I am doing Grade 6 Theory, and am a little confused.

I understand that a passing note is between two harmony notes, and generally comes on a weaker beat. But an auxiliary note is the same, as it goes only up or down and then back to the harmony note. but then a changing note is the same thing again though.

I really don't understand the difference...

A changing note is also between 2 harmony notes but moves in the opposite direction. If the harmony notes move down then the changing note will be higher than the first one.

Passing note: like a link between two melodic notes which are a third apart.

Auxiliary note: Follows a note by step and then returns to the same note.

Échappée: is a note that moves in the opposite direction to the harmony note.

Thanks.

Just a few questions:

Does it matter how many auxiliary/chaning/passing notes are between two harmony notes?
Are auxiliary ones only to be 1 tone apart?
Can a passing note be a semi-tone apart?

Generally, with auxiliary notes, only one note appears between the harmony note either side of it(whether a tone or semitone above/below) - e.g. F E F, or A Bb A. These can be diatonic ('of the key') or chromatic.
Passing notes however, can involve an (almost) unlimited number of non-harmony notes between the two harmony notes, and can involve chromatic notes too - i.e. be a semitone apart from each other. For example, D Eb E F F#
Changing notes are not my forte, so I will pass on those...!

Hope this helps clarify the matter.

denmark

Changing notes = the upper and lower auxiliary notes heard one after another, e.g. the melodic segment C-D-B-C and C-B-D-C sounding over a C major or C minor triad

Correction to denmark77's definition of passing notes: The number of passing tones between two harmony notes cannot be unlimited, if chords are built from stacked thirds and if the semitone is the smallest pitch subdivision.

In tonal music, it is common to find a single passing note or two passing notes between two chord tones, e.g. C-D-E over a C major chord, and D-Eb-F-G over a G minor chord.

Incidentally, in North America, most people refer to passing note as "passing tone", which can be either accented or unaccented; two passing tones in a row as "double passing tones"; auxiliary note as "neighbor tone"; and changing notes as "double neighbors".

I am so cross with myself, I did these with my teacher and fully understood when she explained, yet I have sent this to the back of my brain and forgotten all about them. I must look at my notes!

But that's not the only definition.

I don't mean to be rude but...

What?

Your definition is rather unclear. It would be great if you could supply an example or two.

Your description seems to suggest "echapee" (mentioned by JohnS), which is also known as an "escape tone."



Are you working toward Grade 6 Theory on your own? If so, you should consider getting a tutor. The classification of non-harmony notes is the EASIEST part of Grade 6 Theory.

Can I ask for some clarification here too? I have taken it that you are saying that a changing note and an echapee are not the same. I though they were the same and checked it in my Anna Butterworth book, which says "The echapee ..........................is also called a changing note". Am I wrong in my assumption of what you are saying?

Afraid I disagree that it the easiest part of Grade 6 theory. It's a matter of opinion, not fact, which parts people find the easiest, and I didn't find it the easiest.

Yes, that is the echappee I was describing.
Looks like I ought to have done a bit more revision before posting but this was the one sort of changing note that I remembered at the time of posting.
For those learning this fir the first time I think that the examples in the Blue ABRSM theory book are pretty clear.

Don't worry, I figured this out a while ago.

It's not the easiest part IMO, and I was only confused because the description I was refering had way too advanced vocabulary for me. But I fully understand what everyone has now said. I've moved onto the Harmony book now, and am currently on triad inversions.

Thanks for checking the Butterworth text. I am not familiar with that book at all. I am, however, familiar with many harmony and counterpoint texts, and so far, Butterworth is the only person to say that echapee is also called a changing note.

Sometimes, I really think that a unified list of terms is necessary for theory students and teachers in various English-speaking countries!

I agree organ_dummy.

A definitive list of these terms would help a great deal in clarifying the differences between the echapee and changing notes, at least for exam purposes. The AB Guide part II (blue book) is the reference book I recommend to my theory students, but the Butterworth is also recommended by one of my colleagues as being the better source of examples and exercises. The problem is, although both are published by ABRSM, they do not agree on the exact definitons in this case. One says the echapee and changing notes are two different examples of non-harmony notes, while the other says they are one and the same. It is confusing enough for the poor students, without the textbooks not being in agreement...!

I will have to check what the 'model answers' to past papers have to say on this... if there are any questions on these ...

denmark

I thought that an echappee was a particular type of passing note...

I'm new to changing notes but I have met the echappe passing notes. I have just been looking up the difference in William Lovelock's 'Second Year Harmony' book and comparing it with an example in Stewart Macpherson's 'Practical Harmony'.

From what I can work out it looks like an echappe is the term for when the second of two notes is a step below the first. The step can be 'filled in' with a note which 'escapes' by a step up from the first before it resolves by a falling third to the second note - E F D. This example is in both books. Lovelock calls it a 'form of decoration' (p91).

Macpherson alludes to them as passing notes but makes a distinction between notes that leap and notes that step.

The leaping ones seem to be more complicated and involves two extra notes added to the harmony notes. The passing note 'skips a 3rd to another passing note on [or from?] the other side of the note of resolution, and then resolves upon the harmony-note between the two' (Macpherson p33) Example - C B D C or
C D F E or G A F# G. They all have a skip 'away' in common and all have four notes in the pattern - Macpherson calls the passing notes 'changing notes'.

The difference seems to be the echappe involves only three notes and always steps away first, E F D before skipping to the resolution.

I don't know if this makes any sense - you can't beat the 'old school' sometimes for explanations, even if a bit dry in approach

The term "echappe passing note" sounds very confusing!

In the example quoted above, why can't we simply call the D and F incomplete auxiliary notes? That is, D as an incomplete auxiliary to C and F as an incomplete auxiliary to E.

The D can be identified in another way. If you try to sing or play this melodic line musically, it is not difficult to hear that the D is a passing note between C and E, but then the E is decorated further by its upper auxiliary.

---------

In an earlier post, I said that the identification of non-chord tones was perhaps the easiest thing about Grade 6+ theory. I still think so, despite the disagreement by some forum members.

The crux of the problem is that the definitions provided by various textbooks conflict with one another. The concepts themselves are pretty straightforward. It seems hard because students are confused by the poorly constructed and often conflicting definitions. I seriously think that the theory textbooks published by the AB should undergo major revisions, or else they can only do harm to students. I am not just thinking about the terms for non-chord tones, but also the labeling of various chromatic chords.

I thought in my post I had put E F D is an echappe, as a way of putting a 'non-essential decorative note' between two stepping notes - which is how I understand it. C D F E are the original changing notes and I can see how your new interpretation would fit. I suppose how to analyse it would depend on the context and harmony being used.

I rarely use AB books for theory and only use them to support learning or to give the pupil practice for theory exam papers. I can't agree or disagree about the Butterworth explanation of changing notes etc as needing review as I haven't studied that particular section in the book yet.

Incidentally, if the melodic line C D F E was harmonised by an F major triad, then the D would be a nota cambiata.