Fugue Study ?

but why make rules in some cases and then break them in others ?

spacey


Kev, cadences are usually referred to as turnarounds in jazz and usually written as example, II-V-I - Of course there are many, many cadences. So it's important to know exactly what cadences or turnarounds one is discussing.

It may be easier to answer your questions if you wrote them correctly.
As in 1. you mention three turnarounds...V-I and III-I..(I'm guessing) ..and not sure what the third one is.

2. I didn't understand any of that but you said you did so all's cool there.
And to try and answer your question, rules aren't broken they are replaced with other rules. The trick is to learn them so one can recognize when they have changed.

You mentioned "weak" and that's cool. Some cadences are meant to be that way and it's good you're recognizing (hearing)that. When you compose and need a weak cadence you'll know what you're looking for.

Hope this helps...and theory threads and I don't get along so I'm exiting before I get in trouble. (this is number 2 today so I'm on a thin limb lol)

tarsier


I never said to ignore the tools (rules). And I did say (perhaps not very clearly) to practice the tools (rules) a lot.  And of course Bach knew the tools better than anyone. The tools are what enable you to write/play the music you want quickly and pretty much without effort. They are vitally important.  But more important is to find a theory teacher who can teach you in the way you need to learn.  I spent way too many years in college "learning" from piss poor theory teachers before I finally found a teacher who could truly explain theory to me in a way that I felt let me get it.  I wasted a lot of time learning the rules of 18th century counterpoint through 20th century atonal serialism.  Finally, when I found my mentor, I started to learn the tools of 18th century counterpoint through 20th century atonal serialism.

For example: In college I'd get an assignment to do some 2 voice counterpoint. I'd do it, turn it in and get it marked up by a grad student/TA or maybe on a good day (or bad day) by the prof himself. The result? A piece of counterpoint with red marks on it indicating where I broke the rules. Amount-of-learning=0

Contrast with: I'm doing private study with my mentor. He asks for some 2 voice counterpoint. I do it, turn it in and then we discuss it. Perhaps these notes don't follow this particular rule, but why do they work? Maybe because of this line here that anticipates the intervals... Why does this cadence not feel particularly resolute, even though it's perfect?  Maybe because the lines leading up don't set it up well...  Discussion and back-and-forth and trying ideas.  Amount-of-learning=8

So it sounds like in this context, following the rules are a very important part of the lesson that Fux is trying to teach.  Does he respond to questions and discussion? That would be the first person to ask. Considering the state he's in at the moment, he's not likely to engage in much banter. So also ask yourself if he is a good fit for you. I do realize that you've asked for discussion on this topic here on this forum. But the state of music theory discussion here is about as lively as with Fux himself. Can you find a real life theory teacher somewhere?

I'm just sharing my experience in learning theory.  And I'm no great composer, so it might be best to ignore me. Seriously.