Anyone like to improvise?

Hi Maria, I’m aware of it and I’ve watched  some fascinating videos from John Mortensen and Noam Sivan ( that guy is a genius!!) 

 personally I know very little detail about classical improvisation but I’d welcome any discussion so I could learn more about it 

Maria 

Ken Radford I am not very good at any form of improvisation.

I do like to try to identify how composers applied different rules and concepts and occasionally mimic/"forge" them. 

 Have you heard of the Rule of the Octave?

https://partimenti.org/partimenti/about_parti/rule_of_the_octave.pdf

Figured Bass:

https://partimenti.org/partimenti/about_parti/beginners_guide/basics_of_figures.pdf

Maria fabulous links! Thank you!  I will be trying to learn these - always had the question in my mind .."how did the great composers arrive at such wonderful works".. I knew it had something to do with monks chants.. but not much more than that.. 

Maria Thank you!. This is an incredible site.. had never heard/seen this before. Bravo!

Mark Cooper 

In modern harmonic analysis and part writing practices this is on the right track but a little simplified. Triads and 7th chords are common - particularly ii7, V7 and vii dim7. The dominant 7th is extremely common and is why a major-minor 7th chord is regularly called dominant 7th chord today even when it is not used as a dominant functioning chord. Chord extensions (9,11,13) exist but are used and resolved in specific ways. Sus and Add chords are generally marked as simpler chords with non-chord tones (such as a suspension which is where sus comes from). There are also non-diatonic chords like the neapolitan 6th (flat II) and augmented 6th chords. In the music of the Romantic Period chromatic alterations (flat 5, sharp 5 etc.) are more frequently used as well.

However, this is not how composers from the Baroque and Classical perceived or conceived their music. The links that Maria gave to partimento describe the way composers perceived harmony as a bass line over which specific intervals were considered consonant and dissonant. Harmony was more a byproduct of voice leading practices and established patterns. For instance, Mozart was not thinking that a V6/5 chord must resolve to I with the leading tone moving up to the tonic and the 7th falling by step (as we learn in modern harmony). Rather, he resolved those tendency tones in line with voice leading practices which then created that harmony. Our modern theory is derived from common practice period voice leading and we have retroactively applied a chord system to those practices.

Dustin Anderson thanks Dustin for your informative and interesting reply, it seems I was just scratching the surface!

on this track , I noted that a chord in the Chopin nocturne I’m working on is a typical jazz dominant 13 chord. When I asked my teacher about it, his response was….Oh … that’s a ‘Chopin’ chord.  The Brahms intermezzo I play contains a tritone substitution with a dominant sharp 11  (flat 5) chord . These clearly predate jazz, and so it appears to be a question of context and they are named according to the musical era 

Mark Cooper It is definitely a matter of context / function. In 'classical' harmony (harmony of the common practice period), there is an emphasis on integrating voice leading principles into the syntax of the chords. There is a constant focus on the preparation, treatment, and resolution of dissonant tones. There are always exceptions / subversions, but in general suspensions must resolve, leading tones must resolve, and 7ths must resolve (as well as further extensions like 9,11,13). This emphasis on resolution is a fundamental part of how a chord's function is determined, and that function determines how it is spelled. For instance, in classical harmony Ab C Eb Gb  is a dominant seventh but Ab C Eb F# is a Ger6.  These are obviously the same chord with an enharmonic respelling but that respelling communicates its function and how it will resolve. 

In jazz, there is not this same constant concern with resolving dissonances. Dissonant chord extensions are often valued for their intrinsic sound and can function as stable sonorities. Sus and Add chords are often treated as stable (these would need resolution in a classical context and would also typically need "preparation". Suspensions 'suspend' a previous tone which resolves later than expected; they do not really "come out of thin air" in classical harmony). Because jazz is generally less concerned with managing the resolutions of individual dissonances, chord names tend to be more flexible. Tones that would often be treated as suspensions, appoggiaturas, or other non-chord tones in classical theory are frequently incorporated directly into jazz chord symbols as extensions and alterations. Voice leading still gets used in jazz but it tends to be more about smooth, linear connection (though jazz certainly has its own characteristic tendencies).  

So yes, it is very much about context. Broadly speaking, one could say classical harmony and jazz harmony are like dialects of the same harmonic language.

Dustin Anderson I always wondered about this 'how did the great composers write such beautiful music ?' . Your  superb explanation starting from " However.." gives me some understanding. Need to learn more on that subject.. Thank you !