Tonal Functions List

[Musicologo]

Hi there folks!

After a few posts in analysis with outstanding remarks I've been compiling myself a list of "functions" a certain chord typically has in a song.

I'd say I would apply this mostly to classical music, but I believe songs using traditional tonal systems use the same functions right?

I'm trying to have the reasoning of "everything falls into the categories of Sub-Dominant - Dominant or Tonic". And that the most desirable goal is to make songs that work this way. And we expect that after a dominant we hear a tonic at the end of a musical phrase.

To sum up:

For major tonalities:

Tonic: I iii vi

Sub-Dominant: IV, ii7, ii, i07, #iv07 (eventually biii07, vi07), fr6+, Ger6+

Dominant: V7, vii0, bII7*, ii07, iv07, bvi07, V9

Any other chord has no function in this system (am I forgetting any with function?), so If I find one I am certain that probably I have a modulation and I am in another tonality.

Example: If I find II7, it does not have a function, so probably it's not II7, but instead it's a V7 of the V.

Having this kind of reasoning and "table of functions" has helped me to build up my own analysys system for a huge repertoire where it works.

Of course If I go out of this repertoire and go into Jazz or something, I might as well forget everything, because things do not work this way.

What do you think of this? Wanna add up something? Or build some remarks?...

*I had bii7 by mistake.

[Musicologo]

Now I'm disappointed. So much fuss when is to help about a chord progression or identify chords or music theory about piano rolls and noone wants to give me feedback on this one? :S

[Ogg Vorbis]

I must have missed this thread before. I have some ideas for you to chew on if you like...

but I believe songs using traditional tonal systems use the same functions right?

Well, I think that a lot of Jazz standards and "The Great American Songbook" era songs are much more traditionally functional in their harmonic approach. A lot of traditional cadences, modulations, and other tonally establishing movements occur.

However, by the time of, say, the rock n roll of the 60s shows up, this isn't always as true. You can see this in the chords to songs like "The White Room" by The Cream or "Magic Carpet Ride" by Steppenwolf where it's something like:

E G A C D E

Well, where is the dominant to tonic harmony here? Where is the traditional cadences? Well, it's more modal, or as Jan Civil once said it's something that use of barre chords where there is a lot of parallelisms going on, but it's not so much "tonic" and "subdominant," etc.

I'm trying to have the reasoning of "everything falls into the categories of Sub-Dominant - Dominant or Tonic". And that the most desirable goal is to make songs that work this way. And we expect that after a dominant we hear a tonic at the end of a musical phrase.

think you are going to have a tough case with this statement...just because there are so many cases where..well...that's NOT the case.

In my opinion, I have to look at HOW the harmony is used instead of taking a static snapshot of it and applying a label to it. So a major chord built on the fifth degree of the scale...is it a Dominant harmony? Well, I would ask right back, "I don't know. How is it being used?" If it's a Gershwin tune, maybe so. If it's Haydn, maybe so. But if it's Eric Clapton, maybe not.

Someone could argue that in my above example chord progression above that the D chord is the Dominant harmony because it sets up the ear's expectation of the return of the tonic or "home" chord of E. They'd get an F in some class for it, and i wouldn't whole heartedly agree but I could see the SPIRIT of that statement.

Words like Tonic and Sub Dominant and so on suggest FUNCTIONS to me in addition to whatever scale degree they might be based upon.

However, I can "spiritually" get behind something you were saying though. You said that any triad based on a scale has a tonic, subdominant or dominant function. I'll SORT of agree...maybe you can say that generally harmonies are either establishing a tonality (tonic function) preparing a tonal establishment (dominant function) or prepping the preparation of a tonal establishment (sub-dominant function).

But I still think we'd get F's in class though.

What do you think?

[jancivil]

Hi there folks!

After a few posts in analysis with outstanding remarks I've been compiling myself a list of "functions" a certain chord typically has in a song.

Sub-Dominant: IV, ii7, ii, i07, #iv07 (eventually biii07, vi07), fr6+, Ger6+

Dominant: V7, vii0, bii7, ii07, iv07, bvi07, V9

I don't get why you call #ivdim7 'subdominant'. seems to want to be a secondary dominant. I don't know what bii7 means at all, Dbm 7 in C doesn't seem very functional in any way I can grasp without context. if you mean a Neapolitan sixth, F Ab Db (C), surely that is subdominant.

elswhere here I called the french sixth a superdominant. that's just my thinking, I won't have any objections to anyone else's. a subdominant can be an amen cadence kinda function as easily as anything else. it's to me a matter of strong drive or not, and a subdominant doesn't tell me 'go to a dominant!' per se, though it does in some contexts, no question. in some musics it wants to go to I as much as V does.
a secondary dominant would to me be maybe a category of its own in some musics.

some music isn't impelled by the V-I. Ogg mentioned a couple of rock tunes that use chords derived from double and triple plagal thinking. IV of IV, IV, I. IV of IV of IV, IV of IV, IV, I. C G D A E. Fourths emphasis rather than fifths. Gospel, "amen". So yeah, G to E sometimes, D to E, these are dominants, why not. Indian raga has dominant and subdominant tones, and it depends on the raga (although there will be a P5 or P4 relationship to the other important tones, the thought owes to perfect fifths coherence at basis).


I don't dwell amidst a lot of classical music, it isn't my thing. I think from a jazz standpoint this reductive idea is as valid as in classical - you mean *function*. jazz is, harmonically, Tea for Two changes basically, with ways of perverting it so it isn't "cornball". It keeps moving and you may as well say, "ii V I and interchangeable *substitutes* to keep it from getting bland" and have the gist. it's different some than classical harmony in that "home" isn't as stick in the mud, V can be made into ii, I can be made into ii, and ii does like V but they're all three wild cards if you need 'em to be. but it still goes around in circles, just more ambiguous.

I never think in terms of chord changes, I like harmony to follow lines rather than define them, so I have kind of a disinterested position, I'm fine with your idea, I didn't have a lot to say.

[Musicologo]

Thanks for your insights guys!

I don't get why you call #ivdim7 'subdominant'.

I'd say because all those chords will resolve into the dominant?
f#-a-c-eb -> f-g-b-d -> e-g-c

Otherwise, I don't know "where" to put those chords, assuming that I have only 3 functions -> sub, dom and ton.

I don't know what bii7 means at all, Dbm 7 in C doesn't seem very functional in any way

For me it's the tritonic substitution. All chords (in C) that contain f-b are dominant to my reasoning. Because they will want to solve to e-c.
That's why I also put ii0 as dominant as well, for example.

Musicologo wrote:


I'm trying to have the reasoning of "everything falls into the categories of Sub-Dominant - Dominant or Tonic". And that the most desirable goal is to make songs that work this way. And we expect that after a dominant we hear a tonic at the end of a musical phrase.

think you are going to have a tough case with this statement...just because there are so many cases where..well...that's NOT the case.

Yes, it's true. But inside *some* traditions it's true also. I'm not trying to built a theory that unifies everything. And I believe for each example there is also an exception. It was just "rough" guidelines to try to orient myself and even to teach my students. I have to start somewhere.

And I was trying to create a very simple "receipt", they apply it to "traditional" cases where they apply, and only after deconstruct the whole building when we reach the XXth century, jazz and pop music that makes more exceptions than rules.

If this doesn't work how do you suggest me to work? What are the guidelines to teach newbies? Because if "all" is exception I can't explain anything. For me the "built a base, then train it, then tear it appart when you know what you're doing" was the best idea so far...

[jancivil]

subdominant has no requirement to resolve into a dominant. #iv there is a secondary dominant. I do not find it useful as an eg of subdominant. YMMV.

Following your argument 'tritone substitute': in context, if you encounter Dbm7 in C it's ii of bI and gets you V of bI next. it's a subdominant. to get you that F-B means you need a Db7 (aka 'Db major/minor 7'). which of course stands to reason as a dominant. Dbm7 has Db, Fb... I suppose that's a typo.

I think your premise is sound but it does have problems of application as you present it IMO. I think not having secondary dominant as a basic category is a problem.

[Musicologo]

Yes jancivil, it's a typo, stupid me. of course its bII7. like I said for me it's f-b, the tritone that matters to create the "dominant" function.

But... what is a secondary dominant function then as you are suggesting? And what chords are involved in that "new" category besides sub-dom-ton?

Secondary dominant will resolve typically into what?

[jancivil]

V of V goes to V, like that. #iv dim is vii of V, or as the inversion, several possible targets.

sec. dom. has direct drive to its target, compared with subdominant, can go to I as easily as anything, and in the case of Neapolitan 6 its preferred destination.

[Musicologo]

I see.

Then in terms of my functional reasoning they are the same thing in a very pragmatic approach:

for me sub-dominant are - the chords that go to the dominant.

"Your" secondary dominants are - chords that are dominants of the dominant, so - chords that go to the dominant.

So pretty much the function is the same in terms of "path" in a certain direction: two steps from the tonic. X -> dominant -> tonic.


Difference? Well sub-dominants will tend to approach the tonic from an angle, secondary dominants from another, but they all end up in the same place.

Of course this is a very naive generalization, but as a building base to my intentions, is not *that* absurd I guess.

What makes this beautiful, is that, in considering this "new category of movement" by recursion, if it is possible to have "dominant- tonic" inside dominant then, it is also possible to have "sub-dominant" to secondary dominant.

And that will give meaning, for instance, to a vi7, as a secondary subdominant xD, or to bVI7 as a secondary dominant.

The cicle however it is closed because tonic is in fact a secondary subdominant also... I-II7=(IV-V7)/V creepy.

[psenior]

I look at things as either tonic or dominant. I think just about all the chords you have listed as subdominants are dominants. ii and IV are thought of as suspended dominants. All diminished chords are dominant 7b9 chords. I don't remember exactly what the French and German chords are but I think they were dominant 7 chords? I did not invent this music theory concept; I learned it from Barry Harris.

[Lander.vast]

I don't get why you call #ivdim7 'subdominant'. seems to want to be a secondary dominant. I don't know what bii7 means at all, Dbm 7 in C doesn't seem very functional in any way I can grasp without context. if you mean a Neapolitan sixth, F Ab Db (C), surely that is subdominant.

I think the bii7 has a dominant function and it is probably a tritone substitution, the original chord being V7 subtituted by bii7 that resolves a half step down to I

i.e. - G7 C becames Db7 C

[jancivil]

I don't get why you call #ivdim7 'subdominant'. seems to want to be a secondary dominant. I don't know what bii7 means at all, Dbm 7 in C doesn't seem very functional in any way I can grasp without context. if you mean a Neapolitan sixth, F Ab Db (C), surely that is subdominant.

I think the bii7 has a dominant function and it is probably a tritone substitution, the original chord being V7 subtituted by bii7 that resolves a half step down to I

i.e. - G7 C becames Db7 C

Oh, that principle is known to me. But NB: lower case indicates minor third.

I do not agree with subdominant as the same as dominant.

in terms of root movement for the basic dom/subdom it's the opposite: rising 4, falling 4. If tonic and dominant is all there is, what is ii?

It's subdominant. ALSO, "sub-dominant are - the chords that go to the dominant". just isn't right.

IV-I. Where is the problem? Subdominant, Tonic.

[Lander.vast]

Oh, that principle is known to me. But NB: lower case indicates minor third.

I do not agree with subdominant as the same as dominant.

in terms of root movement for the basic dom/subdom it's the opposite: rising 4, falling 4. If tonic and dominant is all there is, what is ii?

It's subdominant. ALSO, "sub-dominant are - the chords that go to the dominant". just isn't right.

IV-I. Where is the problem? Subdominant, Tonic.

Ohhh ok I get it the guy means biim7 has a dominant function, I forget ii means minor and II means Major...of course it doesn't, it could be a chromatic chord, Db resolves to C, Fb is E, Ab resolves to G and Cb is B. You got to have sub-dominant function, other wise where do the ii V I's fit.