Talk:Tristan chord

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article falls within the scope of the WikiProject contemporary music, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of contemporary music subjects. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

	This article falls within the scope of the Opera WikiProject, a collaboration to develop Wikipedia articles on operas and opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues, identify areas of neglect and exchange ideas. New members are very welcome!
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Modern Spelling 2 Liszt and the Tristan Chord 3 MIDI file 4 Adding music 5 Golliwogg's Cakewalk 6 Idioteque 7 The Beethoven example 8 Bach example 9 Analyzed from a Thorough Bass Perspective 10 Opening Paragraph 11 Tempo

[edit] Modern Spelling

I had put that the so called tristan chord is a Fm7b5 chord. Someone deleted this as unhelpful. First' I'd like to see their musical credentials. I have many years of education in this specific area of theory, and am an Autistic Savant. This is not some enigma for the generations, it's a damn chord. To me, it sounds like what it is, 4 notes, big deal. Only an un-educated or stupid person would challenge such a simple statement. There is no arguing this point. So, please, help me keep it in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ReignMan (talk • contribs) 19:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes, spelling things, enharmonically, in a different way can change the meaning of the chord and its function. Credentials are irrelevant and often misleading. Content for Wikipedia is provided by published sources. You don't find jazz-chart style chord indications above the staff lines in the published scores of Wagner or any other 19th century composer. You need to find a published source before adding content to an article. I guess I'll find some way to live with the fact that I'm stupid and uneducated. Things could be worse for me, I suppose. Have a good day.--Roivas (talk) 19:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Liszt and the Tristan Chord

Alan Walker in his Liszt biography says that Wagner may have heard the Tristan chord in one of Liszt's songs. The song was 'Ich mochte hingehn' and was composed 10 years before Wagner started to work on Tristan and Isolde. Though Beethoven and Chopin may have used the chord before, the interesting thing about this example is that Liszt uses it in a way almost identical to Wagner, according to Walker. If the music for this could be found, perhaps it would be an interesting addition to this page.--DStong

[edit] MIDI file

Can the MIDI file on this page be changed so at least it's at the correct tempo? It's too fast right now. Try eighth note equals 80 or quarter equals 40.

And what's the title and opus number of the Beethoven example?

Ryan

Welcome. Currently the midi file can't be changed, as midi files can't currently be uploaded to Wikipedia, see Wikipedia talk:Sound. I will attempt to create an .MP3 (or even .ogg) file in a more correct tempo.

If you clicked on the Beethoven example you would have been taken to a page which would tell you more about the picture. If you simply rest the mouse on the graphic text appears which reads, "Beethoven's Sonata Op. 31 No. 3". Hyacinth 21:54, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes, there seems to be a bit of a problem with the tempo of the file - myself and User:Opus33 discussed it a little (I thought we'd had the discussion on this page, but obviously not). I made the file with Lilypond to play at dotted crotchet = 35 but, unfortunately, while the file sounds fine if I play it in Winamp, it's too fast if I play it through my browser. So there is some sort of problem with the file, but exactly what's causing it, I don't know. If I get time I'll try to fix it (of course, I'll be very grateful if somebody else does it before me). --Camembert

[edit] Adding music

I'd like to add a whole chunk of text illustrated with musical examples to this article, but I haven't got access to music writing software. Is there anyone out there who could construct musical examples from instructions I give them?

Thanks, Anselm

I could probably do that, assuming that the examples aren't too long. EldKatt (Talk) 13:47, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, EldKatt. The musical examples will only be a bar or two each, but there will be quite a few of them. They'll all be on the conventional piano score format.

Just as a trial run, if I gave you the following instruction, would it be clear enough for you to produce a musical example? I've used the pitch notation in the Wikipedia article "Scientific Pitch Notation", and the "|" character to denote barlines. (The music is the imperfectly remembered opening of a Bach chorale from the Riemenschneider 371.)

Sop: Bb4 | A4 A4 G4 (all 1/4 notes) Alt: G4 | G4 F#4 G4 (all 1/4 notes) Ten: D4 | Eb4 D4 C4 Bb3 (1/4 note | 1/4 note 1/8 note 1/8 note 1/4 note) Bas: G3 | C3 D3 G2 (all 1/4 notes)

Being a new Wikipedian, is it OK to carry on this discussion on these pages, or would it be better carried on somewhere else? (Assuming you want to go on with it, that is!)

Anselm

Your instructions make perfect sense, although a simpler way of writing the note lengths might be desirable (use your imagination, as long as it makes sense). I don't have an endless supply of time, though, so about how many is quite a few?

To answer your final question: if we're the only ones who need to communicate, it'd probably be better to use user talk pages. EldKatt (Talk) 14:46, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Images and Wikipedia:Requested pictures. If you can point me towards your source I would be willing to create images from that (as opposed to through lengthy written descriptions by yourself). Hyacinth 00:54, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, Hyacinth, but I'm afraid lengthy written descriptions may be necessary - it's hard to tell before we've launched into the article. I have to construct theoretical musical examples for the most part, so images won't do. Also, I've noted your e-problems on your talk page, and it sounds as if you could do without a long-term project (such as this one might turn out to be) for the meanwhile!

Anselm

[edit] Golliwogg's Cakewalk

While the Tristan chord is implied in Golliwogg's Cakewalk, it is not quoted note for note or even interval for interval. The three chords that appear are an implied F major chord (From the bass up, A-A-F), A C7 chord (C-Bb-E), and an interesting chord, Ab Minor with an added 11 (Ab-Db-Cb-Eb). The latter chord is a very intriguing. Since the Db is added, it functions as a dominant in the key of Gb. This is reinforced by the next phrase, which resolves to Gb major. This chord, however, cannot be the Tristan chord as there is no tritone between any of these intervals. So the quote here is more a quote of the opening of Tristan and Isolde, rather than the chord itself. Am I interpreting this incorrectly? Kntrabssi 17:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Idioteque

This chord is not in Radiohead's Idioteque. It might be in Mild und Leise somewhere but it's not in the part that Radiohead sampled. Bob

[edit] The Beethoven example

Is not the the "tristan chord", the chord is shown to be composed of Ab, F, Eb and Cb, regardez:

where in actualy fact it is a C natural as you can see here [1]. therefore i am removing it an replacing it with an instance of the "tristan chord" coming up in Chopin. Aarandir 10:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying that the asterisk-marked chord should have a C natural instead of a C flat? You were probably looking at the wrong place in the score: the cited chord occurs in the fourth bar of the last line of the first page in the document you cite, and it does indeed have a C flat even there. If I'm getting you wrong, I apologize, but you might like to reconsider your removal. EldKatt (Talk) 11:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. For the record, there is an error in the example, though: The left-hand quavers in the penultimate bar should also have C flat instead of C natural. But I digress somewhat. EldKatt (Talk) 11:30, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I've amended the image. It should be correct now. - Rainwarrior 22:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

My god i feel such a turd, yes you are right i failed to notice beethoven bought in the main motif as it were into minor, yes you can revert my edit. Aarandir 14:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

thats actually quite intresting, i had no idea beethoven could be so liberal in his harmonies. hes used a chord composed of Ab, F Eb and C in the beggining which is a major chord with an added 6th which ive never seen in any classical music before, and hes also used the "tristan chord" which doesnt resolve where i expect it to. intresting, yes keep the beethoven example, my chopin exam is rubbish and hard to recognise Aarandir 14:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

the thing is, ive NEVER understood the fuss about the "tristan chord" (in fact i dislike it being credited to wagner when i can see it in bach), perhaps its my ignorance, perhaps i have a point, the only unique thing i can see that wagner HAS done is made it resolve where you werent expecting it; from Ab minor with an augmented 6th (Ab, Cb, Eb and F) resolving or landing rather on E major 6th (E, G#, B, and D). In my life expereince the "tristan chord" which consists of an augmented fourth, a major third and a perfect fourth usally resolves itself by tuning the aug 4th in a perfect 4th (so if you started on F the B natural will become Bb) and the major third becoming a minor third (so the Eb turning into D). this is evident in my bach example, The D minor with added aug 6th resolves by diminishing the A and F into G# and E and also in the chopin scherzo, the E G B and C# resolve happily onto E F# A# C#(F# major 6th). Aarandir 11:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe the fuss is because in Tristan und Isolde it's (a) the very first chord in the piece; and (b) it's held for more than a moment, giving the listener time to wonder (subconsciously) how it might resolve, if at all. (The second and subsequent times you hear the piece, you'll know what happens, but subconsciously the uncertainty is probably repeated each time. Cue music psychology.) Regards, David Kernow 02:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

So if anything the fuss is about where it resolves rather than what the chord consists of? fair enough. Aarandir 09:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'd say not so much as to where or how it resolves but that at the start of Tristan und Isolde our (subconscious) attention is drawn to the chord itself, as it is held for more than a moment and nothing else occurs during that time. It was also a very unusual chord with which to start a piece of music, i.e. not suggesting any particular tonality or resolution. (Cue writings about Tristan and Isolde's longing and unresolved love, etc, etc.) Yours, David 11:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

intresting. thankyou, i can come to appreciate and respect this chord and its use now. just wondering now why there isnt a big kerfuffle about chopin starting his scherzo in B minor with the same chord, held for even longer... Aarandir 13:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

True, although I suppose whether or not it's held for longer depends on how fast the scherzo is taken; but this is beside the point that it's not only the very first chord heard in the piece but the very first event, made all the more attention-grabbing by being played ffz. Perhaps it wasn't seized on by theorists because Chopin's use was so much a gesture (the ffz chord = "Listen!", "Here comes something dramatic!", etc ...followed by a perfect cadence into the piece's key) or maybe because it occurred in a piece for piano rather than an overture to (and leitmotif of) a Wagner opera, the latter more likely to draw theorists' attention... These are just guesses, as I really have no idea. Somebody somewhere with music credentials has probably found or invented a plausible story or three. Regards, David 02:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

i just dislike wagner (understandbly in my opinion) and thats probably clouding my opinion on the chord. yes, indeed i've come to respect it (and to some extent wager) more but it seemed like an awfully big fuss on an awfully insignificant part of the prelude, but i realise that it is the first chord, is held for long(er), doesnt resolve how we expect it and how it fits in with the longing thats associated with the romance between the two lovers. to be frank it boils down to the fact that i dislike Wagner, its rather conspicous why. Aarandir 22:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

So far I've only enjoyed some of the music by Wagner that doesn't involve wobbly singing – yes, what a giveaway, I must be a philistine to some folks and probably by definition "dislike Wagner" – but (a) who cares; and (b) I'm always game to try it if I'm sold on someone's enthusiasm for it or the like. Enjoy, David 02:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

yes, wagner is only midly entertaining compared to chopin in my opinion. its like comparing the great fire of london to a tiny family BBQ, the analogy doesnt really work with chopin and wagner, but i'm quoting russel brand who is pure genius! right, thanks for explaining the significance of the chord and putting it in some kind of context, cheers David. Aarandir 09:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I think David's explanation above (starting in a way "not suggesting any particular tonality or resolution") is a quite relevant one. It leaves the listener in total uncertainty about what's going to happen, in a rather successful way; not so much because of how the Tristan chord itself is harmonically built up, but because of the context. (And I'm not saying this as a Wagner enthusiast; I'm not overly fond of him.) I'm reminded of Beethoven's ninth symphony, which begins in a similarly mysterious, and highly original, manner, although harmonically it's about as simple as it could get. EldKatt (Talk) 22:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bach example

I'm removing the Bach example. It's a perfectly ordinary subdominant (in the key of A minor) added sixth chord, resolving to a dominant seventh chord. While it does contain the pitches of a Tristan chord, they're spelled differently and, above all, stacked differently: If this example fits here, so should every other minor added sixth chord in the history of music, making for a great body of largely irrelevant examples of "the Tristan chord before Wagner". The issue of restacking also raises the question of whether the Chopin example belongs here—I think not, since it also is a largely different chord, but I will leave this open for comments for a while before taking action. EldKatt (Talk) 11:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

• I agree that the Bach example is a little tenuous/contrived. I'd say the Chopin example has more in its favo/ur, but would make the contrast I mentioned in the previous thread. Yours, David Kernow 13:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Analyzed from a Thorough Bass Perspective

What I am about to write is OR on my part, but may be of interest to some editors here.

The "Tristan Chord" can almost be signed as a "chord of the second". The (D#) aug 6 is the only interval that stands in the way.

"Tristan Chord" on F: (D#) aug 6, (B) aug 4, (G#) aug 2

The "chord of the second" as codified by C. P. E. Bach in his Essay on the TRUE ART OF PLAYING KEYBOARD INSTRUMENTS on pg. 256:

[The aspects that agree with the Tristan Chord are bold]

3. The chord may contain the major or minor sixth, the augmented or perfect fourth, the major, minor, or augmented second.

In Wagner’s example, the bass (considered the dissonance of the “chord of the second”) even resolves down a half step!

--Roivas (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opening Paragraph

The chord's intervals are being explained in a rather childish manner:

More generally, it can be any chord that consists of these same intervals, viz. (from the lowest note upward) an augmented fourth, a major third and a perfect fourth.

Intervals are measured from the bass. Can we find a source for this or delete the sentence? --Roivas (talk) 15:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Only two year olds don't measure notes from the root! I changed the article accordingly. Hyacinth (talk) 04:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Good job.--Roivas (talk) 16:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tempo

I am no Tristan chord historian, but I don't think it was the tempo that made it innovative, and therefore, the tempo should not hold the dominant place it does in the first paragraph. It is misleading, and places undue emphasis on the tempo marking. I am reverting to my previous edit, but please correct me if I am missing something. Captbaritone (talk) 10:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Where should that information go? Hyacinth (talk)

The last paragraph of the "The chord itself" section begins with a discussion of the importance of the slow tempo. If we feel the actual temp marking is of importance (and not just the fact that it was slow enough to not merely be a passing dissonance) it could be included here. Another option would be to include it in the musical example image. Your thoughts? Captbaritone (talk) 17:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)