Talk:Subtonic

Misleading

This article is very misleading. Roman numerals indicate chords, but they are used here to indicate scale degrees. In order to indicate scale degrees, the author should have used Arabic numerals. 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. Thanks for a great article. Arabic numbers commonly refer to intervals not scale degrees. Roman numerals are standardly used in the context they are used here, as of the date of this comment. RichardJ Christie (talk) 05:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Outlier

This definition for subtonic is an outlier. Commonest harmony pedagogies identified the diminished seventh degree as the diminished subtonic, and used subtonic as a synonym for leading tone, a newer term. Seventh degree was also common. This article should be changed to reflect the commonest practice instead of adopting an outlying departure from it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.77.150 (talk) 06:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Original research December 2010

How may the content marked with template:OR original research and what should be done about it? Hyacinth (talk) 09:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The several claims marked with this tag (since December 2010) assert relative frequency of usage, but there are no supporting references. Since no verification for these claims have been found over the past eight months, the claims probably should be deleted.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to unify the layout of scale-degree pages

WikiProject Music Theory is spearheading a proposal to unify the layout of the scale-degree pages. The discussion can be found here. Since these pages not only include discussion of the scale-degrees, but also occasionally discuss triads and seventh chords built on these scale-degrees, it is important to systemize these pages. This will also curtail the creation of pages for each individual triad and seventh chord, some which may not necessarily contain enough content to be expanded beyond a stub. I invite you to comment on the proposal with thoughts, criticisms, or suggestions. Thanks! — Devin.chaloux (chat) 19:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested

I Believe The subtonic is the tone below the tonic. One semitone below, as found in the diatonic major scale.

Here's the way I think it goes:

tonic: the tone

dominant: a fifth up from the tonic, the other important tone. the first harmonic of the tone that's not the tone again (the first harmonic is an octave).

subdominant: the fifth below the tonic (no, not the note below the fifth -- see submedient)

mediant: a third above the tone (the middle note of The Chord)

sub-mediant: the third below the tonic

supertonic: the tone above

sub-tonic: the tone below (a semitone) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BobbyBoykin (talk • contribs) 13:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually BobbyBoykin, the Subtonic is a whole-step below the tonic. The note a semitone below the tonic is the leading-tone. It is your statement that is incorrect. — Devin.chaloux (chat) 16:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Here are is a page with about 7 references that contradict the assertion that the subtonic is a whole step down. It may be that the term can properly be applied to the 7th degree of any scale and so in the case of the pure minor it would be a whole step. I would think it odd that the six of the scale degrees have classical names, one of them does not, but then there is a name for a note that is not even part of the scale.BobbyBoykin (talk) 14:57, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Of your seven references, only three equate the term with "leading tone" or a note a semitone below the tonic (or "upper tonic", in one case). The others define the term either as any diatonic note below the tonic, or the "flatted" seventh scale degree (of course, this is the Wikipedia reference, which should not be counted here). None of these dictionaries, however, are music references. Have you checked the Harvard Dictionary of Music, or New Grove, or any standard textbook on music theory? Both Harvard and New Grove allow for the possibility of either a semitone or a whole tone below the tonic. The Harvard (2003 edition) entry "Subtonic" reads, "The scale degree immediately below the tonic, especially when it lies a whole tone lower". Julian Rushton's article in the New Grove (second edition, 2001) says, "The seventh scale DEGREE in a harmonic context; in a melodic context this degree is called the LEADING NOTE if it lies a semitone below the tonic, whereas ‘subtonic’ may also refer to a diatonic pitch a whole tone below the tonic (e.g. B♭ in C minor)." In short, the term "subtonic" (as its name says) refers to the note below the tonic, and this may be either a semitone or a whole tone below. When a distinction is to be made, the term "leading note" is used for the semitone below, and "subtonic" is used for the major second below. Theorists teaching the subject, especially to beginners, often make this a hard distinction. For example, The Complete Idiot's Guide to Music Theory, by Michael Miller (Penguin, 2002), gives this definition on p. 252: "subtonic The seventh degree of a scale, or the chord on that degree (VII). (In classical theory, the subtonic is the lowered seventh, while the normal seventh is called the leading tone.)" George Thaddeus Jones's venerable Harper-Collins College Outline Music Theory (HarperCollins, 1994) says on p. 52, "Scale degrees … are frequently identified by names and numbers. … The names are the same in both major and minor, with the exception of those for the seventh degree; the unaltered seventh degree of the natural minor scale is sometimes called the subtonic, while the raised seventh degree is called the leading tone, as in the major scale." Earl Henry and Michael Rogers, Tonality and Design in Music Theory, Volume 1 (Prentice-Hall, 2004, p. 60) state, "In major, ↑7 is a leading tone and lies a half step below the tonic. In natural minor, however, the seventh scale degree is a SUBTONIC (↓7)—a pitch a whole step below the tonic." Alfred Blatter, in Revisiting Music Theory: A Guide to the Practice (CRC Press, 2007, p. 80), in describing the scale degrees says, "The seventh scale degree is called the leading tone. The lowered seventh degree, found in descending melodic minor and natural minor, is sometimes referred to as the subtonic." So, depending on just how pedantic you want to be, "subtonic" can refer either to any diatonic note just below the tonic (semitone or whole tone), or strictly just the diatonic whole tone below the tonic.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Jerome, thank you for the detailed reply. This is correct. Will this be incorporated into the article? Second, the material you just deleted, some of it can be supported. Hopefully one of these days when I'm not so busy trying to graduate, I'll quote them. — Devin.chaloux (chat) 21:40, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Some if this has already been incorporated. In order to add more of it, it may be necessary to rework the form, since the current link to the second paragraph militates against adding anything extensive at the end of the lede. As to the deleted material, I agree that some or perhaps all of it can be supported, but this material has been challenged since December of 2010, and sixteen months does seem an adequate amount of time to allow sources to be found. There is nothing to stop any editor from restoring this material, provided that reliable sources are supplied.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Jerome, for a very detailed and informative reply.BobbyBoykin (talk) 22:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

You are welcome. As you can see, you were partly correct, and this has resulted in some corrections to the article. I trust that the next time you discover an apparently well-referenced article that you believe may contain an error, you will come forward again—if perhaps a little less aggressively.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Jerome, thanks again, and yes I will try to be less aggressive. Does anyone think it would be useful to mention that the flatted or minor 7th occurs much earlier in the harmonic series than does the leading tone or major 7th? Thanks BobbyBoykin (talk) 10:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I think it inadvisable to open that can of worms, which will only serve to muddy the waters here. You are going to immediately run into the objection that the major third above the dominant is lower down on the harmonic series than the seventh above the tonic; next will come the claim that the seventh partial is so much further than a whole tone below the eighth that it really ought to be considered a small minor third; then you will discover (if it has not already long since become plain) that the overtone-series hypothesis is in itself contentious. Very soon, the entire article will become incomprehensible except to nit-pickers with advanced degrees in psychoacoustics and very large axes to grind.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Pivot chord?

The article says "♭VII is in this case a pivot chord borrowed from the parallel minor (its dominant seventh)", but I think this is wrong. For instance, if you take C major, its ♭VII is B♭7, but there's no B♭7 in the parallel minor, A minor. Also, the dominant seventh of A minor is E7. Am i wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Souzadaniel (talk • contribs) 00:21, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. There is certainly something wrong here, but not quite what you are describing. A minor is the relative minor to C major; the parallel minor is C minor. But the quality of the dominant seventh of any key is the same, regardless of whether it is a major or a minor key (M3–P5–m7 above the root). Furthermore, the dominant seventh is by definition V7, and so cannot also be ♭VII. A dominant-seventh type built on the ♭VII degree in a minor key is the dominant of the relative major, whose tonic is III of the referential minor key. Perhaps this is what is meant here?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:37, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I should have checked the article for context first. Evidently, this is using jazz terminology, which often differs in confusing ways to "straight" theory. For one thing, in a jazz context, a seventh chord is by default what is called by non-jazz theorists a dominant-seventh (or major-minor seventh) chord type. In non-jazz theory, a ♭VII in C major would be a major-seventh chord, with an A♮. The explanation as it stands makes sense, in that not only is the seventh scale degree lowered from the major to the minor seventh (B♮ to B♭ in the case of C major), but the same is being done to the sixth degree (A♮ to A♭), thus producing a dominant-seventh chord type. This chord is used in jazz as a substitute for the dominant, similar to the tritone-substitution dominant. Although all three of these chords are dominant-seventh chord types (i.e., M3–P5-m7 over the root), in jazz they also have dominant function—that is, they progress directly to the tonic chord. (In "classical" theory, the ♭VII generally progresses to the III chord in minor—the tonic of the relative major—and the "tritone-substitute" is respelled as a German sixth, which progresses not to the tonic but to the dominant—in other words, it has "pre-dominant" or "dominant-preparation" function.) There is still a bit of a problem with the expression "pivot chord", but this may also involve a peculiarity of jazz theory terminology (in which I am no expert). In "straight" theory, a pivot chord is a modulating device: a chord that is common to two different keys and is used to connect from one to the other. The link on this word here connects to the article "Common chord", which has a rather broader meaning. It might be better to change the term to more honestly reflect where the link leads, but I am unsure whether it is correct to use the expression "common chord" in a jazz-theory context.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

"ISBN unspecified" or "No ISBN"?

Five references given in the § Notes section state "[ISBN unspecified]". This seems peculiar, since most or all of those books predate the use of the ISBN system. Is there a good reason to use this phrasing, viz. "ISBN unspecified", rather than, say, "No ISBN"? (There may be some WP standard for such cases, but I'm not aware of any.) yoyo (talk) 05:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

The relevant guideline is found at Wikipedia:ISBN#Missing or invalid ISBNs, and reads "Articles that do not have any ISBNs can be tagged using {{Lacking ISBN}}. Entries that are missing the ISBN can be tagged with {{ISBN missing}}."—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

subtonic

As a musician I'm pretty sure that the statement "the Subtonic is one WHOLE step below the tonic note" is incorrect. From B to C is not a whole step at all, but B must be considered as the subtonic when playing in C major, in which B♭ may occur, however, as a leading note. When playing in G major the sub-tonic is F♯, with a possible F as a leading note. Wiebe Stodel. 62.195.132.57 (talk) 07:39, 3 February 2023 (UTC)