Chord progressions and Root movement

[Kyzzok]

Hi !

I bought the book "Music Theory for Computer Musicians" I'm French and my English is not perfect but it's more easier to learn music theory with this book in English than a French piano book (boring and only in piano score).

So, I have few question:

In this book, we have two chapters, "8-Chords" and "18-Chords Progressions and Root Movement"

In the chapter 8, we learn that, we have a tonic, a dominant and a subdominant chord in each scale. It says, for a good chord progressions, you need to start with the tonic and finish with the dominant. Ok - But I ear lot of musics which do not begin with the tonic chord or which do not finish with the dominant, so, this is a generalization not a rule, right ?

Again in chapter 8, "When you are familiar with chords I, IV, and V (C Major), it is time to start developing chord progressions with more than three chords. You can achieve this by incorporating secondary triads. These are all the minor chords in the key—Dm, Em, and Am." Same question, it's a rule or a generalization ?

In the chapter 18, we learn root movement (by fourths, thirds and seconds), I understood but I have troubles with the relation between chord progressions and root movement ?
In chapter 8 we learn to begin with the tonic, add secondary triads for a good chord progressions and after we learn that root movement is the most important feature of chord progressions... So... You understand why i'm confused

Thanks you for your answers !
Simon

[JumpingJackFlash]

In the chapter 8, we learn that, we have a tonic, a dominant and a subdominant chord in each scale. It says, for a good chord progressions, you need to start with the tonic and finish with the dominant. Ok - But I ear lot of musics which do not begin with the tonic chord or which do not finish with the dominant, so, this is a generalization not a rule, right ?

Right. Also, at this point in the book they trying to make things easy for you by restricting you to chords I, IV and V. They want you to be happy using these primary triads before moving on to other chords.

Again in chapter 8, "When you are familiar with chords I, IV, and V (C Major), it is time to start developing chord progressions with more than three chords. You can achieve this by incorporating secondary triads. These are all the minor chords in the key—Dm, Em, and Am." Same question, it's a rule or a generalization ?

They are saying that, once you are familiar with chords I, IV and V, you can start to add in the other chords (II, III, VI and VII). They are still keeping things relatively simple for you for the time being.

In the chapter 18, we learn root movement (by fourths, thirds and seconds), I understood but I have troubles with the relation between chord progressions and root movement ?
In chapter 8 we learn to begin with the tonic, add secondary triads for a good chord progressions and after we learn that root movement is the most important feature of chord progressions... So... You understand why i'm confused

Any series of chords is a chord progression. (Well, that's debatable - some would argue that a "progression", opposed to a "retrogression" for example, has to move towards the tonic - eg. II-V-I.)

Root movement is how the roots of the chords relate to each other. For example, in a I-IV-V-I progression, the roots of the chords are the tonic, subdominant, dominant and then tonic. (Presumably, they have also introduced inversions by this point, so the roots won't necessarily be in the bass).

Root movements of a fourth for example include I-IV, II-V, III-VI, IV-VII, V-I, VI-II and VII-III.
Root movements of a third include: I-III, II-IV, III-V, IV-VI, V-VII, VI-I and VII-II.
(They are all rising intervals. A rising fourth is harmonically the same as a descending fifth and vice versa - in other words, I-V could be considered a root movement of a descending fourth or a rising fifth).

Remember, when you are just learning this stuff, you are not expected to produce work of the same standard you find by famous composers - you begin practising the basics first. As you learn more your music will become more advanced. The most important thing is not to run before you can walk. Go with the pace of the book (or get another book!). For more advanced work, I recommend this.

[Kyzzok]

Thanks a lot

[kdavis2600]

Hi !

I bought the book "Music Theory for Computer Musicians" I'm French and my English is not perfect but it's more easier to learn music theory with this book in English than a French piano book (boring and only in piano score).

So, I have few question:

In this book, we have two chapters, "8-Chords" and "18-Chords Progressions and Root Movement"

In the chapter 8, we learn that, we have a tonic, a dominant and a subdominant chord in each scale. It says, for a good chord progressions, you need to start with the tonic and finish with the dominant. Ok - But I ear lot of musics which do not begin with the tonic chord or which do not finish with the dominant, so, this is a generalization not a rule, right ?

Again in chapter 8, "When you are familiar with chords I, IV, and V (C Major), it is time to start developing chord progressions with more than three chords. You can achieve this by incorporating secondary triads. These are all the minor chords in the key—Dm, Em, and Am." Same question, it's a rule or a generalization ?

In the chapter 18, we learn root movement (by fourths, thirds and seconds), I understood but I have troubles with the relation between chord progressions and root movement ?
In chapter 8 we learn to begin with the tonic, add secondary triads for a good chord progressions and after we learn that root movement is the most important feature of chord progressions... So... You understand why i'm confused

Thanks you for your answers !
Simon

Almost all these books will reference traditional four part harmony rules, so it's important to learn them but realize they're a guide and you're allowed to break the rules. For example, using minor III chords sound pretty good but frowned upon in most theory unless it's a III dominant resolving to a VI.

[tapper mike]

While agreeing with the above. You'll learn more studying actual music not "psuedo" music. What's more you'll have something you can play in front of people

[b4serenity]

While agreeing with the above. You'll learn more studying actual music not "psuedo" music. What's more you'll have something you can play in front of people

That seems like a good point...does anyone have any examples with familiar tunes that may demonstrate these concepts? Thanks to the more enlightened!

[JumpingJackFlash]

While agreeing with the above. You'll learn more studying actual music not "psuedo" music. What's more you'll have something you can play in front of people

Four Part Harmony is not "psuedo" music. Bach's chorale harmonisations, probably the most famous examples, were (mostly) written for the church; for real people to sing and play, and for the masses to listen to. Hymms in this style continue to be sung and appreciated in modern day churches around the world on a weekly basis.

To say nothing of the vital experience and discipline you get by studying Four Part Harmony. Many of the principles influenced most subsequent composers and a mastery of the basic techniques will be a great asset to anyone wishing to write homophonic and/or contrapuntal music in a broadly diatonic way.

[jancivil]

there is this idea that people seem to get from having the information spoon fed them that, 'develop some chord prgressions' is something you can do outside of all context. and people get to be masters of copy and paste of all the 'facts', the roman numbers and how to make triads, the circle of fifths and this information.

either you're analyzing music or you're not. if you aren't looking really at music, what could you possible KNOW about 'developing chord progressions? Maybe it isn't actually time to start developing chord progressions based on some half-digested, if that, information out of a book or off a page on a website. 'Four part harmony' is a methodology for making music. It isn't music per se.

I would guess that is what Mike means there.

[jancivil]

To say nothing of the vital experience and discipline you get by studying Four Part Harmony.

It's vital when you look at the model eg., JS Bach, and a light goes on in your head. "Vital", ie., it lives, it thrives. when you apply it to a tune, it lives, it thrives. It doesn't when abstracted as principles outside of context.

You won't know anything about the reasons for, and the exceptions to principles until demonstrated, really in music. There isn't evidence here of that.

I know from experience that JS Bach broke a lot of the so-called rules abstracted from that practice. That are taught as rules for the entire common practice period.

Information is not knowledge.

[JumpingJackFlash]

Information is not knowledge.

I entirely agree that theory should be studied in the context of practice.

My point was that the study of Bach's chorales, for example, was a useful and valid endeavour, and not merely concerned with "pseudo music".

[tapper mike]

Seeking out what interests you would be a better route. I could say start with something simple like "I feel Fine" by the beatles however It doesn't comforn to literal interpertaions of chords. The root chord has a dominant 7
IV chord has a sus 4 where a literal interpertaion would make the I and IV chords major 7ths. Pop, Rock, Blues, Country, Soul, RB, Disco, often subsitute dominant 7's for Major 7's

As well in many instances they will omit the third so it is neither major nor minor. {power chords) There are also several supsitutions such as a v1 chord can be played as a dominant 7

You don't need a lot of chords to write or perform well. What you do need to get the physicallity of playing. The heart of rock and roll is the beat as are most popular styles of music. "The Beat" Comes from the process of playing rhythm patterns, and getting accents under your fingers.

[PlasticSoul]

This is the best book I read about harmony (chord progression/root movement)...

http://www.amazon.com/Harmony-Computer- ... 1435456726

Its my reference now... Maybe it can help you...

[djmino02]

Hi !

I bought the book "Music Theory for Computer Musicians"

I have the same book. It is pretty good. This post reminds me that I need to break it back out and begin reading it again.

Are there any Ableton Live users on here? I have noticed when building simple progressions in Ableton that it indicates out of key notes with a bold interfaced line in the piano roll.

[jancivil]

My point was that the study of Bach's chorales, for example, was a useful and valid endeavour, and not merely concerned with "pseudo music".

Certainly.

It's hard for me to credit just how useful is discussion of principles outside of the context of what happens in actual music. root movement. as Mike says, pick up a song and see what happens in the song. Then information describing the moves has meaning.

I, IV, V.

[jancivil]

Are there any Ableton Live users on here? I have noticed when building simple progressions in Ableton that it indicates out of key notes with a bold interfaced line in the piano roll.

You're using a crutch before you learn to walk there.