76 replies to this topic

[jianxli]

Just adding my thoughts to this thread...

 

In Grades 1-5, you largely just have to remember information and then apply it in the exam.

In Grades 6-8, you need a firm working knowledge of the material contained.

 

I did the Grade 5 to Grade 8 jump. This was over a space of years and I did A level music, a lot of composition and was half way through my undergraduate (music) degree when I decided to take it. Then I did the Harmony in Practice workbook and the AB Grade 8 workbook (this one http://shop.abrsm.or...-Grade-8/610372) and was all set.

 

I don't think it's something to rush into at all!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. You have done flute and piano exams quite well. For your career, what do you be? A concert pianist or flutist probably?

[charmainemusicalotaku]

I'm currently using these books. 

 

ABRSM Theory Workbook : It's easy to understand and the format is very much like the official exam. It will be good practice after you've learned the theory.

 

ABC of Harmony : My piano teacher recommended to me. It comes in 3 books. Red, blue and green. Some of the Grade 6 chapters are in the red book and others are in the blue book. I find it a bit confusing because all the chapters are not in one compiled book. 

 

In Preparation For The Theory Exams : It's mainly reading. The information is in an easy-to-understand format and not a chunk of text where you have to find the information. 

 

Lastly, I got a lot of past year papers to do..

[socrates17]

.

Edited by EdGJ, 01 June 2015 - 08:25 .
Deleted - commercial advertising/cross-posting

[blueglasses]

QUOTE(BitterSweet @ Mar 4 2013, 09:25 AM)

- Harmony in Practice (Anna Butterworth) is a mighty tome, and can appear both dense and dull on first reading. It is kinda both.

mighty tome? (chuckles)

It's actually a harmony book for beginners, certainly one of the lightest on the subject. It's like a harmless sneeze, compared to other harmony books.

I think it's wildly overrated.

 

You are so right! The Butterworth text cannot hold a candle to what's available from the international offerings produced by the major publishing companies.

I possess the majority of the current texts and ancillary resources from these publishing companies so I strongly advise anyone that desires to study tonal harmony and beyond to contact myself and I will be thrilled to enclose details of these international resources.

Ditch the Butterworth text as its outdated, unmusical (doesn't offer a sound to symbol approach), expensive and incorrect facts are revealed-eg the 6 4 chord is taught as 1c V and this is NOT accepted internationally by renowned theoreticians such as Steve Laitz, Clendinning/Marvin, Turek, Aldwell/Schachter and Roig Francoli.

The ABRSM needs to revamp the Butterworth text or drop it from their publications as it's really quite poor in comparison with international offerings!!!!

[Hildegard]

Blueglasses wrote:

 

Ditch the Butterworth text as ... incorrect facts are revealed-eg the 6 4 chord is taught as 1c V

 

Nonsense. Butterworth teaches that the 6 4 chord is a second inversion, which is correct (page 13) and then in Chapter 7 explains the various 6 4 progressions (cadential, passing and auxiliary).

 

I prefer Hugh Benham's two Harmony Workbooks (Music Sales) as he starts from the real basics (keys and intervals) and explains chords and figured bass more clearly than Butterworth, but there are no "incorrect facts" in the latter.

[blueglasses]

Blueglasses wrote:

 

Ditch the Butterworth text as ... incorrect facts are revealed-eg the 6 4 chord is taught as 1c V

 

Nonsense. Butterworth teaches that the 6 4 chord is a second inversion, which is correct (page 13) and then in Chapter 7 explains the various 6 4 progressions (cadential, passing and auxiliary).

 

I prefer Hugh Benham's two Harmony Workbooks (Music Sales) as he starts from the real basics (keys and intervals) and explains chords and figured bass more clearly than Butterworth, but there are no "incorrect facts" in the latter.

May I suggest that you get yourself up to date with what is happening in the music theory arena. Butterworth and others are WRONG because the CAD 6/4 5/3 should NEVER be seen as an inversion-voice-leading is the issue here-The chord is NOT THE TONIC IN SECOND INVERSION but the Dominant by embellishment and the UK exam boards are wrong to state and accept 1c V. Get your facts right before you state nonsense on a site.

[Hildegard]

Blueglasses wrote:

 

The chord is NOT THE TONIC IN SECOND INVERSION but the Dominant by embellishment

 

Which is what Butterworth says (page 91):

 

"The notes that make up the 6 4 chord are really ornaments ..."

 

Have you actually read the book you are attempting to criticise?

[blueglasses]

Are you so naiive and ignorant to think that I haven't read her text!  Do I take your comment to be an insult or a joke?

You are NOT dealing with a novice here you know!

The Butterworth text falls short in so many ways.....

There ARE incorrect facts in the latter so you need to watch what you write to others such as myself as 1c V is incorrect for the cadential 6/4 and renowned theoreticians are stating this also!!!!!!! The 1c must NOT be thought of  as a Tonic chord in second inversion so by writing 1c it automatically gives the impression that one is hearing the Tonic chord in second inversion.

I am so pleased that there are tonal harmony texts that do reveal correct information and these texts are so musical in comparison to the Butterworth offering.

Shall I send you the necessary info regarding these texts? 

[BadStrad]

Blueglasses, it appears the exam board is happy with the text and they have been running exams for more years than I suspect you've lived. Surely if there was such an error as you assert exists, then it would have been picked up at some point in the last seventeen years, and as Hildegard points out Butterworth and yourself appear to be in agreement about the 6-4 chord.

Perhaps if you were to provide the names of the texts that you deem to be superior, rather than mentioning that they exist it would be easier to compare them with Butterworth's approach.

[blueglasses]

Blueglasses, it appears the exam board is happy with the text and they have been running exams for more years than I suspect you've lived. Surely if there was such an error as you assert exists, then it would have been picked up at some point in the last seventeen years, and as Hildegard points out Butterworth and yourself appear to be in agreement about the 6-4 chord.

Perhaps if you were to provide the names of the texts that you deem to be superior, rather than mentioning that they exist it would be easier to compare them with Butterworth's approach.

Any exam board does not hold any monopoly in musical education be it teaching or performing and when it comes to the teaching of music theory, all the UK accredited exam boards fall so short of musical (sound to symbol approach) theory resources when it comes to aiding the UK learner. We are still offering texts that are so outdated and views that are NOT in line with international thought and parlance. The Butterworth text for one has received no revision since its publication in 1999 and that says it all. What is so needed in the UK is VISION to make music theory MUSICAL.

 

I am an ex music examiner so I have all the experience necessary to state what I have said. I note your musical credentials which are so basic so save your words for the novice!  Oh YES! I can certainly provide the titles of texts that are far superior to the Butterworth text and feel free to come and see me at my studio in Northern Ireland and I can show them all to you as well as their ancillary resources such as Instructor Manuals etc which alone have more details than the measly offering by Butterworth at the time.

 

You most definitely need to research these texts as you will be blown away by the depth and musicality in these international resources.

I am smiling here as what seems to have been revealed is your lack of knowledge which I find very alarming.

Feel free to purchase the following (of which I have all of them!) read through them and then I dare you to get back to me and try remaining loyal to the Butterworth text!!!!!

 1)Tonal Harmony-Kostka and Payne-5th / 6th / 7th Edition-McGraw Hill 2)The Complete Musician- 1st / 2nd / 3rd Edition-Steven Laitz-0UP 3)The Musician's Guide to Theory and Analysis- 1st / 2nd Edition-Clendinning and Marvin- Norton
4)Theory for Today's Musician-Ralph Turek-McGraw Hill 5)Harmony and Voice Leading-4th International Edition-Aldwell, Schachter and Cadwallader-Cengage, 6)Harmony in Context- 1st / 2nd Edition-Roig Francoli-McGraw Hill

 

I also highly recommend (before a study of tonal harmony begins) either of the following courses of which all are sonic orientated and deal with all aspects of fundamentals and beyond:

a)From Sound to Symbol by Michael Houlahan and Philip Tacka (text and ancillary resources), b)The Musician's Guide to Fundamentals by Jane Clendinning, Elizabeth Marvin and Joel Philips, (text and ancillary resources) c)Understanding the Fundamentals of Music by Robert Greenberg (dvd lecture course).
d)Explorations in Music by Joanne Haroutounian, published by Kjos
e)Sound Advice by Brenda Braaten and Crystal Wiksyk, published by Frederick Harris.
f)Theory Gymnastics by the "Three Cranky Women", published by Kjos - in my opinion these resources are the best of what's on offer throughout the world. Try them and you will NOT look back!!!!!!!

All of these courses offer a theoretical course of study in fundamentals and beyond with the philosophy that the sound works WITH the symbol and not WITHOUT it. Sadly, this is NOT what the UK accredited examination boards of music (ABRSM/Trinity Guildhall and LCMM) are offering in their graded examinations at this moment in time and the texts/workbooks of all the UK exam boards are so boring, unmusical and not of the same calibre in standard when it comes to the USA/international texts/workbooks.

The only accredited music external exams board to offer such an examination is by the Australian Music Examinations Board-AMEB.
Check out their Music Craft syllabus, it's the BEST!

[BadStrad]

Blueglasses, in light of your assumptions about my musical education, perhaps I really should update my signature to reflect not taking music exams is my choice and does not reflect a lack of education in the field (but that seems a bit long winded). You seem to associate the term "adult learner" with "having little musical education." I, on the other hand, agree with many of the great players who say that you should always be learning, when you stop, your playing stagnates, so I like to remind myself of that in my signature.

As for a study of theory, my teacher was a pupil of Nadia Boulanger and a successful composer and pedagogue, so I have little worry about the standard of my theoretical education.

Thank you for the book list. There are some good books in there. I don't know the Theory Gymnastics text but if nothing else the title has piqued my interest.

[BadStrad]

As for monopolies, in the UK at least the AB probably has the most (theory) exam entries with Trinity running a close second and both cover very similar content, as would be expected. So it's more of a duopoly.

[Hildegard]

Are you so naiive and ignorant to think that I haven't read her text!  Do I take your comment to be an insult or a joke?

 

You can take my comment in whatever way your wish. You claimed that Butterworth made a mistake by not recognising that chord Ic can be regarded as decoration of chord V. I observed that she makes exactly that point on page 91 of her book.

[hummingbird]

I am an ex music examiner

For which examining body, blueglasses, as a matter of interest?

[blueglasses]

Blueglasses, in light of your assumptions about my musical education, perhaps I really should update my signature to reflect not taking music exams is my choice and does not reflect a lack of education in the field (but that seems a bit long winded). You seem to associate the term "adult learner" with "having little musical education." I, on the other hand, agree with many of the great players who say that you should always be learning, when you stop, your playing stagnates, so I like to remind myself of that in my signature.

As for a study of theory, my teacher was a pupil of Nadia Boulanger and a successful composer and pedagogue, so I have little worry about the standard of my theoretical education.

Thank you for the book list. There are some good books in there. I don't know the Theory Gymnastics text but if nothing else the title has piqued my interest.

Do NOT presume that I am assuming anything about you and do NOT rest on the name of a renowned theoretician through association, this will never wash with professionals. I do not care if your teacher was a student of JS Bach. No one is a music demi god. By the way, these texts I have mentioned are excellent not good, especially the correlating Instructor Manuals of which I know you will NOT possess as the publishing companies allow only professionals / instructors to have them!