Are Parallel Fifths and Octaves Really Forbidden?

Link to book composition lessons:
calendly.com/musicauniversalis
In this video I discuss the contrapuntal sin of employing parallel fifths and octaves, and why they are considered forbidden but yet still appear in the scores of great compositions.
For some further reading on the topic, the following links are very helpful, and are definitely worth a look.
Parallel fifths and octaves in Bach Chorales:
www.bach-chorales.com/Consecu...
A compendium of parallel fifths found in famous classical pieces:
musictheoryexamples.com/2paral...
A special thanks as always to musopen.org and imslp.org for offering free public domain sheet music and recordings online.

[@MusicaUniversalis]

Additional Information: The first of the parallel fifths I show in the Mozart Sonata in D Major K. 576 example is not a true parallel fifth as it is an augmented fifth to perfect fifth, the second is however a full blown parallel fifth. The Corelli example is a diminished fifth to perfect fifth which is considered far less forbidden depending on which musical treatises you read, however some music theorists still opt to discourage its usage.

[@ThatGenericDude]

I'm curious. Have you heard of Wim Winters and his Whole Beat Practice?

[@themobiusfunction]

However, Mozart's Piano Sonata No. 16 does contain a perfect fifth->perfect fifth in the second movement (in thr G minor section)

[@davidgleba3832]

In both cases in the Mozart sonata, the upper voice moves up before the lower one does, turning the 5ths into 6ths.

[@aangtonio5570]

To me, the whole thing is dead simple: - Do you want to strengthen a melodic line? --> Use parallel fifths and octaves as you want, fearlessly. - Do you want to maintain independence between voices? --> Avoid parallel fifths and octaves as possible. Rules are just style conventions in order to achieve a certain goal. They're not written in stone. ✌

[@pjbpiano]

In fact, you have stated the exact thing that those who avoid parallel fifths and octaves. They destroy independence. So if you want write independent lines, they are not good options.

[@tinikadavis2412]

I AGREE WITH THIS. This truly explains what happens when you use them, i.e strengthens it because of how consonant the sound and if you really wish to express independence you avoid it. Making it seem like a bad thing limits the student and really doesn't explain why.

[@themajor2072]

I think it also worth pointing out that the blending of two instruments into one voice is actually the desired outcome in a lot of orchestral music, especially that of the 19th century. Parallel octaves, for instance, are used all the time in the case of the contrabasses (or, as they are sometimes fittingly called, double basses). To have the basses double the cellos an octave down was the standard in continuo writing and the early orchestral writing of Mozart and Haydn, and Rimsky Korsakov even says in his Principles of Orchestration that the basses should almost always be blending with another group of instruments (of which the two most conventional choices are the cellos and bassoons, both usually separated at the octave). There are plenty of other cases of doubling at the octave in orchestral writing (violins in octaves, doubling a flute two octaves down on bassoon, brass in octaves, etc.), but this example is by far the most ubiquitous and consistent. Details in how, and when, composers operated within these rules should not be lazily glossed over by theory professors, because exceptions are what prove the rule and define the parameters.

[@MusicaUniversalis]

Which is why parallel octaves are more of an afterthought in this video.

[@SpaghettiToaster]

@@MusicaUniversalis Parallel octaves are even worse than fifths in voice-leading though. Doubling octaves have nothing to do with parallels in voice-leading and the two should never be confused.

[@MusicaUniversalis]

@@SpaghettiToaster A nuance not properly explained in many theory courses to be honest. Beethoven seems to think they are less offensive in his contrapuntal piano music. But in the case of the Hammerklavier Fugue he’s probably just trying to imitate orchestral octave voice doubling.

[@themajor2072]

@@MusicaUniversalisI think that theory doesn’t place enough emphasis on the fact that the rules of voice leading and counterpoint were designed with the human voice in mind. In Palestrina’s time, a mass for 4 voices meant 4 voices both functionally and literally. Avoiding parallel harmonies, including parallel octaves (and even limiting parallel 3rds and 6ths) makes a lot more practical sense once you consider each voice as having to be sung as an equal and independent part. A voice cannot be independent if all it’s doing is running parallel to its neighbor, and the parallel harmony would throw off the balance of the ensemble in favor of whatever line is being harmonized at the fifth or octave, thereby diminishing the independence of the remaining voices. It only makes sense to avoid this approach on principle if your goal is to write polyphonic music with complex counterpoint for a handful of voices, as was the case for Palestrina.

[@SpaghettiToaster]

@@MusicaUniversalis Well yes, in practice and especially in keyboard music, I'd say that (bare) octaves are less offensive than (bare) fifths in general. In free composition, it's of course not uncommon to freely move between part-writing and chordal doublings, and in thick writing, you can have both octaves and fifths that are totally unoffensive. Beethoven also likes to use octaves on the keyboard just to emphasize a line and make it sound more powerful, probably in an attempt to get out of the fortepianos of his time something more akin to a modern piano sound. Bare fifths, on the other hand, just sound terrible on the keyboard. I think one of the most interesting instances of octaves in counterpuntal music is BWV 855, where Bach just has a full bar and a half of parallel octaves, in a two-voice fugue of all things. Nobody ever seems to talk about this one. But is clearly shows that even in counterpuntal music, it is totally fine to write parallel octaves as long as you make sure to treat it the same way as you would having a voice drop out and playing another one twice as loud. The Bach example is especially interesting because the octaves come and go in the middle of a phrase, not after a cadence or as some kind of interlude.

[@epicduckrex994]

As a composer myself I like to question if the time is appropriate for it. Like making an artistic choice; that’s what makes it fun :)

[@caterscarrots3407]

Parallel Fifths and Octaves in Bach, I have noticed show up in 2 main circumstances. 1) Chorales as you mention in the video. It's not that uncommon to see parallel perfect consonances in chorale voicings, the main thing is that it shouldn't be between outer voices, like Soprano and Bass 2) Octaves of Registration in for example Fugues, where he isn't really adding a new melody so much as he is adding depth to a preexisting melody.

[@user-wn1dd8ls2u]

5:56 I was taught that if one of the fifths is augmented or diminished, they are not considered as parallel fifths per se

[@carlkohweihao9584]

Same.

[@caterscarrots3407]

I've heard that too and I'm not sure how much I agree with that. Yes, unequal fifths and unequal octaves are a thing, but I would consider them to be a special case of parallels that are worse than ordinary parallels in a contrapuntal context. I mean, B-F moving to C-G and D-A moving to E-B are both fifths where both voices are moving by step in the same direction. In this sense, they are both "Parallel Fifths". But while I would say that D-A moving to E-B is perfectly fine in some contrapuntal contexts(inner voices of a 4 part chorale for example), I would not say the same of B-F moving to C-G. This is because of the slight interval differences. In the case of D-A moving to E-B, both fifths are perfect. Because of that, I would say to use it sparingly in counterpoint, but I would also say that in some cases like the inner voices of a 4 part chorale, it's okay to use it. In the case of B-F moving to C-G however, you have a diminished fifth moving to a perfect fifth, an unequal parallel fifth as I'd call it. This, I would absolutely forbid in a contrapuntal context and strongly discourage in other contexts where parallel fifths are used because it's a dissonance moving to a consonance, but not correctly in a contrapuntal context. Dissonances in counterpoint *must* be resolved either via oblique motion, where one voice stays still, or contrary motion, where both voices move in opposite directions. For a diminished fifth, that means 4 possible resolutions by half step and 2 more if you consider the whole step resolutions just as valid, like this: Half step resolutions: - B-F -> B-F# Discouraged, but not forbidden - B-F -> Bb-F Discouraged, but not forbidden(Indeed, both of these diminished fifth to perfect fifth resolutions via oblique motion are perfectly okay in the harmonic context of a diminished seventh and are behind the common tone diminished seventh) - B-F -> C-E Strongly encouraged - B-F -> Bb-Gb Strongly encouraged Whole step resolutions: - B-F -> B-G - B-F -> A-F Unequal fifths don't do this because both voices are moving in the same direction.

[@carlkohweihao9584]

@@caterscarrots3407 Well, for me, I think the opposite. In my opinion, a diminished or augmented fifth moving to a perfect fifth is considered acceptable and does not constitute parallel fifths. The reason for this has to do with the main idea of parallel fifths and octaves: two voices that are either a fifth or an octave apart may sound like one because they have overtones in common. Take the note B as an example: its first overtone is an octave higher (B), while the second overtone is a twelfth higher (F#). When B and F# are played together, they sound hollow because both voices share the same overtone, which is F#. Therefore, the harmonic progression from B-F# to C-G will sound like a single note going a step higher because both voices do not sound independent. However, B and F do not have overtones in common and are harmonically dissonant. Hence, the two voices in the progression from B-F to C-G are more distinguishable and can, therefore, be accepted. For some reason, this harmonic progression may sound displeasing because we would expect the note F to resolve to an E since they are just a semitone apart.

[@caterscarrots3407]

@@carlkohweihao9584 But it’s exactly this displeasing harmonic progression, this diminished fifth moving to a perfect fifth that makes me feel like it’s way worse in a contrapuntal context because incorrect dissonance treatment. If I had this happening in a canon for instance, I’d immediately modify it to get rid of it because of the incorrect dissonance treatment. I’d rather have a brief, hollow sound than an incorrectly treated dissonance. Or in other words, yes, I’d rather have a parallel fifth than an unequal fifth in a chorale harmonization. Really though, if I’m going to have a parallel perfect consonance in something other than a chorale, like a fugue or something, I’d rather it be octaves. And this is not to say that I don’t avoid parallel fifths and octaves whenever possible in a contrapuntal context, I do. But if parallel or unequal perfect consonances are for some reason unavoidable, I’d rather it be parallel than unequal and I’d rather it be octaves than fifths.

[@Deliquescentinsight]

Surely it is always a question of what kind of musical effect you seeking? Octaves and 'power chords' (parallel 5ths) can be very effective!

[@HarpsichordHymnsTimRemington]

Thank you for this concise yet thorough explanation of parallel fifths and octaves. Very well presented in your video. Like you state in your conclusion, I avoid parallel fifths and octaves in my music, though I use parallel octaves on occasion to strengthen a voice line. Excellent information!

[@LucasHagemans]

5:58 diminished 5th to perfect 5th is allowed, if in another hypothetical situation the configuration of scales would be thus that parallel thirds were minor ALL THE TIME it would also be considered weird sounding. In the diatonic context the parallel 5ths are perfect most of the time.

[@MrMayAllDay]

Especially when listening to older film and television, I have been noticing the parallel 5ths used for various textures and effects. For example, recently heard them falling chromatically in a horror score. At some points it may have been verboten, but it now seems a necessary and useful tool.

[@aangtonio5570]

Yep, quartal and quintal harmonies are an staple in soundtrack composition like in suspense and horror media, because of their inherent unstable, ambiguous character.

[@CarlosLalonde]

Interesting video, nice job!

[@gspaulsson]

Keep in mind that theory is derived from the practice of composers, not the other way around. The "rules" are not really rules, just tools that are useful to master. It's like everything: if it's the effect you want, it's good; just be aware of what you're doing. As I was taught the rule of parallels, they are ok in inner voices but should be avoided in outer ones. With parallel 5ths, besides the independence of voices another consideration is the somewhat archaic organum sound. Also curious is that parallel 4ths are ok, though they also have a peculiar sound and can't be used in invertible counterpoint, when they become 5ths. Unsupported 4ths are considered dissonances, e.g. in 6-4 chords.

[@sihplak]

4:35 I would almost say that in that specific instance, because the F's are doubled, in a way it seems like it's treated as a rest for the top voice, such that the top line actually "sounds" as though it goes from B to G to A.

[@balbino4]

Very very good! Thank you very much!

[@johanbrand8601]

Can I maybe ask for the links to the specific video's for the performances of the BWV 323 and the Corelli concerto in g, please. It's the most beautiful versions I've ever heardbut couldn't find the specific video's on KZbin.

[@citylightsyt]

Great vid deserves more attention

[@rogerramjet6615]

The octave doubling in nearly all orchestral works (usually double basses and celli) and many piano works does not constitute consecutive octaves. The reason that consecutive 8vas are avoided is because it's like having a voice drop out. So for example a 3 voiced counterpoint becomes a 2 voiced counterpoint. If a 4 part contrapunctal piece has one consecutive 8va, it goes into 3 parts briefly before returning to 4 parts. This sounds like a mistake because it a pointless move. However if one of the 4 parts is doubled from start to finish then it is considered a 3 part piece.

[@micaelat3734]

Thank you for explanation. It makes perfect sense to me. So that's the reason that if you follow the second voice only in a 3 voice piece, it suddenly seems to disappear. Or skip a note. It has to do with the overtones disappearing. I think that is also the reason I don't like it when some people make a recording of singing all the parts themselves. It sounds so bland. I suppose that because all the parts are sung by the same person, the distinctive overtones unique to that person cancel each other out. The same might perhaps happen when a duet is sung by a soprano and another soprano (who takes the lower voice) instead of a true contralto.

[@OmnipresentPotato]

Bach himself used parallel fifths sometimes. Check out the Burlesco from Bach's Partita No. 3 in A Minor BWV 827, and the e-minor fugue from the first of the Well-Tempered Clavier.

[@zaqareemalcolm]

there was a section of a fugue i was studying that had the top and bass voices in (transpositions of) octaves and fifths in some places, and the independence between the two was moreso by differences in rhythm and just much contrary motion there was

[@Lucius_Chiaraviglio]

I have been listening to some Domenico Scarlatti sonatas recently, and some of them have considerable stretches of parallel octaves, so the concept of using them never completely died out. I should also point out that many pipe organs have been built from the early Baroque through modern times with stops (mutations and mixtures) whose whole job it is to produce parallel octaves and fifths (occasionally with the addition of major thirds), although normally the fifths (and major thirds, when applicable) are pure rather than the tempered fifths you would get by directly playing the parallel fifths as such on the keyboard.

[@baconcheesyboy]

Alice in chains>

[@LucasHagemans]

6:16 the parallel 5th from E-B to E#-B# is much more salient actually.

[@Brandon55638]

I'm interested in composing medieval style pieces based on chorale tunes. Do you know anything about how composers from the 14th century must've thought contrapuntally (besides direct cadences and Landini cadences)?

[@SirMatthew]

There is definitely a place for fifths and octaves. Especially today, they evoke that feeling of an ancient piece of music. It's almost eerie when used a certain way.

[@yango8778]

Another reason why parallel fiths became out of fashion during the Renaissance was because it was the main sound of medieval sacred and profane music, and they wanted their music to sound as less medieval as possible. Something very similar happened in painting where, for example, in the Italian school of chiaroscuro expressive colour contrasts (which were the latest sh*t in medieval paintings) were sacrificed for dramatic light and shadow contrasts. Thus, many paintings of this period are nearly monochromatic.

[@JonathanOvnat]

Even if you want to write music with independent voices, you can still use parallels to thicken/enrich one or more of them. All the great composers including Bach have done so.

[@kofiLjunggren]

OMG! YESSSSSSS!! THANKS FOR THIS

[@kofiLjunggren]

Thought I watched your Beethoven video

[@elchatismiquin6445]

Great! Thanks!

[@YourFavouriteColor]

a short note on the one thing you said about "the only reason is the promotion of the impression of independent lines." I actually think there is a sonic element to it as well. The perfect fifth, as you said, is very stable and absolute sounding. So when the perfect fifth(especially when it's do and sol) is prepared by similar, oblique, or contrary motion, it really highlights the "sturdiness" of that interval. When you have parallel fifths in 3 part writing, it's like going from one very sturdy brick, to another very sturdy brick, so the "sound" of preparation and payoff are disrupted, and I do think that's mostly an unpleasant sound. In the cases of orchestration, a lot of those parallel fifths are essentially "power chords," and are functioning as accompaniment, not as counterpoint. If you take an orchestral score and have a line of melody, and follow that with parallel fifth motion, it's still going to sound pretty unpleasant, at least when using common practice harmony. So a brief amendment to your claim. I think refraining from parallel 5ths both promotes the independence of the voices and also sounds better in contrapuntal writing and common practice styles. Once you get into expanded chromaticism and the 20th century, all bets are off and parallel 5ths sound great(as you said)

[@frankenfed]

Hi, which piece of Bach is it that plays at the 3:20 mark?

[@caterscarrots3407]

This makes so much sense. If parallel fifths and octaves weren’t allowed at all, we would get nothing like Grosse Fuge, Pathetique Sonata, or just about every symphony in existence.

[@lollertoaster]

In those first examples I can hear how music slows down with a parallel fifth, especially in Mozart it stops and accelerates. When I was watching Dr. B music theory, I was sure this is an acceptable use of parallel fifths.

[@pauloluisdemoraespereirape9484]

Sensacional!!!

[@mestremusico]

How about a video about hidden fifths?

[@MiScusi69]

Where did you find the font for the thumbnail? I NEED IT

[@skern49]

Neither of the Mozart examples are parallel 5ths. Parallels which arise from ornamentation of the basic contrapuntal voice leading are not real parallels. We have a simple 5-6-5-6 sequence with chromatic appoggiaturas, i.e. DA - DB - EB - E#C

[@tinikadavis2412]

In the example with Corelli's Concerto Grosso in G MINOR in bar 2 what you highlighted in red as Parallel 5th is actually Dim 5th (F# C) not so? Moving from a Dim 5th to A P5th is not considered consecutive/parallel 5ths not so?

[@eltonwild5648]

Name of the last piano piece?

[@MusicaUniversalis]

Debussy: 1st Prelude from the 1st "Livre"

[@zinAab79]

Is fun how times change. Breaking this rule is basically the fundation of all rock derived music.

[@RenardeauGuy]

JS Bach wrote the melody is the centre, and when a parallel fifth sounds good, that's no problem. Listen with your ears and not with your eyes.

[@kmk8284]

I like using parallel fifths when imitating traditional ethnic Filipino sounds. It's very unique sounding

[@JonathanOvnat]

6:14 not parallel fifths. The E is ornamental. The D is the skeletal note.

[@greevar]

Metal uses perfect fifths all the time, and it's awesome!

[@auto_revolt]

The power chord is basically every 80s metal band's bread and butter

[@AJBlueJay]

Whenever I hear parallel 5ths or 4ths it always makes me think of Max Martin and songs like "Baby One More Time" :/

[@chriss6356]

I can understand octaves maybe sounding like one single voice, but fifths don’t sound anything like a single voice to me.

[@mer1red]

I'm sorry but, according to what I have learned, the video and some commentators here show that they don't have a complete overview of the voice leading rules. It's not just about voice independence. For the sake of brevity, I just mention this without going into detail. In music, nothing is forbidden, but you have to know the aesthetic effect of the techniques you are going to use in order to express what you have in your head.

[@PabloGambaccini]

Parallel fifths that do not include the base and happen between chords in inversion are normal and sound good. For example a II6 going to a I64 can create easily Parallel fifths between the upper voices, but as the chords involved are in inversion and the general movement is contrary, the independant feelling remains balanced. In this case, you go from a chord in fundamental to one in first inversion, accoustically first inversion is better when the fundamental or the fifth of the chord is doubled, and that is what happens. Also the base in first inversion, charged with the imperfect consonant colour cancels any idea of void a perfect consonant interval may produce.

[@matthijshebly]

Someone once said (and I paraphrase): "The rule of no consecutive fifths and octaves is *descriptive*, not *prescriptive*". In other words: it describes the way things were (and sometimes still are) done, 99.9% of the time. It became a "rule" only because composers did it that way; not the other way around.

[@JonathanOvnat]

4:13 Maybe these are not parallel fifths, but a typing/editing mistake. Besides parallel fifths, all the voices go down. This is solved by switching voices between the soprano and tenor. The soprano goes B to B an octave lower and the E in tenor goes up to F#. Perhaps the mistake was made because the traditional melody of the choral was as the soprano is written, and the editor could not imagine Bach wanting to split a melody to different voices (even though it's very common in his French suites). The listener would have still heard the known traditional melody.

[@ApfelKUCHENGESCHMACK]

Regarding the Bach choral that you are talking about around min 4.00: it is rather unlikely that it was written by JS Bach. The collection of chorals that we know nowadays on the one hand consists of chorals that are part of Cantatas, Passions and Mottets, and on the other hand of chorals that were published by Bach’s son, Carl Philipp Emmanuel Bach. This collection includes a lot of atypical chorals and many researchers believe that hardly any, if not even none of them, were actually written by JS Bach. The choral that you are referring to in your video is not part of a cantata, but part of this collection by CPhE Bach. In those Bach chorals that were written by JS Bach with absolute certainty you cannot find parallel fifths or octaves, so I would say that in conclusion this choral is probably one of those that was not written by JS Bach, but rather by one of his sons or students.

[@baconcheesyboy]

Alice in chains when they don’t care:

[@stevepayne5965]

"Nothing is forbidden; everything is permitted" may not fly in morality, but it does in music! Context, context, context.

[@pitmezzari2873]

But is Iron Man even a good example? To me, it's a power chord riff, not two indipendent voices, could someone explain why a rock guitar riff which has nothing to do with voice leading would be seen as parallel fifths?

[@zaqareemalcolm]

because even for homophonic, and melody + accompaniment writing in the past they still usually avoided parallel fifths as much as possible (being more homogenous structures still made by stacking independent lines), but youre right the use of power chords is not really about voice leading but a matter of how distortion changes the sound of a guitar

[@KiteintheWind111]

Power chord bad. Unless power chord needed.

[@theinstrumentalists7193]

A distinction you need to make is counterpoint and polyphony are not the same thing. Counterpoint refers to independent voices, so it might be easy to call it polyphony, but polyphony refers to independent voices playing unique melodic lines.

[@aangtonio5570]

Even more simple: Counterpoint is the technique to achieve a well-balanced polyphonic or homophonic texture.

[@jamesmclips]

My ears aren't telling me there's anything wrong with the Bach excerpt

[@WEEBLLOM]

1:58

[@handledav]

dou

[@Wildcard71]

Having the lines overlapped, is even worse. And even that happens more often than expected.

[@JamieSmith-fz2mz]

I don't know if you could set out to be one of the greatest contrapuntal composers to ever exist. Seems like that would have to be just an added bonus. Not worth the effort to chase after it since the holder of that title doesn't get anything.

[@matthijshebly]

"no". They can be unidiomatic, though.

[@GarGlingT]

It is for an experiment. Composer try to do a music lab.

[@onewhogetsbread9975]

Let's write a fugue with tritones in it!!!!

[@zaqareemalcolm]

they already did that in the 20th century lol

[@System.Error.]

ㅎㅇ

[@originunknown3209]

“Once you free your mind about a concept of music and harmony being correct, you can do whatever you want.” Giovanni Giorgio Moroder.

[@HomeAtLast501]

You seem unable to free your mind and see this objectively. If you simply listen to the impact parallel fifths have on the listener, they give the feeling of depth, substance, mass, structure. So if you want to have that impact on the listener with a certain melody line, one way to do this is with parallel fifths. You can simultaneously add instruments that provide independent voices. You seem encumbered by the "rule".

[@brendanward2991]

It still makes no sense to me. Parallel thirds and sixths don't destroy the independence of voices but parallel fifths do?

[@SpaghettiToaster]

Yes, because of psychoaccoustics. Because the octave and the fifth are the first two overtones above a note, they blend much more easily into a single note with a different timbre. You can hear this in orchestral doublings at the octace, where you never feel like you're listening to multiple voices, but just a single voice with a new sound, depending on the mixture of instruments. Thirds and sixths are so far removed from the fundamental in the overtone series that we can easily perceive them as separate.

[@brendanward2991]

@@SpaghettiToaster Separate, yes, but hardly independent. How can a voice be called independent if it is shadowing another voice at the third or sixth?

[@SpaghettiToaster]

@@brendanward2991 That's just semantics. If you can distinguish them from one another, they're two voices and that's all that matters. Of course, you'd never write a full phrase of uninterrupted parallel thirds and call it counterpoint. But the point is, if you make sure your voices never move in parallel fifths or octaves, you have a choice to do with them whatever you like, from a simple accompaniment of parallel first inversion triads to the most complex fugue, with even the possibility to move from one to the other, with each individual voice always remaining audible to the listener. That's what independence means. What you do with that independence is up to you. On the other hand, if your voices are not independent, that is, they feature parallel fifths and octaves, you have to be aware that the listener will probably perceive these instances as a temporary loss of a voice, and compose accordingly. For example, in a strict three-part canon, it would just sound trash to have the third voice drop out at random times for no good reason. Just like you wouldn't write a long oboe melody where random notes in the middle are suddenly played by a trumpet.

[@brendanward2991]

@@SpaghettiToaster "If you can distinguish them from one another, they're two voices and that's all that matters." So parallel fifths are OK if one voice is played by, say, a trumpet and the other by a violin, making it easy to "distinguish them from one another"? "Of course, you'd never write a full phrase of uninterrupted parallel thirds and call it counterpoint" - So parallel thirds are now banned unless they last less than a phrase? Now you're just making up new rules. The fact is that the occurrence of odd isolated parallel fifths does not destroy voice-independence, and yet even Classical composers avoided such fifths as a general rule. It's almost as though they were avoiding parallel fifths because they had been taught to avoid them--not because there was a very good musical reason why they ought to be avoided.

[@SpaghettiToaster]

@@brendanward2991 So parallel fifths are OK if one voice is played by, say, a trumpet and the other by a violin, making it easy to "distinguish them from one another"? No, because it won't be easy. That's the whole principle behind orchestral doubling. You can double almost any combination of instruments at the octave and get a new timbre, almost never easily distinguishable voices. "So parallel thirds are now banned unless they last less than a phrase? Now you're just making up new rules." I never said anything about thirds being banned. It is totally permissible in baroque voice leading to have parallel thirds for as long as you want. You just wouldn't call it counterpoint. In fact it is very common in baroque music to have long stretches of parallel 63 chords (first inversion chords) as accompaniment. "The fact is that the occurrence of odd isolated parallel fifths does not destroy voice-independence" Not true, it destroys it immediately, almost as surely as parallel octaves or parallel unisons would. "even Classical composers avoided such fifths as a general rule. It's almost as though they were avoiding parallel fifths because they had been taught to avoid them--not because there was a very good musical reason why they ought to be avoided." The reason parallel fifths are uncommon in classical music is that they are almost as destructive to voice independence as octaves, but less useful in doubling. Hence, there is usually no good reason to write them. If you want to distinguish between voices in a passage, you're better off not writing them. If you don't and you want to meld multiple voices into one new voice with different timbre, octaves sound better than fifths.

[@voxveritatis3815]

Like almost everything in life, the devil is in the details. The context of the musical phrase in which a parallel fifth might be embedded is most relevant. Especially if you are writing 4-voiced counterpoint, not to mention a fugue for four or more voices. However, and in any case, parallel fifths have their equivalent in languages as well, too. See my point? Allowed, but almost always unnecessary most of the time.

[@MikeN-cs8qe]

….. blahblahblah Contrapuntal blahblahblah Contrapuntal……. It is the only word I could hear while watching this. 😆🤷🏼‍♂️

[@WEEBLLOM]

ok

[@aquapillareilleahpar3129]

Read a book... Or get hearing aids idk

[@MikeN-cs8qe]

@@aquapillareilleahpar3129hey nice name 👍👌