My first "post-theory" homework.

[cheul]

This theory forum and Compyfox' first asking for help harmonizing his melodies gave me the inspiration to start learning theory myself. So I read some of the more formal posts here, read the introduction at www.chordmaps.com (too bad it's not finished !)in a few days between Xmas and New Year's Eve. Someone suggested to write a bunch of melodies with their harmnony each day or so, and though I don't have the luxury to do so, it remains a good idea. So I thought let's write something in C minor.

While playing I settled for a 4-chord progression :

Cm Ab Bb G (i VI VII V) well ok maybe it's weird

But the mood I was looking for was best expressed by the progression :

Cm Abm so I switched the progression to Cm Abm Bb G

But the point of the exercise is for me to analyse along the way what I'm doing in order to be able in the end to develop a given mood at leisure (skipping some, not all, of the trial/error process). So I need your help, and that's where the purpose of a forum come in handy. Everywhere I need an answer/confirmation you'll see a "right ?", or just a plain question.

At the moment I mainly know about Major scales, modes based on them, 3 minor scales, moving between keys using relative/parallel majors/minors, the relation between a major scale, the Aeolian mode and the natural minor. Let's stop here.

I started my exercise with the C natural minor scale. When switching from Ab to Abm I'm raising the 7th making it an harmonic minor one, right ? If I wanna stay in the harmonic form, Bb the 3rd chord of my initial progression becomes Bdim, right ? But I sonically preferred Bb, and after all the harmonic minor scale is made to live peacefully with the natural and melodic ones, right ?


Anyway what I'm really dying to have some light on, is the C Abm part, because I just dig it. I didn't find those 2 chords living in the same scales known to me. So what's happening here ? Are we talking modulation, on just one chord ? Is it that the first chord of the progression Cm is taken from the key of Ab major (which shares all its notes except Db with C minor), which is then turned to its parallel minor ? But that would be ignoring the fact my melody sarts in minor so the only way I can explain it is : the melody is minor all the way, using C natural minor as the Aeolian mode based on Eb major switched to its parallel minor, getting us to that Abm chord.
My brains just melted.

So how am I supposed to find a general concept to explore and develop this Cm Abm mood in other situations ?

Oh and my homework is here.
Don't pay attention to the silly sound quality. Tell me what you think.

[tee boy]

"I started my exercise with the C natural minor scale. When switching from Ab to Abm I'm raising the 7th making it an harmonic minor one, right?"

Yes, but...

Your triads are based on thirds! So whether the minor scale is harmonic or natural, the Submedient (6th degree of the scale) will always have a major chord.

Ab, C, Eb

What you have done here is create a chromatic medient relationship between the tonic chord (C minor) and the new chord (which I would analyse as an enharmonic):

G#, B, D#

Do you see why I have done this? Because in a triad, you need to have two thirds. You cant have a second for the first interval, ie, Ab to B (even though it SOUNDS as a minor third!).

This is where you music theory is at odds with music practice. There are times when intervals and notes have to be named differently to work on paper. Ab is enharmonic to G# - the sound the same. But on paper, they are very different.

The chord you describe as 'vi' (Abm - Ab, B, Eb) is not a triad of C minor ON PAPER. However, 'bv' (a minor chord on the flattened dominant / 5th) could be considered a chromatic triad.

Sorry if Im not explaining this too well. It would make far more sense if I could show you on the piano or score

TB

[Xnah]

... but the result sounds promising .

[tee boy]

Its funny as I was just talking about chromatic medient and tritone relationships in the other thread!

Try these chord progressions:

C, Eb, Gb (Major chromatic medient progression)

They use this all the time in film score. Just give it to low, big sounding brass (like Horner did in Titanic!).


Now try this one:

Em9, Cm9, Abm9 (minor 9th's in chromatic medient relationship).


You can also modulate using this relationship. Ever listened to the score to Bramstoker's Dracula? The main love theme does this with minor chromatic medients.

TB

[tee boy]

... but the result sounds promising .

Absolutely! You're hear stuff like that in kids films, cartoons and cartoon video games ALL the time. It sounds great!

But ofcourse, he is trying to understand it in theoretical terms, so we have to change how we think of the progression slightly. It is a chromatic progression, even those all the notes are diatonic to C harmonic minor!

Unless you wish to consider the Abm chord to be altered?

This problem stems from the fact that this scale has the leading tone sharpened, making the interval from VI to VII a minor third rather than a second. But one paper it is augmented second!

TB

[tee boy]

This is why I say you should know the music before you try to explain it.

How little sense would that shite make if you hadnt even heard the progression, right?

TB

[nuffink]

edit: My Romans are a bit askew

[JumpingJackFlash]

What you have done here is create a chromatic medient relationship between the tonic chord (C minor) and the new chord (which I would analyse as an enharmonic):

G#, B, D#

Do you see why I have done this? Because in a triad, you need to have two thirds. You cant have a second for the first interval, ie, Ab to B (even though it SOUNDS as a minor third!).

You may be confusing him here. Ab-minor is a perfectly valid chord and is correctly spelt Ab-Cb-Eb. (As you say, it needs to be spelt in 3rds).

There is such a thing as over-analysing. - If you've found a chord progression that you like, then that's fine. You don't always have to relate it to theory (often doing so results in a complicated explanation which doesn't have any practical value, eg: "a diminished triad with conjunct semitone, not only superimposed... but also subimposed"!)

I would advise either staying in key and getting familiar with simple diatonic theory first, or else abandon this and just go with what sounds good. - Of course, it's good that you want to learn the reasons behind your preferences, but not everything has to be analysed in such detail.

Oh, and the other thing that struck me about your post was the use of chord VII. - This is a diminished chord in both major and harmonic minor keys and should generally be avoided in root position for now. Chord VII in first inversion can be used, and usually resolves to chord I (either in root position or first inversion). - But again, if you like the sound, go for it!

[Toxikator]

At the moment I mainly know about Major scales, modes based on them, 3 minor scales, moving between keys using relative/parallel majors/minors, the relation between a major scale, the Aeolian mode and the natural minor. Let's stop here.

I started my exercise with the C natural minor scale. When switching from Ab to Abm I'm raising the 7th making it an harmonic minor one, right?

KIIIND of. I see how you arrived there; the Bb becomes raised to a B, and Ab minor is Ab Cb Eb, and you make Cb into B. Enharmonically this is true (they sound the same), but theoretically that chord is still composed of Ab, Cb, and Eb. That wouldn't normally matter much, except...

If I wanna stay in the harmonic form, Bb the 3rd chord of my initial progression becomes Bdim, right ? But I sonically preferred Bb, and after all the harmonic minor scale is made to live peacefully with the natural and melodic ones, right?

It is true that the forms are interchangeable, though the rule of thumb, so to speak, is to try to keep the raised 7th away from its natural counterpart by at least a couple notes, though immediately after your Bb you return to B natural in the G Major chord... and it sort of doesn't matter since we've establised that your Ab minor chord doesn't actually employ the note B, but the note Cb.

Anyway what I'm really dying to have some light on, is the C Abm part, because I just dig it. I didn't find those 2 chords living in the same scales known to me. So what's happening here ? Are we talking modulation, on just one chord?

If I were doing a harmonic analysis of the movement, I might be inclined to classify it as a temporary modulation... or possibly as chromatic harmony. After all, the only thing distinguishing it from it's more "traditional" major counterpart (which, I must confess, I like more in the examples I've tried to mock up) is the minor third. I might just analyze this piece as i vi VII V.

Is it that the first chord of the progression Cm is taken from the key of Ab major (which shares all its notes except Db with C minor), which is then turned to its parallel minor ? But that would be ignoring the fact my melody sarts in minor so the only way I can explain it is : the melody is minor all the way, using C natural minor as the Aeolian mode based on Eb major switched to its parallel minor, getting us to that Abm chord.
My brains just melted.

Don't restrict yourself to diatonicism in this case. It might be better to just call it chromatic harmony.

If you want to think in terms of modulations, you could also classify it as a iv/III... but the problem with this analysis is A) the lack of tonal relationship between the iv chord and the tonic and B) the absence of the III chord in the piece.

So how am I supposed to find a general concept to explore and develop this Cm Abm mood in other situations?

I'd call it a chromatic harmonic movement, or else a modulation to the vi. given the tempo and phrasing of your example piece (which reminds me in the best way possible of Nightmare Before Christmas) it would likely be best to call it a chromatic modulation. I think it works the way it does because the modulation follows a melodic pattern... the movement to either the VI or the III feels natural in a minor pattern, so modulating there works in a spooky sort of way.

Consider the following passage, based on i, iii (the melody shifts to play in Eb minor for this segment), i, iv:

Audio Example
The idea is that the harmonic motion indicated by the progression i, III, i, iv is slow enough to allow the character of the III chord to be changed to minor (though its harmonic function remains relatively unchanged)

[tee boy]

You may be confusing him here. Ab-minor is a perfectly valid chord and is correctly spelt Ab-Cb-Eb

Ofcourse, but not when C is tonic. Iv never heard of a chord being spelled in such a way that it alters the tonic. I believe the enharmonic spelling for this reason. Plus, it also points to the chromatic 'context' in which the chord is used, ie, as a chromatic medient. To interpret the chord as Ab minor means we have to modulate (so to not alter the tonic), but without a cadence in the new key, the modulate holds no weight.

There is such a thing as over-analysing. - If you've found a chord progression that you like, then that's fine. You don't always have to relate it to theory

Thats totally true.

Ofcourse, we are discussing here a homework assignment though. The original poster is asking how his work would be analysed. The fact that he has used a chromatic chord means that a little explanation has to ensue.

It is not to say that my way of analysing the chord is right or wrong, better or worse etc, than anyone elses. Quite often aspects of music can be analysed in a variety of ways. I just find this presentation to be the most suitable. Imo, this is a progression in C minor which features one chromatic chord.

it's good that you want to learn the reasons behind your preferences, but not everything has to be analysed in such detail.

I disagree. When you are writing music to learn, then it is natural to want to explain things. Perhaps you have done something new, something that no one else has ever thought of...but its unlikely!

I find myself much like the original poster, in so much as I like to understand what I have done. Therefore, with that knowledge I can then reproduce the effect or modify it work in other situations.

TB

[VicDiesel]

You may be confusing him here. Ab-minor is a perfectly valid chord and is correctly spelt Ab-Cb-Eb

Ofcourse, but not when C is tonic. Iv never heard of a chord being spelled in such a way that it alters the tonic.

No, you're wrong and previous posters were right. Abm is Ab-Cb-Eb no matter what key you are in.

And why would it be possible to have a lowered 2nd, 3rd, whatever step, but not the 1st? It's uncommon, true.

Ok, I listened to it. That Cb sounds to me a bit like a leading tone, wanting to go back to the C. It's almost a G+ chord, except for bass. And in fact, you can almost play a G bass under it, and it sort of feels like the right bass. So, you might call it a G+ 9b (no bass)

Or just enjoy the sound and don't overanalyse it.

Victor.

[tee boy]

You may be confusing him here. Ab-minor is a perfectly valid chord and is correctly spelt Ab-Cb-Eb

Ofcourse, but not when C is tonic. Iv never heard of a chord being spelled in such a way that it alters the tonic.

No, you're wrong and previous posters were right. Abm is Ab-Cb-Eb no matter what key you are in.

And why would it be possible to have a lowered 2nd, 3rd, whatever step, but not the 1st? It's uncommon, true.

Ok, I listened to it. That Cb sounds to me a bit like a leading tone, wanting to go back to the C. It's almost a G+ chord, except for bass. And in fact, you can almost play a G bass under it, and it sort of feels like the right bass. So, you might call it a G+ 9b (no bass)

Or just enjoy the sound and don't overanalyse it.

Victor.

Hang on, dont get me wrong, Im not saying that the chord could not be interpretted as Abm. And Im certainly not saying that Ab - Cb - Eb doesnt produce the chord Abm.

What I am saying is that in this context, when all the other tones and harmonies are diatonic to C minor, that a chromatic enharmonic analysis of the chord would be more appropriate.

Beings as the tonic is the tone at which all others revolve, it seems less appropriate to alter it when other options are available, such as an enharmonic spelling.

In addition, the enharmonic spelling is a typical way of 'pointing' to the chromaticism. Iv never once seen a composer alter the tonic and try to such a chord off as being an altered diatonic chord. This relationship is called the 'chromatic medient', and it would be spelled enharmonically imo.

Surfice to say that while I respect your analysis, I dont agree with it. Enharmonic spelling is a fundamental part of chromaticism, and there is little doubt in my mind that it applies to this case.

TB

[tee boy]

Something worth noting...

I think that the Abm spelling might be more appropriate if you were wanted to actually modulate to that key, beings the Ab is Submedient in C minor.

What Im talking about here is matter of context. In the mainly diatonic progression, I feel it appropriate to use the enharmonic spelling in order to prevent confusion and clearly illustrate the chromatic nature of the chord. Indeed, I think that most would perceive this chord as being a minor chord and it being none diatonic.

But dont think that Im argueing that black is white. Ab-Cb-Eb is Abm, no question. And in this progression it could be interpretted as such. What I am doing is using my initiative to prevent ambiguity in the notation. I want the chromatic chord to be as clearly visible on the paper as it is in the listening.

In the C19th literature, this was a common practice. Liszt (who many consider to be the grand father or atonality) is famous for writing chromatic passages enharmonically. His Mephisto Waltz's are a perfect example of this!

I hope this is clear now. I am certainly not trying to confuse. But I think this is an important point, and worth driving home. When the score is the only thing you have to communicate your intentions of the music, it pays to make things CRYSTAL clear.

TB

[VicDiesel]

Surfice to say that while I respect your analysis, I dont agree with it. Enharmonic spelling is a fundamental part of chromaticism, and there is little doubt in my mind that it applies to this case.

Actually, in my last bit of analysis, where I surmise that the Abm is really a G+ 9b, I have to enharmonically change the Cb to a B.

I thought that would make you happy

Victor.

[VicDiesel]

Beings as the tonic is the tone at which all others revolve, it seems less appropriate to alter it when other options are available, such as an enharmonic spelling.

You have to go with the logic of triads. An Abm chord has a Cb in it. What chord would Ab-B-Eb be? I can't find a name for it. B-Eb is a fourth (yes it is), so it's not a triad based chord.

Anyway: more lowered tonics:

First play: Cm, Fm, Ab (add 6), Cm

Now Cm, Fm, Fdim, Cm

Do you agree that the 3rd chord is some sort of F chord? And therefore its third note is some variant of C? The third note in an Fdim is Cb. There you have it. A lowered tonic.

Besides, have you never played C, C#dim, Dm, D#dim, Em? There you have a sharpened tonic. Do you have problems with that too?

And there you can not change it to a Dbdim, because the Db is not a leading tone to D.

Victor.