Why do you prefer and recommend these two books ?
Usually textbooks on Harmony start with a list of intervals followed by a list of chords. You are supposed to know and memorise all of them. This is followed by a huge number of rules that you also must memorise. You are never told in simple terms why you should use this rules, and what happens if you don’t. At the same time as you explore the repertory you seldom see any example of such rules. Quite the opposite you see example after example of composers not using these rules and doing fine.
These two books are completely different in that they don’t require you to memorise anything. In fact they assume you are a beginner. They then proceed to explain why music affects us the way it does. They adopt a historical approach so that you see that there are no rules, it is more a case of “recipes”. They also give you a “logic” that fits most if not all of the repertory, so that as you study your piece all that information is exemplified and is directly relevant. In fact after you read these two books, you will even appreciate why traditional textbooks of harmony are written the way they are and you be able to profit from them. Both books are highly recommended.
What make the circle of fifhts the best way to go through the keys ? (note that the answer to that question is probably in the books you mention !!!
Indeed, the answer will be in the books. I will give you a brief and simplified overview. Think of the C major scale. It has seven different notes. Now, think of the G major scale. It shares with C major 6 out of seven notes. The only difference is the F# (which replaces the F). So you could say that these two scales are closely related. Now consider F major. Like G major, it shares with C major 6 out of 7 notes differing only by the Bb (which replaces the B). So these two scales, G major and F major are very close “relatives” of C major. Like cousins.
Now consider A minor. A minor actually shares all the notes with C major (the G# in harmonic A minor is an accidental – the key signature is the same for C major and A minor). So C major and A minor are even closer “relatives”, say, like brothers.
A piece written in C major will soon be very boring if it stays only within the notes of C major. Typically it will wander into other keys, and these keys will be the closest relatives: A minor, G major (and its brother E minor) and F major (and its brother D minor).
If you pick any piece of music (Haydn, Mozart are both very good for that since they follow the rules closely) in C, you will see that they follow just such an scheme.
As it happens, F and G are a fifth apart from C on each direction. So, if you get used to follow the cycle of fifths you also get used to the movement between keys that is the most used in Western music. You will not (very often at least) see chord progressions that go C to C# to D to D# etc., but you will see a lot of F to C to G. In fact, if you follow the cycle of fifths:
Gb – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb – F – C – G – D – A – E – B – F#
All you have to do to get the most usual chord progression in Western music (I – IV- V) is to chose a key and pick the key to the right and the key to the left. For instance Bb will be Eb (to the left) and F (to the right).
If you are trying to play an accompaniment to a tune, and you know the key of that tune (say it is D major), then most likely the only chords you will need are G (to the left) and A (to the right) plus the three relative minors: E minor, C# minor and B minor.
Does this make sense? If it doesn’t don’t worry. Follow the cycle of fifths anyway and you will be very happy you did later on when you understand all this.
Best wishes,
Bernhard.
Topic: Is this exercise set worth it ?