Talk:Neapolitan chord

Merge

A separate article exists with the misspelled title Neopolitan sixth. It does contain some slightly different information that might be merged into this one. Also, the chord template on that page should be updated with the correct spelling. Jzmckay 11:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone's done this -- TimNelson 02:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Look I'm a music major. Taking a finale class. The aural exercise is lacking and it would take like a minute to improve. I don't know if this is standard but the chord's function is predominant. This could be considered. I don't know finale but I probably will when someone reads this. My email is burnedfaceless@gmail.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burnedfaceless (talk • contribs) 03:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Also if this is standard to just write out the chord when a chord this specific is used I think yall have the wrong fucking system. Case by case each chord I won't read every chord but I'll fix this example because it's fucking wrong.

Typo?

I'm fairly certain that "1st Century Baroque Composers" is a typo. Perhaps 17th century was intended?

Different topic - all the 'flat' symbols appear as question marks. Why not use lower-case b for 'flat'? (That last sentence was intended to end with a question mark!) I'm viewing this in Firefox. Apologies if this is a problem at my end.

Stratopastor (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Examples

This would greatly benefit from some musical examples, both sound files we can play of the chords, and references to places in music it can be heard. --Hugh7 08:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

these examples could be much better. they don't use the grand staff and they go from three to four voices (which is simply wrong for this style). this stuff is all about voice leading! this is basic undergrad stuff, there has to be someone on wikipedia who has a handle on it... sorry i cant help, it's just beyond me right now (which is why i'm here and a little disappointed).Jazzzguy (talk) 09:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Improvements

• Headings: This article needs some headings
• The Neapolitan-to-dominant resolution shown in the example is an incorrect way of resolving the chord. The Db should fall to a B, the Ab to a G and the F in an upper voice to a D. (the F in the bass would resolve up to a G and is shown correctly in the example) 24.77.214.167 (talk) 05:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

-- TimNelson 02:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

We sort of need to improve 1/4 of the headings, but it's still an improvement. DarkestMoonlight (talk) 13:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

• Re. the example of secondary dominant modulation under "Further harmonic contexts": surely the Cb7 should be C#7 or Db7? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnthonyHZA (talk • contribs) 22:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Referring to this last point, I've tried to clarify the passage. I think the original author intended to refer to Cb, but mistakenly referred to Cb7 (which would imply a dominant 7th based on the note Cb), instead of just referring to Cb as a note, which would mean adding that note Cb to the Db major triad.

Note that Cb would be an appropriate choice of enharmonic notation only if the chord were to resolve into the keys of Gb major or Gb minor. If you wanted to use F# major/minor notation, the whole notation of the chord would need to be altered. And if you intended to stay close to C minor, very likely you would notate the extra note as B, not Cb. M.J.E. (talk) 10:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• "The use of a root position Neapolitan chord may be appealing to composers who wish for the chord to resolve outwards to the dominant in first inversion; the flattened supertonic moves to the leading tone and the flattened submediant may move down to the dominant or up to the leading tone." An example of this "outward" resolution from repertoire would be helpful, since it does not generally occur in common practice music. Resolving the flattened submediant up to the leading tone not only doubles the leading tone, but also creates a melodic augmented second, both of which are routinely avoided in four-part writing. Also: "Neapolitan chord to a first inversion dominant has more outward motion than the first inversion, whose notes all move towards tonic." I'm not sure what this means... In terms of voice leading, what is this outward motion, and what is meant by all notes moving "towards tonic"? Kallegretti (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested audio

I have added two audio examples to the article. Hyacinth (talk) 01:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Could you please add audio examples for minor keys as well? (eg. f, G, c / D-flat, G, c) The Neapolitan chord occurs much more frequently in minor keys, so it should be shown in audio as well. (In addition, for the IV-V-I cadence, while it is an IV-V-I cadence in the audio, it doesn't match what's shown in the accompanying image, as it has different inversions of the chords.) Aurora Illumina 22:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. Hyacinth (talk) 04:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Step or skip?

• In the present example of a C major/minor tonic, the D♭ generally moves down by step to the leading tone B-natural (creating the expressive melodic interval of a diminished third, one of the few places this interval is accepted in traditional voice-leading), while the F in the bass moves up by step to the dominant root G.[emphasis added]

The article currently reads as above. An anonymous editor altered it to read "skip" instead of "step" without giving a reason. A diminished third=major second. Step or skip? Hyacinth (talk) 04:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd imagine that it's a skip: it's a third, not a second, after all. Double sharp (talk) 15:49, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Sound examples

They seem to be misleading. The nice little embedded ones that have a play button to click don't correspond to the notated examples around it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.151.121 (talk) 06:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

How so? Hyacinth (talk) 06:12, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Danbleed (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC) I found the audio examples, and the respective explanations, extremely revealing and useful. Great use of audio. Thanks.

This article needs a lot of rethinking.

I thought to add to this some historical examples (e.g. Carissimi, first major composer of N6, but the few earlier ones known as well - Lassus e.g.). Then I thought how poorly organized this article was. For instance, for a reader with limited knowledge of harmony, throwing in the references to Schenker etc here and there, especially right at the beginning, are likely to be confusing; one should offer a simple basic explanation, better examples and if you want to discuss how it fits into Schenker's ideas, perhaps put that towards the end as a separate section.

Then, I can't find 4 instances of N6 in Moonlight sonata; perhaps I am missing one, besides m 3, 19, and 49. So I looked up the referred article by Drabkin in Grove - and discovered author has essentially stolen that paragraph verbatim, except for the part about the Moonlight, which isn't there at all!!! So that reference is misplaced. And the para should be less of a direct copy of the reference.

There are lots of comments in Talk about better examples, both staff and aural, and I certainly think that can be improved. Overall this article is poorly arranged, and needs some better sound examples. What's the point of the first one, which plays just a chord??? A context is needed, N6 doesn't appear by itself. I'm confused.

Also, in the short listing of historical usage through 18th c, (the cribbed paragraph), there is nothing about Bach's uses or other High Baroque composers; Root position N6 for example appears in Partita 2 c minor, sarabande, penultimate measure. Thus it's misleading to mention that as being extended to root position by Beethoven.

I'd like to work on this article and thought I'd put out my major aims here first, to get some other opinions. If anybody is watching after all this time.Tuningmeister (talk) 02:46, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Still watching, after all this time. It sounds like you have got some good ideas for this article. I say go right ahead with them. If any opposition should surface, that is the way Wikipedia works. I, for one, will continue to watch with interest.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Unorthodox Nomenclature Opinion

I'm probably wrong but,
I always thought the nomenclature of this chord makes no sense..

I know it goes against the rules and the foundations of the Orthodox Church, lol
but in essence:

If your F is so important that it becomes the Root,
and what you want to harmonically highlight/express is the b6 interval created between F and Db,
then the chord should be named from that F note.. therefore it's a Fmb6 (no 5).

Or in other words,
If what you want to harmonically highlight/express is the b6 interval created between F and Db,
and you invert the Db chord giving so much importance/weight to the F note, by placing it in the bottom to create that tension,
you're in essence making it become the Root.
Thus the chord should be named from that F note.. therefore it's a Fmb6 (no 5).

(If the chord was Major I would call it F+ or FAug instead, but it is minor.)

And the full progression shall be: ivb6 - V - im // Fmb6 - G - Cm

(You can do all the inversions you want to the G or Cm,
that's not really the point, although some inversions will lead/feel differently,
f.e. the usual G first inv, makes it more defined/strong..)

And that's my opinion.

(Before you try to discredit me,
I've studied a few years in a Modern Music Conservatory, but I consider myself self taught,
I've been a Professional guitarist for 15 years, a Studio/session Guitarist for 12 years,
and also a Music Composer and Producer for audiovisual media, including 10 years of Orchestral music Composition for video games..)

(Ofc I'm not saying the article should be modified,
and I don't pretend changing the minds of millions of strong-minded experts..
But just -> think about it.. ;) Quintessence7 (talk) 17:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

That's certainly an interesting and valid interpretation within the perspective of jazz theory! In classical music theory there's no such thing as a 6 chord, so classical theorists would always analyze F Ab Db as a Db major chord in first inversion, would never view F as the root of these 3 notes (this has been true since Rameau's theory of fundamental bass). When classical music theorists say iv6 they would mean a iv chord in first inversion (Ab C F in the key of C), not a iv chord with an added 6th (F Ab Db). But, classical theorists would view your explanation as correct in spirit even if not in terminology, because historically the Neapolitan chord was a variation on a iv chord (F Ab C -> F Ab Db), so even though a classical theorist would never call a Neapolitan any kind of iv chord, it is taking the place of a iv chord and functioning like a iv chord. Shugurim (talk) 03:37, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Root position examples

I'm removing the following incorrect example of a root-position Neapolitan chord: "An example of a flatted major supertonic chord occurs in the second to last bar of Chopin's Prelude in C minor, Op. 28, No. 20." This analysis (without a citation) is incorrect. The opening two measures contain the following chords: Cm Fm G7 Cm | Ab Db Eb7 Ab | I can understand the confusion, because Db would be the Neapolitan chord in the key of C. But measure 2 is pretty clearly in Ab major, not C. It's a direct transposition of measure 1: C: i iv V7 i | Ab: I IV V7 I | If someone else can find a good example of a root-position Neapolitan chord in an authoritative source, please add it. But in all my years of classical music analysis I have never seen a root-position Neapolitan chord that is not better analyzed as something else in a different key. The Handel example of a Neapolitan in second inversion appears to be correct though, so I've left it in, but added a measure number and explanation. Shugurim (talk) 03:23, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I should add that the only convincing root-position Neapolitan I've ever seen in any kind of tonal classical music was in a Hugo Wolf song, but that's practically leaving classical harmonic practice behind anyways, so I'm not sure it would be a good example here. Shugurim (talk) 03:26, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I have also removed the reference earlier on to Beethoven extending to root-position use of the Neapolitan. The only citation for this paragraph is William Drabkin, who has this to say: "Beethoven, who extended its use to root-position and second-inversion chords (examples include the opening of the String Quartet op.95 and the second movement of the Hammerklavier Sonata)." Neither of Drabkin's examples is a clear use of a root-position Neapolitan.

–The opening of Beethoven op. 95 uses a bII key area, but not a bII chord. The piece begins in F minor, then m. 6-7 is a clear Gb major chord in root position, but its use here is not as a subdominant in F minor. Instead, it functions as a I in Gb major, followed by m.8 a viio6 in Gb (Ab Cb F). Measure 8 then becomes a pivot chord: the enharmonic respelling of Ab Cb F is Ab B F, or the leading-tone diminished chord of C, or viio/V in the main key of F. So this isn't a Neapolitan chord in F, it's a very abrupt modulation to Gb followed by a pivot chord modulation back to F.

–The opening of the second movement of the Hammerklavier sonata is in Bb major, and the Neapolitan in this key would be Cb major. I don't see any Cb major chords anywhere in the opening, or in the whole movement either. There are a whole lot of B-naturals, but until the final measures of the movement they are always accompanied by a D-natural (Neapolitan would be B and D#), in a context clearly part of a G major harmony that is a dominant chord of a C key area. I really can't make any sense of Drabkin's assertion that there is a root-position or second-inversion Neapolitan in this movement.

If someone else finds an example of a root-position Neapolitan chord in Beethoven that actually holds up under scrutiny, feel free to add the line back in!. Shugurim (talk) 04:23, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Neapolitan is a term specific to Classical music

From what I understand, the Neapolitan chord is an idiom specific to classical music, and when a flattened supertonic occurs in other genres, it functions in a different way, has different voice-leading, and really should be given a different term. (For example, see Adam Neely's discussion, at 1:43 "It's not that commonly used in popular music past the 1850s," or at 2:20 "Outside of European Classical music, it's just not used." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2EJp8IHrBI)

Additionally, this entire article really only talks about Classical music. The examples given are all Classical music, the rules given only apply to Classical music.

Finally, a Google search for "jazz theory neapolitan chord" only turns up sources about Classical music, or sources trying to distinguish jazz usage of bII from the Classical Neapolitan chord.

So, I've just changed the opening of the article to clarify that the Neapolitan chord is a classical-music-specific term. For now I've left in the "examples from Popular music" section but I'm adding a qualification that most popular music examples are some other use of the bII chord, not a Neapolitan sixth. Shugurim (talk) 05:07, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Haydn from C minor Sonata finale 01.wav

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:07, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

How is it tabbed ? Or played on guitar for ex. 443???

Yo. How is that tabbed like . The D flat , F and well A flat . And whatever else ? I am considering how to finger that chord on guitar tuned eadgbe ? 40Pence (talk) 15:50, 17 September 2023 (UTC)