Q&A

# How does counting E twice explain the discrepancy between the third between C and E, third between E and G v. fifth between C and G?

+0
−2

I still don't grasp the "source of the discrepancy". "the E got counted twice when we went C,D,E and then E,F,G, but only got counted once when we went C,D,E,F,G." — So what? How does this expound the discrepancy?

Impaled on a Fencepost |

The music theorists of the Middle Ages committed a fencepost error that’s too entrenched to dig up now. Consider the chord made of the notes C, E, and G (a C major triad). If music theory nomenclature for intervals made sense, the distance from C up to E plus the distance from E up to G would equal the distance from C up to G. And that’s true if you measure the intervals by counting upward steps. The problem comes when you describe intervals with what I suppose might be termed “ordinal nomenclature”: going from C to E is called going up by a third (because you count 1,2,3 when you play C,D,E) and going from E to G is called going up by a third for the same reason, but going from C to G is called going up by a fifth (because you count 1,2,3,4,5 as you play C,D,E,F,G).

The source of the discrepancy should be clear: the E got counted twice when we went C,D,E and then E,F,G, but only got counted once when we went C,D,E,F,G. So in music theory, when you stack a third on top of a third, you get a fifth. We musicians are stuck with nomenclature that essentially makes us say “3+3=5” so many times that we eventually stop noticing we’re saying it. (Of course, saying “a third plus a third is a fifth” is confusing on a different level, since it sounds like “1/3 + 1/3 = 1/5”. But I digress.)

Why does this post require moderator attention?
Why should this post be closed?

Post Feedback (1 comment)

+0
−0

The discrepancy comes from the way musical intervals are named. The names are derived from the number of "fenceposts" including the first one, where as the corresponding length of the fence is one unit shorter.

The third+third=fifth equation is thus not $$3+3=5$$ but $$(3-1) + (3-1) = (5-1)$$

The E is counted double in the naïve addition $3+3=5$ because it is counted as the end of one interval and the start of the next interval.

Why does this post require moderator attention?