I made a chord progression that i can't explain with my theory knowledge

[DanRamone]

Hi at all!
I found this chord progression that i made while ago, when i didn't know any music theory. Now that i'm a little more into study, i can't really explain what i really did. It's all minor and it sounds really haunting...i actually don't understand in which key it is...
The chord progression is like this:
Dmin - Fmin - Dmin - Cmin
Dmin - F#min - Dmin - D#min (or C#min)

I thought i was making something in Dmin, but i should have Fmaj and Cmaj on the first part, and F# D# don't fit in the theory. So i arrived at two possible conclusions (but better minds can have better ones): a. i'm breaking the rules in a way that sounds good, and probably this makes the feel of the progression more haunting and "scary" b. i don't really understand so much in music theory, there is a rule behind all of this and i need someone who can explain it to me

Thanks!!!

[Gamma-UT]

This is chord 'planing' (or harmonic parallelism), where you move the same chord around from one root to another.

It was a very popular move in the early 90s for house and techno because artists simply sampled chords from old soul and R&B records. And it was popular among composers like Debussy a century earlier. It gets used in pieces like the Sunken Cathedral. The lack of a definite key centre can make lines like this sound dreamy and other-worldly.

It doesn't come up in basic music theory because it's a 'post tonal' technique. It also breaks several key rules of classical counterpoint, so it only began to be used once composers broke out of using those rules.

[DanRamone]

Thanks a lot for your reply! you just opened me a new world with the word "planing" (a lot of stuff regarding this theme on google).
Is this part of this track also made with harmonic parallelism?
https://youtu.be/A03R1iM8FJA?t=1m48s

[trampofnine]

Hey! I use this technique as well!
I came up with it a few months ago and gave it the name "chord blurs".
Finally I know what "my technique" is.

[DanRamone]

From my first example, i tried to move from minor to major chords at the end of the second progression, it sounds more completed, what you think like:
Dmin - Fmin - Dmin - Cmin
Dmin - F#min - Dmin - Fmaj - Cmaj

[nineofkings]

That makes the last three chords have a tonal function, since it ends on the dominant (V chord). This would give it a more satisfying, "completed" feeling, if you want it to sound more solid rather than floaty.

[zethus909]

yea but whats the bassline

[Martin Alexander]

Hi at all!
I found this chord progression that i made while ago, when i didn't know any music theory. Now that i'm a little more into study, i can't really explain what i really did. It's all minor and it sounds really haunting...i actually don't understand in which key it is...
The chord progression is like this:
Dmin - Fmin - Dmin - Cmin
Dmin - F#min - Dmin - D#min (or C#min)

Hi Dan,

what you did is modal interchange (NOT chord planing - that's about voice leading, not harmony).
That's why it sounds interesting and fresh.
It sounds haunting, because of the modes you borrow it from - see the attached file / table.

Also some progressions (like Dm to F#m) can also be seen as mediants in isolation, but in context i would go for modal interchange, since it's the most logical explanation and links perfectly to what the music makes you feel - haunting.

Nice progression, Dan.

Keep it up !


Martin Alexander

[someone called simon]

my explantion is that it's a bunch of semi random chords that you happen to find nice sounding. I suspect that's as much theory as is required in this instance.

[Martin Alexander]

my explantion is that it's a bunch of semi random chords that you happen to find nice sounding. I suspect that's as much theory as is required in this instance.

That is not an explanation - just plain ignorance.

[someone called simon]

If i draw some random lines on a page that I find pleasing, I don't need a theory to describe it. I think it's a stretch ascribing modal interchange to this chord progression. It would be like me measuring all the angles in my random lines to assign a structure to justify them. I wonder if the big guns of the theory forum will weigh in. I'm happy to be proved wrong. While I'm not speaking from a place of profound knowledge, I'm also not speaking from a place of utter ignorance, whether wrong in this instance or not.

Also, it wasn't meant as a put down. Random things that come from unschooled musicians can be amazing.

[someone called simon]

The first four chords I could see as being in Cm, though the 2nd occurence of Dm doesn't lead there. Replace it with a G7 and it would.
the second four chords seem t be hovering around A to me, if the last of the 4 was replaced with A there would some functional harmony stuff going on.
But then it would be 2 separate 4-chord sequences in 2 different keys, but tied together with the Dm, which is indeed an example of modal interchange, in both keys, Cm and A, I think. But then it wouldn't sound the same as it currently does, though it would be easier to 'explain'.

[Michael L]

I found this chord progression that i made while ago, when i didn't know any music theory.

This is chord 'planing' (or harmonic parallelism)

I came up with it a few months ago and gave it the name "chord blurs"

what you did is modal interchange

I don't need a theory to describe it.

Are these "explain vs explore" approaches just different paths to the same result, or do they actually lead to different results?

[someone called simon]

he want's to explain an exploration, I think, which is fine, of course. the chords were one result. An explanation, if it exists, is a different kind of result, which may cast light on the first one.

[jancivil]

Yeah, make up what ever theory works for you for future usage.

There is no need whatsoever to assign mode names to chords.
There appears to be a prevalence of D minor. It is not modal at all. Is 'Locrian' supposed to be true because of the note Ab? D minor contains A natural. No mode is established at all. Then F#m indicates what, D Ionian? A mode's intervals relate to its central note in a certain way, and does so consistently in order to create the character, the mood of the mode. A new mode just because you find one note that coincides with that mode? Does that really add up to a useful modus operandi? Or are these are just coincidental occurrences; D Locrian then voilà, D Ionian and so forth.

And note well, modal anything is not about harmony. Just because you can create triads off the seven tones of a seven note mode just like you do with major or minor does not mean it's a good idea. It's not harmonic music, modal music. Dorian mode; what happens when you make IV7? It's V7 in C. The weight of that functional harmony is such that you have to take care with it, which means a fair amount of avoidance at the end of the day. Think about it.

The term 'modal interchange' comes from the early 19th century and it means major and minor modes, confer Schubert for instance.
Now, today on the internet we can find all kind of jumbled up shite, it's an opportunity for any tosser to show he can prattle on about modes and sophistimacated harmonic jive. But think about this: any harmony you can borrow from is found in major or minor. There is no need to talk about 'aeolian' or 'dorian' whatsoever. It sounds so veddy edumacated, but it's a lot of verbiage you simply don't need. So skip it.
But, check out this cat, he says it straight:
https://www.coursera.org/learn/musician ... nterchange



If these are {guitar chords and, say} D minor = D A D F, then F minor = F C G Ab, then C minor = C G C Eb, et cetera, it may as well be deemed 'planing' or parallelism. We don't know if it is or isn't. F minor as far I know was an "interchange" from F minor.

I kinda concur with someone called simon and 'it's a bunch of semi-random chords you happen to find sound nice' and that's all the theory that's needed. All of this talk is theory for the sake of theory after a point. Not necessarily a waste of time, it could lead to whole new realms.