On building bridges and chord changes

[osiris]

Here;s another question from a novice. I'm doing research on the interweb about bridges.
The song I'm working on starts in E flat major and the chorus is in C minor.
There was a big discussion on another forum about bridges and chord changes with some good info: (all credit to the original writer)


Writing a bridge to a song is pretty hard. Well, its hard if you want it to be a true bridge rather than just some novelty change up. Simply changing rhythm or moving to some "minor chord" is not enough and its a stab in the dark at making a bridge what it could really truly be if you knew more about what you were doing.

It seems like you are wanting your bridge to break the monotony and take the song to a new height before returning back. If that is the case you are talking about "modulation". Modulation occurs when the song changes to a new key. NOT JUST GRABBING SOME NEW CHORDS. First you must establish tonality in the original key. Make sure the listener knows what key you are starting in. Then you can modulate correctly (powerfully, smoothly). Then for the modulation to sound true and strong you must establish tonality in the new key. Establish tonality by using alot of the I, V, III, and IV chords, or if using odd chords use alot of I, V, III, and IV notes in the melody. There are only a few kinds of modulation:

SHIFT MODULATION: This is the sleaziest and easiest. This is what most amateur songs have. Basically you just choose a new chord and go for it. It takes no skill and it shows. The only way a shift modulation can sound good is if the new key repeats the same chords like a sequential modulation. Alot of 60s music uses that kind of shift. Like when the whole verse and chorus moves up one fret for the end of the song.

SEQUENTIAL MODULATION: This is when a short melody repeats then repeats at a different pitch, carrying the song into the new key. Like in the song "When Love Comes Knocking at Your Door".

RELATIVE KEY MODULATION: This is when a song starts in a key, then changes to its relative major or minor. Like if you started in A, you would change the key to F#m, or from C to Am. Now be careful when doing it this way because relative chords are closely related anyways, so using secondary dominants will help make it obvious that the key is truly changing and not just using its relative casually like most songs do anyways. Remember, tonality must be established for the new key to be apparent to the listener.

PARALLEL KEY MODULATION: The song starts in a major or minor, then modulates to the major or minor of the same chord. For example, you start in A and end up in Am, or start in E and end up in Em. Alot of old Kinks tunes do this.

PIVOT CHORD MODULATION: The song changes to a new key using a chord common to both keys. This is another tricky one because tonality can be blurry if you dont watch out.


Can you please explain this?
Does this mean the bridge has to be in a new key??
I'm interested in the Relative Key Modulation. Does this mean I should use the secondary dominant of E flat major which would make it a I - IIIm - VI - V?
I think I'm lost.

[wrench45us]

That's a very nice and concise explanation of any potential key shift that's likely to return to the original key.
In some song structures that can be a few bars in the verse or chorus or as focused here on the bridge.

Changing key for the bridge is what's discussed, but there's no rule that says the bridge has to change keys. It can be pretty effective wakeup that's something's changing, but a lot of songs don't have bridges just verse and chorus with intro. It all depends on where the song 'wants' to go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_struc ... ic)#Bridge

[jancivil]

Does this mean the bridge has to be in a new key??

No

[Ogg Vorbis]

Can you please explain this?
Does this mean the bridge has to be in a new key??
I'm interested in the Relative Key Modulation. Does this mean I should use the secondary dominant of E flat major which would make it a I - IIIm - VI - V?
I think I'm lost.

There's not a formulaic approach to this. Is that what you're looking for? I see questions like. "should I do such and such?" and I think..."I don't know..it's music, it's not assembling a dining set from Home Depot."

Music is for the ear and as such, I feel that one should do what the EAR demands rather than what the supposed RULES might say. Do what's right for your ear and someone will come along behind you and say, "osiris used a maple bacon substitution quadradic chord here on beat 3..."

[osiris]

What I'm actually doing is a shift modulation, but it sounds nice. Her vocal goes up some octaves on the chorus, so it fits. I think also because the last chord in my sequence of the chorus is a B flat major, which means I could do a bridge with a I - ii - V - I progression might be a nice lead into C minor.
Or follow with an altered progression, the same but making the C minor the secondary dominant.
I think I'm overthinking this.

[jancivil]

I'm interested in the Relative Key Modulation. Does this mean I should use the secondary dominant of E flat major which would make it a I - IIIm - VI - V?
I think I'm lost.

I'm lost too.

what's the original key? Are we moving to or from Eb?

You have Eb, Gm, C, Bb, if Eb is the given key (and lower case m is to distinguish minor). In and of itself, that doesn't contain a secondary dominant.

There will be a number of secondary dominants, let's say six, for a seven note scale as a given. V of ii, V of iii, V of IV, etc.

that [we have a stronger movement than the diatonic to a chord other than I] in itself doesn't mean we have modulated.

[jancivil]

BTW where I first had theory class this was second year material. I took both years at the same time but I had to obtain permission to. Are you sure you're ready to tackle this?

[osiris]

Verse: E flat major.
Chorus: C minor.
But, as such the song structure V/CH/V/Ch, you move from E flat major to C minor, then back to E flat major.

[osiris]

@jan....there's no time like the present.

[jancivil]

An obvious thing to distinguish C minor from Eb Major is G major, "V of vi" in Eb.

Whether or not that amounts to a modulation is a more subtle matter. What does the tune do here?

[jancivil]

@jan....there's no time like the present.

Well, I know that I had to talk myself into that because the teacher didn't want to have someone wasting their time. I honestly was not qualified for that material but I faked it.

[jancivil]

Or follow with an altered progression, the same but making the C minor the secondary dominant.

a minor chord is not a dominant, normally. You want to make C minor the new key, you want Cm to be 'the target of a secondary dominant'.

[jancivil]

Music is for the ear and as such, I feel that one should do what the EAR demands rather than what the supposed RULES might say.

Well, the function of a formal device (a bridge in a new key obtained via a modulation) should serve the tune. With principles with no context, we have carts being asked to pull horses.

Before I used 'music theory' in writing something, I had experience with models showing things that worked.
I honestly think it's more advisable to look at a tune we agree did this convincingly rather than try to teach someone how to compose something, out of whole cloth as it were.

[osiris]

Clearly I'm in over my head.
It's a very simple I-V-IV-I progression in E flat major. B flat is the dominant.
The ii chord is the secondary dominant, correct?
Which makes it F min.
I guess the best advice is trust your ears. Let me play around with it and see what happens.

[jancivil]

ii is a secondary dominant if say it's made into 'II' and 'II' is taken as 'V of V'. ie., F major, as though dominant of Bb. If it works that way, and it doesn't have to. V7 of IV is kind of compelling.