Is it actually wrong to write an augmented fourth (diabolus in musica) into music?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yawnernonner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

yawnernonner

Guest
The “devil’s dyad” or whatever other name it’s gone under?
 
It’s just dissonance. Not wrong. It has a certain sound because of the way the ear and brain work. Somebody must have thought consonance sounded good and dissonance sounded evil, but that is just a personal interpretation.
 
I remember reading something about this years ago, but I don’t remember where. Possibly in a dictionary of musical terms or something of that kind. From memory, it was banned for Church music in the time of Palestrina or thereabouts, but I have no idea whether the ban was ever formally lifted or just quietly allowed to lapse.
 
Last edited:
Are you the new Paganini - writing a church concerto - hahaahha ohhhh man.
 
The funniest commentary I’ve seen on this… Hilarious!

If your browser doesn’t display the subtitles, Click the 3 dots for more and select open transcript. It will appear on the upper right…Or click the settings ICON and turn the subtitles on…

 
Last edited:
No. An interval in music like a diminished fifth (the inverse of an augmented fourth), or a tritone, is not inherently evil. It does have a dark sound, but it is just the fact that the two notes sound “dark” to the human ear.
 
I may be the odd one out to tell you this, but yeah, there is something wrong with the tritone. It’s unhealthy.

I won’t try to argue the point, except to tell you this: if you really want to know if there’s something intrinstically not right about the augmented fourth, do what you can to prevent yourself from hearing it, for a good loooong time. I mean a year at the very least, but a couple of years would be better. Then, try listening to it again and judge for yourself.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
Speaking of dissonance, I’m still trying to find out what is the organ music played starting at 41:15 for the procession…
Click to expand...
I don’t recognize it, but to me it sounds like something from a not very good movie. Another possibility is that this is what you get when you commission an original composition on the average parish’s liturgy budget. Two thumbs down.
 
Last edited:
I somehow doubt the National Shrine in DC is particularly short on money for commissions.

Also, I like the piece, although I know from posting it previously on here that I am in the minority. The beginning sounds a bit more like “here comes Darth Vader and the Sith Lords” than “here come the Knights of Columbus and Malta” .
 
I lost it at “Next time I hear someone singing a pagan interval, I’ll report it to the pope.”
 
Maybe the augmented fourth would work in a song that’s in a minor scale?
 
The dismissal of the augmented fourth derives from its use in polyphany. Polyphany was embraced by the Avignon papacy during the Western Schism as they discarded Gregorian Chant within their liturgy. The Roman Church condemned polyphany in the liturgy due to its rise in Avignon. Even when the Council of Trent allowed polyphany to re-enter the liturgy, they still prohibited anything perverse or discordant (I can’t remember the exact phrasing) to allow the ongowing theological debates upon mathematical and harmonic discord to continue within the confines of the Church to define what exactly is perverse or discordant. In the eighteenth century, the augmented fourth had become accepted by a number of dioceses and was not as harshly condemned as it had been in the past. Now, there really aren’t any inherent naysayers with respect to the augmented fourth in the Church hirearchy and it is relegated to the Bishops’ personal taste in liturgical music.
 
Just think, if we’d had CAF hundreds of years ago, there would be a dozen threads of people arguing about polyphony and calling it liturgical abuse.

Seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same
 
I sincerely apologize for my ignorance, but is this thread about how a certain way music is composed is evil or unhealthy to the listener? And if so, does it have any relation to causing the listener to sin, (losing control, feeling rage, feeling suicidal)?
 
no1special said:
And if so, does it have any relation to causing the listener to sin, (losing control, feeling rage, feeling suicidal)?
Click to expand...
Music, in the sense of notes only and no lyrics or images encouraging sinful behavior, does not cause people to sin.

It’s possible that a certain individual might have a particular reaction to a piece of music or a genre or style of music based on his or her preferences, what he associates certain music with in his head, etc., but it’s subjective to that individual.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
Just think, if we’d had CAF hundreds of years ago, there would be a dozen threads of people arguing about polyphony and calling it liturgical abuse.

Seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same
Click to expand...
Maybe 10 years ago, our choir director tried a new setting of the Litany of the Saints for the Easter Vigil. It was not a hit and was not repeated in any other years. My feeling at the time was that the one we have been using for 1000 years or so was met with resistance the first time it was used. A lot of us just don’t like change, and it is not just us old folks.
 
It’s hard to be certain, because the original post simply asks a question without any explanation, but I would guess that the original poster was wondering about the nickname of a particular interval (devil’s or diabolus), whether the interval is inherently evil, or perhaps whether the name makes it evil.

I haven’t noticed anyone suggesting that it could lead a person to sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top