This is something that I have been wanting to ask for a long time:

I wonder if a student from the US and Canada would lose marks for using North American terminology in an AB music exam. While speaking with some AB practical examiners, I have noticed that most were unaware of North American terminology and chord notation. Therefore, for the purpose of the AB practical exams, I try to adhere to the British terminology when I practise aural tests with my private students. But then, for the AB theory exams, I wonder if the Board makes sure that all theory examiners understand the differences between North American and British usage.

I am also curious to know how the AB theory examiners cope with theory candidates from continental Europe because there are even more differences in notation.

I'm working from memory here, but as I understand it students of AB exams may use UK or American terminology.

Even within North America, terminology and chord notation vary among different schools.

Another related question: In four-part harmony, different people have different takes on issues such as chord doubling and voice leading; some people are more "liberal" than others. What is AB's position about this?
Let me give an example here. Some teachers are rather strict about chord doubling, such as never to double the chordal 3rd in the tonic and subdominant triads. They would take marks off if they see students doubling, say, the note E in the C-E-G triad in C major, or the note A in the F-A-C triad in C major, even if the voice-leading is good. Other teachers do not prescribe rules on doubling, as long as students do not double the tendency tones, which are the leading note and the 7th in any seventh chord.

I'm curious about this, do you have any examples?

I touched on this in the thread on Cambridge Companion books under General relating to sitting the (now abolished!) GRE Music Test.

The theory papers say that you can use any recognised form for describing the chords, but the examples they give don't include the American way.

Eg, We're in C major, and you want Ib (ie C with E in the bass). The way the paper was set was that this was I with a small 6 over 3 next to it. All a bit confusing. The simpler chords are easy to work out, though it takes a bit of time, but Neapolitan and augmented 6th chords were really very complicated.

Incidentally, I teach the value of all three methods to pupils who I think can cope.

Guitar chords; good because they are specific, but they don't relate to the prevailing tonality, which of course Roman numerals do, but they are inadequate/very complicated for chromatic chords. Whereas figured bass tells us exactly where the notes are in relation to the bass, but don't name the chord or place it in any sort of context. All three are valuable and useful ways of describing chords.

Example 1
Key = G minor
Chord tones = G-Bb-D and G-B-D
Chord label = I and I# (or I#3) for people accustomed to using only uppercase roman numerals
Chord label = i and I for people accustomed to using both uppercase and lowercase roman numerals

Example 2
Key = D major
Chord tones = E-G-C#
Chord label = VII6 for people accustomed to using only uppercase roman numerals (6 in superscript)
Chord label = viio6 for people accustomed to using both uppercase and lower roman numerals (o6 in superscript)

Example 3
Key = C major
Chord tones = G-C-E followed by G-B-D
Chord label = V6/4-5/3 for people who recognize the G-C-E chord as a harmonic embellishment known as the cadential six-four
(I can't show the proper notation here, but 4-3 should be written right below 6-5.)
Chord label = I6/4 V for people who take chord spelling literally and fail to understand that the G-C-E chord has nothing to do with the tonic harmony
(Again, I can't show the proper notation here, but 4 should go right below 6.)

That's why I'm debating if I should teach my students the Associated Board notation. They can learn the other system of notation if they decide to continue their music studies in the future.



I might have asked a similar question on the forum before: Is the use of the lowercase letters a, b and c to represent chord positions unique to the Associated Board theory publications, or is it a practice adopted throughout the UK, including the universities? I am curious because scholarly journals published in the UK do not use such letters to label chord positions.



This would be the ideal situation, but it won't work for young students (pre-teens and early-teens) learning harmony for the first time.


By the way, I am also curious to know how the following chords would be labelled according to the Associated Board publications:

Key = C major
Chord X = Ab-C-Eb
Chord Y = E-G#-B
Chord Z = Bb-Db-F
Chord W = Ab-C-D#-F# (German sixth with alternate spelling)

No, the lowercase letters a/b/c/d are common usage over here, at GCSE, A level and university. I understand your way to include what we term as figured bass, so root position would have 5 over 3 (though like our methods, we usually leave root position chords blank), first inversion b, would have a 6 over 3, and second inversion c, would have 6 over 4. Third inversion dominat sevenths would have 6 over 4 over 2.

For yur chords:

X: bVIa
Y: IIIa (not iiia as the smaller case Roman numeral indicates a minor chord)
Z: bviia
W: a bit more tricky. The D sharp shouldn't make a difference, except that a proper German 6th would have an E flat, not D sharp. It is a chord built on the flattened 6th, which has an augmented 6th over it. Maybe bVI with a #6a after it, though that's a bit of a guess and I haven't got my AB book to hand.

Actually, in most scholarly publications and North American textbooks, chord labels incorporate abbreviated figured bass, not full figured bass as guilmant has shown. So root position will show just the roman numeral; first inversion triad with a 6; third inversion of a seventh chord with 4 over 2 or simply a 2.



This is where I am confused. So in the AB publications, there is a distinction between uppercase and lowercase roman numerals? My impression was that in the lower theory grades, only uppercase roman numerals are used, regardless of chord qualities.

I think that is right. Initially students are only required to identify chords 1, 4 and 5 and upper case roman numerals are used. The business with lower case numerals for minor chords only comes in at grade 6 and above, I think. However, I don't think correct usage of a lower case numeral at a lower grade would be penalised.

The use of upper case roman numerals for minor chords is one of the things that bugs me at grade 5.
I don't see the point of teaching something if you might have to turn around and say 'by the way that wasn't quite right' at a later stage.
It's not THAT complicated to teach that a mnior chord is written in lower case numerals and at grade 5 you are meant to know about minor chords.

I AGREE!

To put it bluntly, I think it is a pedagogical disaster to introduce one system of notation now and then introduce another system later

It is important for teachers to recognize merits in different notational systems. At the same time, I think consistency is even more important: choose one way and adhere to it. Otherwise, students can get confused easily.

The most confusing difference I find is in cadence nomenclature. In particular the use of "imperfect cadence".

Are there different names for cadences in the US?

That seems counter-intuitive.



What do you mean? In the United States, cadences are either imperfect or perfect... Is there something different over there in the UK?

V-I = authentic cadence (US) = perfect cadence (UK)

x-V = half cadence (US) = imperfect cadence (UK), with x being a tonic or predominant chord


In the US, the terms "perfect" and "imperfect" refer to the melodic closure in an authentic cadence:

Perfect authentic cadence = PAC = V-I, with the soprano ending on the tonic note
Imperfect authentic cadence = IAC= V-I, with the soprano ending on the mediant or dominant note

Really? I've heard/learned all of those terms (authentic, perfect authentic, half cadence, imperfect cadence). I'm using (and used in the past) McGraw Hill's Tonal Harmony, fifth edition.