint! — specifically in that the bad effect
immediately impresses itself on our ear whenever the counterforces (contrary

§14. First glimpse of the status of the prohibition in free composition motion, melodic fluency, complete harmony, scale degree, modulation, altera-
tion of the character of the voice, and the like) fail to work sufficiently strongly
Dispensation for the use of even parallel successions finally enters only in the •/ against it. Thus it remains true in composition,
example, that the
free for

realm of free composition [FrC., §161]. interval of the

produces a boundary-effect; this can even be obvious,
fifth

Specifically, in free composition the changing character of the voice, whose depending on whether it was really intended or was merely the fault of lack
contrast with the continuously bound real voice of the contrapuntal exercise :
of skill. Therefore the school [of counterpoint] must always direct the student’s
16
will be demonstrated in detail in the last section, has as an attendant attention to that effect beginning in two-voice settings, even if it later pro-
consequence the fact that in order (for example) to be able to regulate the vides him with means to protect himself from it as the need arises. In short,
number of voices freely and at will, sometimes even parallel octaves become the effect of similar motion — indeed in all possible categories as taught by
fully a necessity. •;%! contrapuntal theory — remains ever a psychological reality, even where, smitten
Concerning parallel fifths, among the forces that can successfully coun- by forces of the foreground, it lurks only in the background! 19
motion even in strict counterpoint
teract the poor effect of nonparallel similar
are the principles of contrary motion, melodic fluency, and completeness of §15. Mode of departure from the perfect consonances in general
triads. In free composition, these factors are joined by others: the progression
of scale-degrees and variation of [foreground] key areas are the strongest forces Since in the exercises of the present species any departure from a perfect
which, either alone or, better still, in conjunction with the forces mentioned consonance naturally also represents at the same time the approach to the
above, can completely remove the harmful effect of even parallel fifths. next consonance, all that needs to be said about mode of departure has been

To put it differently: precisely by reason of the tonal identity present in covered here under the rubric of mode of approach. Therefore no further,
the unison and octave, free composition uses octave- and unison-parallelism, special restrictions and prohibitions apply to mode of departure. The only
for example as so-called “reinforcing voices” (which at the same time reduces exception to this is mode of departure from the unison.
the number of voices), and so forth. Moreover, free composition can also— but
note well: always, only under the rubric of concrete voice-leading!
17
— use §16. Mode of departure from the unison in particular
fifth-parallelisms in abundance, by virtue of the fact that it successfully

counters them with new and stronger forces still unavailable in the exercises The fact of complete agreement and blending of both voices as manifested

of strict counterpoint. by the unison obligates the voice leading subsequent to the unison to proceed
Obviously, under such circumstances in free composition the nonparallel with caution (which, incidentally, also best fulfills the postulate of melodic
similar successions, as well as antiparallels, gain still greater freedom than they fluency); at least the voices should refrain
from seeking out in an all too drastic
already had in three- and four-voice counterpoint. manner a contradictory situation immediately after the unison.
Considering the end result, however, that free composition is, under certain If, for the problem of mode of departure from the unison, we take into
circumstances, in a position to dispense entirely with the prohibition not only consideration the three types of motion, we find the following effects:
of nonparallel similar motion but even of parallels and antiparallels, it seems (a) The employment of similar motion harbors the danger that ear and
all the more curious that the prohibition should be taught at all any more, sense will find it difficult to decide, especially in the case of larger leaps, which
even if only in counterpoint and in the domain of exercises. For if in free path has been taken by the one voice, and which by the other. Thus here,
composition, as one might claim, there are no longer any limitations on these for example:
18
progressions, then why should any restriction be imposed in the exercises,
whose results are never of practical quality anyway?
This question, however, is only apparently justified, and the answer is
simple. For I have already said that only the strong motivations and counter-
forces that penetrate clearly and convincingly into the foreground can
eliminate the effect, by nature always poor, of similar motion to perfect
144 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The First Species: Note Against Note 145
at least thedanger of a confusion of voices is present, since it must appear
not always completely clear which of the two dh has moved
to d 2 and which
to f\
(b) Oblique motion, on the other hand, by means of sustaining in one
voice, provides such a strong counierforce of
repose that even the largest
[melodic] interval can be allowed to follow the unison, for example:

Example 189

(c) With contrary motion, finally, the danger is far more

imminent of an
explosive effect by the larger interval that follows the unison, just by the nature
[
unless the device of crossing the two voices (cf. below, §27) were to be used
of the situation itself, for example:
instead; this, however, would appear somewhat out of place, at least at the

Example 190 beginning of an exercise. It is more advisable with such a cantus firmus to
use the octave or fifth as opening interval instead of the unison itself.

This danger is countered best of all, however, by placing an interval of -li

more modest size after the unison, and, moreover, by moving to that interval 7 ;

by small steps; thus the best solution of mode of departure by contrary motion I
is doubtless the case in which both voices depart from each other in seconds
alone, so that they meet in a third:

Example 191

The effects just described, then, yield the following advice for
treatment
of mode of departure from a unison:
Oblique motion takes first preference, since it is best able to avoid an

explosive effect in the succession of intervals. The second

best solution is
contrary motion, but only under certain favorable circumstances, as
described
above. The least suitable possibility, finally, is similar motion, which
should
accordingly be avoided wherever possible in these exercises.
Since the unison, as we shall later see, is prohibited in the main body
of
the exercise and thus may be used only at the beginning or end in two-voice
first-species counterpoint, the question here under consideration has but one
practical application — specifically, when the exercise has begun with a unison.
Therefore one may
test the situation by examining its consequences at
the
very outset— that by determining whether or not the exercise is at all suitable
is,

for a unison beginning. For if we have to set an upper counterpoint against

a cantus firmus that begins, for example, as follows (cf. p. 54):
146 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The First Species: Note Against Note 147

progression by leap fiom the unison lo another consonance is not

permitted, Example 195
nor is progression by leap to a unison, as was
explained before. But since this
leap appears in a pari of the cantus firinus, which is not to be
changed, it may
be tolerated here It is different when one is not confined to the cantus fumus
and can do 20
as one pleases.

lins opinion, clearly, is based on a regrettable misunderstanding, not only of free But such thirds will constitute the exception described only if this succession
composition on the one hand, but also of contrapuntal exercises on the other. The forces on the car as a resultant an augmented fourth— a tritone— in such an
misunderstanding has misled kux in the present instance to grant less freedom to the unpleasant way that the ear’s attention cannot be distracted from it by any
former titan to the latter, since he deduces from the strictness of the exercises, [on the possible later course of the voice leading. Thus in the following voice leading,
one hand,) tne necessity of tolerating possible leaps from a unison, and from the
on the contrary:
freedom of free composition, on the other, the necessity of greater strictness. In fact it
is nist the opposite— as may he seen in example 194 above—, for free composition, more
often than strict counterpoint, is compelled, by reason of expressive content, to use
leaps in such cases.
Treating the question in more detail than Fux, Bellermann teaches on p. 136:

The leap from a unison to another consonant interval in similar motion is not
good two-voice counterpoint, and thus should be avoided as
in much as possible.
the continuation of the voices certainly cancels the resultant of the augmented
[Examples follow., Such a leap is quite permissible, however, if one of the two
voices remains stationary fourth quite adequately. 21
on its lone— tnus in a case of oblique motion. [Ex-
amples follow.) In contrary motion it is likewise desirable to avoid
The reason for the prohibition of such third-successions, then, clearly lies
leaps,
regardless of whether one or both voices make such a leap. Nevertheless, one less in the juxtaposition of F and B or in the resultant of the augmented fourth
very frequently finds exceptions to this tuie, and therefore we may be less strict
in itself than in a special instance of the latter: specifically, that in which the
in observing it. harshness of the [augmented] fourth-resultant strikes the ear in a particularly
drastic manner because it fails to gain sufficient justification through a good
Here Bellermann cites the treatise of Fux, in order to ally himself with the latter
subsequent resolution.
m icgasd io free composition. He confirms this agreement with the following words:
•V But on the other hand a voice leading like the following;
"There is, of course, no reason [in free composition] to introduce less beautiful
progressions of that kind.” What is admittedly correct in these observations is that Example 197
contrary motion often cannot be avoided; in such cases, however, the reader should
adhere to the relevant suggestions in the text

§17. The free approach to imperfect consonances is, therefore, unconditionally permitted;and from this it can be inferred that
not just any encounter between F and B gives reason to apply the prohibition,
The approach to imperfect consonances is free, regardless of whether they are but only, under especially unfavorable circumstances, an unresolved resultant
preceded by a perfect or an imperfect interval.
of an augmented fourth. This, then, is all that can be salvaged of the so
Similarly, all three types of motion are unconditionally permitted when besmirched myth of what is unjustifiably known as the tritone “cross-relation"
they lead to an imperfect consonance, with the possible exception
of the (cl below, §28)!
following cases.
(b) Within the pure diatonic system, a seventh-resultant, for example, is

no more permissible than the augmented fourth-resultant arising from the

succession of two major thirds, especially as it would have to remain unwar-
§18. The possible prohibition of a succession of two major thirds ranted for other reasons as well: 22

(a) The first exception is the case of a succession of two major thirds, as

they are found specifically in the pure, undiluted diatony from the fourth to
the fifth degree in major and from the sixth to the seventh in minor— only a
single instance [in each mode], as we know:
 The First Species: Note Against Note 149

adequately justifies the series of major thirds (bars 4-5), in that it demotes

them to the status of merely transient chromatic advancements through the

space from g to c l . And yet the ear grasps very well too the operation of the
whole process that necessarily produced this effect of transience, and we gain
finally the insight that we are here dealing with only apparent major thirds,
which in fact originate simply from minor thirds instead. It is astonishing how
rapidly our perception functions — how it rushes with lightning speed through
so many intervening stages and grasps the abbreviation:

Example 201
presuppose from the outset a mixed 2J minor key
(
Harmony, §38), in which M
the first example represents the progression V — VI and the second the progres-
sion III — V. Assuming, then, that the student were to use a mixed minor key
for the exercises, he would have to avoid completely the resultant of an
augmented fifth as well, as appears in the second example, while use of the
it

succession in the first example would doubtless be justified without restriction.

It is well known that successions of major thirds (where possible also in

series of sixth-chords) are much favored in ourown time in free composition.
How the latter justifies such successions may be shown first of all by an
example:

Example 200
Mozart, Symphony No. 36,

The illustration at a shows the normal diatonic passing tones that lie

between g and c of the lower voice and between b and e of the upper. That
1 1

is the real background of all later occurrences —

the first stage, so to speak.
The illustration at b presents the chromatic filling-in of the normal
diatony — at 1. in the lower voice, at 2. in the upper. This is the second stage.
The illustration at c represents the first and initially normal attempt to
introduce all of the chromatic passing tones indicated under b into the two
voices, while at the same time retaining the given total duration of four
quarter-notes.
Yet here the two voices, for the sake of clarity and in order to preserve
the passing character of the chromatic tones in a purer form, still interrelate
in such an active way that at any given time only one voice executes its

-!T
150 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

passing tone, and only when the first voice has completed its advancement
rajor thirds in the cellos and violas has as its basis the fact
does the second proffer its own passing tone. Thus when the lower voice has
ree VI in B minor composed out altogether in the sense
completed its passing motion ay —
a in the first quarter, the upper voice enters
is

or.However, the harshness of the effect— an

at the second quarter-note well that the lower voice now sustains!— with its intentional
case certainly stems far less from the
own passing motion c 1
—
cH at the third quarter, the second voice again waits
1

;
om
succession of major
the severe dissonance of the passing
until the first, the lower, has finished with its new passing motion bb — b, and
onic tone b' of the violins,
third a-c# (at *)

then advances from d while the lower voice

and also from the rhythmic
itself in the fourth quarter 1
to d# 1
,
nodulation-motive, which begins at the second
in contrast remains waiting and passive. This is the third stage. quarter,
ior thirds in the following example
It is easily recognized, however, that this procedure finally provides the by Wagner:

opportunity for a more abbreviating and more complicated one (see Example
200 itself), which is precisely the fourth and final stage of the process. For if
Example 203

it is always only a diatonic tone which, remaining stationary itself, in the Wagner, Das Rheingold, Scene III
meantime provides an opportunity for the chromatic passing tone:

Diatonic Tone Chromatic Passing Tone

1
Beneath c of the upper voice ab—-a of the lower voice
Above a of the lower voice c— c# 1
of the upper voice
1
Beneath d of the upper voice — of the lower voice
bt> CH minor:
II (Phrygian)
Above b of the lower voice d — d# of the upper voice
1 1

the fact that (I) scale degrees I and VI progressed

then follows that, since the chromatic passing tone
1
(and later d# 1
must _ to II by means
it eff )
ifth; (2) this scale degri
” .

_ :gree was lowered (t)II, Phrygian); and

II
in any case chart its course above the diatonic passing tone a (and later b), (3)
‘.within itsdomain the tone g# 2
it certainly amounts to exactly the same thing if the two tones — the diatonic was now
,
the
t’

upon to show that'we have indeed remained

called
upper voice of the succession of thirds,

and the chromatic one in each case instead of waiting and following upon — the C#-minor diatony. To be sure, 2 could
exclusively in

one another, throw caution to the winds and run together. S cuu.u have
s na\ appeared here, if Wagner
-

had preferred to follow the drive of the

—-
The ear has come to understand that at the second quarter the third was II toward tonicality
as though it had
t —
indeed originally minor: S until it was enlarged to major: g# (and later db \
1 1
ppddenly turned into a true major D
(Harmony, §137)—: but simple com- ;
,
panson of the effect produced by g 2 shows how much more elegantly
enlarged to db&) only by means of preempting the chromatic passing tone; the tone
g functions in this passage in the service
therefore it accepts unconditionally the abbreviation as well (that is, the final of the diatony to be preserved,
buch lovely fruit of the composing-out of
scale degrees!
telescoping of the two-stage process just described into a one-stage one),
0n hand jt is instructive to see how in the following
the ot her
relinquishes the intermediate stage of minor thirds S
1
and at the second and fbmetana J
>

evades a succession of two major thirds and

example
fourth quarters, and thus arrives immediately at the perception of major thirds also is able thereby to

in these places.

In the following example, by Brahms:

Example 204
Example 202
^Smetana, String Quartet in E Minor (“Aus raeinem Leben”)
Brahms, Symphony No. 4, I

Violin II

B minor: VI
1 52 I WO- VOIO COUN I'bKPOINi
.
the hirst Species: Note Against Note
/ 55

I-'ux is not concerned in any particularly strict way with the succession of two leads to a prohibited fourth-resultant
(sec Example 206a), so that my Examule 197
maioi thirds, as can be seen in the following example: ;
equally exempt from his prohibition.
What his rule nevertheless lacks m ultimate precision is that he unfortunately
Example 205 neglects to say thateven a progression like that at a can still he permitted under more
Fux IV, favorable circumstances, specifically
1 5 when the effect of the fourth-resultant is effaced
by means of a beneficial voice leading. To he sure, an element of this idea, admittedly
SC, ° US a0d al,n0Sl ° nly in ,bc scnse of an
AIK T,T
Albrechtsbetger s own ,
exception, appears also in
discussion, in the following remarks: “In a
cadence will, three
or more voices, two major thirds ascending a whole-step are permitted, as we
can sec
in the two last examples:

Example 207

Albrechtsberger confronts the problem all the more energetically. He too, to state

.t at the outset, represents the problem only as a matter of disallowed third-successions,

2 ‘
but completely avoids speaking ex offo of a “cross-relation of the tritone" as such.

Thus he writes, on pp. 21-22 under VII:

Two maiot thirds ate prohibited in the progression of a whole step upward or

downward, but not in that of a half step; [they are prohibited] also in the case Yet m which the author appears literally to have been compelled by the
tblS ldea
Wi f
>

of a third-leap by both voices; for in these progressions a discordant cross-rela- harmonic theory (here the scale-degree progression
tion, a mi contra fa arises; this is not true, however, of the leap of a perfect
spirit of
| exception, unfortunately is unjustly limited
II
1)
to make an — V-
to the cadence alone, and thus,
as I have
fourth. Two major thirds are likewise prohibited when the voices leap a perfect gaid not expressed accurately enough. In the practical
realm of exercises, however, he
fifth— not because of mi contra but because the diagonal product is a major
fa, rightly attended only to the situation
at hand in a given case; this can be
demonstrated
seventh, which is always a difficult thing to seek out, whether it rises or falls in by the corrections, transmitted by Nottebohm,
pp. 48-49, that he made to an exercise
the continuation. by Beethoven:

When we place his pertinent examples into order, we arrive at the following picture:

Example 206
a) (with progression b) (with the leap of a c) (with the leap of a
by whole-step) major 3rd) perfect 5th)

In i '' S Rulc 7, p Cherubini "The

5.^
states: false relation of the octave, and of the
/
t
***** should
be voided; these two relations are harsh to
the ear,
especially that of die octave.”
(1 here follows a remark the relevant part of
which 1
have already quoted ... Harmony,
§19.) By h.s incorrect and wrongheaded assumption
that only he relation of
the Intone itself (instead of just its
situation in any given
instance) alone must be the reason
; for the prohibition, Cherubini
unfortunately finds
^himself compelled for the sake of consistency
to prohibit any such relation
at all, such
. as the tol lowing.
 ihe First Species: Note Aj-ainst Note J55

§19. Mode of departure from the imperfect consonances

Departure from imperfect consonances is free of any prohibition; since with

the departure, however, the approach to the next consonance is also deter-
mined, all of the principles set forth in §§6, 11, and 17 concerning mode of
-approach now take effect.

icce> §20. Consideration of the traditional formulation

;
of the rules of
voice-movement

:;Tc) enrich the special instruction given here (in

§§9-19) concerning types of
^pice-movement, a synopsis of the pertinent rules as they are found in other
textbooks may now be presented.

|f: Thus we read inFux (p. 61):

First Rule: From one perfect consonance to another perfect consonance one
would likewise have to be prohibited because of B against F (in the form of a If'
must proceed in contrary or oblique motion.
diminished fifth); but this prohibition — fortunately, if contradictorily enough — is on the
Second Rule: From a perfect consonance to an imperfect consonance one
other hand not to be found in Cherubini.
Bellermann returns in this issue to the indifference of the early master Fux. But
"Y may proceed
any of the three motions.
in
Third Rule: From an imperfect consonance to a perfect consonance one
it almost raises the suspicion that he would tend to judge the matter exclusively from
must proceed in contrary or oblique motion.
the standpoint of the Mixolydian mode when he writes on p. 149 in an exercise that
Fourth Rule: From one imperfect consonance to another imperfect con-
he represents as Mixolydian:
sonance one may proceed in any of the three motions.
Here it should be noted that oblique motion is permitted in all four
>, progressions. On the knowledge of these three types of motion and their correct
Example 211
use hangs, as the saying goes, the law and the prophets.

•| He does not discuss here, as we see, the issue of antiparallels.

According to Albrechtsberger, the rules of voice-motion run as follows (pp.
|| 19, 21):

^ ^ * n two chords the second pair of notes forms a perfect consonance, similar
I?:
molion mus * he avoided in moving from the first to the second,
and then explains: 'f.J and contrary
r oblique motion must be used; the first chord may then be either perfect or
?
In the second example of the Mixolydian mode 25 we see F raised to Ftf in the imperfect. [Examples follow.]
fourth bar from the end, while according to the stricter rule the sharp should One must also avoid two
two octaves even in contrary motion,
fifths or
be used only in the cadence itself. This exception can occasionally be permitted especially if the accompaniment
v. provided by an organ equipped with a pedal;
is
in the Mixolydian mode, however, when F arrives from above and then moves for organists play most bass notes with the left
foot, and very often turn an
up again, and when B is heard directly after it in another voice. In such a case ascending fourth-leap into a descending fifth-leap and vice
versa. As a result,
F is not only allowed but sometimes demanded even at the beginning of the parallel fifths or octaves are heard.
setting as well [here follows the exercise whose beginning and end are cited
above]; if we keep F in the second bar, the tritone (F -B) between the two voices
from the second bar to the third would make a very unpleasant effect, which is ,. Since in reference to antiparallels, the prohibition of which he
[in fact] creates,
called a cross-relation, a discordant relationship. In the course of the melody, Albrechtsberger suddenly invokes a justification derived from free composition,
we take
however, only F must be used, in keeping with the mode (bar 5). this opportunity to respond immediately (regardless
of his later amplifications) that,
aside from the inadmissibility in principle of such a procedure, the issue under
This passage clearly relates to the allegedly Mixolydian character of the exercise.
 The First Specie s: Note Against Note 157
.. Several perfect consonances of the
same kind should never be permitted to
succeed each other, regardless of their
particular size; consequently two fifths
;^V and two octaves in succession are prohibited. This prohibition is
applicable to
ever 7 kind ot composition, in two parts, as well as in
jj more.
There follows the explanatory “Observation":

-
.
[Observation:] |
A succession
of octaves renders harmony well nigh
void; a succes-
S '°"
forms a discordance, because the upper part
P- at the same ,
progresses in one key
time that the lower moves in another.
For example, if to the scale
oi L an u
£ PP er P art be added which gives a perfect fifth at each bar, thus:

Example 213

b) J. S. Bach, Aria variata (BWV 989}

m
it foHows that one part will be in C, the other
in G. It is from this concurrence
|.y
ot two keys that the discordance arises, and
consequently, the prohibition to
m *r°duceseveral fifths in succession, even when
ft the movement of the parts

M IpfV . r
g C °" iu " ct> is disiunct The effect always remains the
t^berubmi s Example 12 follows, which presents
same.
several fifth-successions by
|-;

In the fust example by no means necessary

y It is easily discernible that Cherubini, in
formulating the reasoning contained in
a, it is to assume an unisono in order to the latter comment, was governed by an all too vague notion of what a key might be
validate the parallel octaves (even if this secondary effect has to arise there of own
its ha in ts Ramifications, the reasoning therefore suffers at
accord), since the tones G—C of the bass are more nearly incarnations of the scale !l’
exaggeration.
.
i
For if one might perhaps be permitted
least from gross
degrees V— I than voices in the pure contrapuntal sense. 25 That is, we hear the same
to direct it against a phenomenon
•like primitive organum (see above, §12) with justification,
how, on the other hand, can
tone progression in the low register with a different purpose than in the high: in the one use it an argument agamst a succession
as
former, scale-degree progression prevails, in the
of, for example, only two fifths, whether
latter, nothing but melody. 27 If the Stncl count 7P0im or in free composition?
autographs do not deceive, more complex relationships are present in the Bach
m- Is it possible at all, then, to express by
succession of (for example) only two
a
fifths even one key, to say
example. There are either true parallel fifths from the second to the third quarter: f nothing of two
different keys operating in parallel?
1
kzzft , or mere antiparallels from the fust to the third quarter: b =ZXh in the latter Continuing the
e
v .
rule, Cherubini comments:
case, for the sake of clarity, the e of the bass would have to be thought of as a half-note
(i.e., without division into quarters). However one wants .. .. Consecutive have been, and still are tolerated in contrary
fifths
to view it, as parallels or motion.
antiparallels, in any case the scale degrees, ... [Cherubini's example 13 follows.]
it is their expectation and fulfillment, that
justify the fifths here. In this example it will be seen that
one is a twelfth, and the other is a fifth,
which alters the matter. Nevertheless, it is
[Albrechtsberger continues:] g forbidden to use this liberty in
two-voice counterpoint, particularly that
of note against note. The method is
11. If in two chords the second pair of notes forms an imperfect consonance, one :

,
tolerated only in four-voice counterpoint,
where there is difficulty in making the
may use any of the three types of motion in proceeding from the fust to the parts flow well.
second; the first chord may be perfect or imperfect [examples follow]. Since in
y
the following four species dissonances are used as well, they are treated in this ; No justification whatever of the prohibition of antiparallels is given by Cherubini.
respect as imperfect consonances, and the following rule is added to the two The P u P i! ma y meet with consecutive
V works of the galant style, as in
fifths in
preceding: the first chord may be perfect, imperfect, or dissonant. operas, symphonies, etc.; but these are
always only licenses, which are tolerated
in those kinds of composition.
Cherubini bravely ventures deeper into the justification of the prohibition. We .

read on page 5, fourth rule: But how little faith Cherubini himself must have had in his own reasoning becomes
j||
158 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT i;
lhe Firsf Species: Note Against Note
15 9

when and merciless

clear he, the cvci slricl
in “tolerate” actual fifth-
teacher, nevertheless condescends, after
and octave-parallelisms under the rubric of "licenses” in free
all,
f
unfortunately are taught
l0
/°
already u.
U h
TV 1 ” 5 P° ,nt
> aie ,he »'lc* of voice leading

harmonic theory, and, indeed, immediate*

aS
which
wdl

composition! Instead of the banner of “need to tolerate”— alasl

and bewilderment in the treatment of the subject matter are hidden in this word
how much insecurity
fh ^«he
theory
V CXP
as the ex o/^ theory
,h I"'
'\ H ny ,hey hel °° 8
of voice leading, and what harm
in the

T°
co „trap„ntal
they inflict on instruction
^
“tolerate”! —
it would have been far more useful at this point if Cherubim had slated once they are taught in an ill-conceived
manner ,n harmony lesson.
the reasons, whatever they might be, that would cause him to tolerate licenses in free
composition.
Beginning
Hut the fifth rule (p. 6) is still more “Approaching a perfect consonance
surprising.
by similar motion is prohibited, except when one of the two voices moves by a
§21. Construction of the beginning
semitone.” (His Example 14 follows, under the rubric “forbidden motion.”) “This case,”
he continues, “is allowed:”
At the beginning, thus in the first bar,
Example 214 1, 8. or 5 must be used in all cases-
never other intervals, such as
3 (10) or 6.
Th 3111'' 116 ° f pe ' fect con sonances
E« f I a"d
is already familiar
J
whether preference should be given to
from §4 of the
or 8 or 5 can
^
gmewt aptly be deeded on the basis of
1

the situation in the second

bar-that is
W Ether the Un n for eXamp e c£ 16 above
tahr^T r
potable continuation or not, and related matters.
?s!ri
< § T
)> could fi nd a
’ ‘

And after giving the reason for the prohibition first established in the

are already familiar with it from Part

concerning example 214: "The case of the tolerated movement shown
is different,
result, it is
2, Chapter 1, §11— he adds

inasmuch as, on filling up the interval-spaces with quarter-notes, there

true,two fifths, but one is diminished and the other perfect." (Cherubini's
same rule— we
the following
in the example
added counterpoint

"th
such
t
8
the't
;sftefofLm“
anCe °
is

ld
f
this
.

„r::rP;:
,
.

"
sh ouid be scrupulously observed
the lower voice, the lower fifth

Thus
here-when the
must not be used
[by tHe
in c raaior ' an
P ar agraph]; because
as

Example 17 follows, which clarifies the text) And finally:

Example 215
These two fifths are tolerated because they are not of the same nature, and
because the discordancy of which we have spoken as arising from perfect fifths
iS'c. f.

in succession is not present. The old composers, however, always avoided this
progression in two-voice counterpoint. It was only when writing for several voices
that they availed themselves of it in the inner parts, to void committing some
other offense.

It

(n.7, pp.
is perhaps unnecessary
352-53) applies also
for

to the
me to state specifically that
exception set
by Cherubini (Example 214), and that this example, too, falls under the prohibition.
Obviously Cherubini— like Albrechtsberger, incidentally, regarding the issue of two
major thirds— has in this case allowed himself to be misled into positing those
my argument in §11
up— incidentally, quite inconsistently—
r™ : as cantus
ly
at a11
assu
firmus and the upper as counterpoint.
The prohibition of imperfect
.
!° C naajor, but rather to F major, in which case we
m ® ,USt the opposite situa,ion of the voices, with the lower

consonances in the first bar of the exercise

ra y t0 UnderSt °°d S on ’y re,ative that is,
’
exceptions only by the association of Example 214 to scale-degree progression in free ^1 : it derives automatically

7anse ^
— -from h a 10m yS l ° f
° bSCrVed in contra P untal study, that
composition (VII

Sr lTi
I); this is the reason for his vacillation. the solution
Like Fux, except with sound transposition of the second and third
a logically rules,
of dl mn bht ’it,
1S t0 mOVe always in lhe direction from the simple
and natural to the more complex ,
Bellermann formulates the principles on p. 134f. as follows: and less natural (see Introduction,
p. 000).
But there is no doubt that the perfect
Rule I. From a perfect consonance to another perfect consonance, only con-
.

consonances here have the significance

trary or oblique
Rule
motion may be used. [Example follows.]
From an imperfect to a perfect consonance, likewise, only contrary
2.
^!rV IttSrabh a 3
at
r’ PrCSS f
r
CSPeCi y SmCe the PUrp ° Se ° f the beginnin
,0niC
§ can b c
dS harm ° ny (inS0far as the latt
is ^
or oblique motion may be used. [Example follows.] ° 1CC coun terpoint) with the maximum
securityh
of repose and
Rule 3. From a perfect to an imperfect consonance, all three types of motion
may be used. [Example follows.] $enSe ° f PUrely cont rapuntal
Rule 4. From an imperfect consonance to another imperfect consonance, |
L
ivi J" tt
rc,sc a be8 "'
f
understanding of the task of simply
m
"8- therefore, the scale of values established
above
likewise, all three types of motion may be used. [Example follows.]
:

n
Like Fux, incidentally, he also fails to remark on the matter of antiparallels.
-
imn
immutable under all
V ? “ vicissriudes of fashion in teaching:
circumstances, however free composition
(be
it

it
remains
that of
160 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The First Species: Note Against Note
the past, the present, or some future time) may proceed concerning the 161

beginnings of compositions. Exercise and free composition are completely

different things, and it is least appropriate of all to derive principles from the
7
24 U ‘“ier
thirds or sixths consecutively
"°" e Shoulli
f
in similar motion, because
^
necessity, set „o,e than
this produces the effect
of a street son or popular
latter and consider them binding on the former. S melody." Compare also pp.
| 30, 32.

The best statement of the question at hand is by Albrechtsberger, p. 21 under III:

“The beginning and the end must have a perfect consonance, with the exception that §23 ****** C ° m ° nances ’ and a f™ exceptions encountered
the upper counterpoint cannot end with the fifth, and the lower counterpoint cannot ^therein
begin with it." (Compare also p. 66.)

Dehn, by contrast, writes as follows (p. 5f.):

For these two [beginning- and ending-notes], the ancients strictly demanded a
perfect consonance in the key; we shall be satisfied if beginning and end of the I
1
g
! should
With Ul Sa
rA °,
r
g ' h ° WeVer ’ that even
be used in the main body of the
consonances may and
exercise in keeping with the
principles
setting clearly define
third in the
its key, and we may confidently end, for example, with the

upper voice, provided only that the bass note gives the root.
4™* 7^ ?n? 8 ° ng the otherwise applicable laws
departure (§§6-20) as well as the
of approach and
law of more moderate usage
| s v(at least in
principle) are observed.
He then proceeds, on p. 7, actually to begin an exercise with the interval of a third.
V:- The only exceptions
All of this is nothing but infantile mania to “modernize” counterpoint — truculence L The UniS0 ”> which
are:

against a rule whose meaning he has completely failed to understand in the first place.
is prohibited here in the first species of two-voice
if; .

(
Alas, this lamentable confusion of contrapuntal theory and composition-theory! f r the reason thal
jt would inhibit
far 100 abruptly and
drastically the flow of? a setting
^ place by that is so tonally impoverished
in the first
Main Body the limitations of two-voice

^ main ^
j,
counterpoint; and

suddenly pro- would

§22. The preference for imperfect over perfect consonances
Kuce’a
fcduce a ride
cadence, which-if the brevity and
tonal poverty of two-voice
exercises
re a ways kept m view-would
serve as a premature and
misleading god f“
gjie voice leading, and thus
In the main body, more imperfect consonances should be used than would have to weaken irreparably

^
perfect ;f the final
ones, for by dint of the harmonic' characteristics of imperfect consonances
described in §4 of this chapter, they appear more suitable in every case to Tf
J
fe
n Se

unde r s
f C ° Se
rd ',f
Ut
6 6 PUrdy
^
t0 Which the mere successio
" 6-8 is

foster mobility in the setting than the perfect consonances, which either limit
l ater in §29 (^"cerning the same questionCOntrapuntaI
(Coni^^T sensc will be shown
in three-voice counterpoint
If? ,. p ’ see
the discussion in Part
the harmonic content too severely or merely repeat the tone of the cantus Jm 3, Chapter 1, §26.)

firmus.
Here, where the concern is to learn the ways and means by which such T permmer
65 ” SeC ° ndary
^
(See §2§ ° f this chapler)
’ however are ^rtainly '

a modest organism [as the exercise] is to be created, the student’s attention :

must be directed to the incentive for propulsion of content that operates '

precisely in the imperfect consonances.

On the other hand, good taste precludes that more than three thirds or V
no-sVr'nnT?
(0 8) on 72-73
pp^
q
r io
;‘
at hand of the unison with
where he expressly,
that ° f
forbids the unison
in the main body (see the
Pa Ft 2 ’ C hap
§ 12 > He does not t rca t Ihe cadence explicitly [He
‘ er 2 ’
sixths be placed in succession unless there is a particular reason for doing so. J deal with]
deals t f '' 1
avoidance of cadences only in h,s theory
of fugue (p 131)
For even if it is certainly most convenient to write counterpoint against a voice Albrechtsberger treats the prohibition
of the unison or, p. 21 under V-
using only thirds or sixths, in such as case the poor effect of a monotony of he wmes 0II on cadences
p 22 under VIII; “Cadences, including both partial and
.

intervals cannot be avoided, and the lack of variety and contrasts in the
full cadent
intervals then cannot but diminish the artistic merit of the counterpoint. (Yet m trir Li:S *** a

it is not, just for this reason, by any means necessary here to invoke the
assistance of the artificial hypothesis of Riemann about the degree of blending
of thirds. See above, §12 of this chapter.)
On the question of whether sixths, when several of them occur in suc-
Example 216

cession, are better used descending than ascending, sec Part 3, Chapter 1, §23. | “poor”

Fux criticizes ascending motion of several sixths in succession on p. 92; sec tlie

citation in Part 3, Chapter 1, §14 concerning Fux’s Table VU, Figure 11.
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT l he hirst Species: Note Against Note
J6?

Example 217 Example 219

Fux UI, 11
“good”

^ s:sa

in
6 8 3 1
x»

From this it can be inferred that he applies the term “full

3 8

which the dominant tone itself participates, while “partial cadence,”

on the other
cadence” to a cadence
(52
o U
1°
—a

u
Concerning the: Wlth regard to ,he pacing of voices, however,
hand, signifies a cadence that uses only the two leading tones.
however, see p. 81.
%
plose spacing only in the exercises of
Fux adheres to the principle of
permissibility of partial cadences in three-voice counterpoint, the first species; later, he violates that prin-
ciple— unfortunately, to the severe detriment
27 Albrechtsberger teaches— in a purely casuistic manner, to be
sure, since
On p. of his own teaching.
no other possibility in this case— the other methods to be used when the Bellermarm’s comments (p. 143) are excellent:
there was ;

not that the expected chord would always have to

danger of a cadence arises: “. . .

follow, since deceptive cadences (Jngnnni) are more beautiful

and necessary before the K If a iwo ' voice setting
in a correct relationship to
is to have a really good sound, the two voices must
stand
each other and must not be too widely separated.
arrival of the final cadence; for example:" \ Therefore the student
:
must, in exercises, always combine two adjacent
$ v ° ices — tenor with bass, alto with tenor, or alto with soprano; but not bass with
or
aito, worse) with soprano, etc. For pure intonation
(still

Example 218 |
^instrumental accompaniment in
is difficult without
instead spacings larger than the octave; besides, such
Cadenza Inganni spacing* sound empty and poor unless they
of: % are filled out by inner voices In
tW0 ' V0lce counterpoint, therefore, the tenth
P is the widest spacing
permitted.
One should, however, avoid thinking of the sonic
quality of exercises in terms of a free
composition, as Bellermann, in the light of
the foregoing, obviously does, as a
consequence of his profound misconception
of [the purpose of] contrapuntal doctrine
for even in regard to sonic quality, the student
must here experience for the first time
on y the most essential things (cf. Part
1, Chapter 2, §20); the sonic quality
of the
setting should stand purely in the service
of the exercise [and its purpose]: to provide
a foundation fust of all for [understanding]
the nature of the singing voice and of voice
leading in general.
§24. Spacing of the two voices

for good sonority itself dictates moderation in the

spacing of voices;
The need §25. The added voice abides by the rules of the cantus
types are preferable, firmus
thus for two-voice counterpoint, registrally adjacent voice
such as soprano and alto, alto and tenor, or tenor and bass. All rules and prohibitions that apply to the cantus firmus itself are
that the distance to be used
The same postulate of good sonority also stipulates also in constructing the added voice. These include the rules
voices pertaining to
between the two voices should if possible not exceed a tenth. If the intervals (Part1, Chapter 2, §§5-19) and cadences
one another, a (§23), those pertaining to
should, on the other hand, occasionally move too close to melodic fluency in general
(§20), and the prohibitions against chromatic
particularly appropriate countermeasure, among others, is the leap of a sixth;
progression, monotony, the arpeggiation of
same harmonic units (cf. Part 1, Chapter
such leap can regain the contrast provided by separation and, at the
a §§2, 41), and so forth. In short: the
2, added voice, even in the exercises of
time, yield other benefits for the voice leading. strict counterpoint, should be no less melody than the cantus firmus itself!

Fux writes (p. 76):

Second, if move so close together that one does not know where
the two voices
contrary motion cannot be used, such motion can be Clearly, the requirement that the added voice constantly maintain in all
to take them, and if

brought about by the leap of a minor sixth (which is permissible) or an

octave, respects the bearing of a melody applies to an even greater extent in free
as in the following examples: composition as well. For the infinitely greater
freedom that the principal

Imim
164 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT 1 65
under certain circumstances the
melody is entitled to require in that domain naturally extends also to the demands of melodic flue
gcasionally, also the need to avoid
added voice, which accordingly may demand and expect the freest approach a forbidden progression) can
.altogether desirable to cross the
to its formation. voices. It is obvious, however
exceptional condition should by no means be continued toe
particular, should not ultimately
lead to a complete reversal
§26. Consequences of the dependency of the added voice: (a) The which we perceive the two voices.
license of tone-repetition Least of all should it
cadential formula itself.

The very fact that the cantus firmus is the a priori given element, in contrast
$ Mbrechtsberger makes the following appropriate observation (p. 32):
to which the added voice is merely a complement entering the scene a more than three thirds may follow upon
one another in succession i
posteriori implies that the latter is, in turn, dependent upon the former in or them are produced by voice-crossing:”
many respects. Consequently, as the “curse” of
dependency, the added this
voice is quite often forced to deviate from those very rules and norms upon Example 221
which the essence of the independent cantus-firmus melody was founded.
Accordingly, the postulate of melodic fluency itself (which, as noted, is the
primary requirement in the added voice just as in the cantus firmus) can,
under certain circumstances, cause the added voice to violate the prohibition
of tone-repetition— that is, simply to repeat a tone— in order to maintain the
same pitch level purely for the sake of the melodic line.
The unison of the opening bar, incidentally, can itself necessitate a tone- et at the same time we
:??: seefrom this example that Albrecht
repetition in the second bar, since the unison thereby is assured the eminent: has no compunction at all about allowing voice-crossing even t
advantage of a departure by oblique motion (§16); for example: exercise.

!?' •
Bellemann, on the other hand, rightly criticizes a similar
Example 220 voice-crossing at the
cadence itself (p. 145):

c. f.
,
-This must always be avoided at the cadence, however, unless
itself has to make a larger ascending leap immediately before
||
cases are rare, however; for example;
S?

Example 222

How many such tone-repetitions may be allowed to occur in succession,

however, can be decided only by the conditions present in the given cantus
firmus and the line of the added voice. Perhaps not even a threefold repetition
could be called the absolutely ultimate permissible limit.

Albrechtsberger teaches (p. 24); 'The added voice in two-voice setting may remain
stationary for at most three bars (even
and even here the added voice can
if the meter is only two-quarters alia breve, or easily be led in such voices
need not close in inverted position:
three-quarters or three-halves alia breve), because of the static melody.” But when he
moreover adds to this, “The fasto so/o in settings of three and more voices is exempt
from this rule,” he unfortunately expresses in far too naive a manner an idea that in Example 223
flp ff
is

itself indisputably correct. The reason for this naivete, however, is that he neglected
to present the necessary intermediate stages in reasoning, as they have been treated
more fully in the text preceding, in §§25 and 26. I am afraid that he was unaware of
them.

§27. b) The license of voice-crossing §28. On modulation and cross-relation

(

{Tlirough the incorporation of the

As a rule, the added voice keeps to its place through the whole course of an added voice
exercise — that is, either always above or always below the cantus firmus. Yet
|he first time a harmony can be brought to life
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

if we harmony expressed in the horizontal direction, naturally could

disregard 67
not yet happen in the melody of the cantos finnus alone). And this in turn
automatically enables us to incorporate modulations with relatively greater
clarity than was possible in the cantus firimis (Part 1, Chapter 2, §22).
It remains nonetheless true even in two-voice settings that a modulation

must never be produced by means of a chromatic inflection; 50 this would give

rise to either a chromatic progression on the one hand, or the effect of a

mixture of modes or of a chromatic modulation on the other, depending on

whether the chromatic tone were used in one and the same voice [as its
diatonic counterpart], or only in the other voice. But all of these effects must,
as established in Part 1, Chapter 2, §4, appear inadequate and overly vague
in these exercises; they are therefore prohibited.
If, is indeed correct when it moves as shown
accordingly, a modulation
by the Albrcchtsberger excerpt cited in Example 133, it is on the contrary '
Bl> minor: lit] -
-vte i til
incorrect if it includes voice leadings such as the following:
to Eb minor: V

Example 224 JTie firs bar of this example exhibits a cross relation by reason of
a chromatic
gjiciza mn-proc^s which is made to turn back
on itself! the
|lme itself (e —gb c ), as an initially chormatically — raised
!
of the melodic
third of II in Bb
^nunor, juxiaposed with the diatonic
third Eb (incidentally appearing
in three
3 e d egree
( Concernin g the resulting interval of a ’

diminished third e -gb'T| l

in the melody, compare Part
1, Chapter 2, §8!)
In such cases, at least a mixture must be assumed, if not an actual chromatic
lit-
*
3 P U Ct of the chromatic modulation that occurs
in the second bar of
L
modulation. |he example, the tones A (as third of V in Bb minor)
,

and A> (as seventh of V

The chromatic inflections that regularly characterize these latter situations ,^mtb minor) are juxtaposed in the manner of a cross-relation.
are called (inharmonic) cross-relations,
and therefore the limits on any 7 Aj*nek r’ enti,ied “V™
freedom of modulation can perhaps be expressed most trenchantly simply by tenfwd Tonartn
'
”
’
»”
*“»ts modulation
fr? among
den musikalischen Ceschlech-
other things; as a result of misun-
the prohibition of all cross-relation of this kind. a
derstanding,
, u
however, deals only with modulation in it

Thus the concept of cross-relation, to formulate the results definitively,

includes only the case of chromatic progression
different voices; completely excluded from the concept
distributed
is
between two
not only chromatic
o S°; sir
l

overlwIkerfthat^Xlbuechi
d
psa e ch
ap P h
free composition (symphony
e,
work)> so the op,nions set f° r,h
,

r
on *° contrapuntal study (It should
t
counler Pomt as par. of an actual
r r‘
,here
no, be
“introduction
f‘
««

progression used in a single voice, but also the juxtaposition of

tritone; cf. §18 above).
F and B (the
n&2
cln hi
Km
} are 00

;
0, hand ,he s,a,ement
V°7 7 7 ,0 modulation in thebexercises
T^di^tly
y Albrechtsberger quoted
of eou, Jpom.
,S "* by "" f“" d8mMal ,a!ts

In no piece should one modulate to keys other than those

contained in the scale
composition has urgent need of mixture and of chromatic
Just as free
modulation, however, the cross-relation that derives from them becomes in A !i
,' ITT
"7
kCyJ
'

7’ ai,d
a r ° f,C C3n m0dula,e 10 "°
,0f ’
than
mm0t ’ and in the latter modulations], one
^ o^r
major,
must
C
take
like measure not merely r°
h 1
a “tolerated license’’ but a fully justified necessity. UP n
° f| F ° nly in Passin 8. because the Bo
Many examples that incidentally happen to illustrate cross-relation ap-
which .1 , T obliterates
contains completely the idea of the principal key
7 [kCy

(whose
S 35
peared already lit Harmony; these include the following (all from Harmony):
‘

(
‘ hC iead,n S t0ne of D
'

directly
conlmdch“,l
contradicts the principal key'o “It
One can also modulate to F. minor, but tins key
Kxarnple 72, fourth bar, third and fourth quarters; same example, sixth bar,
because of die FP and D*. must
second and third quarters; Example 79, first and second (!) bars, and later be of even shorter duration
fifth than the
modulations mentioned above. The
key of B is completely forbidden,
and sixth (!) bars; Example 84, third and fourth (I) bars; and so on. fih must be raised. In A
since its
minor, one can modulate to C
Accordingly, major and, m passing,
1 can limit myself here to a single example:
aorearTrw
appear,
°
but B major
—
° m,n0r; U,c kc * of E """or can also
is 77
completely prohibited, just as in C major.
168 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT 169

A-. of these modulations art natural and analogous to the principal key.
Practice and reflection provide the means to use them appropriately and with
good effect, and to shape them so as to form a beautiful whole.

So far Cherubini. In a Kvmpnsitiomlehre

all of this would perhaps be appropriate;
in contrapuntal theory, on the other hand, it is appropriate only to the extent that it
is not put forward as instruction directly applicable to
Such an agglomeration of ^serious
'

the teaching of counterpoint, «

b Cherubini! Simply because
mistakes by
exercises of suict the
bin is intended merely as an excursion into the realm of free composition. counterpoint must aitogeiwject
nuximei'chminafic
, . modulation,
and diminished and augmented
Another severe f.aw m Cherubini's ticatincnt is that he fails to recognize all
octaves— il would have been up to1

Cherubini to state
cross-relations as what they really are —
specifically, modulation by means of mixture or
the very reason for these
prohibitions! —
mu;it free composition, in turn, also forgo
them
for that reason? Why?
chromatic inflection. he regards cross-relation as simply a relation to he
Instead, Just for the sake of consistency?
Is it not still more
' consistent
conceived m an absolute sense and at the same time to be condemned in an absolute
if free composition, •
which is i just as entitled to use dissonant
passing tones as strict
sense. We read on p. 8, under “Remarks on the Seventh Rule":
counterpoint, motivates, under the
' ' ,*
, .
, T
—
same rubric [° f passing tone], also
chromatic
progressions—•to ,
t which free composition has indeed inherited
Relation sigmnes the immediate affinity that exists between two sounds, succes- a new, independent right
(cf. Part 1, Chapter
2, §4)? (Compare Examples
>30, 31, etc.)
sive or simultaneous. This affinity is considered according to the nature And why, then-to respond to Cherubini’s
of the
interval formed by the two sounds, so
Example 20 [Example 227 of the present
that the relation shall be true when the text]— , when sor- many ;
new motivations enter the picture, should
interval is true; false the interval Wagner, for example,
it is if is diminished or augmented. False hesitate to write the following:
relations inharmony are considered to be those in which the two sounds do
not belong to one and the same key. The diminished or augmented octave is
a false relation in melody as in harmony, however it may be used The
disagreeable effect it produces may be mitigated, but not entirely eliminated.
Example 229
The use of this interval is, therefore, absolutely prohibited [in melody]:
Wagner. Tristan und Isolde, Act

Example 226
Ex. 19
false relation of the diminished and the augmented octave

Would it not on the contrary have to be

criticized
jail of the reasons he had to write as
he did in this
This way of writing— that he had avoided it eve
is, if
sale of strict counterpoint, which can by no me:

Theic however, more recent composers

exercises? (Compare also Harmony,
are. who allow themselves the following §53ff.)
Finally, it should be remembered that
usages: Cherubi:
cross-relations the tritone, which is addressed more
the present chapter.
Example 228
But let us read further:
Ex. 21

II I i

There is yet another situation ,n which one can a.nvc at a false relation in the
harmony between two different chords; for example:
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

Example 230

IE: Cadence

§29. Construction of the cadence

Example 231
Ex. 23
Like the cantus firmus,
the melody
in turn use for the purpose
of its o'
leading tones. This
automatically :

formulas must be used:

Example 233

I he tone C in the upper voice of the

first chord of the first example
sounds
bad in relation
the C|f of the lower voice in the second
to
chord; that is
indisputable for every trained ear, and it is easily
proven for the intellect by the ,4 nese formulas are necessary if parallel octaves
tact that these two tones belong to
completely different chords, which stand in rom the possible use of
the same leading tone in
no close relationship to each other, and that the added voice.
they cannot be placed in such
direct succession without striking the
F °r
There
ear as unpleasant.
however, a simple method of eliminating
is,
this difficulty-namely, by
M ,
,he abov e cadential formulas,
cadence,'
which have
inserting another note, so that the
^. I prefer the term
contrapuntal cade
voice which (in the above illustration, for they have taken on
;

this form only under the

example) has sung C
itself introduces C# in advance,
or causes the impression .leading
infli

ol C to disappear by means of such

itself, and, indeed, that of the
an inserted note, for example: interval of
called the primary ingredient of
melodic fluency,
Example 232 Another form of cadence,
however, such as the
gf/
Ex. 24
Example 234
A or thus:

u,1 n
Ihiougn and other palliatives, the unpleasant impression
ibis
of false
.

one hand V 6
er vo,ce > substituting the
it
,

thus offends against the

interval
contrapuntal
relations can be weakened and the ear made accustomed to
them, because the e as the inevitable
penultimate tone of the melody
impression then is not so immediate; in
the strict style, however, such cases ys all too clearly the
should always be avoided. traces of a purely harmonic
[ression V— I. Precisely for this reason,
however in
How little the utilitarian value of all this in free 11 cadenc s introduced here
composition, and how superfluous for the first time, the
f
iay be called the harmonic cadence, a
designation

— ~mr~ ir
m TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

that gives far better orientation concerning

its essence than the formerly
common nomenclature '‘full cadence.” The harmonic cadence is therefore to
be banned from two-voice counterpoint, and should not be
strictly
admitted
before the study of three-voice counterpoint is taken
up. Even there, it should
be used only when the two leading tones are otherwise
present in the cadence
and thus pay proper tribute to the spirit of voice
leading: such is the
immutable adherence of counterpoint— indeed, without exception
in the realm
of its exercises— to the purely contrapuntal law of the leading
tones, a law that
counterpoint never sacrifices!
From the above arguments, finally, it can be inferred that a succession
such as the following: ’JM

Example 235

can be called neither a contrapuntal nor a

harmonic cadence: even thei|ff
involvement of the one leading tone in the upper voice is
insufficient, as can i
be seen, to allow this interval succession to be subsumed
under the concept !
of cadence at all. ttm :

Fromthe tendency to maintain constantly in exercises

above all the vocal I
foundation, it follows that the cadential form 3 — 1 is incontrovertibly-i
preferable to the form 10 — 8: -
J
Example 236

3 1 10 8

And it must not be overlooked that a closer relationship between the voices
is always more suitable to the character of a cadence as such than
the more \
distant relationship of tenth and octave.
%
However, those who attend less closely to the spacing of voices may, in -’l
any case, also employ the form 10 8. — :i?

Regarding Albrechtsberger, compare the quotation in §23 of the present chapter. !

In his exercises, he freely uses the formulation 10 — 8 along with the others.
Bellermann states (p. 145):

The cadence involving a tenth and an octave

in (he exercises, since
is not good and should be avoided

one should take care especially at the cadence that the

M
voices stand in a pleasing relationship to each other, and that the
tenth, as the
maximum distance between two voices, be used only in passing in the main
:|§
body of an exercise. : :i'M
 i 74 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The First Species: Note Against Note
175
Example 237 continued
sixths or the like in a forced manner. Bars 5 and and likewise bars 8
Albrechtsberger, p. 32 ” NITS",0 B
“IT
e!P<!C '
«
y "“ eSSful
S
(rf 18 rfl
mk,Ure ° f perf“*
P— Phapto).
6,

Soprano
Lso°a'c^ <** 8) »4 imperfect

* 5 3 6 6 3 3 6 3 8 3 6 3 10 6 8
Alto (c f.)
gTbe progress.cn 3 - 8 m
#=1 c= —7r~ 1
1
the same bars, however, is not a cadence (cf. Part 2, §§23
:ti i-o-l ° 0 1 I.I. —^ 11

—
...1 1 1 ,

6 6 6 10 10 6 6 6 10 10 10 8 10 8 If
Tenor
o tv
r°— *N
---
H. Schenker
Soprano
r:ss^rsa*-
^~==:'!rrres£irtr£=:
=;s
1*

,h ,!ap * Wl “^
U
535633666
b'
;
s amtoi5lj3^^rf^^^<^“^ 2 l ^
'

°
tv .ha, of

8 8
Alto (c. f.)

3 6 3 3 8 10 5 3 3
Tenor
«•»
,

H. Schenker (c. f. by Fux)

Soprano

11 .
Alto
866
(c. f.)
10 663 6
Hki' meft

12 .
Tenor
8 10 66 10 68 63 ,
3 ?"v|&
>n mmm-
faH
Comments on the Preceding Exercises

No. 1. Fux uses fifths in bars 4 andy?, since they came about so naturally throughf^_
contrary motion in the fluent line of the melody; under such favorable linear'.’
£$||
circumstances as he achieved here, he preferred not to avoid the fifths perhaps by||fs[ m
 The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 177
(a) The requirement of stepwise
Chapter 2
§3.
motion to the dissonance

£'
aCed “ - ^out a„ y
The Second Species: Example 238
ild

Two Notes Against One

Tcan easily happen that a relationship of a

General Aspects harmonic nature will be heard
'-lUn d,S S ° nanCe a nd
Of the f ,
‘ he two tones set
downbeat (those ^ the following
firmUS and the counterpoint)^
S
Downbeat and upbeat relationship (known in free
§/. I mno,
P n as anticipahon)
.

ifr
M° unwelcome entity of awhich injects into strict counterpoint
^roughly UnterP ° mt 3
a
melodic-harmonic nature.
This species teaches how two notes in the counterpoint (specifically two 1 pUr as at c, it is enigmatically made clear to the ear that given
half-notes) may be set against one note of the cantus firmus. the tone
This automatically necessitates for the first time a discrimination of two"'
distinct beats. -

The called the downbeat, the second the upbeat. This nomenclature
first is
M ‘Example 239
is derived from the act of beating time, in which the first beat, called strong, '

is indicated by a downward motion of the hand or baton, and the second ^

beat, called weak, by a rising motion. From this point of view, it is certainly j

better to translate the old term “thesis” as “downbeat” and “arsis” as “upbeat" h
rather than vice versa.

Fux

Before
writes (p 74);

1 begin to explain this species of counterpoint, it must be known that

'.f
g|is latter case, it is

z
also the two-voice texture

—-
that fails-and within the

,he

now we are dealing with a twofold temporal organization, in which the measure unified configuraUonsband'
.
f
then obviously
. MtwaMo 'tbe'arlificiaf
or bar consists of two equal parts; the first of these corresponds to downward it goes against the grain of
|§ counterpoint, at least within the
motion of the hand, and the other to upward motion. The downward motion m '?eStS ’ 3 dissonance "t3ctic that
is called thesis in Greek, the upward motion arsis; we will use
these two words I ifeVlndeT leads to effects

in tins study

Better man n (p. 150) uses the terminology arsis and thesis in the opposite sense; fur
his reasons, see Belletmann, p 2 (footnote)

lZ r: “"a'™
“ ^ “
V UCa| -1Um0niC
*-* dissonances Che,
§2. The dissonance on the upbeat

From what was said in Chapter

1 about the requirement of consonance in
|
strict countei point, obvious that the downbeat must be consonant. This %<?,
it is

postulate continues to be satisfied, it is true, if the upbeat too is consonant. 1

But the latter can also, under certain circumstances, present a dissonance
|
against the cantus firmus. A
176
1/0 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
179
The second used in this way (cf. Part I, Chapter 2, §16) establishes truly
complete neutrality from tone to tone, in that it contributes just as little of
harmony to the tone that follows as to the one that precedes. For since it

relates to both just as a dissonance,cannot possibly maintain a harmonic

it

relationship to even one of the surrounding tones. And finally, along with this,
the second provides an especially happy fulfillment of the postulate of melodic
fluency. What better solution could be found?
Thus it came to pass that long ago, in consideration of the attendant
benefits for both harmonic neutrality and melodic fluency, the basic principle
was established: the dissonance on the upbeat may be introduced only by step.

To leap either into or away from the dissonance on the upbeat is

therefore — to formulate this law also in widely used schoolbook terminol-

ogy — not permitted under any circumstances.

§4. ( b) About the direction of the stepwise motion

To judge only on the basis of the foregoing considerations, however, it would

certainly be only consistent to approve also the following solution to our
problem:

Example 241

since here, just as in Example 240, the dissonance on the upbeat still appears Example 242
only in passing. But the two consonant tones surrounding the dissonances are : ^. Couperin, Pieces de Clavecin: Troisifeme
]pns), ed. by J. Brahms and F.
identical; this unfortunately has the obvious disadvantage that all three tones Chry sander
enter into a higher-level melodic unit, in that here the one tone C of the
counterpoint appears as though melodically unfolded. If this effect is to be
suppressed in the interest of the balance requisite for counterpoint, then one
must, as follows e contrario from the preceding, simply avoid returning to the
same tone, while otherwise adhering strictly to the principle of the passing
tone. Or in other words: The dissonance introduced by step on the upbeat
must also continue in the direction by which it entered.

§5. (c) The phenomena of the passing second and the neighboring note

The problem of the dissonance on the upbeat thus leads finally to the
following graduated set of solutions:
piC “ din* it is easy to differentiate the passing
second
thl ne Ik
^
1

S0_Ca,led Wechselnote
1. The first and most natural solution, which at the same time precludes accented passing
fs
§ K\HaShS P lace on *y in free composition.
all error, is that which demands of the passing tone a continuation in the
1
1 ke the
k C Zt
f,rst f
^tw ” ^P^’ ^presents ,
a dissonance enclosed
It,

same direction.
nances, except between two
that it occurs „„ the downbeat instead
of the upbea"
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

Example 243
passing second neighboring note accented passing tone

The scale of values of weak-beat dissonances established above is com-

pletely independent of time and fashion; it is therefore idle and childish to
cite —
just on the pretext of trying to write a "modern” theory of counter-

point— inclusion of the neighboring note as alleged evidence of an advanced

point of view. The effects depicted in the above scale remain the same through
all and are ranked only among themselves! And exactly at the cost
eternity,
of sacrificing the distinction, one can adopt sometimes a stricter standpoint'
(which excludes the neighboring note), sometimes a less strict (which includes;
——— -

it);but the possibility of such a choice merely emphasizes the differentiation: 5 TF

inherent in the problem, never any kind of “modernization" of it.
Unfortunately all previous treatises have neglected to provide a foundation;
for the principle of the passing second. Thus [often] a perfectly correct solution*
of the dissonance-problem that arises just here for the first time (admittedly!
gA^.'Can be seen, a seventh is taken by leap a 2
it is only one of several solutions) is worked out in a completely preemptive; pbeat. If one respects the principle
ppf eonsonance, and understands that such
tone, as a panacea. It is obvious that the student is ill served by such- leading [as in the above example]
pbeiongs only in the realm of free
composition,
cc which from the outset
instruction; but the teacher is also at a disadvantage in that
he himself does is co-determined
|by purely harmonic concepts, then 'n one can in no way excuse
not have a thorough understanding of the rule he adopts and teaches. Fori Fux just because of the
ifruly severe difficulty in
which he found himself. There is
when the time comes to decide whether the neighboring note or, finally, a no question that the tenor
sin the second bar had l ° reach D by
contrary motion if similar motion
still more remote solution like the accented passing tone should be permitted; g-terbe avoided; on the to a fifth were
f other hand, the tenor voice as
such (cf. Part 1, Chapter
in exercises, he simply lacks the security of any guiding principle. According KM not drop below C. So what’could
h d t0 take a different course
be done? Obviously the voice
2, §2)
leading would
to the above account, each solution with own much earlier if „_
its particular effect is clearly,
Pfe f
avoided at ,
the end.
such
w h an irregularity were
to be
circumscribed; and as I have said before, all that remains for the teacher is

to decide the outset, in consciousness and free of any individual whim, b ably ° niy ° bseSSed W ‘ th pursuit
at full i

T of a falsel V understood moder-

to favor either the strictest or a less strict position. Let each teacher and each;

E
ate Tnd
n
°f
°n
f
>
,hC
w r
m8 d,ssonance at the
^^
upbeat but also the neighboring

S^
student decide the matter as he wishes —so long as he understands just which
Xt“the
t f
y
; f
ou crim,na ‘ ing
d,ssonance
!.
upper and lower Af,er -

side he is taking. };$ unfortunately without providing

headLjp.
,t.onl-he adds 35): It lS
f
also permitted to enclose dissonances
,ustifica
(including augmented
d diminished ones) between two
Fux disposes of the problem, without providing further justification, as follows occurrences of the same tone, [both of /which must

no dissonance may occur, except by

indifferences ofTT, effect. In fact,
• •"
< examp,es follow,; but he makes no

Albrechtsberger freely uses neighboring

note as well
refcrin« ere o
In this species l ° nes
««*«.
two notes a third apart, e.g.:
filling the space between
f 77 *1 h,s as if use of the former in contrapuntal
medy the same effect as that of the strict passing setbngs had
dissonance. Such a practice, however
ignores actually present
Example 244 distinctions as though they
simply did not exist makes
^and .udgment ever duller; for the ear
neglects to discriminate propeb
Fux II, 21 diminutio amonl
effects that are in themselves
differentiated, whereby a blurring
execution necessarily arises in
sameness goal
g and m
the exercises.

SmlileTZ
tpm ti,c true
AlbrCCh,
7' r8Cr ~ a,,d f ° r ,hat reason farther removed
goal of contrapuntal
,
instruction-, Cherubini teaches on „ 1 1

diminutio
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT ^he Second Species: Two Motes Against One
ff-f. )

^/.Notc well that this can be done only as

seldom, and then only when it is not otherwise possible to avoid faults of a indicated here, and that the passing
^•dissonance u not to he confused will,
different kind, such as those that cause an excessively disjunct melody arid the the neighboring note.
latter term The
, .
likewise
signifies dissonance on the weak beat;
like. The weak beat can bear either a consonance or a dissonance, provided that however, this dissonance docs
m °Ve a bead
the latter stands between two consonances and the melody that
Such a dissonance is called passing.
it forms is fluent: W ro
"
k ,
lhe samc d cct, °n. but returns to
'[
£.;.vP 8 rcsscs hy a foreign interval, such as:
5
the first tone or sometimes

In this rule, then, passing dissonance, neighboring note, and even accented passing: :
Example 247
lone he side by side, and no further discrimination or justification indicates how
different these concepts are! But this much is clear in any case: Cherubini’s textual
presentation includes the neighboring note, and he thus proceeds to use it freely in
the exercises. But the most astonishing thing in Ins discussion is the inclusion of even'
the accented passing tone in the exeiciscs of strict counterpoint. Compare his ex-
ample 45:

Example 246 Thc composers of the sixteenth century

j,; knew this type of dissonance as well,

I
®b
T^ b, ‘

even then only rarely.

lhey “ scd 11 only 10 quicker note-values
— quarters and eighths-and
p
I| ? n
,'
he facl ha * Bellermann, like his predecessors, fails to provide
any

Whoever cannot
tfitZinp i
IZhtstond'Zd
^uUhe second and Th'T
thud examples,
e
r u
with
,|
ic
i C
|
° the pass,ng sec ° nd ’ he corr,mits- besides* ,he
f

ncep,
,'
he neighborm S no,e in ,hal he
confuses
believe that this is nothing but a lamentable, serious misundet-: the anticipation. Bellermann’s
.
reference to
standing on Cherubini’s part concerning the purpose of contrapuntal doctrine need compositional practice of the sixteenth

only read the following remark of his, which concerns the example cited above;
^ a °" 8 Wl,h
century would have to be considered
he could have seen his way clear to
'

remark that the effects

I

beat
could have proceeded differently, but by placing the dissonance on the strong
I achieve a more graceful and pleasant melody, and that is sufficient reason
:
K?
IL
vet 8
\
t

onZhlTf
(
T
C,Pa “ 0n Cer ' ainly have been sou h t out in
h S ' S ,ruC ’ and must be
unfortunately we must conclude from
,
’
8 composition
Phoned
even in contrapuntal
ggy), his closing phrase that he sees in
to justify nonobservance of the
During the course of his studies, the student
rule.

will find many other cases in which he will want to take advantage of this

procedure. Incidentally, one can learn from this example how the counterpoint
ETST i
or other technical
ey COuld real!y be Suff,cien,ly
,
mo,,va * ed on a given occasion by
grounds, fundamentally only a license,
these

an infraction of the
must be constructed in conformity with the strictest rules of art if it is to conjoin
both pleasant melody and the style uniquely appropriate to this genre of
&T (
d a PP ar n,| y al1 ‘hat can comfort
|obs rvahon that^ U occurred
and reassure him about this infraction
"only in quicker note-values ...
and even then only
is the

"
composition. ISL
gnlury tn ,n TneraVT
general, only I
"
TS'”**
little opportunity and
'** free 00ro *« i * fa » of 'he sixteenth
equally little necessity for those
The contrapuntal exercise, with its modest resources, is supposed to inform the ear for thC,ef0t ' ,S C ° mple,e!y in P^ncipl/to approve
the first time about the manifold phenomena of the tonal world— for example, in this
.

ItZiaZsT
^Bellermann s thought process andi doctrine,
even though in other respects one
|

^concur with his position on the must

case, about passing dissonance, neighboring note, and accented passing tone. Now if: neighboring note.
we insist on immediately infusing it with what is called "style”; in other words, if we
represent the exercises as actual examples of a particular compositional genre and,
II §6. The psychological significance
citing necessities inherent in that genre, attempt to justify the violation of "rules” in
|
of the passing dissonance
them; in short, if we write actual compositions where we should instead learn to :

differentiate effects within the realm of an exercise constructed expressly that

consonance between two voices
j,If
for expresses most exactly their will
to belong
purpose, then the hodgepodge of concepts and principles undoubtedly reaches its apexl er 0 Peak- thC COmra ' tn,ent ,0 unity in the dissonance, ~
And almost suspect that Cherubini’s aberration, like that of Albrechtsberger, is
yet, 1
Iw p R Z.k
find the mark off an independence, albeit
l
conversely,
!

ffv only transient, of the one

again only the result ol an unfortunate delusion of modernism, which, as we have |wice in relation to the other.
already seen and will see often again, prevents the theorist from grasping what alone however, as in this case, the
If,
jg. dissonance remains bound for the
should he taught as the true task of counterpoint tunc
§ to the rather strict specification that it
bellermann (see >0 -151) was the to return to the strictness of Pux
:
'

must flow back into a con-

pp I first in its
g^oancc, and therefore can count only
as a path, or a bridge from
entirely, in keeping with iris preference lor transmitting the latter’s teaching. He the one
gfonsonance to the other, there is still
requires the dissonance to progress by step m the same direction, and explicitly
no danger whatever that such a
gKsenance m.ght destroy the unity of the
excludes the neighboring note with the following words: two voices. Rather, the transient
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

independence increases the value and power of the unity of the two, a unity 185
that was intended from the beginning and is indeed once again asserted.
Exactly in this situation we are provided a beautiful, deep insight into free
composition, which strives similarly to abstract the unity of its “scale degrees”
(see Harmony, §§82ff.)from the independence of many voices. The aesthetic
effect of this unity will be the more complete the more richly the indepen-
dence of the individual voices is constructed.
Elere in two-voice counterpoint, however, where the dissonance is intro-
duced for the first time, one should first learn to grasp its initial function,
and the prerequisites of that function. And one should not forget that, however
modestly the problem of dissonance here presents itself, in this beginning,
nevertheless, we greet the wellspring of countless beauties in free composition.
Thebasic moral of this problem, however, like that of the permissible
intervals in the first species (cf. Part 2, Chapter 1, accordingly runs as
§2),
follows:

In the beginning is consonance, that is, agreement!

Only after a consonance follows the and ultimately
antithesis, the dissonance,
agreement has the last word!
I hus dissonance, here as well, absolutely presupposes
consonance.
Consonance precedes, and only through its contrast with consonance does the
dissonance set itself off clearly!

As far as free composition is concerned, it emancipates the passing

dissonance from the postulate of the second, so that it is possible, as an
extension of the concept, to regard as passing dissonance even a dissonant
note that leaps between two points of a given definite harmony.
The construction, permitted and sought in free composition, of varied
harmonic entities leaves no doubt about the character of such passing tones,
no matter what kind of leap they execute.
Compare, for example:

Example 248
J. S.Bach, English Suite J. S. Bach, Organ Prelude and Fugue in C Minor
No. 6 (BMV 546)

Free composition solves in particular the problem of the passing dis-

sonance within the space of a fourth (in other words: not just within the space
of a third, as strict composition does)— indeed, in such a way that each of the
186 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 187
In free composition, the passing tone can even move in a direction Example 256
different from that of the two harmonic tones, for example: Handel, Suite in E Major

Example 253
J. S. Bach, Twelve Little Preludes, No. 12
•

* * * fBMk
mm
±
Ns =
i
£
—
i 9
£
== —P- s=
£
hhi|
J35J
Kmt

a = L
PEL
=
t

we find that the passing motion

dP~e 2
in the soprano is even interrupted
by another tone, so that the tone
dt 2 almost assumes the effect of a
neighboring note temporarily, at least
On this occasion we may recall that in early music— see J.S. Bach’s Suites, until the
appearance of e 1
.
Several other examples of
Handel’s keyboard works — the passing tones (even accented ones) were some- interrupted passing motion may be cited
here:
times not written out at all but only notated with a sign like this: O' (com-
6 Example 257
pare Harmony, Example 27 ).
R. Strauss, Till Eulenspiegels lustige
The innocent but charming passage shown in Example 254 illustrates Streiche

M
the highly delicate and fascinating effects that can be achieved by providing Violin I

Example 254
Schubert, Deutsche Tanze, Op. 33 No. 11

kuhhimpu
Wmmm
h = harmonic tone
p = passing

just the passing

it
m m
tone with a longer duration than the harmonic tone to which
resolves. In spite of many other secondary effects that catch our ear, the
m
,
The
Chapter
possibility of replacing smaller intervals

2, §17) leads in free composition to a

the next example, where a ninth

Example 258
Brahms, Piano Trio Op. 8, I
is
also with larger leaps
passing
used instead of a second.
(cf.

motion such as that

part

above example really has to be understood this way:

Example 255
mp
Gjt minor: I

The abbreviation common in free composition of two or more tonal

Free composition, furthermore, makes it possible also to interrupt the processes usually called ellipsis-leads, when applied to the passing motion,
passing motion. In the following example: to the following phenomena:
188 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 189

Example 259 he Urth ei ghth note is an °ther

,T
whether J?
v
: .
second-step; thus, the question
arises
R. Strauss, this step is only a passing
Till Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche motion or something else.
Fhe
Hv. T
1 eigh h n0te
pr0vides an answer since it is
! ; itself an
t0 "“
;

lea ' ily aeai " 0n '

appoggiatura
y 38 a " a " ,iCiPa
-’

We
(&
l
—
) g#
theg# as coming from an implied g that was omitted by ellipsis:
perceive
a17
—
1
l

Such occurrences may very well be called elliptical or directly

1
.

superimposed passing tones (cf. Harmony, example 264).

1 mentioned already in Harmony,
§164, that free composition, furthermore,
^ S'tTe
SeVe " ,h eighth -" 0les

“S^ !z^ a
sh0W a Sain

lie>
lh <=

sserab,aee of
— • situation a, the

,he sign of ,he keyboard -

efcts
por -

-
Example 262
has the power of suddenly changing, if necessary, the character of dissonant
passing tones first that
appear as simple passing tones. Therefore, the
portamento based on anticipation (cf. Part 1, Chapter 2, §17) in many cases
is nothing but a second which originally has the effect of a
passing note.
Compare with Examples 116 and 117 in the cited paragraph also the following
illustration:

Example 260
Schubert, “Der Kreuzzug” Jln
iS C
r pecjally in°?u
eXt °" e hou d al
! / “
“ndy the fluctuation of such passing
tones
the ana from Beethoven’s Piano
Sonata op. 110

allS 777T
S alS ,ici
P ali »" s -"’«t of them even involving
° f
S wruiTm
steps of
“ haV '" 6 lhC ni,iai
'
aPPearanCe ° f a passi "S tone as —
Example 263
Liszt,
Rhapsodic hongroise No. 1

The first eighth-note of the uppermost voice is an appoggiatura to f# 1

.

The second eighth-note is the harmonic tone, the fundamental of the

chord itself, which appears here in inversion as a £-chord.
The third eighth-note brings once again the same tone /"#; our perception
subsequently interprets the tones in retrospect in an entirely different way, as
here: SXrffid sic whole maiody,) and ’

Example 261 Example 264

R. Strauss, Till Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche
suspension-resolution
initially: subsequently: Vln. I

b)

susp. susp. antic, res.

and understands the second eighth-note only as portamento anticipation of

the third eighth-note, as shown at b.
190 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Second Species: Two
(observe in the Notes Against One
first violin the original sign of a genuine violin portamento 191
3 2
between d and c ).

By presenting also complete chords only in passing, incidentally, free

composition gives the concept of the passing dissonance its maximum expan-
sion. [See Part 6, first section, especially §§7, 10.]
As far as the neighboring note is concerned, even strict counterpoint, as
we shall see in Chapter 5, uses both neighboring notes, the upper and the
lower, in direct succession; this occurs at however, only as a means of
first,

resolving suspensions, whereby the first neighboring note is [actually] not so

much a neighboring note as, rather, the dissonant suspension itself. Aside from
suspension-resolutions, free composition creates, from the intent and possibility of
forming larger melodic units, a great number of reasons to provide the principal
tone with both of its neighboring notes (that is, the upper and lower seconds). The
order within these groupings can take various forms, as illustrated in the follow-
ing discussion.
We saw already in Example 77 how both neighboring notes occurred
between the principal tones in the following order:

1 2 3 4 previous exampleb
In addition^
’ OCCurs (c ™P-e
Main Tone— Up per Neighbor— Lower Neigh bor— Main' Tone ** Ca
independent melodic
principal tone folio
units as though fn ? 7 braci<eted Passages

a ^ as
the
d wb e tbe latter ,one ayZ

^^
In the following example we see an even independently of its ’ *

larger melodic unit: neighboring™! .

k .

continuation a passing-tone^ * by Vir ‘ Ue of lhe

qualitv ev^“
Example 265
figurescited here is
passage, bars 40ff. in
the bass.)
t & b?
V res ng because the
y
effect
a PPear in a
° f the
later
Handel, Suites de pieces, 2nd collection, No. 1, Air with Variations, Var. IV
§
in two or more voiced
in general.
is d ue t0 ^77^77
to the free number of voices
030 ° CCUr simu,tane
in free
°usly
composition
Here is an example for neighboring notes in
thirds:

Example 267

which contains, in addition to the two neighboring notes of the principal tone
e 2 , also the harmonic tone a\

1 2 3 4 5
Main Tone— Upper Neighbor—-Lower Third— Lower Neighbor— Main Tone

And how ingenious Mozart is in constructing the neighboring notes in the

following figures:

t"
eiehbo " nB -
192 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One
Most recently it has been Richard Strauss who could compose neighboring Example 271
notes conceived even in four voices in a most masterful way:
Wagner, Das Rheingold,
Scene 3
Example 268 (Rhine-maidens)
R. Strauss, Till Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche

h
hin : ih
e ig
heard only as neighbors
of G and R ih /
^; A (tar
undoubtedly should be
>

* .0 be perceived sim,larl
y _i„deed, as a configurata

Example 272

- “r
Example 273
:
nly
- - >* of

present only the V of F major throughout. Instead, one may give the concept
of the neighboring note its due even in such an application as this, without
finding it an obstacle that the four-voice neighboring note is composed
out by means of a motive. (Incidentally, Strauss attempted in the same
composition — miniature score, p. 18, bars 1-4 — a similar, even more dar-

ing experiment, which in my opinion, however, is a complete failure, since re

the harmony B-D-F#-At> (or G$) placed between the harmonies is e" COmraen,S 0n ,he
much too remote for voice-leading reasons alone (the B of the bass moves to
neighboring-note harmony,)
AfeSr'as Sf latto in his MusikalUche
F) to be perceived either as a modulation or as a

By the same token, one should avoid hearing

anything but neighboring-note harmonies:
in the following passages
,
[ttaS wZMTtgFV "r forma,ions: fct —
Example 270 ...»
Schubert., Winterreise, “Friihlingstraum” ss;
5 ,tfh^„ P
d
hC W° M h <0 become

LTrjnwir

m
m Harmony, §63: “How easv
when one \Lnbad\yr
' it is ir
‘° f k
fabri “ te
1C

|
‘

and ^
muSt rcpeat my r «nark
o f music
194 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 195
Highly stimulating is the study of neighboring notes in Beethoven’s Piano
Beginning
Sonata op. Ill, Arietta, Variation No. 4 (&), particularly in the triplet figures
of the right hand. §7. Construction of the beginning
The following example shows how, finally the accented passing tone
Harmony §167) is used in free composition.

igpsssass
(

Example 274

smmsssss
Chopin, Prelude Op. 28 No. 24

Here the passing tone c

2
(within the space of the fourth d2 —u 1

)
is frozen as
an accented passing tone on the strong beat.
Or another, even more daring example:

Example 275
Mozart, Symphony No. 40, Andante Main Body

Variety in treatment

“
§8.
of the upbeat

,rnPOr,am
I* nS0nances or P erha s only
whether
P d!ssonances
p throughout. If the latter of r

Here the accented passing tones (see the asterisked notes) do not enter freely,
as one might believe, but represent passing tones of the most regular kind:
One need only extend the fifth eighth-note of each bar beyond the eighth-
note rest to the first eighth-note of the subsequent bar to perceive clearly and
immediately the underlying passing character of the accented notes even
(Compare the same figures later, bars 88, 89, 92, and 93!)
here.
ISSIS
§9. Spacing of the two voices

AlbrechtsbeTger mentions on p. 17 “cast-out” notes (

notae abjectae) and defines
them thus: “A cast-out note is a tone that occurs as a leap in passing, but which does
not belong to the chord; for example:”

oAem "Str rf a,ion of the vocai principie

and »«<*>«

ass*
Example 276

£-r f
196 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

It has been discussed already in Part 2, Chapter 1, §24 that larger leaps,
especially the sixth (the minor sixth in particular, cf. Part I, Chapter 2, §15)

and the octave, under observance of the principle of melodic fluency, are best
suited to regulate the spacing of the voices and to separate them in those

instances where they have moved too close together.

In his exercises for the species under consideration, Fux unfortunately does not pay
too close attention to the spacing of the voices, so that all too often they go astray
into an instrumental idiom. I repeat that such inaccuracies, by necessity, only confuse
the study and the purposes that accompany it. See above (p. 162) for the quotation
concerning the sixth.

Albrechtsberger, too, unfortunately, pays little more attention [than Fux] to the
strictures of the vocal and solves his exercises mostly in an instrumental
principle,
manner, wherein the spacing between voices is of but little relevance for him.
Cherubini treats the leap of a sixth in a bit more mannered fashion than Fux, but
without any real reason. On p. 16, rule 7, he states: “In the first species of counterpoint
the leapwise progression by the minor sixth is permitted; in this second species it should
not be used unless the voices, because of the nature and pitch level of the given
melody, have moved too close together and there no other means to separate them,”
is

etc. And in an “Observation" concerning he says: “In the first species of

this rule,

counterpoint the leap of the minor sixth is in some measure prohibited, because this
interval, especially ascending, is more difficult of intonation than any other permissible
interval. This difficulty is amplified here because the notes of shorter duration allow

less time to prepare the intonation.” Cherubini's advice, formulated somewhat less

strictly, may hold good; it is exactly the quality of the cantus firmus and the contrapun-

tal line that may make it advisable to use the leap of a sixth or octave even in instances
where one or the other would have to be completely avoided according to the rules
of Fux or Cherubini. For it is not only the purely material distance between voices
that is a decisive factor, but also the aesthetic quality of the line, and this applies even
in the strictest writing technique!

§10. Use of the unison permitted on the upbeat

The unison, still entirely prohibited in the main body of the exercise in the
species discussed up to now (cf. Part 2, Chapter 1, §23), is on the contrary

permitted here — if not on the downbeat, at least on the upbeat — provided that
it can be continued in the most propitious way (that is, by stepwise motion
in the direction opposite to that of the leap), as here:

Example 277

Only Bellermann writes about this at length (pp. 152-53):

It is permitted to use the unison, completely disallowed in the previous species,

on the unaccented part of the bar; progression that otherwise would be faulty

can thus be rectified [examples follow]. One must always take care in using the
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One
Finally, I should point out that especially in this case particular caution Example 281
needs to be taken with respect to the so-called ottava battuta, of which we poor:
will learn in §12.

2. The relation of downbeat

to downbeat (see bracket 2) should, strictly

speaking, be completely exempted from the prohibition even of parallel

progressions, since it no longer represents an immediate succession of tones.
Nevertheless, the ear demands that the prohibition —exactly this constitutes a
new extension of its range of application! — has to be respected to a certain
extent in this case as well. For it becomes evident that under certain
unfavorable circumstances [the progression from] downbeat to downbeat,
despite the intervening note on the upbeat, nevertheless sounds almost exactly
like a direct succession of parallel octaves or fifths —so strong is the connection
made by the ear between both downbeats. In other words: the poor effect of
parallel motion manifests itself so strongly here that it cannot be made
tolerable to the ear even by the intervention of a third note. In particular,
[the leap of] a third at the upbeat turns out to be an interval much too small
and unassuming to be able to banish completely the bad impression of
parallel motion from downbeat to downbeat: —will be discussed later on under 3.
Finally, since the prohibition
Example 279 of parallel motion extends only under special
° ,h l
*•»*» ‘he downbeats, and such
ions are in prmc.plet a lowed-that since the prohibition must
is,
cease to
m0r rem
reUl 0nsh ips - il is self-evident that maparallel
similar
motion from
fi- !l u
downbeat
! L
to downbeat is generally permitted
° f UPbea ‘ 10 pheat (see b " cta 5 >’ w h‘ c h again does not
constitute
°?
Only a larger leap, for example that of a fourth, is capable of removing
W th
trfc he
,
Jl T“T unpleasant only T'
!

,f several
Parallel 0CUvK hfthb and unisons
.

of them occur in succession

the impression of parallel motion by attracting the attention of the ear to its “ provo a ,on ° f lhe
'
however, the parallel motions in
? this
calecr r ‘rtf'
own greater significance. For that reason possible to admit parallel motion e a ‘erbeat Para " el ° C,aves
from downbeat to
it is

downbeat, provided a leap larger than a third is used [after

ouhc W
tol^hf ,h ^ nonpam,UI similar ""'on
’ fifths- a " d unisons — are
of any restriction
the first downbeat]. Se[er
Two things, however, are not to be overlooked: that the tone on the It is worth noting, however, that
first, more advantageous by far in the case
it is

upbeat, which has the function of remedying parallel octaves between down- a nsh,ps ,f at leas ‘ the downbeats are free of parallel motions
!!°
tiiafmfeht'
beats, must occur only in contrary motion to the cantus firmus, since, for a8ai " " *° ‘ h ' prohibition (see
Example 282) above,
reasons stated under 1, one may not write as in the following example:
If I shed some light with a few examples already here, in continuation of
Chapto
Example 280
poor:
llmltTanTnT P 'n l*” V
S,milar mot, 0".
'•

I
§ 14 ' how composition treats
free
do so notwrthstanding that a more
*tailed
ta disc
led discussion in a special section will follow
later. [FrC., §§162-1641J
First, a prefatory remark:

in
Wlt ° Ut
f

ch texture ultimately contains

S
T g that ' deaS ' n freG com P° sition are expressed mostly
tW ° V0ices; nevertheless it may be noted
’ that any
aspects of two-voice counterpoint
as well
and, second, that because of the leap, no note may be used on the upbeat Ce nter int be ween h hesl
that is not consonant with the cantus firmus; thus, it is not permitted to write «e?r ,
justifies the citation
?°
iT
of examplesl f
;g lowest voice alone already
of free composition within a
section on
as in the next example: two-vo.ce counterpoint. (One should
not overlook, however, that
200 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

formore than two voices permits licenses to a considerably greater extent than
does two-voice counterpoint!) For example, the following ne * S so nch "ed octaves here, since they occur in
content: K°k e ,\
>
direct succession
0n °f
Example 283 jushfies r> IM octaves in this case,
u tifies the parallel ^ fint Category {bracket
however, in that the bass
4
Free composition
Brahms, Variations on a Theme by Handel Op. 24, Var. XXIII
D-r rr? C W th thC scal degree r°gress ion;

as obbligato bass movement

fl<!
‘f
'

VCS represent scale de r

P
progression
that is, the lowest tones
r
g ees to such an extent that their character
(obligater Bassgang) recedes into
the background
by comparison. Thus, it
follows that a voice
expressing tlTsSed^
drCumstances a,so P^it parallels exactly
for Ee°ason

example:
53 ^ rCaSOn “ f° r ^ Para ‘ le ‘ fifths ° f lhe followin g

Example 286
Mozart, Piano Trio K. 496 I

Vln.

Example 284

Here, too, it is permissible to speak of a direct

succession of fifths (bracket
one
j
ay disre8ard the composing out
* »h^™£
The connection between strict counterpoint and free composition can in
real

general be discovered only in reductions similar to the one just

quoted.
Finally, it should yet be emphasized that the special be darified
cases as indicated by
brackets on p. 197 do not manifest themselves quite so
exactly in examples
of free composition, but this should be expected in view of
the nature ofthe
G major: V— — (I
etc.

=
)
latter.
B ut if one wanted to avoid parallels such as proved
And now the examples. necessarv in the
Schubert writes: ,o

Example 285 Example 287

Schubert, Piano Sonata Op. Chopin, Prelude Op. 28
42, Andante poco moto >)
b) Beethoven, Pkno Son.,. Op. 27 No. 2,
202 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
fhe Second Species: Two Notes Against One 20 :
If we consider the following examples, which again seem to present parallel
octaves in direct succession:

Example 288

r Y7T "TT ^
e e n
Mendelssohn, Piano Concerto Op. 25,
?h

In the following two examples of antiparailels:

Example 290
Brahms, Symphony No. 4 I

Example 289
Mozart, Piano Concerto K. 482, I

Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 27 No.

2 I

these and similar octave-parallels are justified not only by the fact that the
bass also produces the scale degree itself (as in Example
288 in particular),
but also by the aspect of composing out, which carries even more
weight here.
I he last eighth-notes in both examples
are basically elements of the com-
3553
posing-out process and, therefore, represent only melodic detours
(cf. Part 1, ^b'raho'bVth?
4 but also by the considerations ^ ° nly by reaSOn ofscale - d
^es
and of bracket
Chapter 2, §18), so to speak, that can easily be omitted; after the detours are mentioned in connection with
Example
eliminated, however, only nonparallel similar motions remain— specifically,
from the first eighth-note of the fourth quarter to the first eighth-note
of the
he m“dr
e
f
' l ,S

P “
ear
a8 '' "“I
antipaIaMs “
“ b='

n °‘ a WayS limiled as is
'
can occur Zt
Sieved,
fences done" '
to
next bar:
The masters avoid octave-parallels involving neighboring
notes even in free
CC
composition. They write, for example:
—g 1
and / ab 2 — bb 2
Example 291
d -G \f -bb.
a) J. S. Bach, Two-Part Invention b) Handel, Suites de pieces, 2nd collection,
These are progressions that are clearly justified in free composition, especially - ..
No. 1, Prelude

in composition for more than two voices. (Compare the Wagner

excerpt,
Example 182, and also Example 285.)
In the Mozart example, moreover, the principle takes effect
that a voice
of free composition can always abandon its character as an obbligato voice
and strike out along the path of mere doubling; in this latter function it likes
to join with another voice —
indeed, precisely in parallel octaves!

:-v.-
iliiSiiiMliiihili
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One
At a, there occurs on the second eighth-note in the bass the tone a instead the unifying spirit of the
scale d
of d\ and at b, Bb instead of eb. (Compare also Harmony, Example 200, A-C-E), then there is even less case, the harmony
where, at points marked with an asterisk, the neighboring note is avoided for downbeats 13 have thirds and octaves, when the
sixths,
the same reason as in Example 291, and the path to the tonic had to be taken
Another example:
instead.)

On Example 295
the other hand— if I may discuss this point here— the masters write
Brahms, Piano Sonata Op.
nonparallel similar motion to fifths without hesitation in the same situations 5, II

involving neighboring notes, for example:

Andante espressivo

Example 292
Handel, Suites de pieces, 2nd collection. No. 1, Prelude

Tux teaches (pp. 75-76):

Concerning nonparallel similar motions, however, their justification in
free composition is the more natural in that the composing out of should be noted, then, that
It
harmonic the leap of a third
concepts and the elaboration of latent polyphony (compare pp. 59 and 63) nor *two successive octaves,
successive fifths re:
because the note [which]
the upbeat in such 3 Way occurs on
,s re arded as if
already lead to them of necessity. Here are two additional examples: « it were not present;
such a note, as a consequence r
of shortness of duration and
thus, because
limited space, cannot
communicate the interval in such
Example 293 l 3 Way that the ear f
ails to recognize
relationship of two successive rf7"‘ ,
•
• the
J. S.Bach, English Suite No. 6, Handel, Suites de pi&ces, 2nd collection, j ... fifths and octaves.
It is
different in the cas
Prelude No. 1, Air with Variations, Var. Ill case of a leap that contains
a larger space-for example,
the fourth, fifth, and sixth
1 sinc< there
Wl the distance from the first note to the
second has the effect that the ;
”• has, in a
* ear manner of speaking, already
016 ^ ^ downbeat by the
-

arrivai of the
-
c

second note, likewise on the

forgotten

downbeat.

F X n me " lions tha t nonparallel similar

„ I. ,T
remedied L me
by the leap of a fourth (cf.
Table III Fig,
*
baSiCa ly SU erfluous
P since was
A/T’ r, l
> it sel’f-evfdent.

ocuves, since they afton, ™„'

y „ ^ “

™
—
the teachers mentioned
previously, but he is verv much inrlin«l t .

*“ .o
sLir a,,d oc,aves ,nd

y proachable licenses T
in
° f aVOi,iin8
two-voice counterpoint by
the
fifths “d
strict
™
“-idered
masters of old
”
LJ i
bTon
' it ^2 rT"?* °pmi

f
d
1
,w°
b y * nterven n notes, whatever
g '
they
It

•v'V —
206 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 207
I conclude from this that the above method [of avoiding octaves and fifths] hand, to a much
stronger degree, for reasons that have to do less with
the
should be used only in case one writes for more than two voices or in rare
octave than with voice leading. The poor effect is essentially
itself
instances where one cannot find a different solution. softened at
c in that here the upper voices as well at least
1 have made all these remarks and examples concerning the avoidance of progresses by step from the
upbeat to the downbeat, but at d it protrudes more strongly
octaves and fifths for the purpose of demonstrating the insufficiency of the rule because the upper
voice moves by a larger leap.
rather than proving that they really can be avoided [by such means]. The rule,
which I prefer to regard as falsely attributed to the old theorists, is nevertheless This poor effect at d can be defined in the following way: our ear perceives
not entirely without value and can occasionally serve a useful purpose. the melody as too peculiar and individual, because the leap A to D occurs
in the soprano.
The basic error, however, that leads Cherubini to such strictness is again the fateful
First, every modestly musical ear senses that, instead of
confusion of counterpoint and free composition. What role does tempo play in the the actually chosen
exercises of strict counterpoint? Isn’t the principal goal here to explore tonal effects in path, a simpler and more natural way would have led here to the same
goal,
relation to their causes, without concern for tempo and rhythm? And isn’t this purpose such as:

served if the ear is made aware of the fact that, in the case of two octaves on successive
Example 297
downbeats, it makes a difference whether a leap of a third or a fourth is used on the
intervening upbeat? Even Cherubini couldn't ask more of the theory of counterpoint.
Another error of Cherubini’s is that he obviously considers it implicit in the rule itself
that the prohibition of parallel octaves and fifths extend also to downbeats under all
circumstances. But this is not the case. The extension of the prohibition to tones that
do not occur in direct succession is, on the contrary, an exceptional situation caused
Two-voice counterpoint, however— and this must be stressed—
only by the special circumstance of the third-leap; in case the latter does not occur, is unable to make
us understand why, instead of the simpler and
the prohibition, too, is canceled and again the norm prevails that the prohibition more natural course given in
Example 297, the singular path, as at d in Example
cannot apply to tones that do not occur in direct succession. This result, however, is 296, was chosen.
opposite of that given by Cherubini in the above remarks. Second, the decidely melodic nature of the leap attracts
just the our attention
especially because it is at the same time highlighted as
a sharp contrast by
§12. The so-called ottava battuta the more tranquil step of a second in the lower
voice. Our instinct, however,
seems to require— not without justification, to be sure—
that the more extensive
While motion an octave is usually not only permitted but also required to
to leap, on the contrary, should instead occur in the lower voice, while
the upper
occur by contrary motion, there is an exception to this rule, in which the voice, which attracts our ear first of all, ought
to maintain the natural quality
octave, though arrived at through contrary motion, nevertheless makes a bad of the melody and, therefore, move only in smaller,
more fluent and singable
intervals.
impression; this has led to the prohibition of such an octave. Specifically, when
the lower voice progresses simply by step from upbeat to downbeat and the Third, the brevity of the upbeat emphasizes the unpleasant
effect of the
upper voice same time moves by situation even more drastically; in particular, it appears as though the exag-
at the a larger leap such that the two voices
suddenly meet in an octave on the downbeat, then the bad effect of a so-called
gerated tension in the melody were almost entirely
disproportionate to the
ottava battuta is produced. brevity of time during which it occurred.

Consider, for example, the following octaves, of which are arrived Fourth, finally, one cannot disregard the effect of
all at anticipation (A to D),
through contrary motion: which doubtless adds to the poor effect.
In view of so many disturbances of the natural
effect, it becomes clear
Example 296 that a voice-leading such as that at d has to be
prohibited entirely.
a) b) c) d) mentioned
. I already that at c all bad effects, in so far as they
can be
I 1 J ~ 1 n J-J- attributed to the leap alone, are absent; besides the
empty effect of the octave,
there is only the disturbance that the lower voice
lacks the larger interval!
which, by its nature, would have established a
counterweight to the emptiness’
of the next octave. The question, therefore, is
whether this deficiency alone is
A difference in the effect of these examples will easily be discovered. enough to prohibit such a voice-leading. I myself would
prefer to let only the
While perhaps only an “empty” impression on the downbeat can be given situation decide this question: in two-voice
counterpoint, at least, an
observed at a and b (a result, especially in two-voice counterpoint, simply of octave of the kind at c will sound too empty under
certain circumstances; on
the octave itself), we feel the emptiness of the octave at c and d, on the other other occasions, especially in composition for many
voices and in a more
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

favorable milieu, however, the effect can be good.

Thus, within the prohibition
ot the ottava battuta, one would have to
differentiate more closely between
cases c and d, and limit the prohibition to the latter
cases in which the upper voice progresses by
in particular — that is, to
a larger leap.
Furthermore, since the ottava battuta involves motion
from upbeat to
downbeat- a progression that by its very nature highlights
the bad effect-, it
is clear that the prohibition could not be
taught already in the context of the
irst species, where the distinction
between downbeat and upbeat is still
lacking, but had to await the second species (as here), which manifests those
categories (analogous to the accented and unaccented parts of a bar in free
composition) for the first time. The only alternative is to remove the problem
of the ottava battuta from strict counterpoint
altogether and treat it instead
only in the context of free composition.
For the same reasons as in the ottava battuta,
I consider it a fault when

instead of an octave, a unison or a

fifth is approached in such a way that
the lower voice moves only by step while the
upper voice progresses by a
larger leap. In the following example:

Example 298
a) Albrechtsberger, p. 90 b) Fux IX, 1

the effect of such voice leading may be experienced;

note especially how in
the example at b the size of the leap in
the soprano contrasts with the
unassuming second of the lowest voice in an all
too individual manner.
As examples of ottava battuta in free composition may be cited:

Example 299
a) Mendelssohn, Piano Concerto b) J. S. Bach, St.
oe i Matthew Passion, Aria “Blute
210 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Second Species: Two Notes Against One
Fax’s discussion of the Ottawa battuta
(pp. 72-73) has certainly become the
definitive one. I therefore quote it in full: This also holds true especially of the unison:

Then, from the tenth bar to the eleventh [of the exercise under
[Aloys:]
Example 307
discussion],you have progressed from a tenth to an octave in such a way that
Fux II, 15
the lower part moves up a step while the upper part descends
a step; such an
octave is called thesis by the Greeks
and battuta by the Italians, because it
appears the beginning of the bar. This octave is prohibited. I have
at
often
pondered this matter, but I can find neither the reason for the prohibition
nor In composition for eight voices, such leaps in
the difference that makes this octave permissible: 15 the bass and in voices that
represent the bass can scarcely be avoided, as will
be mentioned at the proper
time.
Example 303
Fux II, 18 Fux presents these thoughts in the context of the first species. This in itself already
signifiesa misunderstanding of the Ottawa battuta because
, here the element is still
lacking which so clearly exposes the emptiness of
the octave in the first place— namely,
the differentiation of downbeat and upbeat. The Ottawa battuta in general
cannot
really produce its full effect until free
composition, where the accented and unaccented
while the next is disallowed: parts of the bar play such a prominent role;
see Examples 299 and 300 above.
However, we do not learn from Fux what effect it
Example 304 has when the upper voice
progresses by leap instead of the lower one,
and why in this case the Ottawa battuta
Fux II, 19 is to be prohibited; it is simply
his "opinion" that such a voice leading
should not
be tolerated, even in counterpoint for more than
two voices.
Albrechtsberger deals with the Ottawa battuta as follows
(pp. 28-29):

Itremains to be noted that the old teachers prohibited

the Ottawa battuta in
where both octaves are produced by contrary motion. It is different with composition for two as well as more than two voices. I
the prefer to use it neither in
unison that arises by progressing from the third to the prime— strict nor in free writing for two voices; may be
for example: it acceptable in three-voice
writing, even more so in four-voice, especially if double counterpoint at the
Example 305 octave is involved. The Ottawa battuta (in German: Streichoktawe) is that octave
Fux II, 20 which occurs on the stroke or beat, that is, the
accented part of the bar. [Here
followsan explanation of what constitutes an accented part of the
bar through
all meters.] When a perfect octave is approached in the upper
voice by leaping
through a fourth, fifth, or sixth from an unaccented to an accented
part of the
bar and the lower voice ascends only by a half-
or whole-step in contrary motion,
in which case the unison, wherein the proportion is that of one to one, is heard the Ottawa battuta results; it can occur in the following
ways:
only very slightly, and appears as though engulfed and lost; for that reason,
the Example 308
unison is never to be used in this species of counterpoint, except at the beginning
In strict setting of the first species
and end. But to return to the octave called battuta mentioned above, I leave it !n free settings
up to your free choice whether you use it or avoid it; for it is not a matter
of
great importance. But when the octave is so constituted that the lower voice
rises a step while the upper leaps downward several steps, in my opinion that
is not to be tolerated even in composition for more than two voices:

Example 306
Fux II, 14 Example 309
In strict setting of the second species In free settings
212 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 2
[Examples follow of both third-species counterpoint and free
composition.] The
I findthis rule too somewhat strict; nevertheless,
reason it is prohibited may be that it becomes too one must admit that it
faint and almost resembles
the unison; for example: originated in a very correct observation. In
connecting the following two triads,
for example, in four-voice writing:

Example 310
Example 313
likewise in
all modes

As is evident, Albrechtsberger
no more able than Fux to specify the true reasons
is

for the prohibition; in attributing the poor effect solely to the emptiness of the octave
Albrechtsberger, too, disregards the extent to which it is
caused by the larger leap itself
as well as the downbeat. True, he formulates
the prohibition somewhat more precisely,
in that he stipulates the leap of at least a fourth in the upper voice as a condition for
its application; for that' reason, c in our
Example 296 would not be an ottava battuta it will be noticed that the second triad at a sounds far less voluminous-one
for him. This alone already marks an essential step
forward, as compared to Fux, in could almost say empty— in comparison with the first one. In free composition,
understanding the problem of offavn battuta. where one is not limited by a cantus
firmus, this usage at the accented part
Cherubini seems in general to ignore the prohibition of ottava of
battuta; he does not the bar isnot recommended; the same triads, however,
sounded in reverse order
mention the term anywhere, nor does he concern himself as at b, have an exceptionally beautiful effect.
in practice with the
traditional prohibition. On the contrary, he writes in Example 40 on p. 14:
Unfortunately, everything in this remark is misguided.
Whether the approach to
the octave from the tenth, as at a in Example 313, is not,
Example 311 on the contrary, strong and
convincing and, thus, the opposite of an empty
effect, can obviously be decided only
by the special circumstances of a given piece.
1 note also that neither Fux nor
Albrechtsberger viewed a motion to an octave like
that shown at a as a prohibited
ottava battuta. Bellermann, therefore, should
have demonstrated with different and
more convincing examples as well as with more persuasive
arguments that the problem
ot the battuta, nevertheless, exists also in free
composition. That the example at b has
nothing whatever to do with the problem is
obvious.
The more recent theorists have
little concern for the effect of
the ottava battuta;
and since he considers the octave-parallels of the downbeats nevertheless, it cannot be disavowed and, therefore, also cannot be
to be avoided more ignored in theory.
convincingly by the leap of a sixth than, for example,
a fifth or a fourth, he is not
even deterred by the unpleasant effect of the ottava
battuta that is undoubtedly § 13 . The possibility of a change of chord at the upbeat
produced in this case!
Bellermann follows entirely on the track of the venerable master Fux, whom he cites, beat> ^ at is> l ^ e u pbeat, can occasionally even present a change
incidentally, on pp. 136-137. Nevertheless, we find in his work (p. 205) the following
voice leading:
This type of occasion is, to be sure, limited to a single situation— specifically,
when a sixth follows a fifth, or vice versa:
Example 312
Example 314

this is a direct consequence of the

following consideration: on the one
hand, passing dissonances must be excluded
from the present issue because,
precisely as a result of their dissonant
nature, they can establish no new
harmony (consonance) at all [Part Chapter
3, 2, §2]; on the other hand,
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Second Species: Two Notes Against One
however, any other consonance [than a fifth
or sixth] would quite simply only
complete or continue the harmony of the downbeat: Example 317
Ex. 41
Example 315

In free composition, unlimited

freedom of harmonic change awaits the
composer: it may
be executed within a bar, within a
single beat, and
moreover, also with devices other than merely
By contrast, the change of harmony mentioned
the successions 5 —
6 and 6 5 — !

above is the only one admitted

y strict counterpoint. Just in its preliminary uniqueness, however,
it forms the
entrance, the portal, of the problem of change
of harmony altogether.
But from the necessity of clearly expressing
the key at the very beginning
of an exercise there follows the
obligation at least not to use such a change
of harmony immediately-that is, not in
the first or second bar-because
otherwise it would lead too quickly away
from the key.

P°inulea,er However adroit these observations

may be, they contain an erroneous and regret-
still, Iquote here the following (analogous) correction
hv
I
aPP '° ” ^ Beeth0Ve " in
table contradiction thatcannot be reconciled with the spirit of counterpoint. Why
Nouebot: pTn^- introduce here the concept of harmony (see Example
41) in the sense of harmonic
theory? How is it possible in counterpoint to conceive of
a sixth-chord and cause the
voice leading to be influenced by this preconceived notion?
Example 316 Isn’t it necessary, on the
contrary, to generate voice leading in contrapuntal exercises
only in accord with its
own laws— that is, the requirements of the line, of melodic fluency,
and the like?
Furthermore, despite the second part of the rule, and despite
Example 42, Cherubini
seems not to have been aware that in strict counterpoint only the intervals
5 and 6
can signify a change of harmony.

§J4. The prohibition of tone-repetition is now reinstated

Repetition of tones is prohibited in the second species. Thus we return here

to the original prohibition, as it applies to the cantus firmus, and we justify
this return (a contrast to the first species, which permitted the repetition of
*
0neS— compare ^ art Chapter 1, §26) by observing that the enriched pos-
provided in the second species by the two half-notes make it possible
sibilities
The unfolding of the intended key, according
to Albrechtsberger, has to be now to achieve a beautiful melodic line even without any licenses; thus it is
rigorously observed even this far into the
exercise. Decisions about this matter, necessary to permit an exception to the otherwise
however universal prohibition of
can be madeonly on the basis of the given cantus firmus.
tone-repetition.
Cherubini writes in rule 4 on p. 15:

Counterpoint of this type [second species] provides Obviously viewing the renewed prohibition of tone-repetition as self-evident,
the license of having either Fux
one or two chords per bar; thus, if one decides and Albrechtsberger remain silent on this point. In Cherubini's text,
to use only one chord, each half on the other hand,
note must be a different consonance, the prohibition is already implied in his formulation
but both must also belong to the same of rule 4 cited in §13 above!
especially by his words “a different consonance.”
Bellermann explicitly discusses the
prohibition on p. 150.
 2 16 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One
§J5. Certain faults that can result from the proliferation
of tones It may, however, be risky to prejudice such cases of actual writing procedure, which
under more favorable circumstances could scoff even at this rule. Really, enough has
The proliferation of tones in this species could, more
easily than in the cantus been said if the student is instructed to avoid unit-formations, no matter how they
iirmus and in the first species, lead to certain violations originate.
of contrapuntal voice
leading and the postulate of melodic fluency. For From our strict viewpoint obvious, however, that Albrechtsberger oversteps the
this reason, one must beware it is

of outlining a triad, a major or minor seventh-chord, or limits of strict counterpoint by writing, on p. 99 in a three-voice exercise of the third
(still worse) a
ninth-chord with three or four tones. equally important to
species, as follows:
It is remember to
change direction after a larger leap.
Example 322

Compare the comment by Albrechtsberger quoted in Part Chapter

1, 2, §§19 and
20. Here I want to emphasize again the results of that discussion; in strict counterpoint
only the construction of the cantus firmus and
the course of the contrapuntal voice
can decide whether or not several tones necessarily
group into a unit. If they do it is
unimportant whether the unit itself is a triad [or not],
since any unit-formation is
Stricdy forbidden in the exercise. Therefore,
Albrechtsberger is correct in writing on In counterpoint of quarter notes, he outlines the diminished triad and, furthermore,
even uses the interval of a diminished fifth!

Example 319 §16. The prohibition of “monotony”

The proliferation of tones, however, could evoke, even more than in the first
species, the danger of a unified motivic, melodic-thematic formation; for that
reason, I again emphatically caution against such shapes.
Compare above, p. 101, the quotation from Albrechtsberger. Fux, however,

and
writes without scruple as follows (Table IX, Figure 2):
in commenting on
the voice leading as follows: “Secondly, it is of
significance
that especially this C
[that is, the concluding C] permits and justifies the
major-seventh Example 323
chord produced by leaping through four notes: C, E,
G, and B, because as octave of Fux IX, 2
t e preceding C
it makes the sensitive note
B move upward, whereby the last three
bars of the counterpoint establish a good
melody.” And similarly, he allows the
following voice leading of a Beethoven exercise
(compare Nottebohm, Beethovens
Studien, p. 49): :>

Example 320
Cadence

§ J 7. Cadential formulas

The stipulation requiring both leading tones

terpoint can be satisfied in exercises of the pre

|
8 in the upper counterpoint and 5 — 3 |
1 i

1, Chapter 2, §23).
and remarks: “It is an error if the two notes that form a seventh fall on downbeats”
for example: Example 324

Example 321
 218 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Second Species: Two Notes Against One 219
In this context
it is to be expressly
emphasized that the leading tone must Example 327
actually be the penultimate tone of the
counterpoint, never the antepenul- B. A.
timate; thus it is never permitted to
reverse the order of tones as follows
(compare Part 2, Chapter 1, §29, Examples 234 and
235):
III
II mi
Ill
1!"
Example 325
Ihhoti PH
ilMi

Bellermann, too, speaks on p. 153 of the whole-note in the penultimate bar as an

exception.

Only exceptional cases, when the above formulas

in Regarding Cherubini’s absurd lapse in this matter (p. 31, rule 7), see the citation
would be entirely
impossible for one reason or another (for in Part 3, Chapter 2, §7.
example, because of the peculiar
construction of the cantus firmus), is it permitted
to fall back on the closing
formulas of first species— that is, to use a whole note in the penultimate bar.
Exercises
mark S lre dy in the context of species
first but compare also pp. 67,
,
Q iT ^
7 tC
v tr i*

can,us firmus is in the lower voice, a major

(p. 66,
Example 328
’
, f ’
sixth must be
used with the penultimate note; if it is in
i*

the upper voice, the minor third is required.” Fux III, 3 and 111,12
Jhus hux at the same time opts for the
requirement of raising the leading tone in
the Dorian, Mixolydian, and Aeolian modes:
c to ctf,
f to/#, and to g$\
g
deserves to be mentioned in this connection
It
that Beethoven, too, has dealt in
his own way with the problem of the
raised leading-tone in the Dorian mode
(compare
Harmony, p. 7/ ff) In one of Beethoven’s sketchbooks
kept in the archive of the
Ceselkchaft der Musikfreunde in Vienna there
is a curious and ingenious idea,
hastily
wntten in the margin in Beethoven's hand and,
so far as I am aware, unnoticed until
now; it is an attempt to avoid the C# in the cadence
of the Dorian mode, as follows:

Example 326

Instead of 5 — 6 — 8 (compare Example 324 above) he uses 6 — — 8— in other words, 5

a kind of plagal as though
effect, — Beethoven failed to see, however, that the ca-
111 1.

dence in mode too requires both leading tones always in direct succession
the Dorian
[to
the tonic]:
g D , and that there was only one remedy for the defect that bothered him-
to give up the Dorian mode altogether!

Albrechtsberger indulges on p. 36 in various cadential formulas which, however in

many cases really belong to the domain of
composition. That he at least retained
free
the requirement of always having the leading
tone directly precede the final tone
however, can be proven by pointing not only
to the cadential formulas to be cited
later (p. 93 f.) but also to the following correction of an error
by Beethoven (Nottebohm
p. 52):
220 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
 225

•*8^11?®' ! The ' in

?
the counterpoint lingers in an almost too
monotonous
|||;at the pitch-level of d furthermore, it meanders awkwardly and aimlessly
;
in the
region of the fourth
between a and d^. 1

No. 2. In bars 2 and 3, the two as of the

tenor are somewhat disturbing, because
^
M\they ap pear twice in succession. Observe that in the last
: m •reminiscent of free composition.
three bars the effect is alreadv

3. The line is beautiful; the only disturbing element is that it touches twice on

P^ ^ac-tone a (bars 7 and 10). Bellermann is unjustified when he “corrects” this

226 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

exercise— incidentally, with little success— in the cantus firmus as well as in the coun-
terpoint (bars 7 and 8) as follows:
Chapter 3
Example 329
cpt.
The Third Species:
Four Notes Against One
No. 4. A more instrumental approach. (Compare above, §9.) Bellermann uses this
exercise as well, but streamlines the leaps in bars 7 and 8 by changing the counterpoint
as follows:

Example 330
jV; General Aspects

§i. The principle of the passing dissonance in its application to the

rhythm of four quarter-notes

No. 5. A counterpoint with a most beautiful line. Observe the fortunate location 1 he use of four quarter-notes in the
added counterpoint against each whole
of the apex-tone e 2 .
n ote of the cantus firmus makes it possible for passing dissonances
No. In bars 8 and an fC'. to occur
6. 9, effect similarly unpleasant to that in the second exercise
at an y °f three points in the bar: on the second, third, or fourth
at bars 2 and quarter.
3. fy
As before, however, dissonances, wherever they may be introduced,
No. 7. Bars 5 and 6 as well as 7 and 8 show an inappropriate repetition. (Compare must
above, §16.)
always occur as stepwise passing tones between two consonances,
except in
the following instance, which is perhaps the only
No. 8. In bars 6 and 7, a modulation to F major. Concerning the last three bars, fC' other conceivable possibility:
see the quotation above in §15.
No.
9. In the penultimate bar the sixth as well as the seventh tone of E
minor is Example 331
raised(compare Part 1, Chapter 2, §23, Example 140).
No. 10. Written entirely in an instrumental fashion. The intervals are no longer
notated in actual size, but are mostly measured from the upper octave of the
counterpoint. Unity of space (compare §9) has been completely abandoned here.
No. 12. Instrumental, so far as the distance between voices is concerned. Neighbor-
ing note in bar 3! See the .quotation above in §5 concerning bars 9 and 10.
No. 14. A flowing, beautiful melody. But observe that Bellermann, even though he
believes in the Dorian mode, uses the tone Bb in bars 4 and 5.
Here, for inevitable reasons that reside both in the fourth D—Gof the added
voice and also in the tone B of the cantus firmus itself, the diminished fifth
actually takes on the role of a consonance, so that the dissonant
fourth appears
in passing between it and the third.
Particular attention, however, should be paid to the effect of
a dissonance
that is to be used on the third quarter. To be specific:
initially, the third
quarter is heard simply as a weak beat; but the ear, by virtue of
the further
subdivision present of half-notes into quarters, is made conscious that the third
quarter contrasts with both the preceding second quarter
and the ensuing
fourth quarter as a relatively stronger event, as
a kind of strong beat. As a
result, a typical secondary effect intrudes into the
principal effect: it is as

227
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Third Specie$: Four Notes Against One 22 9
though the dissonance were actually placed again on a strong beat, as though every dissonance in this species “occur between two consonances.”
On p. 53 he
a “first” beat:
intentionally constructs the following error:

Example 332 Example 334

* 4

In this secondary effect, then, is in fact to be sought the origin of the This provides an occasion for the following remark:
accented passing tone (Wechselnote) of free composition, which, accordingly The error is the B in the bar under consideration, because
. . .
it does not
(cf. Harmony, §167, and here Part 2, Chapter
2, §5), should be understood as proceed upward to the adjacent C; for if in two-voice counterpoint a perfect
a dissonance that is- indeed conceived once again as a passing event, but at fourth on the third quarter is not led upward or downward by step, and
is instead

the same time gains a position on a strong beat. enclosed between two occurrences of the same tone, the impression made
on
Further, the artistic principle of variety, already articulated in Part 2,
it is the listener is that of a dissonant chord; this is just as faulty as if the fourth
were to be approached by leap with two half-notes
Chapter 2, §8, that —
demands constant pursuit of diversity just for the sake of
example:
in the second species, for

aesthetic contrast!— in the use of dissonant passing tones. The student should
therefore strive, to the extent that the voice leading permits it at all, to Example 335
introduce passing tones in colorful succession, so to speak— that is, alongside
those on the second and fourth quarters, to use them without hesitation on
the third quarter as well.
At the same time, however, it may further be inferred from the continuing

validity of the law of the passing second that even here, as before, it remains
incorrect to leap away from a fourth, for example:
But from this it is perfectly clear that Albrechtsberger understood very well the peril

Example 333
of the present species — that of attempting, with the given means of four quarter-notes
and even in violation of rules, to project a
harmony, as though the environment were
poor
that of free composition, where such a thing could indeed occur without restriction.
Albrechtsberger therefore marks as incorrect the following voice leading
by Beethoven
in the exercise cited by Nottebohm on p. 53 under No. 15:

Example 336

This holds true regardless of the extent to which the clarity of the harmonic
conception (here the chord F — —
A C) expressed by the counterpoint is inten-
by the multiplicity of four tones, and regardless of how closely that
sified

harmonic clarity approaches our perception with something approximating

the expression of a harmony composed out in the manner of free composition
(see below, §8).

The exception described above of a fourth which, although it follows a diminished

fifth, nevertheless retains the effect of a dissonance passing between two consonances,
istaken from an exercise by Albrechtsberger (p. 52). 1 should like to point out only that
Albrechtsberger himself obviously remained unaware of any peculiarity of this case.
He considers it completely self-explanatory, even though on p. 43 he requires that
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Third Species: Four Notes Against One
Bui the following precept in Bellermann (p. 158) may be considered an exaggera-
or the following:

Example 339
. .thus here one must take care first of all that the first and third quarters in
.

the bar are consonant with the cantus firmus, while on the second and fourth
Fux X, 3 Fux XVIII, 1

quarters a passing dissonance may be used [examples follow]. After preliminary

exercises in which this stricter rule is diligently and repeatedly observed, one

may later, in consideration of melodic fluency in the counterpoint, now and

then take the liberty of placing a passing dissonance on the third quarter as
well; but in that case the second and fourth quarters must always be
consonant
[examples follow!.

But Bellermann appears not to be at all aware that even in contrapuntal exercises the
A voice leading such as the following, however;

principle of variety exerts influence in this matter.

Example 340
Fux XVIII, 2
§2. Use of the neighboring note

The remarks made in the preceding species concerning the neighboring note
(cf. Part 2, Chapter
§5) should also be taken into account in connection
2,
with the third species. At the same time, however, one should remember a
possibility easily overlooked, namely that the neighboring note (like any other
dissonance, and also like the cambiata) can be used to very good advantage
which uses even the anticipation (Bellermann’s alleged neighboring note), occurs in
across the bar line— that is, from the fourth quarter of one bar to the first
Fux’s work only this one time.
quarter of the next. Like Fux, Bellermann too makes a commitment to the stricter
formulation (p. 158):
In a certain sense, because of the increased number of notes in the “Although the neighboring note is occasionally found in counterpoint of
this species
counterpoint, the need for the neighboring note is even more urgent here than by sixteenth-century composers, use in exercises
its is not permitted, because if it is
in the preceding species. Nevertheless, for the sake of practice, it is used, quarter-note motion can be achieved without
desirable effort.” The only misleading part
at first to adhere in the exercises to only the strictest formulation, in order of this is his reference to sixteenth-century compositions, which certainly have
to at least
learn to solve the problem of melodic fluency and beauty also, insofar as no direct relevance to the topic.

possible, without using the neighboring note— and thus under more difficult
conditions. Beginning

§3. The quarter-rest as a license

Accordingly, Fux, too, in keeping with his view cited in Part
2, Chapter 2, §5,
appears to prefer complete avoidance of the neighboring note. He deigns to use it
Ifa rest is to be used at the beginning, as in the preceding
now and again only in the most pressing circumstances, such as in an exercise of the species, it must
always be a quarter-rest for that alone is able to give
fifth species: prior notice to the
coming quarter notes.
In exercises in triple meter for similar reasons,
Example 338 (£), only an eighth-rest is
to be used.
Fux VI, 11

§4. Increased use of the unison

232 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
233
remains available here in the third species when the unison occurs on the me pronibition, since it is able to assert itself
even in this relationship, can
fourth quarter ,
if the unison
placed on the second or third quarter, it enjoys
is
boast oi another advance over what had
also the advantages of oblique motion, which were already been achieved in the second
unknown in the second species: just see how it has managed
species: to extend itself from its initial area of
application— the direct succession of two tones (see Part
2, Chapter 1, §6)— to
Example 341 the extent that it is here able to regulate the
succession of tones so far removed
from one another!
That motions can still be painfully obvious to the
parallel
ear in spite of
the three intervening quarters of the counterpoint,
however, is doubtless
1 1 connected to the fact that it is precisely the
downbeats that are strongly
impressed on our hearing by the very rhythm
of the cantus firmus itself. Or
in other words: if the cantus
§5. The prohibition of parallel firmus had a still further subdivision, perhaps
and nonparallel similar motion
into half-notes
or the like, the impression of the downbeats
may have still. wider application at such a distance
from one another would undoubtedly be very
much weakened.
In view of this perception [of the
Concerning ranges of application of the prohibition of prominence of downbeats], however, the
parallel and nonparal- best recommendation is rather to avoid
lelsimilar motion, the four quarter-notes of the parallel motions in the main body of
present species allow for the
the exercise so that they can be used with
discrimination of four relationships, illustrated here as in the preceding so much better conscience only
species in cadential formulas or with the nota
by means of brackets: cambiata (to be discussed shortly)
because of one or another attendant difficulty.
Finally, it goes without saying that
nonparallel similar motions may be
used without restriction, as was the case already
in bracket 2.
4. In bracket 4, from upbeat to upbeat,
the formation known as "after-
beat octaves or fifths may be completely
exempted from the prohibition.
J J J J
o It m ay be reported here that in regard to “afterbeat" octaves
or fifths, neither Fux
nor Albrechtsberger displays any kind of
reticence; they use them freely in their
1* In bracket 1, concerning the actually direct succession of two tones, exercises as well. Compare Fux, Table
VI, Figure 6; Table VI, Figure 9- Table XII
the prohibition applies in its strictest form and entirely without Figure 5; also Albrechtsberger, p. 1
exception (cf. 12 (bars 11-12).
I art 2, Chapter 1, §6 and Part 2, Chapter 2, §11 — bracket — and the pertinent
1 Cherubini has the following to say on this matter
(p. 20, rule 3): “In two-voice
remarks). counterpoint neither one, two, nor even three
quarter-notes can avoid a prohibited
2. The relation of upbeat to downbeat (bracket2) takes a form analogous
octave- or fifth-succession, or cancel its
effect, even if in certain cases contrary motion
is used, or leaps greater than
to that of the second bracket in the second species (see Part 2, Chapter a third:"
2,
§11), though certainly with the distinction that the second bracket
there (in
the second species) depicts the relationship of downbeat to
downbeat. Accord- Example 342
ingly, here as in the earlier case, the rule
can be applied directly— that is,
one quarter-note
parallel motion is in principle better forbidden than allowed (although here’
again, as in the second species, the possibility
exists of redemption by means
of a leap larger than a third); nonparallel
similar motion, however, is

—
completely exempt from the prohibition.
3. But in the relationship of downbeat
provides at least the further advantage that three tones
intervene and lay claim to our attention
of the counterpoint
parallel motion —
to downbeat in this species— which M Ed =F===fc=l
=3
;

c
1

HH
j

can be at least in
principle all the more easily tolerated. Yet it should be scrupulously observed
that if the counterpoint not skillfully
constructed, even in the relationship
is

depicted by this bracket — thus

the most remote relationship
in the ear —
nevertheless recognizes parallel motion and actually
perceives it as a fault. So
 The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 235

Example 344

“poor” “poor”

Obviously, this same exaggerated, in a way already fossilized and unprin-

is the
cipled strictness that we observed in connection with his treatment of the same
problem earlier, in the second species. {Compare the remarks in Part 2, Chapter 2,
§11.) And when he goes so far as to create a new field of application for the
prohibition— indeed, in the relationship of second quarter to subsequent downbeat — ,
we “good, because the chords are almost the same"
can endorse such aural' sensitivity only to a very limited extent: under certain
circumstances a parallel motion even in this relationship could strike the ear in an all Albrechtsberger is certainly correct with this stricture. As the reason for
too unpleasant way;
tion so strictly, even
it remains, nevertheless, an exaggeration to formulate the prohibi-
only for the exercises of
this poor effect — unfortunately Albrechtsberger neglected to give one him-
if strict counterpointl 1

se ^f the following should be cited: after the strong and extended succession of
seconds, even the smallest leap will have to be noticed as melodically
§6. A faulty third-leap altogether too particular
and individual. And sometimes, when the interval of
the leap
added harmonically to the preceding tones, an unwelcome
is
W'\ ,

Among the contrapuntal theorists, Albrechtsberger is the only one who calls diminished chord or a seventh- or ninth-chord suddenly results. If one
attention (on p. 44f.) to the following “offense against good melody,” which observes further that the leap is forbidden not in the middle of the bar but
occurs “when after four, or even only three, stepwise ascending notes an % on| y when it leads “into a new bar,” then it is in the last analysis also the
upward third-leap is made into the next bar; and also conversely, when a measure-boundary that exposes the poor effect of the leap, reproachable
downward third-leap is made into a bar after three or four notes descending i.V, already from the melodic standpoint, also in the rhythmic domain— hence all
by step” — for example: p:. :
the more glaringly.
But certainly, it depends completely on the particular situation
in such a

Example 343
case whether contrary motion is to be recommended as the best solution; if
Si. neutrality and complete equilibrium of all tones of the counterpoint are kept
in view as the unalterable final goal, then other methods will also be found
J I I 1
to avoid such “offenses against good melody.”
236 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 237
after e# 1
, thereby creating a third-leap b —
to be convinced of the poor Example 347
effect of the latter! (This is above and beyond the
additional necessity in this
case of expressing the t-chord [a-d-f\.

§7. The nota cambiata (changing-tone figure)

Traditionally and generally, the formation called nota cambiata is taught in

the third species. Each individual passing tone otherwise exhibits completely normal construc-
The phenomenon represents an organic unit consisting of five tones whose tion in that the dissonance is actually presented in stepwise motion. It is just
course is immutably fixed; for example: that themiddle tone of the second passing motion must at the same time be
understood as the final tone of the first; and it is exactly this feature that
Example 346 produces the interlocking character and the apparent irregularity of the
7
*
phenomenon.
The following, then, can be viewed as prerequisites for the nota cambiata:

(a) the first quarter of the group must be consonant;

(b) the second quarter introduces the dissonance, which begins according
to rule with a stepwise approach;
(c) the third quarter contains the apparently faulty third-leap, but must
The infraction in this example of the rule of passing dissonance can be
itself in all cases be consonant with the cantus firmus;
noticed immediately: the dissonance of the seventh at the second quarter,
(d) the fourth quarter continues the stepwise descent by which the second
which is first introduced in compliance with the rule (that is, by step), is
quarter arrived, and is therefore to be heard as both endpoint of the
unfortunately left in a manner contrary to the rule (by leap) as the counter-
firstpassing-tone motion and middle tone of the second;
point moves ahead to the third quarter.
(e) the quarter, the last tone of the group, is again consonant with
fifth
In essence, however, the offense is only apparent; for the second quarter
the cantus firmus.
(d 2 in our example) is very well connected— connected indeed, above and
beyond the interpolated third quarter, to the fourth quarter (c 2 ). By virtue of Accordingly, the following possibilities exist:
thisconnection, the mandate of the passing second nevertheless finds its
complete and just fulfillment, if only through the path of a detour. 1. A genuine nota cambiata may also span its five-tone group from
The detour, to be sure, has its own further consequences; for the offending upbeat to upbeat, for example:
third quarter, as though under penalty for having delayed the immediate
Example 348
consummation of the seventh that entered as a passing tone, must seek its
own support form of an absolutely consonant relationship to the cantus
in the
firmus; that must
at least be underwritten and supported by the latter
is, it

through the quality of consonance if it is successfully to play the role of a

delaying interloper. Moreover, the alien third quarter establishes a new base
for a second, normal passing tone; for the situation it has brought about is

such that the fourth quarter (c 2 ) —although, according to the foregoing,

2. A nota cambiata may be constructed equally well
psychologically representing the destination, so to speak, of the first passing in the ascending
direction as in the descending, for example:
motion (the first, second, and fourth quarters)— itself functions simultaneously
as a passing tone between the third quarter of the Example 349
first bar and the downbeat
of the next (i.e., between the third and fifth notes of the complete figure in
our example).
Or, to put it differently: the nota cambiata represents fwo passing-tone
motions, which, although interlocking, are nevertheless genuine and complete;
see the bracketed tone-successions a and b in the following illustration:
238 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 239

Under no circumstances, however, may phenomena such as the following

count as a nota cambiata:

Example 350
a) *
Xf
which falls two tones short of being a nota cambiata; the configuration instead
represents a harmonic anticipation (see Harmony, §167) 2 such as is often used
in recitatives, especially at the conclusion.
From
the aggregate of prerequisites listed above, however, it can ultimately
where the second quarter is in any case a genuine consonance, which may be inferred that the nota cambiata, as a unit so extensive as to embrace five
be left by leap at will; or this: tones, fundamentally stands in contradiction to strict counterpoint itself,
which, as we know, invariably postulates a state of complete balance. In the
Example 351 strictest sense, then, it can hardly be counted as a phenomenon of strict
b) counterpoint
That the earlier theorists nevertheless carried over this genuine element of
free composition into the domain of strict counterpoint proves only with how
little care and clarity they conceived the boundary between free and strict
settings.

where the third quarter is not consonant with the cantus firmus; or:
Since the structure of the beginning of the nota cambiata— specifically from
the first to the third tone — manifests the space of a fourth,
it is not only

Example 352 necessary but instructive to learn to distinguish between the nota cambiata
and the passing tone in the space of a fourth, as I have presented it above,
p. I84ff.

First, let us consider passing tones. As Example 249 shows, two [different]
passing tones in the space of a fourth are possible from the outset; and it is

the order of the intervals by which the passing tone is approached and left
that distinguishes the two forms from one another. In one case, the smaller
where most of the characteristic requirements of the nota cambiata are interval of the second is executed first, and only after it the larger leap of the
satisfied, but the group begins with the second quarter, thus producing the
third, while the other case uses the reverse succession in that the third precedes
overall impression of a certain lack of precision and transparency in com-
the second. It is precisely the latter form, however, that produces the more
parison to the genuine nota cambiata; or:
natural effect. The definitive psychological reason for this is that the more
distant, so to speak more strenuous, leap of a third clarifies the direction with
Example 353 greater accuracy, and actually brings us closer to the goal than the step of
d.) * the second; the latter, indeed, leaves open the possibility that the very next
tone a second removed may be the goal of the passing motion rather than
the tone of the- fourth, which still lies at the distance of a third. For the same
reasons, then, of the two possible descending passing tones in the space of a
fourth:

Example 355
which deviates from the genuine nota cambiata in that the dissonance on the a) b)
second quarter, instead of being introduced by step, is approached by leap we —
shall see below, in the commentary on the literature, what this actually
represents — ;
or:
240 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 241
again the form at a has the advantages of naturalness in comparison
to that
at b. Obviously, under certain circumstances, only the less themselves in advance to the coming harmony as neighboring notes or
natural form can
bring forth a correspondingly marvelous accented passing tones. Beyond that, incidentally, free composition is able to
effect. This is corroborated, in respect
to the fourth in the bring to life in our imagination not only the immediately present concrete
ascending direction, by the previously cited Examples
250-252; tonal edifice, but, far more, the total complement of constituents of the
for the descending direction, on the other hand, the
following
example may serve, whose profoundly poetic harmony in all their possible registers and octaves. Thus if we find, for
effect is based on nothing other
than form b of Example 355: example, in a passage that we recognize in advance as cadential, the following:

Example 357
Handel, Chaconne in G major, Var. II
Chopin, Prelude Op. 28 No. 6

we understand the second eighth-note c of the bass as first of all in the service
The simple fact, however, that
the case of passing tones in the space
in of the expected V, as the neighboring note of the coming fundamental D; but
of a fourth, regardless of direction, the postulate of naturalness besides this, our imagination independently supplies, before c, components
is satisfied by
having the leap of a third precede the step of a second, implies
the intrinsic (either B or d) of the major triad on G that is being left:
differences between such a passing tone and the nota cambiata, which in all Example 358
cases demands the reverse order. Just this observation permits a clearer and
deeper insight into the nature of the nota cambiata: it invariably
adheres to
the order of second followed by third, because only in this way
can it express
the fact that the step of a second initiates the intended normal
passing-tone
motion, which is completed, with the aid of a second passing-tone Consequently, however— and precisely
motion, this is the result inaccessible to super-
only at the fourth quarter, The nota cambiata thus represents, perception— even the second eighth note, the passing tone approached
to be sure, a ficial
torm of passing motion, but one of such unusual and intricate by leap, embodies nothing but the original form of the passing tone itself!
construction
as not yet exhibited by the passing tone in the space of a fourth.
is
One sees, how one and
then, the same basic phenomenon manifests itself in
The heightened awareness that has here been achieved of the existence of so many forms, yet without completely losing its identity in any of them!
so many and varied effects of the different forms of passing events
as such — However much a given variant may conceal the basic form, it is still the latter
we have thus far encountered the neighboring note, the accented passing tone, alone that occasions and fructifies the new manifestation. But to reveal the
the passing tone in the space of the fourth, and now also basic form together with its variants, and (thereby] to uncover only prolonga-
the nota cam-
biata— gives me an opportunity, finally, to explain further the tions of a fundamental law even where apparent contradictions hold
diversified sway— this
phenomena of those disjunct passing tones of which several instances (Ex- alone is the task of counterpoint!
amples 248, 253, 257, etc.) have already been cited. After the foregoing, it is obvious in an example like the following:
counterpoint totally lacks the power to make us sense in advance
Strict
Example 359
the coming harmony at any given point, since the force of its voice
leading, Bach, WTC
J. S. I, Prelude in C# Minor
m spite of all the necessity intrinsic to it, is by no means
adequate for this
purpose. Free composition, on the other hand, makes available such
signposts
to the future in the form of scale degrees and other
auxiliary forces of
harmonic logic. By thus sensing in advance leaving aside — possible
surprises along with the composer the coming harmony (much as we read or
hear ahead when we read written matter or listen to
speech), we also
immediately grasp in free composition the function of those tones that
bind
242 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 243
that a passing tone in the space of a fourth is undoubtedly present in the
But since the beamed notes are not available in this species of counterpoint,
bracketed succession; that this passing tone, however, differs completely from good authority has approved the first example, where the second note
a nota cambiata; and further that is a
it deviates from ordinary passing tones in seventh, perhaps because the melody is more agreeable.
the space of a fourth in that it places in the foreground nothing less than the
Such commendable effort toward investigation of the problem,
effect of an anticipation. and yet— alas!— in
these last words, how timid the attempt at a solution! If I nevertheless
The passage from Handel’s Messiah chorus “And with His stripes we are reject the
solution, it is for reasons of my own that have been
healed,” quoted by Bellermann on presented in the foregoing, and
p. 162, represents a genuine nota cambiata: because Fux's utterances appear to me not to be in
accord with the intuitive feeling
that he himself must have experienced
on executing a nota cambiata in composition.
Besides, my treatment of the problem provides
Handel, Messiah a still broader overview encompassing
several other phenomena similar to the nota cambiata, and
Alto
offers the means to
distinguish and differentiate among them.
Albrechtsberger first cites Fux, with examples expanded as follows
{p. 48f.):
 The Third Species.- Four Notes Against One 24S

A critique of this changing-tone figure newlyadded by Albrechtsberger can pose

no difficulty. One need
only consider that, as he himself admits, it is derived from the
works of “good masters.” Does this not itself signify that they were found
only in free
compositions, and that, strictly speaking, they also belong only in that domain?
What
they have in common with our nota cambiata is in any case only the number of tones
(five); for the rest,
because the third-leap precedes the step of a second, they are all
the more closely related to the passing tone in the space of a fourth.
As a genuine
trait of free composition, however, they are most
appropriately recognizable simply as
composed-out seventh-chords ( Vierkldnge ), to which only free composition, but not

strict counterpoint, has a just claim; and this is the basis of the merely apparent
((-chord
in four-voice counterpoint presented by Albrechtsberger in Example 366
as a “license”:
in fact, it signifies a |-chord instead! Albrechtsberger nevertheless uses such “changing
tones" of free composition in his exercises of strict counterpoint as well. See
Albrechtsberger, pp. 68, 69, 95, 96, 97, 119, 133.
Cherubini (p. 19) at first bows respectfully to the usage of the “classical com-
posers”— as though they really had everything in common with strict counterpoint, even
in its most primitive formulation!— but ultimately opposes the rule of the nota cambiata
and announces:

In any case, I would not know how to justify such an

extreme violation of the
rule; and tradition also has offered us no grounds on which this faulty practice
of our forebears could have rested. 1 cannot understand why, instead of writing
as follows:

Example 367
 The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 247

doing so, it counts on the fact that our instinct, in spite of everything, is privy to the
true situation. The case is similar, for example, to that of resolution of a suspension:

Example 372
a) and b)

In the last example there are two dissonances that occur in succession and
violate the rule; this is sometimes allowed, if the dissonances move by step:
fe
wherein our instinct is so familiar with the suspension's innate necessity of resolution
sometimes one is forced by circumstances to write in such a way. But how the
|;;;
lllat can even be further burdened by [simultaneous] advancement of the lower
lh e ear
classical composers could justify writing dissonances by leap I do not com- voice, without risk that it will become confused and fail
prehend — unless they did so for the sake of greater variety and in consideration ||f
to perceive that the origin of
phenomenon at b is to be derived from that at a, as the first act of the process.
o) the short duration of the quarter notes, or finally, because the third is only It is clear, then, that Cherubini’s dispute with
the “classical composers" is therefore
a very small leap and therefore always rather easy to sing in tune.
completely insupportable in the present instance; and for the rest,
it is nothing but a

With his wondrous thought process, Cherubini placates us really only with the °f ma d fancy to believe counterpoint and compositional theory to
be completely
confession that he has not understood the basis of the nota cambiata: that surely identical concepts!

disarms any criticism! But would have been better if Cherubini had rejected the
it Belter,nann writes at length (p. 159) in explanation
of the nota cambiata; only
nota cambiata by reason of good understanding rather than failure to understand; for excerpts from his remarks will be quoted here:
||||;
in that case he would undoubtedly also have sensed the obligation of consistency, and
The following practice was favored by the older composers. They considered
would have spared himself the unquestionably more serious error of possibly allowing Jp; a
'ea P in smaller note values (quarter-notes) to be easier from a weak beat
the voice leading of Example to a
370. In the latter, there are altogether too many licenses
strong beat than vice versa. They much preferred to make this leap
. . .
from
at one time; and if a similar idiom may elicit the most frequent application in free
the second -to the third quarter rather than from the first to the second, even
composition, it is nevertheless a self-deception and an obfuscation not to perceive that I!!!;.
111';:
when second quarter thereby entered into a dissonant relationship to the
this idiom must then remain all the more alien to strict counterpoint. In the first place,
ol h er voices and, strictly by the rule, would have to proceed by step
Cherubini’s example presents a combination of species, which can. best be accom- Mr
plished only along the path to free composition (see Part 6); further, the most primary |||rAnd similarly again on p. 160.

law of the neighboring note according to strict counterpoint is violated, in that the third Th‘ s explanation is deficient, however, just because it is able at best to explain
quarter is not once again a consonance; and finally, the dissonance of the third quarter on *y l h e f* rst l f> ree ton es of the nota cambiata, but not
the total phenomenon
by no means occurs between two consonances, which also must absolutely be counted
as an error. Cherubini’s explanation of his own example, incidentally, is inadequate; if
P
g ;
.
i
comprising five tonesl Admittedly, Bellermann enlists the further
naively confused explanation (p. 160): “One finds almost
aid of the following
without exception that the
the only requirement were that “dissonances move by step,” what manner of bad voice |,r three notes following the leap again rise by step, so
;
;
that use of the changing tone
leading would then have to be permitted under almost always leads to this pattern”:
all circumstances even in exercises! The |||
true reason Example 370 nevertheless has merit— but only for free composition, to be
sure— lies
Ife Example 373
rather in the following fact: the figure represents an abbreviation of two
normal acts, which have been compressed into a single one; the graphic form of the first
act appears as follows:

Example 371
But how could he defend
himself against the still more damaging objection that he
has,with his explanation, proclaimed as allegedly general a principle which
finds no
application outside the nota cambiata itself? Because if attention is
supposed to be
paid in counterpoint to “accented and less accented” notes (p. 160), as Bellermann’s
position requires, then impossible to avoid the question of why, as in the nota
it is

and is to be
understood as meaning that against one tone of the cantus firmus, four cambiata, a leap from the strong to the weak beat would not have to be prohibited
quarter-notes form a counterpoint with a neighboring note introduced in a perfectly 'jin all cases. Further, 1 call attention again to
that third-leap across the bar line which
regular way on the second quarter. The second act consists in the circumstance to — —
was forbidden earlier see §6! And so, in Bellermann’s case, we witness
the following
—
be seen latei in the combined species that the lower voice docs not await the curious scene: although he comes rather close to an intuitive grasp of the phenomenon,
completion of all four notes, but moves ahead in advance to the next passing tone; in jhe is not able to explain and defend it adequately, and thus, for lack of thoroughgoing
m TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT

comprehension, permits himself to be carried way by completely false ideas. He allows,

for example, that “the changing tone can occur just as well on the fourth quarter of 10

the bar as on the second” [p. 160], but on the other hand feels obliged to “excuse”
the changing tone that moves upward with the following words [p. 161 n]: “In the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the changing tone is found only in the descending
direction; in modern compositions however, it can be well used even in ascending":

Example 374

J J *| J
But never this:

Example 377
He has still more about the changing tone: ‘The changing tone was treated
to say
exactly as a consonance, and even in polyphonic compositions in which one or several
voices had no heed was paid to its dissonant relationship” (a
to sing passing tones,
quotation from motet by Palestrina follows); then on p. 450, in paragraph 4: “The
a
4
changing tone should be used only in rnelismas; the latter must never be broken up
(!)
by [changing] syllables”— a thought which reveals clearly that Bellermann perceived
the nota cambiata as a self-contained entity only in the form of a unit of five tones. Here— on the pretext of composing out, which is always insupportable in strict
Nevertheless, he rebuts Cherubini, in an {indeed extremely) ill-conceived polemic, with
the following words (p, 161): “And doesn't more modern music exhibit very similar
counterpoint — on the third quarter a fourth occurs, which, instead of function-
ing as a passing tone, is both approached and left by leap.
idioms, which, if adjusted to fit the rule as Cherubini would have would sound very
it,
As for monotony, its avoidance is now all the more imperative, since the
awkward? I think for example of the idiom not uncommon in our recitatives”:
danger of consolidation into units is still more present by virtue of the four
Example 375 quarters than in the preceding species.
Recitativo The of a change of chord (cf. Part 2, Chapter 2,
effect can be
§13)
gjp-
manifested more acutely by the third species, with its medium
still
of four
quarter-notes, than by the second. Since the harmonies in the third species
can be given a more distinct shape, their succession is also more clearly
perceptible; and it makes a significant difference whether a change of chord
takes place from bar to bar or only within a single bar. Instruction
in
counterpoint therefore has the task first of calling attention to the difference
of effect in the two cases; if it nevertheless goes still further and
proclaims
In this remark he himself again takes into account only the that the delineation of only one chord in each bar is initially better and
first three tones of the more
figure, asthough these alone formed a complete nota cambiata, or, rather, as though natural, that advice is founded on the fact that before the tone of the
'}" cantus
the recitative-idiom quoted represented use of a genuine nota cambiata (see the ^ rmu « harmonically divided, so to speak— that is, before it is assigned two
explanation given above of a similar phenomenon as anticipation). U is

different harmonies —
it would have to be more appropriate to present the single

tone first of all in a single harmonic environment. (Often enough, it is

p
§8. Recollection of several earlier principles v- precisely the neighboring note that most easily aids in this task, and
/ facilitates,

,r;
tatter tha l some other note, the retention of the same harmony throughout
So far as the arpeggiation of harmonies is concerned, the prohibition with the entire bar.) Yet one is, certainly, allowed to carry out a change of chord
which we are already acquainted (cf. Part Chapter Chapter
by means of the succession of 5 and 6; only the first bar, whose unified
1, 1, §3; Part 1, 2,
§19; Part 2, Chapter 2, §15) remains in effect; it is all the more necessary £' :
harmonic profile (as said already in the second species) is simply a prerequisite
;

because the presence here of several tones within the bar makes such an p; for comprehension of the key, must be kept free of such a procedure.
arpeggiation more tempting and at the same time easier.
Special care must be taken here to ensure that dissonances are never left
The tendency and necessity of free composition to compose out har-
by leap. (Precisely in this connection, the fourth, as I have said already in
§1,
m monies however, and thereby to generate content, at the same time provides
>
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Third Species; Four Notes Against One
a reason for the fact that within its domain, all manner of triads and all faulty as a weak beat, even though a !}-chord is implied with it. If this bar
seventh-chords may be arpeggiated. But in the same measure, then, in had be set in four voices, or to be accompanied by the organ, the octave of
to
connection with composing out and the support of harmonic fundamentals, the first note G would be added; the second note, D, would then have the
even the leap away from such a (merely apparent!) fourth 4 is desirable and passing— or better, arpeggiating— !j-chord, as at No. 1 below [see example 380].
permitted without restriction; for example:
Example 380

Example 378

‘All good'

Here, when the bar has four quarters, as in the third species,6 the if-chord may be
used on the third or fourth of them, when the bass arpeggiates an entire perfect
chord or sixth-chord. It remains forbidden (without the use of a ligature) only
on the first [quarter] note.

The author's confusion, which led him to such an inordinate admixture

of strict counterpoint and free composition, is obvious for all to see. Yet I do
not want to neglect, given such a fitting opportunity, to mention that the
above invoked octave that the accompanying organist would be entitled and
perhaps even obliged to add in the low register is nothing other than the
scale degree or fundamental, as it is known only to free composition, and
which there, with its own necessity, account for and justifies the content
Example 379 generated from within it!

Cadence

§9. Construction of the cadence

Since the other leading tone 7 must under all circumstances occur only or

fourth quarter [of the penultimate bar], the following, among others,
 The Third Species: Four Notes Against One 253

Example 383 continued

As can be seen, this is because of the parallel unisons or octaves from upbeat
to downbeat.

Exercises

Example 383
Fux IV, 15 and IV, 16
256 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT

Comments on the Preceding Exercises

Chapter 4
No. 1. Observe in bars 4 and 5 the added original flat sign, in spite of the Dorian
mode. In bars 7 and 8, on the contrary, evidently because of the approach of the
cadence, Fux avoids
error of two [successive]
a similar use of a flat sign; as a result, however, he
major thirds in bars 8-9— about which more
commits
detail has been
the
The Fourth Species:
given in Part 2, Chapter 1, §18. It is not without irony that Bellermann, who cites this
Fux exercise on p. 165, uses the Bt> instead of the Dorian Blj in bars 7 and 8 as
well —
what becomes then of the Dorian system, in which Bellermann certainly believes
Syncopation
(cf. Bellermann, p. 49)?
No. 5.The B(? in bar 3 is original, in spite of the Lydian mode; Bellermann,
however, who also reproduces this exercise, removes the flat sign; thus he here does
the opposite to what he did in the first exercise. In bar 9, Fux's counterpoint can
hardly be called fluent and good; Bellermann is justified in changing it as follows:
General Aspects
Example 384
§J. The concept of syncopation

If in strict counterpoint based on

a binary division of the bar (compare the
second species) a consonant note on an upbeat is extended
No. 5. In bar 6 the arpeggiation of the C triad makes a thoroughly poor effect. Bar into the following
downbeat, which is indicated specifically through connection
8 exhibits the figure discussed in more detail in §7. The parallel fifths on the strong by means of a
tie, the resulting phenomenon
beats in bars 8-9 are, under the circumstances, not to be condemned. is called syncopation; for example:

No. 6. Bars 1-2 yield a deadly, inexcusable monotony in their relationship to bars
3-4. In bar 5, the tone F is no neighboring note, although the D in bar 6 is, and Example 385
likewise the G of bar 9. Bar 12 shows an arpeggiation of a triad (cf. Exercise 5).
No. 7. This exercise shows modulations in bars 6 and 9, and a neighboring note
in bar 3.

Stnct counterpoint emphasizes, however, that

% the note on the upbeat must
always consonate with the cantus firmus. Thus,
for reasons that will be
revealed later, it excludes from its domain
at the outset any case in which
.the note of the upbeat forms a dissonance that,
although obviously first
conceived as a passing tone, is nevertheless turned
;

into a syncope by means

of tying; for example:

Example 386

7 4 7 6

:
The following example from free composition
shows the same thing:

257
 The Fourth Species: Syncopation 259

§2. Classification of syncopes

ii the principle of syncopation— that is, the continuation of the consonant note
of Lite upbeat into the following downbeat— remains always the same, the
material content of the syncope, on the contrary, can be further differentiated.
Specifically, in spite of [the immutable requirement of| tying and consonance
on the upbeat, the interval that arrives at the downbeat may be consonant or
even dissonant, and for this reason we speak of consonant and dissonant
syncopes (
ligatura consonans, dissonans):

Ap major: n
Example 390
We shall see later, to be sure, the circumstances under which even strict
counterpoint
permits a
itself, daring
dissonance at the upbeat:
a first step

^ j
toward
p
free composition, nevertheless
T 1
I
I
.
5 7
Fux (p. 80) defines syncope as "two half-beats ( halbe Schlage) against a whole beat
such that the two half-beats remain in place and have a tie over them; the first must
be on the arsis, the second on the thesis." counterpoint unquestionably allows both types.
Strict
Albrechtsberger’s correction of an error by Beethoven (Nottebohm, p. 50): the consonant syncope, in spite of its different external appearance,
Still, if

obviously belongs to the same family as the other consonant phenomena

Example 388
observed in strict counterpoint up to now, the dissonant syncope on the
contrary offers a completely new technical and psychological principle: in it,
by contrast with the single dissonance passing through on the
upbeat and,
indeed, between two consonances (the only one permitted so far), we at last
encounter— for the very first time in strict counterpoint!— a dissonance on the
strong beat. The new prerequisites and effects presented by the latter will be
treated in detail shortly.

confirms strict counterpoint’s immutable requirement of consonance at the upbeat.

Cherubini writes (p. 22): "Syncope is the name given a whole-note whose first half §3. The consonant syncope
lies on the weak beat, and whose second half lies on the strong beat of the following

bar"; thus:
Once the mechanism of a consonant syncope (consonance on both upbeat
and downbeat) appears immutably fixed, all that remains is to
Example 389 form a clear
notion of its And this is very easy to describe in strict counter-
continuation.
point. Foraccording to the principle of the present species, a consonance
if,

must always be placed on the upbeat, then motion away from

the consonant
syncope must always lead to another consonance, whether by
step or by leap.
Apart from the fact that the new consonance on the upbeat
becomes itself
the basis for the next syncope, it now enters either (a) as a third party along
Betterniann erroneously takes up the further development of the syncopation with the cantus firmus and the note of the preceding strong beat to express
concept somewhat prematurely in even as he introduces the discussion, he speaks
that, "%
the same harmony, or (b) as a second party with the cantus firmus alone to
of the dissonant syncope in particular, and then forms the general concept. Only later,
produce, necessarily, a change of harmony (cf. Part 2, Chapter
on p. 174, does he correct the error- only by accident, as it were: “The note that is 2, §13 and Part
2, Chapter 3, §8). The latter, as we know, is possible only with the successions
tied to this on the arsis (= downbeatl] is either a consonance or a dissonance. . .
~5 — 6 or "6 — 5:
 The Fourth Species: Syncopation 261

Example 393

Moreover, especially in extended use of consonant syncopations, wherever

possible the old rule should be applied, according to which an
imperfect
consonance is more desirable on the strong beat than a perfect (cf. Part 2
Chapter 1, §22). And their similarity is in no way canceled by the fact that in the syncope,
Finallyshould be noted that the unison, too, can appear in
it
a series of the dissonant note of the downbeat is identical to the so-called consonant
consonant syncopations. More about this later. preparation on the upbeat, while in the passing dissonance, upbeat
and
downbeat must exhibit different tones.
Although Fux does not speak explicitly
about them, Albrechtsberger (pp. 57-58)
says: “The consonance-ligatures may move at their resolution
In both phenomena the essential course of events— cf. Part 2, Chapter I,
[sic!] either by leap or
by step to another consonance; but the latter mode of progression can apply only
to
§2, and Part 2, Chapter 2, §6! — is the same:
the perfect fifth and the two permitted sixths”:
Consonance Dissonance —Consonance
Example 392 In this light even the dissonant syncope is fundamentally nothing
but a
type of passing dissonance, a part of the general problem of dissonance
altogether, which in the realm of strict counterpoint therefore
includes, along
with the passing dissonance on the weak beats (second and third species),
also
the passing dissonance on the strong beat, specifically the dissonant syncope
(fourth species).
f-f
Fux is the only theorist who, although chiefly concerned with another problem, at
least made an effort at the same time to explain the inner nature of the dissonant
(Examples follow also of continuation by leap.) syncope {p. 80):
It should not be overlooked, however, that in the example just cited he initially
pays no further attention to fifth-successions, since he has set on
Since dissonancescome about here not accidentally or as a result of filling out
the downbeat at a
per diminutionem) as in earlier species but, rather, essentially
[a larger interval]
and on the upbeat at b as many as three fifths in succession. (

and on the downbeat, and since they have no attraction in and of themselves
(as they strike the ear rather in an annoying way) but derive
their beauty
[Wohlklang] from the immediately following consonance to which they are
§4. The nature of the dissonant syncope
resolved, the subject of resolution of dissonances must now be treated.

(Compare the citation in §15 below.) Thus we

If we compare the dissonant syncope with phenomenon, familiar from the
the find here already an inkling that even
the dissonance of the syncope, just like that of the simple
second species, of the passing dissonance, we are surprised to find that they passing tone on the weak
beat, is to be grasped only from the standpoint of consonance!
have a common characteristic, namely, that in both, the dissonant element is
situated only between two consonances!
The phenomena of strict counterpoint under comparison here are in fact §5. The law of downward resolution of the dissonant syncope in strict
made more similar to each other by this characteristic than they are differen- counterpointand the limitations it imposes on the types of syncopes
tiated from each other by the circumstance that in the
syncope the two
The dissonant syncope in strict counterpoint must always be led downward
consonances enclosing the dissonance in the middle position are placed on
by step to the nearest consonance.
upbeats, while in the passing dissonance they are placed on downbeats:
The following table presents first of all every possible dissonant syncope:
262
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 263

Now to the most difficult aspect of the subject, namely the reason for the
rule according to which only a downward resolution is admitted in strict
counterpoint.
If we consider an example of free composition, like the following:

Example 395
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 13,

Grave

C minor: 1

we find that a number of factors cause us fully to expect in

advance— just
b) with ascending stepwise resolution according to the logic of the harmonies— the C triad (in
f position) that arrives
at the third quarter of bar 2. Contributing
to this expectation is the presence
of scale degrees (see Harmony,
§84) together with the composed-out entities
that result from them, as well as the
development of richer devices of
polyphony. Consequently, given the clarity of the total
situation, we then must
sense perfectly correctly the function of all
of the tones conceived as suspen-
sion formations, such as b — — —
c\d l eY and a b 1 g; these tones represent either
(from the standpoint of the scale degree C
itself) the suspensions '“'7 —
^2 — 3,
8,
and 6—5 respectively, or (from the standpoint of the tone
£b, as
All syncopes under A, b and B, b, however, are excluded at the outset
bass note of .the sixth-chord) the suspensions ~5 — 6, ""7 — 8, and ""4 3
respectively.
from use in strict counterpoint.
Because of its lack of scale degrees and very considerable reduction of
“NB” above A, a 3 and B, a 2 is to indicate that the augmented fourth
its
other resources, two-voice texture in strict
in both upper and lower counterpoints, so long as the paths of the syncopes counterpoint is unable to offer any
possibility of attaining an equally desirable
in a strictly maintained diatony are not blocked off, must be allowed to appear clarity concerning the function of
the syncopes that arise in its milieu. But
without restriction even in strict counterpoint. In this matter— as remarked precisely the fact that downward
resolution of dissonant syncopes was used in
already in Part 2, Chapter 1, §3 —
one must consciously, if also reluctantly, take
at a very early time —
practice and justified in theory
in fact, long before composers had learned
into account the artificial organization of diatony. to fructify the
horizontal dimension through harmonies, to elevate
“NB” above A, a 5 refers to the fact that in the harmonies to the rank
itself, even the diminished
of scale degrees, and finally to bind
fifth could be regarded dissonant the latter together as diatony and as
as a syncope, if the requirement of
system— makes it our obligation today to seek the reason for
downward resolution did not call attention to the insurmountable obstacle of this rule (cf. Part
2, Chapter 1, §12!) only in the causes and effects of
the dissonant fourth, as an insupportable resolution. strict counterpoint itself!
Compare with Example 395 the following:
 The Fourth Species: Syncopation 265

help us crack these riddles. Strict counterpoint, then, in

order to lend at least
some kind of interpretation to the tone, invokes the only means available to
it, namely consonance. Since
it can by no means certify the
dissonance as
Gvfl independent, under such duress it provides the tone in
consonance that is only fitting.
each case with the

I once again in this context to the idea expressed on p. 153,

call attention
and repeat here: consonance signifies the a priori principle in
I
the tonal
universe. After all, strictly speaking, consonance
adds to a tone only that which
the tone carries within its own bosom by nature in the form of the overtone
series,
regardless of whether the particular interval is an octave,
fifth, third, or
only the artificial inversions of those (unison, fourth,
sixth)!
Thus the tone c
1
,
to return to our example,
must first, under all cir-
cumstances, acquire consonance, before dissonances such as 7, 9, 4,
its
2, etc.
Here too, in both cases, it is the tonic (see Example 398) can pass above or below it.
that we fully expect in bar 2 under In the most fundamental sense
both a and b— indeed, after the preceding V in the first bar of both examples; of strict counterpoint, then, there can be only the
following passing tones:
and therefore the contributions of the harmonic components of the I are
welcome and comprehensible, regardless of how they are brought in, even if it Example 399
be by means of ascending or descending suspensions.'
A) in the upper counterpoint
2
And similarly: 1. the 7th:

Example 397
Mozart, Piano Sonata K. 333.

2. the 4th:
•

:
a a)

3. the 9th:
On the other hand, if we consider any arbitrarily selected tone within the
course of a two-voice exercise, forexample the tone c strict counterpoint
1

cannot explain what this tone c 1

might be— whether a scale degree itself, or a
harmonic component of one, or perhaps just a passing tone within some scale
4. the 2nd:
degree, or something else. Therefore, dissonant phenomena such as the
following: A*)

Example 398

B) in the lower counterpoint

5. the 2nd:
a) b)
A
whose ancestry and significance in a given place could be explained to the
last by free composition, must remain unsolvable riddles in strict
detail
counterpoint, and no device (cf. Part 2, Chapter 1, §2) would be able here to r f r f
2
266 £523
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 267

among others. This phenomenon shows a stricter form than the accented
passing tone and the free suspension, which will be discussed later.
If the phenomenon of the syncope is thus to be understood only as a
product of abbreviation— the first elliptical process in strict counterpoint
itself!— then it is also possible to
answer the question of why the dissonant
syncope in strict counterpoint must always be resolved downward. For if the
tied dissonance is from the outset only a passing dissonance, then the
basic
rule of the dissonant passing tone remains fully as applicable here as before,
specifically, that the direction of motion by which arrived
it (cf. Part 2,
Chapter 2, §4) be maintained. In the light of this, then, the answer to the
question just posed depends upon which direction of passing motion (see
Example 399) should be assumed in the case of a seventh, fourth,
ninth, and
so forth. This means that if we argue, in the case
of the seventh, for example
for the passing motion as seen in Example
399 at la, then the seventh, as a
With this let it be once again most emphatically established that in strict passing tone coming from above, must continue
downward; but if we gave
counterpoint there logically can be no fundamental and endemic way to preference to the other passing tone, as seen
at lb, the seventh would then
introduce a dissonance on the downbeat — that is, just on the head of the have to continue its upward path; and so on, mutatis mutandis , for all the
cantus-firmus [tone]. remaining dissonant syncopes.
Yet strict counterpoint does undertake, given a preceding definite con- Nothing is simpler, however, than to answer
sonance, to place
this latter basic and
a dissonance on the strong beat, as an act of force, so to preliminary question, if we begin with the only logical point of view. It is,
speak. This act of force consists in a conflating of two situations which were specifically, that in the absence of any more exact orientation concerning the
originally separate.
meaning of the cantus-firmus tone, the latter must be supplied
with the fullest
Specifically, in the first stage of this process (consider the following ex-
possible, or most definitive, measure of consonance,
so as to shape at least the
ample):
brief momentof consonance-effect for the tone in the most satisfactory
way.
Example 400 So suspensions in the upper counterpoint are concerned, in deciding
far as

our preliminary question about the point of departure

for the passing sev-
enth— see Example 399, la and b—
our instinct prefers the octave to the sixth,
..simply for the reason that the former interval
(cf. Part 1, Chapter
2, §11) is
moie na ! ur al than the latter, which is only a product of inversion,
; and, ulti-
mately, even points to a different fundamental:

the consonant beginning 1

(c ) of the passing motion is deleted (see the Example 402
parentheses),whereby an appeal is justifiably made to our instinct, which here
is able to supply on its own the necessary consonance on the downbeat. 3

Therefore the passing dissonance can be moved forward, onto the unoccupied
downbeat, so that the passing tone as such apparently ceases to exist.
In the second stage, the sacrificed consonance of the downbeat finds a
< .
—
For the Passing fourth see Example 399, 2a and
b— the fifth is more
substitute at least in the consonance of the upbeat of the preceding measure. suitablethan the third as point of departure of the passing
tone, because the
The mark of this substitution is the tie, which, to be sure, presupposes identity ^former draws the boundary of consonance of the
fundamental better than the
of the preceding consonances with the dissonant tone. By this means, finally, latter.

the so-called syncope of a seventh is produced: Since in the case of the ninth see 3a and b —
we must choose between third—
^and octave, we decide in favor of the third, which provides more
Example 401 harmony to
gffie lower tone than the octave. For the same reason,
in the case of the
second— see 4a and b— we prefer the third to the unison.
Jn lhe lower counterpoint the question of the
-o Sfc- beginning of the passing
|° ne for the second see 5a and — b—
is decided in favor of the unison, for the
reason that it at least fits into the characteristic
harmony of the tone c itself,

J
268 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 269
white the lower third a deprives the c of its roothood-tendency by reducing
Before I how dissonances are to be resolved, it must be said
begin to explain
it to the status of a third.
that a tied note nothing but a delaying of the following note, which
is
The lower then, as
fifth expresses still more than the lower third the
drastically though liberated from its servitude, again finds itself in
a free condition. For
complete loss of roothood-tendency of the given tone c 1 and therefore in the this reason, dissonances are always
, to be resolved downward by step to the
case of the passing fourth in the lower counterpoint— see 6a and b— we decide nearest consonance, as is seen clearly in the
following example:
for the third in preference to the fifth.

The passing seventh —see 7a and b — ,

from the standpoint of quantity of Example 403
harmony, is better imagined as beginning with the lower sixth than with the Fux V, 6
octave: the latter interval, at least, is the inversion of the upper thirdl (For the
seventh in the upper counterpoint, however, the upper sixth was rejected,
precisely because it is the inversion of the lower third.)
As the point of departure of the passing tones has finally been decided for
4 3
the absolute reasons cited— specifically, 8 before 7, 5 before 4, 10 before
9, and
3 before 2 in the upper counterpoint; 1 before When
2, 3 before 4, and 6 before 7 the delaying process is removed, this figure appears as follows:
in the lower—, at the same time the direction of the passing tone is established;
as we see, it is a descending passing tone. Example 404
Selection of the other departure-points would, on the contrary, necessarily Fux V, 7
have suggested an ascending direction for the passing tone; although the other
departure-points are certainly possible per se, just here, in strict counterpoint,
they had to be rejected. In any case, this much
clear: dissonant syncopes is

with ascending resolutions are peripheral to the problem under consideration;

therefore strict counterpoint can refer to them only as, in a sense, more distant This reveals that it can easily be understood which consonance any dissonance
relatives, which have their place only in free composition. There, under the is to be resolved to: namely, that which is found at the downbeat of the following
aegis of scale degrees (which clarify all relationships from the start), they can bar once the delaying process is eliminated. Thus it happens that when the
manifest their characteristic passing effect and expressive value cantus firmus below, the second will have to be resolved to the unison,
lies
all the more the
fourth to the third, the seventh to the sixth,
effectively and securely. and the ninth to the octave.
Let us finally solve this problem definitively on the basis of strict coun- And moreover, on p. 81:
terpoint: if the postulate of descending resolution of dissonant syncopes
Joseph: . With your permission, I should like to ask whether the delaying
. .

establishes at once the path of three tones, from precisely that fact we can
or tying of dissonances occurs also with the ascending motion? For
the following
see the reason that, as mentioned in §1 above, [in the fourth species] only examples appear to be essentially the same:
a
consonant character must always be demanded of the note on the upbeat.
For suppose it were permitted in strict counterpoint to place a dissonance in Example 405
passing also on the upbeat. In such a case one would have to arrive at a Fux V, 15
unified formation comprising two full bars (see Example 386a), because,
regardless of the dissonant passing tone, the dissonance of the syncope now
demands for its own part a fixed continuation. But wouldn't such an extensive
and, by its lack of motivation, moreover incomprehensible formation stand in
contradiction to the uppermost postulate of strict counterpoint— that of maxi-
mum neutrality of the tones? If one tried to avoid such a danger perhaps by
Aloys: You raise a question that is harder to untangle than the Gordian
knot— one which you, as a beginner in this discipline,
cannot understand, and
suddenly turning the syncope into a consonance (as in Example 386b),
which, therefore, will be taken up in another context.
wouldn't one be guilty in that case of a transgression against another crucial Regarding whether the
thirds indeed remain the same both rising and falling
after the delaying is
prescription by abruptly and arbitrarily depriving the dissonance, conceived
eliminated, as said, it will be explained at the proper time
that some difference
as passing tone, of its natural and proper downward motion? is present. In the meantime, you must believe me,
as your teacher, that all
dissonances must be resolved by descending to the nearest
consonance.
Among all of the teachers, Fux is the only one who at least acknowledges for the
Albrechtsberger does not attempt to justify the prescription of
student the problem of the prohibition of upward resolution as such. On p. 80 we read:
downward (or
prohibition of upward) resolution under discussion; he rather
simply decrees the rule
270 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 271
as self-explanatory (p. 57) and adds only this: "It is certainly well known that the
§6. Certain syncopes which, even though they resolve
downward,
diminished fifth in all settings tends to resolve downward to the third; but here this
are either entirely prohibited or only tolerated
cannot occur immediately, at least not in the upper voice. When it [the diminished
fifth] is tied there, the minor third or minor sixth must be struck at the upbeat, before
resolves]”; for example: Even syncopes that are given downward resolutions—
[it see above, A, a and B,
a— are subjected to a further reduction for the purpose
of strict counterpoint:
Example 406 despite their downward resolution, one among them is altogether prohibited
and several others are only tolerated. To be specific, ~7-8 in the lower
counterpoint is prohibited, while others are more or less tolerated: '"l and
9 — 8 in the upper counterpoint and 4 — 5 in the lower counterpoint.
I

The
reasons for this restriction are now to be discussed in detail.

§7. The total prohibition of the '~7— 8 syncope in the lower

etc. counterpoint

a ue
“poor without downward resolution” The prohibition of the “7 — 8 syncope in the lower counterpoint is based on
the fact that the passing motion whose middle tone (see above, §5) is the
Compare the voice leading in Albrechtsberger, p. 103, in an exercise of three-voice seventh begins with the sixth below [the cantus firmus].
counterpoint: Among aH the consonances which can initiate a passing motion-octave,
fifth and third (or tenth) before the seventh, fourth and second
(or ninth) in
Example 407 the upper counterpoint, and unison, lower third and lower
sixth before the
second, lower fourth and lower seventh in the lower counterpoint— the lower
sixth, as
is evident, represents without
doubt the least appropriate initial
interval. Consider that we arrive at the lower sixth only by
way of the inversion
of the upper third (which by itself shows
the questionable derivative quality
of the former interval with sufficient clarity);
and consider, further, that in
And finally an excerpt from a Beethoven exercise (see Nottebohm, p. 52), approved by strict counterpoint the syncope
of the lower seventh is in danger of being
Albrechtsberger expressly as a “license":
mistaken for the syncope of the upper seventh (especially
as in the latter case
we can easily posit the very propitious interval
Example 408 of an octave as point of
departure for the passing motion): these two reasons
explain our instinctual
resistance to following the path of inversion
or to giving preference to the
lower sixth over the octave. In other words: it
is difficult, even impossible, for
us to posit directly the lower sixth; this, however, is absolutely necessary in
the case of syncopation (according to
§5) if we want to determine the direction
of the passing motion. Strict
counterpoint, therefore, lacks all means to compel
Here the diminished
As can be inferred from
fifth even appears
this,
to be resolved in a different voice.

Albrechtsberger admits as a dissonant syncope the

us to accept the lower sixth, and this eliminates the "'7 —8 syncope in the
lower counterpoint.
diminished fifth as well, even though its resolution necessarily comprises two full bars.
Just this fact, however, provides us with sufficient reason to exclude this syncope, which
leads to such a broad unified formation, from the domain of counterpoint and
The conditions for this syncope are completely different,
strict however, and far
consign it instead to free composition. more favorable, in free composition. There, we intuitively
follow the logic of
On pp. 75-78 and lOOf. he shows—-in
a disorganized manner, to be sure, because the scale-degree progression; just for that
reason, since we are entitled to expect
only among other things — also the
upward resolution of dissonant syncopes ""2 3, — one or another harmony, we are also able under
certain circumstances to
""7 —8 [in the upper counterpoint], 7 6,
'"9~ — —
8 [in the lower] for use in free interpret at once the downward-resolving suspended
seventh of the lower voice
composition. as a suspension of the octave of the expected harmony. Moreover, in free
Concerning the augmented fourth, see the citations below in §9. composition such a syncope can, without being
misinterpreted, even occur
Bellermann’s citation concerning the augmented fourth is in §§9 and 10.
between an inner voice and an upper voice:
272 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 273
Example 409
always a serious mistake, as 1 have stated repeatedly,
It is
to call upon the practice
Schubert, Piano Sonata Op. 42, II ot the masters in free composition to decide problems in
strict counterpoint. Even
more surprising, however, is that Fux nevertheless uses this very "'7
8 syncope in the —
lower counterpoint in an exercise (Table VI,
Figure 1; see below, Exercise 4)
apparently only to avoid doing violence to the melodic line.
Albrechtsberger, only subconsciously, comes closer to the truth than
if
Fux when
he writes, [Fux] forbids the resolution of the lower seventh to
the octave, which in
two-voice counterpoint is a very appropriate prohibition;
but it is well-known that other
famous composers have often used it as a suspension
to a complete chord in
muiti-voiced compositions; for example”:

Example 412
No- 1 No. 2

regardless of the fact that, measured from the fundamental, the intervals would
be different. Thus in the above Schubert example, the syncopes would
represent either — if the tone C itself (scale degree I) were to be con-

sidered the fundamental, or — if the ^-position of the harmony were to be

taken into account.

Fux devotes the following passage to this difficult question

(p. 81f.): Albrechtsberger expresses here his intuitive notion that it is only two-voice counter-
Aloys: must confess that
deliberately omitted the seventh. Hardly any rea- point itself that causes the restriction; admittedly, he
I I is not able to express this idea
son can be cited here except the authority of great masters, with greater precision.
to which we must
always pay attention in practical matters. Almost none can be found who used While Fux and Albrechtsberger approve of the syncope -'7
8 in the lower —
the seventh resolving to the octave in this way: counterpoint at least in free composition (even though they
are not yet able to gain
about why it is permitted there but prohibited in
clarity
strict counterpoint), Beller-
Example 410 mann commits the gravest error that can be committed by a theorist, in that he extends
the prohibition also to free composition
Fux V, 13 (p. 216):

The inversion of the ninth— that a seventh prepared in the lower voice
is,
which
would resolve to the octave— is, because of rough sound, prohibited not only
its

in a capella composition but generally in any kind of polyphonic music that

conforms to rules.

Example 413
One might say that the seventh so resolved cannot be tolerated because the
octave to which it moves is a perfect consonance, from which it can derive little
harmony, if it were not the fact that these same masters often resolve the
for
second (which is the seventh in inversion) to the unison, from which a
dissonance can derive even less harmony, since it is the most perfect consonance.
1 maintain that one must follow the usage of renowned masters in this matter.
Here is an example of the inverted seventh, or second:

Example 411
By the same token, the situation just described also
Fux V, 14 must not occur between
two inner even though similar things can occasionally be
voices,
found in
i 1 smaller note values in the works of the best masters.
Compare the four-part
motet “Dies sanctificatus” (No. 1 of the first book of
four-part motets) by
Palestrina, bar 16.
Such occasional exceptions, however, are not to be imitated,
and have no influence whatever on the stricter rule.
274 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Fourth Species: Syncopation 275
Such a wretched abuse of theory! It is all the more reprehensible as the author’s percep-
6 is laken on| y figuratively and not in its literal reality, then, of course,
a
tion did not even suffice to recognize the effect of the prohibited syncope as beautiful and
good thus remains in arrears
theoretical vacillation must arise concerning the syncopes “2 1 and ~9 — 8. —
world,
in free compositions;
which
it

find their justification in the beautiful effect so attained!

vis a vis indisputable facts of the tonal
Then one must ask: Is 9 — 8 really '"9 —
8 or perhaps only “2
— 1; and,

Bellermann invented the “rough sound" in order to find some way

I almost fear that
to motivate the ..U
vice versa > ,s 2 — 1 also something from “2 —
different That teachers 1? in
restriction.
predicament decided in
this favor of assuming one
single syncope “ 9 — 8 and
abandoning the 2 “ —
1 can be explained on two
grounds. First, they viewed
7 the in te™al of the octave in counterpoint as a more suitable consonance than
§8. The necessity of restricting the use of: (a) The ~2 — I and "9 — 8 the unison (especially in three- and four-voice
counterpoint where the octave
syncopes in the upper counterpoint can have a better harmonic effect than the unison). This
point of view, which
belongs to the realm of strict counterpoint itself,
certainly cannot be disputed;
Use of the syncopes '"2 — 1 and ""9 —8 is best restricted in counterpoint, for the second point, however, which is invalidly
derived from free composition,
the following reasons: must be ejected all the more emphatically. The aural
; image of triads, which,
First, the resolution leads to perfect consonances, in particular the unison in the name of scale degrees of free composition,
always lives within us, leads
and the octave, that are less appropriate in counterpoint. quite naturally to the acceptance of the octave rather
£ than the unison as an
Second, because of those consonances, greater caution must be used with interval of further reinforcement; in other
words, in free
/.. composition we
regard to voice leading (cf. later, §15); this leads necessarily to a certain e *P ect tbe harmony C-E-G, for example, to appear in the form at a rather
inconvenience in the practical execution of the exercises. than at b in Example 414.
should be stated now, however, that an important law originates from
It

these syncopes that are to be used only in moderation; it is the law of the
identity of the tone of resolution. Since unison and octave are identical with better than:
the tone of the cantus firmus, the above-mentioned syncopes really lead back,
even though by way of a dissonance, to the tone of the cantus firmus. What
damage this fact must cause in other difficult circumstances will be
demonstrated later in parts 3 and 4.

Leaving aside the restriction [of these syncopes] in counterpoint, we are

In this case, too, we are inclined to view as more compelling the octave, whose
..better quality has already been certified by the overtone
obliged nevertheless to distinguish clearly the two syncopes mentioned here series. Nevertheless,
.it is unjustified to transfer this inclination to counterpoint,
as two completely different phenomena. Thus it is not permissible in strict where the decisive
counterpoint to consider “2 — 1 merely a "9 — 8 syncope transposed down an
factoris voice leading alone, not scale
degrees and other elements of rein-
forcement, Therefore, in the given situation— that
octave. Decisive for the distinction is only the voice-leading in the exercises is, when it is required by

themselves; here the intervals "'2 — 1 or “9 — 8 simply have to be taken

.
voice-leading 2 —
1 had to be used without hesitation;
and if, according to
principles of counterpoint alone,
literally, precisely in the way they occur in the voice leading! it is justified to consider the unison inferior
We will see later that most theorists tend to understand '“'2 — 1 as
to the octave, and thus
to regard the syncope that resolves to the unison
as
contained in '“'9 — 8 — that is, to deny the independent quality of a “2 — 1
likewise then we may draw as a consequence [of this] only
inferior,
the
distinction between “superior” and “inferior” in
syncope. The reason for the difference of opinion appears to me to lie in the a purely contrapuntal sense;
we may not foMhis reason alone deny the contrapuntally
following. Theorists promise in their introductions to base the exercises of independent quality
of the “inferior” syncope. In other words: anyone
counterpoint on a purely vocal foundation, and accordingly teach [the neces- who insists most strictly on
the vocal foundation in the execution of exercises,
sity of] a proper distance between the voices; later on, however, they uncon- and, thus, is accustomed
to regard the distance between voices as
sciously abandon their original (and correctly conceived) intention in order an irrefutable reality, must also view
to be able equate (that confuse) counterpoint with free composition:
.~ 9_
8 as something materially completely different from -2 —
to is, 1, regardless
of the fact that, for the reasons presented here,
under the influence of the latter, they already use in exercises voice-spacings he will prefer the former
syncope to the latter, and, for the rest, will find it best
that can no longer be understood as vocal but only as instrumental. But if to limit the use of both
syncopes only to cases of greatest necessity.
theorists decided to explain intervals beyond the tenth, for example, such as
11, 12, 13, 14, by suggesting to themselves as well as to their students that
these intervals are not what they appear to be but rather 4, 5, 6, 7 merely Despite scale degrees, free composition does not abandon
the principle
transposed up an octave; or, put differently, if the distance between two voices
M voice-leading altogether; therefore it remains true even here that “2 —
276 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 211
and 9 — 8 certainly represent different phenomena, depending on whether
they function— again only in terms of voice leading— as suspensions to the Example 417 continued
fundamental or to the octave, as for example here:

Kxainplc 415

J. S. Bach, French Suite No. 2, Sarabandc

incorrectly figured acceptable

Ihave touched upon this point already in my discussion

of fourth-species
two-voice counterpoint in the context of dissonant ligatures
in the upper voice;
to E? major: II I repeat it here once more so that
aspiring composers are not misled by many
I

- an erroneous figure. They should keep in mind

that the second-iigature can
The phenomenon of 2 '
—
at the asterisk is not canceled by the fact
I
that
never be figured [as such] in settings of three or
more voices if the ligature or
the lower voice moves away during the resolution of the syncope (cf. Part delay is contained in the upper voice,
but only if it is in the lower voice, which,
6).
being a half- or whole-step below [the upper voice], is
delayed by means of a
From
the passage (already quoted in §7) that Fux devotes to the 7 8 syncope ~ — igature and resolves downward to the minor or major third. The ninth is indeed
[inthe lower counterpoint], one can at least infer that he appears to recognize the
£ literally identical to the second above, but not in accompaniment and resolution.
independent quality of the 2 1
— —
syncope and does not want it confused with [Compare also p. I04ff.]
"9-3.
We Iead something similar in Bellermann
{p. 175), who in this case abandons the
on the other hand, expressly denies the independence in the upper
Albreclitsberger,
Fuxian trail: ‘The ninth is therefore a
second which, depending on the distance
counterpoint of the —
—2 1 syncope, which he regards as assimilated by the —9 8 — between its elements, resolves to the octave or the
unison . etc.” (Compare also
syncope. Thus he writes on p. 57: “Seconds always resolve in the contrapuntal lower . .

: later on p. 215). Soon thereafter he remarks: “The ninth has not been used so
voice down a half- or whole-step to thirds." This means that he does not recognize frequently as the other dissonant intervals. In
two-voice counterpoint it really should
the syncope of a second in the upper voice. Moreover, on p. 58 we find the following |be avoided completely.” Such a statement about [musical]
practice can hardly be
figured-bass notation:
considered a satisfactory rationale for his assumption
that 1 and 8 are -2 — “9 —
'identical.
Example 416

!$?•
b
( )
The 4 — 5 syncope in the lower counterpoint
~4~ 5 syncope in the lower counterpoint has a value similarly inferior
to the syncopes just discussed; when we consider that this syncope is based
that is, the same figure for -9 —
8 and -2—1 together with an NB remark which
on the passing motion 3 —4— 5 (whereby, unfortunately, the third is only the
becomes completely clear only when we read Aibrechtsberger's explanation on Vlower third), we immediately understand that our instinct prefers under
p. 161: all
circumstances the syncope of a fourth in the upper
The second resolved in the lower voice to the third, counterpoint, which
is
and in the upper voice originates from a much more favorable passing
to the unison It is always erroneous to figure the compositions
motion, namely 5—4—3.
or more parts— tor example.
latter in tor three
//Moreover, since in the 4 —
syncope the interval of resolution is a fifth, it
5
,.is clear that this syncope, because of the inconveniences of voice leading
Example 417 /connected with that interval, is of inferior value in that it poses a greater
/technical danger; therefore it is advisable at least to limit the use of this
instead of:
.syncope.

Concerning the augmented fourth, see above, §5.

Fvx uscs ~4 - 5 (iuilc frequently, from which may be

Vscruple it inferred that he lias no
; concerning this kind of syncope.
2 78 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 279
Albrechtsberger, on the other hand, articulates the following thoughts
on p. 59 categories, a more detailed explanation
without further elaboration: “These tied fourths in the lower and treatment can be offered only in
counterpoint are not
£:/ tne later sections.
authentic fourth-ligatures, but only an accompaniment to the second-ligature,
which Fl
et us cite th e upward resolution
}' t >
must go along with [the fourth-ligature] in settings for three or more voices." Through of dissonant syncopes, which
.f
clde
ally has aheady been mentioned
this remark alone he indicates that he certainly does not have a very high opinion of j‘ i" frequently in §5 ‘(cf. Examples
syncope.
395-3 97 and p. 268). Specifically
this it is the scale degree
:^ in free composition
Apropos of an augmented fourth he uses in an exercise (see Exercise bar y. which permits— indeed compels— us to assume ascending
6, 10, passing motions as
000) he remarks as follows on p. 63: "The second NB at the interval well as descending ones. In this sense,
p.
f—b excuses free composition (in contrast to
strict
the otherwise faulty mi contra fa, because the next measure does not lead to C major ^"terpomO includes the syncopes 7, 4, 2, and 9 in the upper
but to A minor, Besides, the strictness and constraint of this species excuse much.”
I a 4 and 7
counterpoint,
the iower ,hese syncopes resolve upward.
(Compare also the illustration on p. 105, with the text on
K J?
’ ’
>
But the relation
p. 106, quoted in Part 3 3 1 se to the basic form of the dissonant syncope of strict counterpoint
Chapter 1, §10.) | not at
,.
is all that of "exceptions,” as is
unfortunately taught in textbooks
Bellermann (p. I72f.) also opines that
J"4 — 3 [in the upper counterpoint] is more 00,5 bot h ,n pr,nt a " d oralI
and
frequently used than '“'4 — 5 in the lower counterpoint; and
y they represent on the contrary new
;
solutions
if the fourth should be :

to new profr/ems— problems

, , ,
completely foreign
augmented, it is said to be prohibited in two-voice counterpoint in the form of a
pother hand, it would be equally incorrect
to strict counterpoint. On the
syncope in the lower voice. See §10 for a quotation [from Bellermann] concerning the to place them alongside the
descending resolution as though they were
augmented fourth in the upper counterpoint. | of equal rank from the outset as
r exam
I :° rank P ,e Riemann does. [Voice-leading] situations differ among themselves
,
>

and nobody can deny that the situations

! constructed intentionally
§10. Final codification teach,n § Proses in a syncopation-exercise
% pnmitlve than those of free composition.
of strict counterpoint are more

In the light of the foregoing, we can state definitively that in the upper
U Ct coun er POint must be accorded ‘
Thus the downward resolution of

counterpoint 7 —6 and ’-'4— 3 would be preferable, but in the lower

f f"
U P|W,,
psychological priority in comparison to
^solution of free composition! May teachers
counterpoint only "'2 — 3. !?{f<< of rule and
finally stop speaking
exception," then, or at least get accustomed
to recognizing
The completely unquestionable character of these latter syncopes, inciden- I ig.Miese phenomena as two branches— one of them younger than
tally, can be explained most simply just through the fact that their intervals
the other— that
sprout from the same trunk (the
passing tone!),
of resolution are precisely3 and 6, which are so desirable for counterpoint and 2. Since in free composition the harmony
which raise no further problems of voice leading. i of the triad or seventh-chord
S I,S * espe c,ive ‘^versions,
as 1 ^ or f, f, and
Regarding the syncope "'2 —
3 we may add that it is the inversion of I °
106), it is clear that there the material
»
T 1
\ (see Harmony,

’"'7
—6, which (because it stems from the passing motion 8 7 is to be — — 6) gs accordingly better understood-specifically,
content of a dissonant syncope
as a suspension
regarded as original. Thus -~'2 —
3 shares the particular high value of ~7 6. — • precisely to a
f- 4 - f-, or l-chord. 4 Add to this the possibility
resolving

And this, finally, is also the reason ^2 —

3 in the lower counterpoint appears
ip
resolution and of chromatic motion,
intervals become available to and new
of upward

so much more plausible to our sense than "*2 1 in the upper. — |.serve as preparation— intervals
that strict counterpoint could not yet
allow, such
as 4 before 5, 6 before 5
7, etc. More on this in the later sections.
| But to gain a better overview of the
have already said that it contradicts the essence as well as the history of
I
varieties of dissonant syncopes, it is
...advisable to review once again how
the rule under consideration if its justifications are sought only in the realm •
the basic form consists of three elements:
the tone on the upbeat forms
of free composition. (This unfortunately the first, which serves as preparation of
what is done by, for example,
is the
.

suspension; the same tone immediately

Riemann, whose theories, so fatally | introduces the second, in that it is
divergent from art, will be refuted at every
jp continued (tied over) to the downbeat;
suitable opportunity.) the third element finally is the
resolution to the upbeat. The spirit
of variety penetrates into these elements
Free composition, incidentally, shows mostly prolongations of the basic |
||here so as to transform them individually
form; how can they even be understood in their true significance, not to or collectively in one respect or
another.
mention be systematized, before the basic form has been grasped in and for
I begin with time
as a basis of variety. Since free composition
itself— which can happen only in strict counterpoint? With the following &_ 4 .
\
|/the rhythmic rigidity of the cantus firmus,
it proceeds on its own
eschews
discussion I offer an attempt, within the bounds of a modest outline, to to use a
different note-values instead of the
familiarize the apprentice of art with the panoply of syncopation-forms, whose half-notes of the original form:
% d (More detail will be provided in the next chapter.) But however
•

common point of emanation is just that basic form 1 have set forth in the | may be organized, they can be perceived in
^values
these
preceding series of paragraphs. obvious, however, that with respect to most
an artistically correct way
It is
% gnd-which is still more important in free composition-at
the same time
280 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 281
performed correctly, if their deviation from the basic norm (that of equal
categor y beIon 8 s also the suspension
halves) in each case is assimilated into artistic consciousness. of a sixth before the
of a triad, for example in the double
fifth
suspension fcf of free composition
4. Another basis of variety, which, like time, can reshape the syncope, is But in such a case, it is not
permissible to speak of a sixth that has
harmonic character within the individual elements. In applying this new basis turned
mto a dissonance (see above
p. 126) or of a “make-believe
of variety to those elements, we achieve the following results: consonance"
(Schemkonsonanz) as Riemann
does. Because in actuality it is
(a) The preparation itself may take on a dissonant character in free only our
consciousness and prescience of the scale
degree itself (or of the harmony to
composition, in contrast to strict counterpoint, where it may have only come, whatever its rank) that sets
off so much more emphatically
consonant character. Such a dissonance stems usually from a passing tone, the
suspenst on -cha rac ter under
consideration. But even though we
which derives its necessity and justification from the scale degree, 6 if it is not sense the
consonant sixth-suspension in under the guidance of the predicted har-
otherwise based on an elision (see below under 5). To this category belong mony.— just as clearly
as the dissonant fourth-suspension,
those cases of which C.P.E. Bach (Versuch, Part Kap. XXVI) speaks as and sense both
2, suspensions again more clearly than would be possible in strict
"displaced and about which he states the follow-
notes ” (ruckende NofenJ, counterpoint
we must never draw the monstrous
theoretical conclusion that culminates
ing: “Through displacements (Riickungen) the usual harmony is either antic- the proposition that just on
in
account of increased clarity (intrinsic to
ipated or delayed.” 7 From his examples, the following may be cited: free
composition) a sixth should be counted as
a dissonancel Wouldn’t it then
be
necessary to treat all other
Example 418 consonances similarly, and to regard them
as
dissonances the moment they occur with
the function of suspensions? For
example, in a case like the following:

Example 420
Haydn, Piano Sonata Hob. 46,

(b) The tone at the downbeat can, in free composition, be consonant in fM

a sense completely different from that which applies to a consonant syncope M
of strict counterpoint. Since free composition, in contrast to strict counterpoint,
includes clearly defined suspensions to seventh-chords (see above under 2), it
'
accordingly presents under certain circumstances even, for example, an octave
as suspension to a seventh — or, under the assumption of upward resolution, a

sixth suspended to a seventh and the like. Another example from C.P.E. Bach’s
Versuch, cited earlier under a, may be quoted here as an illustration (see Kap.
XXV, §8):
maintain then, that in the case of
the sixth-suspension we must always be
Example 419 content with just the feeling of
suspension, at the same time allowing the
swth refam fu ly ,ts consonant character.
; .
J ,
Otherwise we get onto the
precipitous track of Riemann’s theory-see
his Handbuch der Harmonielehre,
hr0u misund erstanding and exaggeration of
7-j
^correct idea,
s /
he
r
arrives at
an
complete misconstrual and falsification of
otherwise
chordal
.values that are forever
regarded by the artist himself as consonant, and
simply
proclaims them to be dissonant. For
example, p. 139: “A chord represents
282 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Fourth Species: Syncopation 283
consonance or dissonance only when understood in its relationships to Example 422
others — that is, in its logical context. We will discover, therefore, that it can Brahms, Symphony No. 1, Introduction
be possible, or rather, necessary, to understand a major or minor triad as a
dissonance.” Or the following, p. 140:

If a harmony acquires its full aesthetic value only through its relation to a

r
tonic^that
yield not
is, if the discrimination of simple- and contra-fourth sonorities
empty names but concise formulas for definite functions of
just
harmonies in the musical fabric- —
then any chord that is not itself a tonic will
is to

X! 1

actually be heard not as itself, but rather in relation to that chord which is tonic.
f espress. e legato

In other words, only the tonic chord itself is truly an absolute consonance.

But where does it lead, I ask, to call every “relationship” — just because it is a

relationship — an adequate ground for conversion to dissonance? Wouldn’t one

then necessarily have to consider even the fifth of a fundamental — just by
virtue of its undeniable “relationship” to the latter, certified as “adequate” by
the overtone series — a dissonance? And finally, isn’t the thing we call a
From tins we discover the following:The fundamental of scale degree I
“relationship” in truth merely a mode of our way of conceptualizing (like
!S C fu ct,ons a suspension to c# 2 (at the last
“time” and “space”), and in no way an objective reality? But why should a
:
!
7as
’

Ffdamentalf of scale
?
degree #1, so that the step is a chromatic
eighth-note of the first

“mode of thought” have such power over the natural phenomenon of con- 2
he n SCrve S as a sus Pension to the following
one;
sonance as to alter its innermost nature?! Therefore 1 caution most emphati- r
i
T n d 2 —to Lbe
aegree li,
,
fundamental of scale
exact, as a consonant suspension "~5
6. The next —
cally against yielding to the obsession with “relationship,” as Riemann does,
suspension >s found at the first quarter
and hearing dissonant chords where only consonant ones rule— admittedly | next of bar 3, and has the form
3f4 5- —
follows 5f6b — 6t], 6f7-8 etc., thus syncopes with ascending resolutions
maintaining their “relationship” all the while, like everything in the world!
ancUhromatic progression (see above under
2).
the upbeat, which consonant
(c) Finally, at is supposed to present the
M
° re0Ver the $ynCOpe is sub ect to modification
’
brought about by
resolution of the dissonant syncope, a dissonance can also appear. It will be
»

shown below under how combined with an elision.

usually
If we add to the
5 this is

varieties just shown under a, b, and c the liberty of upward | W

Thus th e preparation itself can be elided
and the dissonance placed
n ,he strong L
beat in its absence. Dissonant chords
resolution, of chromatic progressions, of modulations and so forth, the number ? thereby arise, for which
of hybrids among all of these varieties soars to infinity. An example may li £;“? in cl rcumstances a purely implicit preparation (see Harmony, Example
illustrate. Instead of the following: r
parently
through the preceding harmony can
8I)

free dissonance must be understood

be assumed; otherwise the ap-
as the clearly established internal
element of a latent passing motion
Example 421 (see above, Example 399). In the
latter

rm j-

,t
the elided consonance that would
case,

inferred from and supplied by the

.
(
.
initiate the passing motion
is to be
harmony belonging to the dissonance itself.
hlS way We ar " ve at the so ‘ caIled
free suspensions, and it may be that the
^ultimate origin of seventh-chords (see
Harmony, §99) is best explained with
reference to the elision of a preparation
or of the consonant beginning
..
of a
- passing-tone motion.
When for exam P le Brahms, in the last movement
W,
;;:.pnony, writes:
:
>
of his Fourth Sym-

Example 423
Brahms, Symphony No. 4, IV
Winds , ,
i
284 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Fourth Species: Syncopation 285

we find here that a seventh-chord is applied to each bass note (E, F#, G, A); scale degree II is to be implicitly supplied after VI 7 (cf. Harmony, § 127 )•
the
each case we can assume an implicit preparation, the last analysis, H-observe the chromaticization of the
in
also a passing motion whose consonant initial interval
or, in

has been elided. (The as bearer of

third!
(
Harmony §139) — is to be viewed
both the consonant resolution
(g after f) and at the same time as
resolutions, granted, are perfectly regular.) preparation of the next seventh (V 7 (Compare
). examples 35-38 above and
(b) Further, in free composition a second act of independent character can the explanation, particularly on
p. 511)
be mixed with the resolution in such a way that the latter is prevented from 6. The possibility of eliding the preparation
of dissonant syncopes or
taking place, at least in such a pure form as in strict counterpoint. resolving them on the
strong beat, as well as the possibility
of modifying the
And yet even when another voice moves simultaneously, the consonant harmonic character of all elements of the
syncope, leads quite logically to
character of the resolution can still be preserved (cf. Example 415), about ultimate reduction of the basic form to a mere concatenation
of weak and
which, incidentally, more detail will be given in the section on the combined strong beats thus to a purely rhythmic
form, which then fully resembles the
species. term of the consonant syncope of strict
counterpoint (see above, Example 391).
Or, the resolution can be apparently fully divested of its consonant his reduction to a purely rhythmic
nucleus may insofar as any system now—
character if it moves directly to a second dissonance. In the latter case one at all can be introduced into such
a plethora— be considered the final
often speaks of a so-called preparation of dissonance by dissonance, while in transformation of the basic form.
fact the act of consonant resolution of the first dissonance implicitly accom- I would include here the following, for example:
panies the second one — even granting that the rhythm of the basic form is

obscured and, simultaneously (for purposes of explanation), a texture of several Example 426
voices is reduced to an underlying three-voice model. Thus, for example, Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 27 No. 2, Allegretto

behind the chain of seventh-chords in Example 230 (bars 2 and 3) in

Harmony there stands the following basic voice leading, in which I have
placed the elided resolutions in parentheses:

Example 424

Without doubt the purely rhythmic effect of the syncopation-form stands in

the foreground here, and, if you like, along with itthe effect of anticipation
(see the third quarter of the first bar: Gb), which, however, in the last analysis
(see p. 188) certainly stems from a passing motion (F — G — the “displacement”
h)
of C.P.E. Bach (see p. 280).'’ So far as the scale degrees are concerned, their
progression can be identified as I —V— I, unless one prefers first
to ignore the
tone Ab (the fifth of scale degree I, in the left hand of bar and thus
1) to
arrive at the following:

I — —V— II I

bar: 1, 2, 3, 4

The Ab could then be considered simply

an organ point.
Still more instructive is example 427 on
page 286. Genuine syncopes, prepared
and resolved downwards, are found here in bar (
'~'4
6 ~7 6 in relation to - the bass
Ab, or 3 in relation to the scale degree Db itself) and in bar 8 ( ^4 — 3 in
relation to the bass Gb). The remaining syncopes, on the contrary, show a devia-
tionfrom the basic form, which can be understood
only if the scale-degree pro-
gressionis taken into consideration. Because
if at bottom it is the third quarter in
each case (here, admittedly, along with the downbeat)
that is to be related to the
286 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
287
Example 427
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 27 No. 2, Allegretto

Ce the n0l at
KTvtw’ T r i°
n iS COmp,eted b * the use of longer values,
revea,s i,self compiete,y

harmony (see the dotted lines), then at least in this sense the basic form is ap-
Example 430
parently still preserved, in which, likewise, it is not until the tone of resolution at
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op.
the upbeat that the true harmony (belonging to the cantus firmus) is completed. It 110, Arioso dolente
is still more justifiable, however, to compare the syncopes under discussion with :

those that rest purely on rhythmic bases when one considers that here it is only the ;

roots of the seventh-chords (that is, the tones Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, and Gb) which |
receive the syncopated form, not the actual dissonances (in the left hand the
sevenths: a b, db.gb, cb), which alone, instead of the fundamentals, should accord-'I
ing to the rule have been treated in syncopated form. (Regarding the mode of pro- I

gression of the dissonances, see above, Example 424.)

G minor: •
I
Incidentally, in those places where the syncope emphasizes its purely :

rhythmic nucleus it is not always absolutely necessary that the connection ,

from a weak to strong beat be literally expressed graphically by means of a.v

tie. The latter can rather be tacitly supplied according to the meaning of the
passage. Haydn writes, for example:
;

m
Example 428
Haydn, Variations in F Minor

fe
t..=m
lh ?' cven "*• from intending
and express tire effect of tics! Measured
be actual
in
rests, can cany with
relation to the scale degrees
:W to ' 5ix tcenlh-note chord of each 3/16 group in
tire bass introdSs a'
188 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT The Fourth Species: Syncopation
289
syncope, resolving sometimes upward, sometimes downward; moreover, in each Example 432 continued
case the preceding tone of the melody is to be considered as though still
sounding, or —which comes —
same thing tied in syncopation, into the
to the
rest. This effect is completely clear especially in those cases in which the

—
melody even repeats the preceding tone after the rest for example, b and
l

2
eb The performer must therefore take special care to give expression to the
.

concealed syncopes in spite of the notation with rests!

Insofar as rhythm alone is under consideration, it must be noted that in
duple or quadruple meter, forms like ff'tff or are to be regarded
as syncopes; but that on the contrary, in triple meter the connection of the
second and third quarters: f f\ does not yet count as a syncope, since in
comparison to the first quarter, the last two together represent the weak part
of the bar.
Thus the following example:

Example 431
Haydn, String Quartet Op. 64 No. 5, I

J—i J
d h ^
^syncope
vnrnn of
S p
C ° ncl US10n from aI1 these
f strict
r f
considerations, the dissonant
.

counterpoint represents the basic form

of all possible forms
#f dissonance in free com os 'hon which
P occur on the strong beat, as well
as
any other derivative phenomena.
i^ And if the basic form, in keeping with the

ItoT T !
Ca tUS firmUS aPPCarS 3t firSt
strictest specifications, ?
free
t0 be bound only to the
'

composition in no way contradicts this if,

for its

« a "d
<* -
How
the accented passing tone differs
from the dissonant syncope can be
earned easdy from Example 243 or 3B2 ; in
that the dissonance of the
accented passing tone is placed
on the strong beat, its similarity
to the
dissonant syncope ,s undoubtedly
well grounded; but since on
the other hand
m the accented passing tone
both of the consonances that surround
it are
.different tones and since moreover
the tie is lacking, its genus approaches
gmore closely that of the simple
passing dissonance.

Cherubim goes too far when he proclaims, without any defense

fL. (p. 24, rule 4) that
Ce coun er P° int of the present species it is necessary
?,°T‘ to abstain as much as

^S
?

C2^
;
:

h
ni e J
0yiI
T
if° C ( r b e Wh
> ieS in h
lf
‘he dissonances of the fourth and
COUn,er P° int lies in the u
r ^ PPer voice, and that of the
the ninth. That of the

|
0wer voice ” Thal is admittedly correct,
j f but on purely
ar she grounds one could ,
imagine a more thoughtful approach
to a problem \\Z
certainly remains one of the
most difficult and important in
our art
p h ,s
'
BMerm
c»„";^„r,; Bo
hC
r s
*<*
fril ° ne nd in ersion >
itS ‘ he diminished fifth, were used
ii l e fL
tH
y
m
as actual dis-
8 beat ° nly rare cases b
y ihe old composers.
i' fo T; : "
f°" ,

er (t W °' VOiCe counterPoint,

fourth species), their use
According
I- -would
wouM be
b e (a) in two
t Sin
voices, as here:
,
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation
291
Example 433
The student is thus g.ven an opportunity
to become acquainted with
new source of effects that are significant a
.

for the voice-leading.

There is no doubt that the
j
necessity of tying causes difficulties for the
dl 8: bUt 11
V * thC m ° re im P° rtant in this ^ntext to be mindful
•r.
ofmeM
melodic
of fluency
fl
in the counterpoint.
‘ To understand more fully the spirit latent
and (b) polyphonically, that is with accompanying voices, as here: in the historic development of
1 IS l ° fmd Precisely in the diss °nant
syncope a
pTkI' b-‘ n means of
Example 434
establish Pmely musical causality a means whose
g a
suitability could -
equalled for settings of the vocal
epoch. In the instinctive search
ly.fa tecCl ce 10 expand the ‘cngth of a
§
6
’
M »
]
°
n
S ° W n Iaws

inStmct dl$ oovered in the

fr
7 ^ T “’f?
setting (compare in particular
thin tHe C° ntext
- T
had otherwise no compelling
compulsion to prepare and
a voice-leading

necessity the
,

resolve a dis-
Ce 3
& ne,r . at least ,7 7 °? means C e
of musical of fe ‘gning a kind causality and
necessity from harmony harmony. Considering to
that a seed of such
p ™ puIsion was contained even in the simplest passing
I motion (the issue of
In the strict liturgical masterworks of the sixteenth century, however, this type
is seldom encountered.
W3nd ,0P ngy of" gth
,
el

our
should
;
blstor
e
art!), it is clear that
be ke Pt a| ways in mind in investigating the nature

| the compelling fore e of the

dissonant
Compare the dissenting view on 262.
yn pe ™ usl he v >ewed a S mcomparably stronger
p.
i ^ and more urgent.
US1C C3USaiity jUSt deSCnbed remained
an inherent quality
Hil
Beginning
of the

timatTVnd
ajimately
e
and with
d x rrr
r T
n°i

Wilh seemingly greater necessity

n m
r rumen,ai music
arm0nieS appear
- Th “ e -

be linbd
««
i-
the more drastically
and
§11. Construction of the beginning . obtrusively a tone of one
harmony hooks into the flesh of the following one
, The higher degree of structural necessity as well
as length is then further
It is permitted in exercises of fourth-species counterpoint, as in those of d SCale degrees (deluding all
that derives from
such as them
second-species, to use a half-rest in the Ifnn a > :
first bar.
'
C r0matlClSm m
du,atlon etc ') and orml Considering
f that the artist ’

It is already evident from the use of the syncope, however, that the upbeat was able
ahIe to ?
tn receive only the
major triad from Nature's domain
’l

(cf. Harmony
must be consonant. e mU marV;‘ 3t tH CrCatiVe ° Wer 0f
P the huma " k ind to erection
ffoLl t f
Pr0Ud ediflce ° f musical art and 10
How flexible even this principle is in practice will be shown by two of Fux’s "
$UCh S tr °" g and compelling imbue it
exercises when the same problem is treated in the context of three-voice counterpoint. sj 3 COmpl ,
IV
necessities! Through these very necessities
^ividua!
[See Part 3, Chapter 4, §7.]
language or the other ^ ,y

artsl
nature,
Thus,
music acquit “logic" no
obvious that there Is ample reason
it is
IeT h n
mUS to
V,deS SUCh 3 Pr ° ud testament
to the autonomy of
Main Body „
human
h ‘r f't
uma creativity, highest among r° all the arts.

Cetm th ‘ S iSSUC’ may VCry Wdl qu0te Fux ‘* ,ema[h on

§12. Preference for dissonant over consonant syncopes sin£Z 7 0 am0Unt
P- 83: “However
°/ appeal fr0m ,he ligatures ’ 1 *Wre you not
iTt^fe^Z" Th
Hree Cantus firmi in the same
In general, dissonant syncopes are preferable to consonant ones. L
T. ?
,v«y thoroughly with other, similar
manner, but also to practice
cantus firmi as well; for one can
Decisive for this preference not so much the specific appeal of the' never be too
is U #1U C m
^ttj ?™ Pa“' additi °n ' a,S ° the Statement
-
technical value for the voice leading
? P 136?

2
dissonant suspension alone, but, rather, its t ; kec f a PP'y ligatures sometimes ,
in one voice, sometimes in
another-
of the counterpoint which can only gain in fluency and smoothness by
itself, 15 asl °o‘ shin
8 how much grace the melody receives, even
its frequent and skillful application. (The situation is exactly the same as that
C,b 3 Part C 31 i0n dear,y Perceptible to the
'
originates by making'

.to this kind of composition

^°' ear. This applies not only
y
regarding the use of the passing dissonance in the second species, cf. Part 2, ,
but to all others as well.”
n the c oo;exl of three-voice
Chapter counterpoint in the same species
2, §8.) !S .

glowing in Albreehtsberger we read the

(p. 103): “The remaining bars may have
on the downblat
292 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation
a consonant or dissonant ligature, the latter of which
293
is preferable if ligatures are used
frequently.” Moreover, he does not neglect to make the following requirement on p. It makes anessential difference, however, whether
62: “Melodic fluency must be observed here as well.” situations are (a) dissonant or (b)
the syncopes m thc.se
consonant, and also whether only the
Cherubini brings a different perspective (p. 23, Example 72): “If dissonances are or a less strict
strictest
standpoint is applied in both cases.
not used, there is a danger of writing parallel octaves and fifths,” We will soon see
what this rule is all about (cf. §15); in any case, it contributes at least a technical
pecifically 8 T 9 — 8 and
KPP*
2 —
(,h ° only oncs undct consideration here),
T m —

"
reason for ranking the dissonant syncope in counterpoint higher than the consonant 1 1 the upper counterpoint and 5 4 5 in T
tne lower counterpoint viewed
one. for the time being from the strictest standpoint,
admit of neither parallel nor
nonparallel similar motion in the situation
§J 3. The preference for imperfect consonances by bracket 1 If 1S therefore not permitted
to write, for example, as

As everywhere else in the exercises of counterpoint, the imperfect consonances

Example 435
have a better effect than the perfect ones here as well.
As I have said before, this is the reason the syncopes ~2 — 1, 9 — 8, and
~4 — are considered less desirable than ”~7 6,
~*4 — — 3, and
'"'2
— 3 (cf.
§ 10 ).

'
§14. Use of the unison also on the downbeat

Because of the good occasion provided by oblique motion (made possible by

the ligature for the first time in counterpoint in relation to the downbeat),
the unison is permissible here also on the downbeat a situation that, as we —
know, was not allowed to occur in the second or third species. This
prohibition results, first of all, from
the nature of the dissonant
That the unison is, however, permitted on the upbeat is again for the — yncopes, as well as from the requirement
that they resolve downward.
same reason— self-evident. Because
1 is completely bound to the latter
requirement, the dissonant syncope
v^ppears as nothing but a delay of the
Compare Albrechtsberger, tone of resolution; thus, the
Bellermann
p. 58.

“To place [the unison] several times in succession

states further (p. 175): ^
SC3rCe y anything but ddayed
above-cited
Paralld ° r no "Parallel similar
(either on the upbeat or on the downbeat) is, of course, prohibited according to the motion^
rules set down above about the use of perfect consonances.” As we will see presently,
the unison — precisely because it is a perfect consonance — is subject to the same caution Example 436
as the other perfect consonances. A

§15. Parallel and nonparallel similar motion in the present species

Among the three relationships that we had to distinguish in treating this CXPOSeS a “ t0 ° Cleafly ‘° ° ur erce
problem in the second species P Phon the poor result of
(cf. Part 2, Chapter 2, §11), only two remain
in the present species; the first and strongest of the former relationships— the
I ^f
c ° nd ’ m addition to what was said about these
progressions already in
direct succession of
by the ligature.
upbeat and downbeat— has, of course, been absorbed here
Here is a diagram of the two possible relationships: TsS in
.,

MTff n cfrom the

^thculty
r ,es

pr° bi°
the extent that they were faulty
em 1S compounded by a circumstance
—
c£ Part 2, Chapter 1
that presents severe
bkt. 2 psychological standpoint: the
and necessity of
obligation
^the downward resolut, on announce in
bkt. 1 advance imminent danger of a
the
iproh.bited similar motion; therefore, those aspects of obligation and necessity
cpt. J J4J J must be considered the actual,
treacherous source of the mistake. For if one
c.f o o ...knows that the dissonant syncope will have to move in a downward direction,
1. Because of the special circumstances of the present situation, the gvhy seek out at all (consciously, that is) the error that lurks in it? The ear
afterbeat successions (see bracket 1) here take first consideration. |2 ways shows us the truth of this matter, beyond any shadow of doubt. (From
this, incidentally, we can now finally
understand even better why earlier—
.
:

cf.
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 295
§§8 and 9 —we had to recommend limitation of the use of '"9 — 8 and 4 —5
syncopes.)
But the descending second-step contained in the falling
creates for our ear at least the illusion
succession '"6 5 —
of a required downward resolution to
The necessity of syncopes, as it is posed precisely by the exercise as such, such an extent that, psychologically, our syncope comes close
to the realm of
leads, on other hand, also to a certain leniency regarding the absolute strictness
actually dissonant syncopes. Our ear
automatically reacts with greater sen-
of the prohibition of parallel motion involving dissonant syncopes; otherwise,
sitivity toward that succession—
obviously, indeed, only because of the falling
all voice leading in exercises would soon be rendered impossible. In this second-step, as though it were a true parallel succession
involving dissonant
exigency we are aided by the more discriminating valuation of perfect syncopes—; therefore, it may be advisable to exempt the falling
succession 6 —
to — 5
consonances from Part 5
2, Chapter 1, §4; and since, for reasons discussed there, from the granted above to the consonant syncope, and to
liberties
the fifthpreferable to the octave for contrapuntal purposes, we permit the
is
include it in the prohibition mentioned under a. In
syncope 5'|'4 —
5 in the lower counterpoint under certain circumstances, but
ing consonant syncope 6 —
5 'f'6 —
other words: the descend-
5 occupies an intermediate position,
we never grant an exception to 8't'9 — 8.
therefore, it is best to extend the prohibition
and,
of parallels involving dissonant
Ad b: The consonant
syncope, even though it may be considered (in a syncopes (see under a) to this syncope as well,
even though it lacks by nature
more remote be sure) a delay of the tone following the upbeat, is,
sense, to
the requirement of a downward resolution.
on the other hand, free of any requirement of a downward resolution.
On the other hand, this kind of
Therefore, from the outset, even from the strictest standpoint, this syncope
illusion is not present in the succession
6 5 16- -
5 in the ascending direction;
therefore, its use is again characterized by
relative freedom.
may demand, if not complete access to prohibited progressions, at least a
Nevertheless, what was said above (under a) should not be forgotten: in
certain liberty with regard to parallel motion, to say nothing of nonparallel
case of a more lenient treatment, it is again the that requires the strictness
fifth
similar motion— for example:
of the prohibition to a lesser extent than the octave.
As a final result of the considerations set forth
under a and b, it should
Example 437 be kept in mind that there can never
be an exception in the case of a
dissonant [syncope that yields] similar motion
to an octave, but that, because
of the lesser perfection of the fifth,
dispensation may be granted under certain
circumstances for a parallel succession of fifths
(whether ascending or descend-
ing, dissonant or consonant, or in the
upper or lower counterpoint) provided
only that such a succession not be misused by
excessively crass and unneces-
sarily repetitious application.
—especially in view of the fact that no better possibility may be available [in
a given case]. This liberty is required even more urgently as the
2. A still greater degree of liberty, however, is called for from the outset
successions
involved are by nature only afterbeat successions.
m the relationship of downbeat to downbeat
(see bracket 2) than could be
granted in the case of the consonant syncopes
The following, however, should be kept in mind: the more attention is discussed earlier. Nevertheless,
since the repeated use of perfect consonances
paid in such a situation to placing imperfect consonances at least on the on the downbeat would have
to result in an overly empty setting, it
downbeat, the better even parallel progressions can be tolerated. Thus, 6
8^ — is clear that the liberty must be
applied
6 8 is better than 5 — —
8^5 8 (cf. Part 2, Chapter 2, §11, under 3, and the
sparingly in the present situation as well.

remarks under 2 in the present section).

The same principle would apply, strictly speaking, also to the succession
of consonant syncopes in the upper counterpoint, that is, 6 5'|'6
5, which
— — Free composition from the outset knows nothing
like this. A requirement
signifies a change of harmony (see above, Part 2, Chapter of uninterrupted syncopes, which is necessary in
2, §13 and Chapter strict counterpoint for
3, §8) —
for example: didactic purposes, is from the outset alien to free composition. While this
alone reduces the dangers inherent in syncopes
with regard to prohibited
Example 438 progressions, an additional factor is the interpretative
force of the scale-degree,
which can bind together a longer chain of syncopes
into one single unit—
phenomenon that counterpoint is unable either to originate or
to demonstrate.
In this context, compare Harmony, Example 195, where scale degree VI in B
major by
~
itself generates a chain of seven syncopes: 6 —
5f6 5t'6 — —
5
T 6 5 t6 — f6 —
eighth-notes).
(moving in a rhythm of sixteenth-notes over seven
It goes without saying that the repetition of the fifth as a sixth,
 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation
as seen there, equivalent to the ligature of counterpoint, even
is
though the
articulation with legato slurs appears to
indicate something different »o mistake is contained in them
In this context may be cited the
3 fw ml
after , j
the retardations
T.*T
are eliminated
remark by /./. Quantz in his Versuch (Table V, Figure II).
einer A nweisung die Flote traversiere
zu spielen 12 Chapter XV, §24, on the
,
116 C ° nSiCkred “ appr ° pnate t0 about ‘he subject in two-voice
execution of cadenzas in two parts (cf. also ^unterpoillt
§20ff. in the same work):
f° r hi$ m ° re
In a passage in sixths where you do not
wish to touch any dissonances, one of
of the'
ot Z
the fourth species in three-voice r
counterpoint.
iSSi ° nS 311 thC thorou g hl y- however, in his discussion
Observe the surprisingly subtle
F Dtle 8y and
the two parts must anticipate a note, whether discriminating train of thought on
ascending or descending, so that p. 101:
the other may adjust accordingly: To treat the subject more thoroughly, however, I must repeat what has been
said elsewhere about the
[various degrees of] perfection
Example 439 of the consonances: the
C ° nSOnan Ce’ tbe octave even
IX! T
most perfect; the more perfect
f
more perfect, and the unison the
these intervals are, the less harmony

rhl
n0r har
charming [abou
r
“
Furthermore, experience has taught
that dissonances by themselves
beau ‘y' but whatever is perceived
than] is generated solely by the
consonances
they contain
have neither
as euphonious and

to which the
r hus we ’ n see that a
dissonance lha
fsToTtn? u .t ? ‘ resolves to a fifth

Here the lower part has the

movement, and indicates that in the first bar the
haTthP
that f r
the following
b e han
example T teS lving tQ an 0C,ave Therefore,
is
?
'

discarded by good masters as faulty

it is not surprising

upper part should ascend, and later that it should

descend again. 15
Example 441
How subtly the effect of the anticipation-indeed,
in the form of the syncope
Fux XI, 5
etc is bere ~
P* acecl in the service of improvising two-part cadenzas '
, i/ ,
and how ,
delightful the words with which Quantz
describes all this! How far
the overall level of our musical culture has
declined since then-in spite of all
the spiritual heroes who have come and
gone in the meantime! In general,
todays musicians are no longer able to improvise the next one, however,
preludes or modulations; is considered suitable to counterpoint:
they are no longer able even to execute
cadenzas and fermatas in their leisure
time! And which of today's teachers, Example 442
incidentally, would be in a position to
provide such a clear rationale for a technique Fux XI, 6
like the one just discussed for
the execution of cadenzas, and thereby
convince the student of its necessity!

In the context of two-voice

counterpoint, Fux discusses all these problems as
hough only in passing. He merely presents the basic principle by
taking his theory
(discussed earlier in r
§4) as a point of departure (p. 81):
t
‘Uicrarca ana excused the more tl
Therefore, it is impossible to progress perfect consonance to which the dissonance
from a unison to a second or from an resolves approximates the nature
octave to a ninth by way of a ligature, an imperfect consonance.
as the following examples show
[examples
° Table V, Figure 8 follow]. If the retardation
were to be eliminated, there
would be two unisons in succession in the
second [examples of Table V, Figure 9 follow].
first example and two octaves in
the
jc’Lr5
; n 0rder T re Clear lhat

t0 d,Sa low p
trom the outset Fux distinguishes between
rallel
8t9-8 successions under all circumstances
8+9-8
However, it is good if the motion ?nnt, iiTk
ote well that: no mention
. ! f
( is made here of the consonant syncope 8 +
from the second to the unison or from
the ninth to the octave occurs as follows: 10-8) but
P 294) 35 tolecabk The question remains
whether I
ether, in view f7ll
viet of [allowed] fifth-successions in the upper
'

°P en
counterpoint, the syncope
>14-5 in the lower counterpoint is
also tolerated. Fux defends his
principle of
granting syncopes from the outset a
greater degree of freedom in fifth-successions
than
m octave-successions with the following argument
[p. 101]:

In order to respond your not inconsiderable reservation, I point out that

to
much
hat is disallowed in the upper
register is tolerated in the lower,
because higher
tones are perceived with greater accuracy
by the ear, while lower tones become
298 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation
somewhat dark because of their iower pitch, and do not impress the ear so
forcefully. For higher elevations 00 7 wouia oe too simple
clarify, while lower elevations obscure.
wthout them. All syncopations and dissonances
can be traced back to them
Even though, as can be sensed from the context, this remark does not relate to the
What would harmony be without these elements? 14
syncope 5 + — 4 5, we may nevertheless conclude that, precisely because it occurs in (Compare also my “Contribution
8+9 — 8
the lower register, this
Study of Ornamentation” [see Appendix]
to the
syncope appears to him less reproachable than in the In his own §1
exercises, Fux strictly observes the above theories.
upper counterpoint— leaving aside the intrinsically more desirable quality of the fifth,
avoids parallel successions with
He by no means
which, of course, remains the essence of Fux’s argument (compare the above quotation
consonant syncopes-for example, 8+10-8
(cf Table
from Fux,
And,
p. 101).

as if all these elaborations were not enough, he adds, using the examples in
19 „r
litdescmDie
nvi l
e scruple, Yh;
F,g ure 20 )* or the succession
' 614

fS* ‘
Y .
,
(cf. Table V, Figure
°n h e COritCary ' iS frequent,y used b
y hm. with
5+4-5
lit that he then uses a nonparallel
,! ,

Table XI, Figures 3 and 4: succession-for example 6+4-5-with

Example 443
is infd
SCfUP
4 TE
ybC Unders,0od The relationship of downbeat
” ° U‘ h
-

“ i,ati “ hC Wri " S ' f° r

to downbeat
as

Fux XI, 3
Example 445
Fux XU, 5, bs. 5-7

Example 444
Fux XI, 4
view, I ha3Z
^ lhC Ieiati0nship of upbeat t0 u
arC

P beal according to
m many

-
rCSPeCtS: t0 Pr ° Vide 3 bettCr 0Ver ‘

him the following rules

apply;

(a) 8 t 9— 8; “Here the tied ninth is prepared by the octave. Even a

single
C 0f h S Pr0hlb,ted “
’ S°UndS alm ° St iike tW ° parallel oclav “"
(Example no 4! p 61)
(b)
Octave-successions with consonant syncopes,
however, he describes on pp. 59-60
OUr ~ VOice settin s - even th °ugh they
« seem to sound
‘ocUv^ndE
octave and-fifthish (oktaven- und !,
quintenmdssig)” (Examples follow,
the following consideration (p. 100), so very characteristic for recognizing the essential 8 in the upper counterpoint and
showing 8 +
quality of tying
8 3-8, 8 in the lower in the + + 6-8
Beyond the
(cf.

fact that
§12):

one must attend to the authority of great masters, who

exolanatT’ *h
caution
* *° Albrechtsberger

^^
' p ,03 ') From ‘he qualification added
m3y SUrmiSC <hat tW°' VOlCe coun,er P°int
'
to the above

requires some
approve the first example but disapprove the second, you should know that my
C) Re8 din 5 ^4^ 5 in the
,0Wer counler P° in b he teaches on
remark, “ligatures change nothing,” applies only to the nature of consonances, -

r ?- p. 60f.: “The
-
which is the same in both examples. For the rest, who can deny that ligatures
fnIli

“ Tie a„T2frJ?
4
ne of is
5t4 5 ,he "r
m ° re ' ha " ° nCC in direCt success i° n are prohibited in
’ «
have a great effect, and have the power to avoid errors and to modify settings? ,
settings of VO n b0,h StriCt and free st
How beautifully Fux formulates here the double effect of the syncope: on the one SriS-T
fifthish A words,
In other
.
u’ he prohibits 8+9-8 y‘ es because they sound too
a while !
'

without exception, he allows

hand, it means only a delay of the resolution-tone, so that the suspended tone could 5+
simply be disregarded and omitted; on the other hand, however, it manifests a certain
transforming power by virtue of which we must attribute to the syncope a purpose
thfr or th t°oE 'k ‘if T “""
JUi0n th 3t
a<,ic,s
,
il ** USCd ° nly ° nCe He gives
himse,fon p 61 -
‘
reason for

and beauty in its own right. (Compare to this the following treasurable definition of
the appoggiatura in C.P.E. Bach's Versuch iiber die Example 446
wahre Art, das Clavier zu spielen,
Part I, Section 2, Chapter Albrechtsberger, p. 61
2, §1:

Appoggiaturas are among the most essential embellishments. They enhance

harmony as well as melody. They heighten the attractiveness of the latter by
joining notes smoothly together and, in the case of notes which might prove
disagreeable because of their length, by shortening them while filling the ear
4 — 5
 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation
301
(d) Parallel successions of fifths in
consonant syncopes are differentiated by Al- Mkrmann seems at first to follow the doctrine of
brechtsberger as follows: Albrechtsberger (p 175V "Since
hed n 0te on lhe downbeat is considered
t ie
*
(a) He considers them good when they ascend (seeabove under b), no matter upbeat, ,t ,s not good to use
an extension
the same perfect consonant
£
whether the ascent occurs by step or in larger intervals interval several times in
(compare the examples on p. 58:
T 0 — T 6 — 5^ 6, or on
5 p. 60: 5 3 — 5 3 — 5 in the upper and lower counter-
e
^
Theref° re ’ he COnsiders "bad ” also
the
point);

(/3) He prohibits them in the descending direction only if they descend by step in
xam ple°St6
example 8T6-8t6-8, while the grade "marginally acceptable" is given
conseouenTe "Th
"8
lGaSOn eXP
^
he pre P ares to draw from
5f6-5t
a bold
the upper counterpoints:
tilths are
5f6-5 f6-5
allowed without hesitation, for example:
(see above under c). The other descending SSSh hi
settings with both voices ,
alS0 Why flfths as they a
ascending, are not unpleasant to
’ PP ear in the f°ll°w* n 8
the ear, even though thev
occur on the accented part of
the bar.” Thus, he approves
Pr6 C3t e “800d ’ b 1 immediately
,
6T5 6+5 6 — \ —
Example 447 ’
revokes as much as he has conceded:
sTudent" mustf no repeat such
student .
? "The
turns too often, but must always
aim for an appealing
anety of intervals. Does this mean
that he might admit, from the
outset, the applica-
tion of less stringent
principles from downbeat to downbeat?
And even though he ex-
h SUCCeSS, ° nS ’ 316 ° CtaVe - SUCCessions
‘mplicity included here?
twTet:htff
H ° h,bded Cta
°
; Ve
accession that always threatens in the
case of a ~ -
P
syncope can be avoided, J L j 9 8
he discusses only in the context of
three-voice counterpoint, on
In a certain sense Albrechtsberger’s
theory is thus more specialized than Fux’s-
concerning point c and even contradicts the
that
dfi, it

would provide depth and orientation, without which

contrapuntal doctrine must
latter. Nevertheless, it lacks aspects
!uch°inter^i
n
fro
d
^
Wh
“ '° be prepared by the tenth
he baSS mUSt ascend
or > some other
remain only a collection of casual rules, restrictions and
2.

downbeat:
The following rules apply for Albrechtsberger to
prescriptions of obscure origin.
the relationship of downbeat to
voir,
replaced
P‘
, .,
’r
T
hv ,ts solution, the voices
d by
^ ^ if il is t0

S ° tha ' if the nin,h were

‘° be
would move in contrary motion. Prepara-
form a ninth with the

n
| >on by the octave is completely faulty,
since very ugly hidden octaves
(a) Descending successions of fifths would
in the lower counterpoint, for example:

Example 448 Example 449

Bellermann, p. 214
‘not too good”

5f 4 — 5
are prohibited by the same restriction as [that which applies to] (see above
under lc).

(b) All other possible types are allowed— for example, 61~5 6 in the 6fS — —
direCt ‘° n (P- 58)
5 ’
1-5 -3 —
3 in the descending direction
(p. 60); see also
^Tolfetc
Unfortunately Albrechtsberger provides no justification ap P roach es this question in his Crosse Kompositiomlehre
for the rules even here. » (Vol. 11
Again in this matter, Cherubini assumes the
r ,

b° W ev er he imme diately
strictest possible standpoint, one that is
’ obscures its origin: instead of determining
.
k (
rigid almost to the extent of obtuse lack of principles. He prohibits
5f 4 — 5f4— of prohibited progressions in the context of the
phenomenon of syncope in
(p. 23 Example 70), without any differentiation and under all circumstances, counterpoint, he immediately speaks
of the mannerism of "chain suspensions,”
and also which
prohibits 8 f 5-8 f 3 -8, etc. (Example f 6- 5 f 6-5 f 3 - oniy in a «“«-
example). In practice, however,
72), 5
5, etc. (same
n-*-
6 — (see p. 24, Exercise 2). Strangely
we see him contradicting himself by using
5*f 6 — 5+
5 enough, Cherubini does not discuss parallel
successions from downbeat to downbeat at all.From this strict standpoint, one under- §J6. The possibility of an interruption of the ligatures
stands more easily his statement (quoted in §12) recommending more frequent use of
dissonant syncopes. |The law of syncopes is, of course, uniformly valid for the
Finally,
should be mentioned that he also cites the example of Fux
it
duration of the
(quoted exercise; nevertheless,
in this it is permitted, as an exception, to interrupt the
volume as Examples 443 and 4441 and annends to it a HhU syncopes
and replace them with two ligature-free
beats, for which, in some cases,
a
and a half-note can also substitute. This
^halt-rest
is appropriate when a
302 TWO-VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation SO-
repetition (monotonia) is to be avoided, or to give a new stimulus to a line,
Example 450
once its continuation has become impossible for one reason or another.

Fux explicitly cites monotony as a reason [for an interruption of ligatures] on pp.

^
I
«r
could indeed have used a ligature there, but 1 deliberately avoided it
Joseph: I

in order to preclude an unpleasant repetition, since 1 had used the same

ligatures
immediately before in the third and fourth bars. A different' type of cadence, which appears in an exercise
by Beethoven ( Nottebokm
Aloys: Your remark is prudent, for one must pay careful attention to matters
of melodic fluency and continuity.

That he views the interruption of ligatures, nevertheless, only as a concession Example 451
necessary in a difficult situation, can be seen from the following basic idea
stated in
the context of three-voice counterpoint [p. 104]: “The ligatures here constitute the
main purpose, a thorough understanding of which can be gained through such
exercises.” (Compare the quotation in §12.)
Albrechtsberger (p. 62): “Finally, it is important to know that, in case the invariable
use of ligatures is not of good effect, it is permitted if necessary to use once or (at
expressly criticized by Albrechtsberger
is
most) twice a freely introduced consonance on the downbeat in the with the remark: “N.B. not too
counterpoint” often”- he adds
a C
(Compare also p. 103.) We may 1 Com
also recall, however (see above, §5), how, as a result
Nof f2ton ‘rS2
Nottebohm, TO*
p. 52, and in Albrechtsberger's own
1 P are the same Nation i"
of the use of the dissonant diminished fifth as a syncope in the upper
counterpoint,
he (precisely Albrechtsberger himself!) arrives at yet another and individual interrup-
tion of ligatures.
,hc
C “
Side ' **
treatise, pp. 105-106

if lhe Ca "‘“ S "" >»* * —

Cherubini proceeds this time with greater precision (p. 24, rule 5):

The law of syncopating

Example 452
is to be observed in every bar. However, if this obligation
makes it difficult to keep the melody
middle register— in other words, if the
in a
syncope would carry it too high or too low— or if the syncope causes similar
phrases to have too much resemblance [cf. Fux, above], or, finally, if phrases
become too confusing through syncopes, then it is advisable not to syncopate
for one or (at most) two bars. This remedy, however, should be the closing formula ~2 —
used only if 1 would not be possible
3 | at all from the outset. Since i
there is no other possibility. is impossible to give up the other leading
tone, B, would it not be better,
instead o
writing as tot lows:
For Bellermann’s comments on this matter, see p. 175f. of his treatise.

§17. The prohibition of tone-repetition Example 453

It should be emphasized that here, as well as in the second and third species,
the repetition of tones is entirely disallowed.

Cadence

§J8. Cadent ial formulas

Without exception, 7 —6 j
8 is to be used in the upper counterpoint, and
2 — 3 |
1 in the lower. This is evident already from the required presence
of both leading tones:
304 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation 305
§19. The misguided treatment of syncopes in the conventional
theory of harmony

The theory of syncopes represented here treats, to state it once again and most
emphatically, precisely the same subject matter that is taught in conventional
textbooks on harmony in chapters about the preparation and resolution of the
seventh and the other dissonances. May the type of treatment to which this
problem has been subjected here demonstrate that the problem of the syncope
can have its real home [only] in counterpoint, not in the theory of harmony.

Exercises

Example 455
Fux V, 16 and 17
Soprano
The Fourth Species: Syncopation

nil
308 TWO- VOICE COUNTERPOINT
The Fourth Species: Syncopation
309
Example 455 continued
H. Schenker lhe ofa •-* this -
4 - 3 and 2 - 1 (see p 2741? Z n T '
'if*11
feaUy - 10 and 9 - 8 or only
see above, p.
294 (note that the downbeats U pbeats of bars 9 a "d
10,
k
sh ° w the
and concerning the fifth-successions
10); Parable intervals 5
both cases we encounter Cheats of bars 3 and 4, see p. 295. In
in the d f L
non
mann's cautionary attitude °f and thereforeTleller-
exag^rateTlS^h
is exaggerated.
He changes bars 9-10
following: (p. 177) to the

Example 457

b
a° rS“ -~ - *** l
b = merely wanted to avoid

cussed above 011^294

"' i

^ ermann
"’
« b «» dis-

oX STST Syncope 7 IT
see above, pp. $ynCOpe 1
269’and 274 277 In bar 7 >
passage as follows
° d
to th ‘ S
Bel|
(p. 177): changes -
the

Example 458

Comments on the Preceding Exercises

, d -*°"
No.Concerning the interruption of tying in bar 5, see §16. Bellermann, who
1. uses
the same exercise (p. 176), disregards monotony and makes the following change:
tary on Albrechtsberger
H J ^^ Ut '° n in bar *
10-11, see the commen-
in §5
Example 456
nled fc “ rth lhe l0W “
e“IT
ra
7 Albrech,sb ' r8" bimself
follows Kim in dkregmdTng Whoever
«, substitute a highe" °
|h°"aciud dis'j “ ,oic “
c£ » b °™.
§8), can, of
octave
Claye ,n thls ’’a"”" (

-7-6 instead of
»"d, accordingly, think of the
syncope

which certainly does not succeed in improving the effect.

the raised sixth 11
m °de Albrec hlsberger uses
As
Chapter
to the succession of

1, §18.
two major thirds in bars 5-6: see above. Part 2,
(bars 2 and 4)
and seventh
without
taK XhTmtanfs* ) “'"m ^ ’

b°d 7 “f exercise

No. 2. This exercise (also taken over by Bellermann) basically shows, if the ligatures
are removed, only successions of thirds. If this is in a certain sense to be considered a
on the downbeats
of bars 7 - 10 see
instrumentaily conceived,
added voice an octave
p 300 under A
is unfortunatelv^
g
"
tl exerci
"S
ascendin g direction
because apparently ^^ ^
° n,y trans ose ‘he ’

fault of the counterpoint — one that can be excused only in part by the basic require- the limit of a tenth
higher to be convinced
that *t "
P
ment of ligatures and the difficulties resulting from it—, one should nevertheless at least
not overlook the octave, sixth, and
writing.
in this ease. This
il no n § but
3,1 neCeSSary ,0
^p
h t an all-too-convenient
exceed
mode of
“V
fifth on the downbeats of bars 2, 5, and 7, which do
improve the effect here.