How do you know/find the Dominant chord in a progression?

[osiris]

I'm basically stupid at music theory. I'm doing a 2-5-1 progression and tried triads of chords for D minor. It didn't sound like I wanted it to. Researching this, a website suggested making the G chord Dominant. Chorded with four notes. I did this, and now it sounds great.
Am I correct in reading that the next to last chord in a progression is the Dominant chord?
Should this then be progressed up/down the D Minor scale?

[Ogg Vorbis]

Here is some very high-level concept stuff for you to think about when you look at harmonic progressions...

The "1" chord sounds "final" and "satisfying" like you are at the point of resolution. In the key of A, the tonic harmony (A C# and E) will sound settled and resolved.

When a rock has landed on the ground, gravity has done its job. The rock has nowhere else it wants to go. Its energy is resolved.

The dominant harmony's job is to PREPARE the tonic. That is to say, that the dominant functions to set up a RESOLUTION of dissonance back to the settled, consonant "home key center."

Throwing a rock into the air sets up a situation where gravity will act on it. Throwing creates a "need" for a resolution. In music, the gravity is consonance. The resistance to gravity is called dissonance.

In traditional tonal harmony, the major triad built on the 5th scale degree serves as the dominant harmony. That is because it contains dissonances which our western ears tell us are compelled to resolve. In the key of A, that G# in the dominant chord, has a very strong tendency to "want" to resolve to the more stable pitch of A.

Especially in the context of everything else you play in the key of A. The more you establish the key of A, the more strongly the dominant will want to resolve back to the tonic.

But the word "dominant" can be a FUNCTION, rather than purely a strictly defined major harmony built on the 5th scale degree. Any harmony that serves to prepare the tonic and resolve toward the tonic can be said to have DOMINANT FUNCTION. There are substitutes galore for the 5 chord, especially in jazz and pop.

If the dominant chord prepares the tonic, then can you prepare the dominant? Yep! The "2" in your example of 2-5-1 functions this way. The 2 prepares the 5 which prepares the tonic. You can even alter the 2 chord to be a "doninant seventh" chord so that it "pretends" that it's in the key of the dominant, only for the dominant to be resolved to the "real" tonic. You'd analyze it this way II7/V V7 I

So a progression is sometimes thought of as a chained series of preparations. 2 can resolve to 5, then it can use a deceptive resolution to the 6 (since the 6 contains some of the same notes as the tonic). The 6 can prepare the 4, which is a great way to prepare a 5 harmony, which is a great way to prepare a 1. In the key of F, you'd have this result...

Gm C7 Dm Bb C F

Kind of a corny and overly-used progression, but you can see how the functions go.

The metal spring uncoils which causes the rock to rise into the air, fulfilling the spring's need to resolve its energy, but this only causes the dominant function of gravity to require ITS fulfillment. The final resolution is that of gravity as the rock comes to rest on the ground. 2 -- 5 -- 1

Dumbest analogy ever, but maybe it works!

[osiris]

Maybe the question is moot. upon further reading I see this:
1 tone - Major
2 tone - minor
3 tone - minor
4 tone - Major
5 tone - Major (dominant)
6 tone - minor
7 tone - Half Diminished
So, the 5 will always be dominant.

[llatham]

Maybe the question is moot. upon further reading I see this:
1 tone - Major
2 tone - minor
3 tone - minor
4 tone - Major
5 tone - Major (dominant)
6 tone - minor
7 tone - Half Diminished
So, the 5 will always be dominant.

Sort of. The 5th note of the scale is called the Dominant note (or scale degree 5 is the dominant, etc.).

But people also use the word "dominant" to describe a FUNCTION - which as the earlier explanation put so well - provide energy to arrive at the more stable Tonic.

*Most* Dominant chords are built on scale degree 5 (hence the name) but can have alterations. For example:

In A, E (E G# B) and E7 (E G# B D) are considered dominant function chords.

In Am, Em (E G B) and Em7 (E G B D) are built on the dominant note, but are not considered to have dominant function (traditionally, though in modern music they have been used as a "dominant substitute"). The change of G to G# (raised 7) makes the "chord built on the dominant" to become "a functional dominant" and produce the same chords as in Major (E and E7).

Also, chords built on the leading tone of a key are considered to have Dominant function, which in A would be G#o (G# B D) and G#%7 (G# B D F# - percentage sign means "half-diminished").

Same problem again in minor - G B D and G B D F are not dominant function (in fact, they point to another key altogether) so the 7th of the key is raised (G to G#) to make G#o (G# B D) and G#o7 (G# B D F - note change in F).

So V V7, and viio, vii%7 and viio7 are considered dominant function chords in both major and minor (in major they occur naturally, in minor an accidental is needed). Now again, bVII (like G B D in Am) have been used as "psuedo-dominants" in contemporary music (and folk music, etc.) but usually "true" dominants need to be a major chord, or a dominant 7th chord on 5, or a diminished triad or half- or fully-diminished seventh chord on the leading tone (7 in Major, raised 7 in minor).

BTW, your chart is for 7th chords in Major - the Dominant chord can be just a triad too, and dominant function chords can be triads, 7ths, 9ths, etc. as well, on either 5 or the leading tone. Be aware that you can't just build a chord on 5 in minor - you need to change a note if you want a "true" dominant.

As an added bonus, chords on the leading tone are considered by some to be "rootless" V (5) chords - see, G# B D (viio in A) is the upper notes of E G# B D (V7 in A) so you hear a similarity of sound and function in those chords.

Best,
Steve

[Hink]

Here is some very high-level concept stuff for you to think about when you look at harmonic progressions...

The "1" chord sounds "final" and "satisfying" like you are at the point of resolution. In the key of A, the tonic harmony (A C# and E) will sound settled and resolved.

When a rock has landed on the ground, gravity has done its job. The rock has nowhere else it wants to go. Its energy is resolved.

The dominant harmony's job is to PREPARE the tonic. That is to say, that the dominant functions to set up a RESOLUTION of dissonance back to the settled, consonant "home key center."

Throwing a rock into the air sets up a situation where gravity will act on it. Throwing creates a "need" for a resolution. In music, the gravity is consonance. The resistance to gravity is called dissonance.

In traditional tonal harmony, the major triad built on the 5th scale degree serves as the dominant harmony. That is because it contains dissonances which our western ears tell us are compelled to resolve. In the key of A, that G# in the dominant chord, has a very strong tendency to "want" to resolve to the more stable pitch of A.

Especially in the context of everything else you play in the key of A. The more you establish the key of A, the more strongly the dominant will want to resolve back to the tonic.

But the word "dominant" can be a FUNCTION, rather than purely a strictly defined major harmony built on the 5th scale degree. Any harmony that serves to prepare the tonic and resolve toward the tonic can be said to have DOMINANT FUNCTION. There are substitutes galore for the 5 chord, especially in jazz and pop.

If the dominant chord prepares the tonic, then can you prepare the dominant? Yep! The "2" in your example of 2-5-1 functions this way. The 2 prepares the 5 which prepares the tonic. You can even alter the 2 chord to be a "doninant seventh" chord so that it "pretends" that it's in the key of the dominant, only for the dominant to be resolved to the "real" tonic. You'd analyze it this way II7/V V7 I

So a progression is sometimes thought of as a chained series of preparations. 2 can resolve to 5, then it can use a deceptive resolution to the 6 (since the 6 contains some of the same notes as the tonic). The 6 can prepare the 4, which is a great way to prepare a 5 harmony, which is a great way to prepare a 1. In the key of F, you'd have this result...

Gm C7 Dm Bb C F

Kind of a corny and overly-used progression, but you can see how the functions go.

The metal spring uncoils which causes the rock to rise into the air, fulfilling the spring's need to resolve its energy, but this only causes the dominant function of gravity to require ITS fulfillment. The final resolution is that of gravity as the rock comes to rest on the ground. 2 -- 5 -- 1

Dumbest analogy ever, but maybe it works!

awesome post

[Ogg Vorbis]

awesome post

Thanks. I'm writing a book called, "Everything I Know About Music I Learned by Flinging Rocks and Feces and Noticing What Stuck."

[jlocri]

awesome post

Thanks. I'm writing a book called, "Everything I Know About Music I Learned by Flinging Rocks and Feces and Noticing What Stuck."

I like the concept, I like your way of teaching, but I hate the name. No one learns theory by throwing poo around...

Well, good luck.

Good post before, btw.

[chj]

Thanks. I'm writing a book called, "Everything I Know About Music I Learned by Flinging Rocks and Feces and Noticing What Stuck."

I like the concept, I like your way of teaching, but I hate the name. No one learns theory by throwing poo around...

If you use your ear to come up with something then look back and analyze what you put together you start realizing the theoretical basis of what sounds good. I think that's the jist of of the title.

Alot of originators probably didn't have a theoretical basis for their style, they just composed by ear. Afterwards people broke it down and put together the musical theory. I think the title is quite appropriate.

[Ogg Vorbis]

[quote="llatham"
Now again, bVII (like G B D in Am) have been used as "psuedo-dominants" in contemporary music (and folk music, etc.)
[/quote]

Yes, that's true. Like in the Beatles' "Norwegian Wood" which is in dorian mode, the resolution works like you've described it.

Regarding how a dominant V harmony works, let me know what you think of this weird idea...

A harmony built on Ab C and Eb is consonant...within the context of the key of Ab major.

But...

A harmony built on Ab C and Eb is dissonant within the context of the key of Db major. Why? Because when you do a good job of establishing the key of Db, then it establishes the "tonal memory" within the listener's mind. Ab C Eb is consonant within ITSELF, but ultimately it is DISSONANT because the listener compares it with the established tonality of Db.

C (which is the third of the dominant harmony) is a minor second from Db (the root of the tonic triad). This is the harshest dissonance.

Eb (the fifth of the dominant) is a major 2nd away from Db and from F (the third of the tonic triad).

Ab is perfect 4th from Db within the context of the bass and is, therefore dissonant. Ab above the bass (if you doubled the root of the dominant triad in the voices above) is neutral and requires no resolution because it is not dissonant with the tonic harmony.

(The perfect 4th is the "and sometimes Y" exception because it is dissonant from the bass and typically wants to resolve to a third, but from any other interval OTHER THAN THE BASS it is consonant.)

But what I am arguing is that, depending on the tonal context, a triad may be consonant or dissonant (and that goes for a single pitch too!

I think the proof of this pudding is in the eating. You can HEAR dominant harmony resolving. If the tonality were NOT established in this way in an audience's mind, a pianist could play everything up to the dominant chord and walk away from the stage and the audience would think that's perfectly acceptable. Well, after all, it's consonant isn't it?

But in reality, someone would jump on stage and have to PLAY the TONIC chord before there was wide spread apoplexy in the hall.

Is this kind of poo flinging reasonable thinking?

[shanecgriffo]

i prefer the lydian dominant!

(he says , throwing some poo! )

[osiris]

I like this: Investigating how to write a melody. Found a website that suggested writing the alphabet in 7 columns, like this :
ABCDEFG - then put the rest underneath, like this:
HIJKLMN - you get the idea. Then pick someones's name that means something to
OPQRSTU you. Say Osiris. Your melody would be: A E B D B E...... I know
VWXYZ this is WAY off topic, but I thought it was fun.

[llatham]

A harmony built on Ab C and Eb is dissonant within the context of the key of Db major.

Actually, it's not "dissonant". You're confusing terms. Ab C Eb is an *active* harmony in the context of the key of Db (though it can have different degrees of activeness, for example in a Half Cadence or a Tonicization).

Why? Because when you do a good job of establishing the key of Db, then it establishes the "tonal memory" within the listener's mind. Ab C Eb is consonant within ITSELF, but ultimately it is DISSONANT because the listener compares it with the established tonality of Db.

Again, I'd use a different word than "dissonant". It's consonant with itself, yes, but simply "active" or "unresolved" in a Db context.

C (which is the third of the dominant harmony) is a minor second from Db (the root of the tonic triad). This is the harshest dissonance.

Well, you're making more of this than it is. It's the *leading tone*. It's not simultaneously occurring with the tonic. The "energy" is not because of it's dissonance, but its *distance* from the tonic.

Ab is perfect 4th from Db within the context of the bass and is, therefore dissonant. Ab above the bass (if you doubled the root of the dominant triad in the voices above) is neutral and requires no resolution because it is not dissonant with the tonic harmony.

You're misunderstanding this (or rather, applying it where it doesn't belong). Again, this Ab in a V chord in Db is not happening simultaneously with the Tonic note. If we can hear a Db above the Ab (a 4th), we can certainly hear one below it too, so your theory here doesn't hold water.

(The perfect 4th is the "and sometimes Y" exception because it is dissonant from the bass and typically wants to resolve to a third, but from any other interval OTHER THAN THE BASS it is consonant.)

A perfect 4th is a dissonance with the bass when it is above the bass. It is not a dissonance between other *voices*. And again, this applies only to harmonic intervals, not melodic intervals.

But what I am arguing is that, depending on the tonal context, a triad may be consonant or dissonant (and that goes for a single pitch too!

Again, your term "dissonant" is not a good one for this idea - they already have a word for this in theory, it's called "tendency". The leading tone is a tendency tone, it "wants" to resolve to the tonic (in many contexts, not always though). The V chord is a tendency chord in many contexts - it "wants" to resolve to the tonic chord (and again, there are situations where this tendency can be heightened, or lessened).

I think the proof of this pudding is in the eating. You can HEAR dominant harmony resolving. If the tonality were NOT established in this way in an audience's mind, a pianist could play everything up to the dominant chord and walk away from the stage and the audience would think that's perfectly acceptable. Well, after all, it's consonant isn't it?

Not really true. You're right in that if I walk up to a piano and play a G, and walk away, no one's going to want to come up and play a C. But, you're wrong about the "leading up to it". If I play F, Dm7, G, then stop, they are going to want to walk up and play a C.

That's because the context of a key can be set up without ever hearing the tonic chord - that's why tonality works the way it does - it's about establishing tonal centers through setting up expectations, and ultimately resolving those expectations.

But, if I play Am7, D7, G - there's no way they'll expect C. But again, if a context of C is already established, the G will want to go on to C despite the cadential formula on G. In other words, it's all about context, not anything inherent in the chords.

But in reality, someone would jump on stage and have to PLAY the TONIC chord before there was wide spread apoplexy in the hall.

Not really. Depends on the audience. Plus, Blues songs end on Dominant 7th chords all the time, and no one wants them to resolve. Again, it's all about context - establishing contexts and fulfilling the expectations that have been set up in the listener.

Is this kind of poo flinging reasonable thinking?

IMO, no. But it's the kind of "made up" theories I see online all the time (and the kind I made up myself years ago before I studied theory).


When you begin to understand that the way things work in various styles are because of learned expectations and stylistic conventions, and not things inherent in the notes themselves, you begin to have a deeper understanding of music in general.

P.S. None of this is meant to be an insult, or to be argumentative - on the contrary, I intend it to be informative and hopefully beneficial.

Peace

[JumpingJackFlash]

A harmony built on Ab C and Eb is dissonant within the context of the key of Db major. Why? Because when you do a good job of establishing the key of Db, then it establishes the "tonal memory" within the listener's mind. Ab C Eb is consonant within ITSELF, but ultimately it is DISSONANT because the listener compares it with the established tonality of Db.

No. You're mixing up two terms; Dissonant and Chromatic. In the above context, you mean chromatic, meaning foreign to the key. The two things are not the same; something can be chromatic and still be consonant (like an F# chord relative to C major), and something can be dissonant and be perfectly diatonic (like the notes B and C sounded simultaneously in the key of C major).

[Ogg Vorbis]

Thanks for the feedback. I am thinking about it. Here is what I am coming up with...

An interval in the context of a certain tonality is "active" (i.e. has a tendency to want to resolve) by virtue of its dissonance. An augmented 4th will (of course depending on context) resolve well to a major or minor 6th because it is unstable. Instability and dissonance are aspects of the same thing.

Whether or not an interval is occurring simultaneously or serially is not important to its function. The leading tone tendency to resolve up a half-step is still perceived, even though the dissonance is not simultaneous.

Remember, an arpeggiated harmony "works" the same way as simultaneous harmony.

If not by dissonance, then by what OTHER means to active intervals become active? Can someone explain the dominant function in terms OTHER than the resolution of dissonance?

As to the criticism that new ideas are just "made up theory," what then IS theory that is not made up? Isn't all theory simply a lens through which we look at things? Don't all nomenclatures, symbols and explanations become adopted by convention than by "naturalistic" properties?

I think that's why it's called "theory."

[llatham]

No. You're mixing up two terms; Dissonant and Chromatic. In the above context, you mean chromatic, meaning foreign to the key. The two things are not the same; something can be chromatic and still be consonant (like an F# chord relative to C major), and something can be dissonant and be perfectly diatonic (like the notes B and C sounded simultaneously in the key of C major).

I might clarify this by saying, In the key of C, F# is chromatic, but it could be consonant with the note D for example. Likewise, Ab and Eb would be chromatic in C Major, but a bVI chord would still be consonant.

Steve