Ask me anything Music Theory and I'll answer

[LXNDR1]

i must forestall that i'm totally music illiterate, so the question is extremely stupid, but not myself

on a keyboard when i change chords only using white keys, so there's always one white key distance between two closest keys i depress in a chord (4 keys depressed in total), the sequence makes perfect musical sense, i hear melody
i change them sequentially playing from for example E,D,C or upwards
however when i select a, say, minor chord and keep it strictly minor playing sequentially E,D,C there's for the most part not much sense in the sequence

all i think i understand at this point is that when i only play white keys i go through different types of chords and that's the reason it sounds like a melody

how this phenomenon can be explained from the music theory standpoint?

hopefully i didn't totally confuse you with my word bound description

[VicDiesel]

Dexter,

(seems to have gone away, but oh well)

your explanations sometimes lack in clarity. Your post about progressions starts out sensibly enough, but then it contains the following nuggets:

The reason is because to fully understand progression, you have to know them to know their progressions.

I beg your pardon?

For example the progression in a G Major scale is a 7th (or F#).

What? I thought a progression meant "bunch of chords in a row", or something like that.

About modes:

They are all unique because of their intervals. Once you know them then stressing one over the other is a matter of preference.

Really? We're playing a song in C, the current harmony is an F chord, and I decide to play that C scale with an F# in it. You call that a "preference"? I call it wrong. Methinks there is more to modes than "preference".

About Cb, B# and all that:

I just pointed out that you should really never see it in sheet music.

You can't point out what's not true. WTC I number 3 is in C# major, not Db, and so there are lots of E# and B# notes. Take a simpler example. Suppose you have a minor progression Im IVm, and you spy it with a leading note, giving Im I IVm. Now do that in C# minor which has a modest 4 sharps. You really have to write E-E#-F# and nothing else.

The use of notes like E# are used for the point of theory an not application.

You have an extremely limited view of theory. Romantic, piano centric, and western. I once took a private lesson and played my F# (or whatever) fairly high pitched. The teacher said "no, we're doing renaissance here, not baroque. The F# is _lower_ than Gb, not the other way around".

Turks would also severely disagree with you. Ever seen a Kanun? (Qanun, however you spell it)

[RandolphCarter]

A very dumb question:

if in chord progression notation, in the key of E (for example), E would be noted as I (in roman numerals)... how would Eb major chord be written down in roman numerals? As Ib?

Thanks!

[TankEyes]

A very dumb question:

if in chord progression notation, in the key of E (for example), E would be noted as I (in roman numerals)... how would Eb major chord be written down in roman numerals? As Ib?

Thanks!

It would be VII(maj) or plain old VII I believe.

[TankEyes]

Hi there. I have a quick question. When I wish to make a key change, say from a major to a relative minor, do I need to use a pivot chord to make the change, or can I just swith staight into the new key? Also, when changing keys around the circle of fifths, is there some kind of formula to know which pivot chord to use when changing keys? Thanks very much for your help.

To choose a pivot chord you simply look for a chord that is part of your new key, and contains a note or notes from your old key. As you go around the circle of fifths there should be one "new" note each time, so you can use that new note as a part of your pivot chord.

Going to the relative minor, you have no new notes to exploit, so a good technique would be to use a V-I cadence to your new I.

So if we were in a key of C major, we could use Em as a kind of pivot to Am. You could also use IV-I. You could even change it to E major for a different flavour that would still work. If you're heading into I, it's often effective to choose a chord that has A couple of notes "surrounding" the I note. So in our C major key you could use G major, which is the dominant of C!

A lot of pop songs modulate between the major and relative minor. It's such a natural modulation that you can get away with anything really!

[VicDiesel]

A very dumb question:

if in chord progression notation, in the key of E (for example), E would be noted as I (in roman numerals)... how would Eb major chord be written down in roman numerals? As Ib?

Thanks!

It would be VII(maj) or plain old VII I believe.

No, that would be if it was a D# chord. The "Ib" sounds right to me.

Though I have a hard time imagining an Eb chord in a piece in E.

Victor.

[TankEyes]

A very dumb question:

if in chord progression notation, in the key of E (for example), E would be noted as I (in roman numerals)... how would Eb major chord be written down in roman numerals? As Ib?

Thanks!

It would be VII(maj) or plain old VII I believe.

No, that would be if it was a D# chord. The "Ib" sounds right to me.

Though I have a hard time imagining an Eb chord in a piece in E.

Victor.

Ahh OK, whoops.

I feel for you Dexter

[Sascha Franck]

No, that would be if it was a D# chord. The "Ib" sounds right to me.

Hm, not sure about that. Usually, in notation, you try to stick with as few sharpened/flattened note letters as often as possible. Ideally, each note letter is only used once (I know, absolutely impossible in anything not staying strict in one key). As an example, if you had alternating notes between E and whatever-you-call-the-note-a-halfstep-below, you'd always use D#.
Now, I know that once it comes to roman numbering (regardless whether we're going for the classical or jazzy approach), things are a lot different. But usually I'd try to stick with the same "as few sharpened/flattened letters as possible" paradigm, too, especially in case there's not exactly a proper explanation available, for whatever might be the chord in question.
As you already said, in case of an Ebj chord in the key of E (regardless whether it's major or minor), it'd most likely not work as a functional chord in the key at all anymore - it'd possibly be there due to some chromatic passing or due to some modulation. In the first case it depends from where you come and where you go (and/or whether you prefer sharps or flats). In the second case, the roman number probably would be applied following the new (modulated to) key anyway.

Fwiw, I have to admit I've never seen any "Ib" (or "bI" for the matter...) roman numbering at all. But then, I'm only familiar with the jazzy kinda theory approach.

- Sascha

[cryophonik]

Depending on the context, a major VII chord in a major key (e.g., a D#maj chord in the key of Emaj) could be a secondary dominant, if it resolves to the G#min chord (i.e., the iii chord in the key of Emaj), in which case it would be notated as: V/iii

In other words, the D# chord is the dominant chord of the G#min scale and is "borrowed" when used in the Emaj to strengthen the resolution to the G#min (i.e., iii) chord.

[Ogg Vorbis]

Depending on the context, a major VII chord in a major key (e.g., a D#maj chord in the key of Emaj) could be a secondary dominant, if it resolves to the G#min chord (i.e., the iii chord in the key of Emaj), in which case it would be notated as: V/iii

In other words, the D# chord is the dominant chord of the G#min scale and is "borrowed" when used in the Emaj to strengthen the resolution to the G#min (i.e., iii) chord.

I agree with that...you nailed it! I also remember using brackets to indicate temporary keys in roman numeral notation. So if you are modulating to a temporary key, then you'd have a bracket and in the lower part of your bracket you'd have the harmony as it functions in that new key area. So Eb triad could be a "new" I harmony (or whatever key you've wandered into temporarily).

Hard to tell how to notate it without understanding the context in which it takes place...

[VicDiesel]

Fwiw, I have to admit I've never seen any "Ib" (or "bI" for the matter...) roman numbering at all. But then, I'm only familiar with the jazzy kinda theory approach.

Bruckner wouldn't have blinked twice. Couple of third relationships:

I - IIIm - Ib

or E-G-Eb. Nothing to it. I'm sure it happens somewhere in one of his symphonies.

Victor.

[Sascha Franck]

Depending on the context, a major VII chord in a major key (e.g., a D#maj chord in the key of Emaj) could be a secondary dominant, if it resolves to the G#min chord

Well, *if* it was a secondary dominant, it'd most likely be a dominant chord. But then, maybe it was only me assuming that a maj7 chord was meant...

- Sascha

[Sascha Franck]

I - IIIm - Ib

Out of interest: Are you really using "IIIm" in classical functional explanations? I'm used to "bIII" from jazz theory - and I'm also used to using capital letters only, so IIIm in the key of E major would be a G#min (the "m" hence being the minor indication).
I really don't remember much of my classical theory classes anymore.

- Sascha

[sakethencamenone]

Hi there. I have a quick question. When I wish to make a key change, say from a major to a relative minor, do I need to use a pivot chord to make the change, or can I just swith staight into the new key? Also, when changing keys around the circle of fifths, is there some kind of formula to know which pivot chord to use when changing keys? Thanks very much for your help.

To choose a pivot chord you simply look for a chord that is part of your new key, and contains a note or notes from your old key. As you go around the circle of fifths there should be one "new" note each time, so you can use that new note as a part of your pivot chord.

Going to the relative minor, you have no new notes to exploit, so a good technique would be to use a V-I cadence to your new I.

So if we were in a key of C major, we could use Em as a kind of pivot to Am. You could also use IV-I. You could even change it to E major for a different flavour that would still work. If you're heading into I, it's often effective to choose a chord that has A couple of notes "surrounding" the I note. So in our C major key you could use G major, which is the dominant of C!

A lot of pop songs modulate between the major and relative minor. It's such a natural modulation that you can get away with anything really!

Thanks alot for your reply. I wil try your ideas out later on.

[echomusic]

Hey everybody, sorry I've been away. I'm actually on a project so I'm really busy. I'm experiencing a first for my career. That is composing a new score for a movie that's being written and whether it goes to production or not I'm really excited about it.

Before I continue on I want to clarify a couple things. First, I must apologize to all of you for how I allowed myself to come across. I wanted to make clear also that I'm NOT a guru of any kind and I don't know it all. I have had a lot of success in my music career an I've found that I tend to come across that way.

When I first came here I made my intentions clear that I'm a musician, performer and published author & composer. Obviously many of you have researched me and I've been 'tagged' as a guru, so when I make a judgement error (usually out of my own opinion) I get crucified for it. It's my fault in my own way.

Back to theory...

I want to make a slight drift here from the relativity of theory to the practicality of the wisdom of application, (when theory stops and application begins) and ask a question of my own.

I'm taking this approach here because the knowledge of theory specifics is very high. There is only one other forum in which the environment it like that so it's a really good opportunity for all of you to really pitch in.

The question is, How do you (personally for the composers and performers) translate the theory you know into application and use? What I'm getting at is, how much of the theory do you use when playing or composing?

As I'm writing this second edition, one of the things that I'm doing is filtering out the pieces of theory away from the core. I want this edition to address what is used most as part of the core theory (hopefully applicable to everyone regardless of style, genre or instrument), then expand into specifics.

It has been my experience as a classical composer and Classical/Pops/Bluez/Jazz/Swing Double Bass player that the theory I apply varies but there is always part of theory that transends all of the barriers. In other words there is theory that is book knowledge and nice to know, but not often necessary, then there is theory that is absolutely necessary and I use every day.

If you all can answer the parts of theory that you all use everyday (or often) it will greatly help me to structure the book so that everyone, regardless of level can use it effectively. I want to create a "how to" type of book instead of a "know about" type of book.

There are books that teach you about a topic and books that coach you how to do a topic. 99% of the sites, resources and books out there are the "about kind" and it literally took an avid student like myself months and months to get a grip on the core of theory and even longer to apply it.

My goal is to give a totally different experience where my reader actually become students and are coached so they can use what they learn immediately from day one like I did with my general theory book, Music for the Simple Man.

It wasn't a big book, but it was full of meat. By the end of the first chapter anyone could begin site reading and as many of my previous students have done, begin composing on staff paper.

Even though I was met with some hostility for one of my opinions, I'm not dissuaded. A few of you have emailed and messaged me about the hostility and I appreciate it. At the same time I like criticisma and I'm glad to see all of you participating.

I've spent about 40 or so minutes going over this thread and taking notes. All of this is great information for the new edition of my book. Thank you all very much.

Keep asking questions that you may have and even though I may not reply right away, remember I do read regularly and take notes, so I do see your questions and responses - I just can't always answer right away because of my current schedule.

I appreciate also those of you who are answering in lieu of my busy schedule and resultant inability to post every day. Maybe we can work on a project together when I get off of this one.

Please continue to post, and as always, if I don't know an answer I will do the research and find it!

Dexter