Tonic and dominant

[Arr0wHead]

I keep seeing references to the Ionian mode, which is something that never existed outside of a couple of music treaties. Can those that talk about the Ionian mode point me to a composition done in that mode during the modal period (means until the XII century more or less)? I'd like to see that.
I know that there are millions of musics I don't know about, but...

Whoa nellie -

Let me start in with this, more context: "music theory" and tonal harmony cover the period from 1400-1900. And most theory texts describe Ionian as the major mode. If you disagree with the texts, that's great, but it's one heckuva tough thing to argue with. And I'm really not well enough educated to argue on behalf of those writing the texts. Maybe you could drop an email to Kostka and Payne?

This isn't the music history thread, it's the music theory thread. I can honestly say I'm ill equipped to discuss any sort of history - those were all 8 am classes I was very prone to skipping.

I'm starting to understand the theme - this is a big ongoing self-taught vs formally-educated thing, isn't it?

[vurt]

I'm starting to understand the theme - this is a big ongoing self-taught vs formally-educated thing, isn't it?

youll get used to it, some folk like to think music shouldnt be fun.

[JumpingJackFlash]

Modes and chords are built the same way from their related scale, are they not?

No. Modes do not have a "related scale". The dorian mode is the dorian mode. It isn't part of something else.

in western music it's the primary mode

No, it's not. You're mixing modality with tonality.
As I said before, the "Ionian" mode came very late, many centuries after most of the other modes.

You may think of it as "the primary mode", but that has absolutely no basis in music theory. It is no more "primary" than any of the other modes, if anything, it would be secondary for the reasons already given.

"music theory" and tonal harmony cover the period from 1400-1900.

No. Music theory goes back centuries before this, even back to the ancient Greeks. Tonal harmony is but one aspect of theory, modality is another. One is not better than the other, they are completely different systems.

And most theory texts describe Ionian as the major mode.

Which book? - Please quote from one.

You'll find that some books might say that they represent the same notes, but on no account does that make them the same thing, anymore than they are the same as "Mela Shankarabharanam"! As I said above, they are different systems. - It depends on context and how they're used.

You can't say that Mozart's Eine kleine Nachtmusik is in "the Ionain mode" for example, anymore than you can say Nicolas Gombert's In illo tempore loquente Jesu ad turbas ("While Jesus was speaking to the crowd") is in "the major key".

[fmr]

I keep seeing references to the Ionian mode, which is something that never existed outside of a couple of music treaties. Can those that talk about the Ionian mode point me to a composition done in that mode during the modal period (means until the XII century more or less)? I'd like to see that.
I know that there are millions of musics I don't know about, but...

Whoa nellie -

Let me start in with this, more context: "music theory" and tonal harmony cover the period from 1400-1900. And most theory texts describe Ionian as the major mode. If you disagree with the texts, that's great, but it's one heckuva tough thing to argue with. And I'm really not well enough educated to argue on behalf of those writing the texts. Maybe you could drop an email to Kostka and Payne?

This isn't the music history thread, it's the music theory thread. I can honestly say I'm ill equipped to discuss any sort of history - those were all 8 am classes I was very prone to skipping.

I'm starting to understand the theme - this is a big ongoing self-taught vs formally-educated thing, isn't it?

All I wrote about is music theory. Theory didn't born out of nothing, it's just a formalization of common musical practices that existed way before. That's why you can't learn or talk about theory without placing it in context with the historical background. And if you want to talk about modes, you have to go way back before 1400, at least to the year 600, as a cultural concept, and even earlier as a practice. And in 1400 modes were already being abandoned. So, your context is a little out of context.
At Vurt: music is certainly fun, and needs no theory at all to be enjoyed (fortunately), but we are talking about theory here. Sorry if it isn't fun to you, but it is what it is.

[Trakstar]

show us why then!
Evidently you know nothing about it, to say that.

the character of a mode is what makes it the mode. we do not need ANY chords for this character to reveal itself.
Modal melody has existed in, eg., India for centuries. They do not use chords in Indian Classical Music. Same for Arabic modal music described in Maqam theory. There are not chords. The intonation of these rows does not really allow for chords. There is a constant ONE underneath in these types of music.

however, and here's a concrete example, let's take D Dorian. The use of a G7, pushes by the tension B-F it contains to C major; obviating the D TONIC, ie., the Dorian-ness of D Dorian completely. This is known to musicians that are interested in it. You are interested in something else.

no, i was just winding you up because:
A) Yes, you are right I no next to Dick compared to others, limited western chromatic scales at the minute im afraid but I am a big fan of C major for some reason and trying to expand my horizons little by little

B) It makes great reading and interesting learning so now Ill look up mode and modality and stuff and see where it leads. We dont even share the same music tastes but I am all for learning and was sad when you were not here because all the arguments stopped not of which were in a bad way rather just funny banter so its been good to see your name active on the forums again.

[tapper mike]

Into to piano is all about the C major scale because it's easier to read and to finger. Just like most intro to guitar lead playing is focused on E and A for examples.

The more you actually listen and perform music of others the more that stuff washes away. Most people writing find about 5 or 6 keys that they have a feel for and ignore the rest. Depending on genre performers aren't as lucky as writers. You are expected to play the song in key. And if you play jazz you are expected to perform a song in several keys just to show you can cut the mustard.

[Trakstar]

Into to piano is all about the C major scale because it's easier to read and to finger. Just like most intro to guitar lead playing is focused on E and A for examples.

The more you actually listen and perform music of others the more that stuff washes away. Most people writing find about 5 or 6 keys that they have a feel for and ignore the rest. Depending on genre performers aren't as lucky as writers. You are expected to play the song in key. And if you play jazz you are expected to perform a song in several keys just to show you can cut the mustard.

Ahh, thanks for the info, and yes I agree because I find that happening quite a lot as I try to modulate out of the Key of C major into other chord progressions of other scales in pursuit of the mood or feel of the music i am actually trying to create. I would set off to make a sad deep tune but end up with a monophonic melody with sparse groove and happy chappy timbre to the piece

Fek me, those were the days

[tapper mike]

Okay,

I've written this out several times and each time something happened and I didn't complete it.

Here goes.
Firstly a song can have more then one key. But usually it's limited to two. They often occur either during the turnaround (in jazz) or in a different section (progression) of the song such as the bridge.

There is a very good reason why one would want to resolve to the I chord or the V Chord. And that is resolution. A progression has a beginning middle and end. Ending a progression on the V or I chord defines that the progression has ended. Where by you have the option of repeating the progression or going to a different progression. Such as going from the verse to the chorus or vice versa.


If you are constantly moving ouside of the key you are losing focus. It meanders and the further away you move the harder it gets to draw a conclusion.

If you want to work in a different key then C I fully advise doing that. But work in the different key from beginning to end. Or atleast section your keys so they aren't an endless stream of non repeating chords.


I don't encourage you that all your songs sound the same and always start on the root and resolve to the root or fifth. That's fine for somethings like the blues but not for others. I also don't advise doing what I did way back when which is stock up on "Modern Chord Progressions" works because they rarely if ever are actually found exactly as described in actual songs. Although they do usually have different keys for the progression type books which will get you out of trying to play everything in C. I do advise taking lessons. When starting out on the keys some chords are harder to shape then others. It makes moving between them a little difficult for people who have never sat down with a teacher. A teacher will show you how to get the most out of the chords and make them feel at least a bit more natural. The more familiar you are with all chords the more likely you will be at exploring them. Again (I think I've said this) the best way to learn is by learning songs. Where you get to see and hear the progression in action as well as develop the skills to recreate it.


Now lets talk about Key Function.
There are both common and uncommon subsitutions you can use for a chord. The structure of the chord may not exactly fit into the key structure. But does fit the key overall.

A classic example of this is in the blues (although many many styles use chord alteration and subsitution)

The Key of C = CDEFGAB
Major blues in the key of C has three fundamental chords C7, F7 and G7
The only chord that actually makes the perfect fit for the key of C is G7
C7 is spelled C E G Bb. Bb is not found in the key of C
F7 is spelled F A c Eb. Eb is not in the key of C either.
But because the primary chords C,F,G are all major(dominant) it is considered in the key of C when you play a blues progression in the key of C

So now you have your first harmonic variations that while don't cookie cutter fit into the key of C they are rooted enough to call it the key of C.

Lets take a look at two common 12 bar progressions. The first resolves to the I chord and the second resolves to the V chord.
Example 1


Example 2


What do you play over that? Well the C7 arpeggio will work on a lot of it.
So will the mixolydian C scale as it has a dominant7. So will the major pentatonic scale. So will the minor pentatonic scale. So will the blues scale. Of these options the blues scale is the most harsh The C blues scale is C-Eb-F-F#-G-Bb. It is the harshness of the blues scale against the C7 chord that gives it character. Many blues, rock, country, disco, pop and hundreds of other styles mix and match the scale "licks" play a little bit from one scale and try to play a little bit of an overlapping scale/lick from another.
This can create a "bittersweet" sound. You don't have to mix and match you can simply work out one of these scales against the chord. The one thing you wouldn't want to play is a C major scale (even though the key is still C) Against the C7 chord. Try it if you are up for experimentation but don't expect great results.


Generally when playing the blues the first 8 bars the melody is based on the root chord. It doesn't change when moving to the 4 chord. this creates a little bit of self resolving tension. The turn around is considered the last 4 measures of a 12 bar blues where the chord movement turns around and heads back to the beginning. In the turn around you do want to align your melodic ideas with the harmonic content. This is one "type" of modal playing. match your melody to the supporting chord rather then focusing on the key.



In the first example the progression resolves to the 1 chord. In the blues this is a signal that the exact same thing is going to be repeated like one line of verse to another verse. When the progression ends on the V chord instead of the 1 it's a signal that something is going to change like going from the verse to the chorus or the chorus to the solo.


Now you'll notice a "passing chord" in example 2 the Ab7 chord does not belong to the key of C it's just a little jump that makes the V chord stand out a little. Passing chords by there nature are "transitory" though not "transitional" Transitory means it's only there for a little bit and it's used to connect with the key chord. Passing chords are generally either a half step below or above the target chord. You don't want to "hang" on a passing chord you always want to move to the key chord from the passing chord. Too many passing chords in a progression and it will go to mush in a non blues settings. So you want to use passing chords with discretion.


In jazz there is this thing called tritone substitution. It is when you substitute any Dominant7 chord (though usually the V7) with a chord that is a flattened 5th above it. So if you are playing a G7 chord in the key of C you can substitute a C#7 chord. Actually you can substitute any chord that contains the 3rd and the 7th of the dominant 7th. Again use caution. You don't want to do it all the time and you do want to transition back to the key.


That's not all.
A progression can be anywhere between two measures and 32 measures long. the longer it is the more important it is to return to a base (such as the I or V chord) However that doesn't mean you can't simply ramble around on two chords for awhile. Or even one. There is this concept called "Vamping" A vamp is when there isn't a chord progression it's just one chord repeated over and over again (all though it's nice to "cap" it with a different chord at the end) When you are playing a vamp. Especially when the 3rd isn't expressed you can work thru different modes. If you are holding down a power chord such as C ergo CGC it isn't defined as major or minor. this means your definition comes from your melodic lines not the chord structure. It's a good way to work out your modes playing scales and licks yet altering them to fit the mode. The thing is you want it structured that 1. it always returns to the original mode you started with. 2 that the duration of each mode is equally long. So if you play 4 measures in ionian mode. you don't hop around and only play one measure in phrygian then two in mixolydian then hop back. It also give you a chance to work out your "other scale/modes" such as your pentatonics, and modes from the harmonic and melodic minor. It's a very "jazz fusion" thing and can take awhile to develop.

There are also other both common and less common substitutions. By now you prolly know your relative major/minor stuff like substitution an Am for a Cmajor. To me that's not really a sub but I digress.
In jazz any minor7 chord can be substituted (though usually the vi chord) with a dominant 7 Ergo Am7 becomes A7. If you spend any time studying chord progressions you'll find this a lot especially in I-VI7-ii7-V7 progressions.

In pop there is less of a concentration/concern with making everything a 7 chord. The bigger the chord the less of an impact it can have. Sometimes you just want chords that cut to the chase. Hence the popularity (not only in rock) of "power chords" where there is no 3rd present and therefore lends it self to ambiguity. You can also apply some (not all) parallel motion to a chord progression Such as C-D-E-D notice all major chords. Or A(m)-G-F-F
or one of my favorites i7-bVII - bVI7 -V7 (walk don't run by the ventures and Stray Cat Strut) You can run split parallels such as E-D-A-G (notice all major chords) You can build chord progressions by using the minor or major pentatonic scale where every interval becomes a chord building block ala Eric Clapton, the beatles and others. Take a look at the verse for Back in the ussr http://www.azchords.com/b/beatles-tabs- ... 00936.html
A-C-D-C

And there are countless methods and examples I could point out. But it's not about what I want nor is it about what others have done (though you are free to borrow an idea if you like it) It's about what you want to do once you find them. Resolving to the 1 or V chord is a fine idea if you want to go there but there are plenty of options out there. And the more you explore actual music by performing it the more open you will be to those ideas.


One of the things I got locked into when I first started playing was that If I read somewhere about something I would take it as an absolute. Music Theory at it's best is about expanding the realms of possibilities not narrowing them. If you are so afraid you'll make a mistake or it won't sound write because it doesn't fit the original criteria you are in the wrong medium.

Which feeds back to...learning songs. Learning songs deconstructs rudimentary theory which can inhibit more then expand one's talent. It exposes theory for what it is, Just an idea that you can draw upon or put to the side. As well it demonstrates different theories at work under different circumstances. Learning a song is intimate, intellectual (which is the smallest part) physical and aural because you are listening to how things sound together rather then just reading about it. It strengthens muscle memory which makes learning new shapes, patterns, chords and keys easier not harder. It also reinforces the value of time, timing and meter. The heart of rock and roll is the beat. Not just rock and roll all styles have a feel. And most of that comes down to how things are played not just what is being played. The more you play songs of others and try to emulate them the more you will develop on both an emotive sense. It builds confidence in playing not detracts from playing. It also gives you devices (rhythmic, harmonic, melodic) that you can recreate or modify to suit your own playing. All the great songwriters and many a lesser one have learned thru imitation. By learning the techniques and methods that others have used in the past. They might not have covered the song on an mp3 or a record but they learned by playing songs. Not by reading theory alone or by simply messing around till something came up.

[Trakstar]

danke , very appreciated

[tapper mike]

One thing I'd like to add on.

Your method. while it's good for somethings it's not for others.
Trying to play a chord progression while trying to play a melody over it, is sort of like trying to ride a bicycle while trying to operate a radio controlled plane.

Yeah you can do it if you have a very big open field with no distractions but you'll be too busy concentrating on keeping them both moving to really enjoy or learn from the process. All it takes is one moment of looking at the plane for too long and you might hit a rock fall from the bicycle and have your plane crash into something.

When you study the accompaning part do that separately (at least at first) This helps because you can infuse some rhythm into your playing and it opens you up to explore full chords as opposed to primary ones. Different chord variations and extentions and breaking up the chord like using arpeggios not to mention adding riffs and either creating pockets to fill or putting the chord in the pocket for the melody to surround.

When you are concentrating on developing these rhythm style techniques it makes your songs sound... well hipper and more fun. What you could do is sing over the top of your chord progression instead of trying to hack out a melody or.... Record your chord progression then play it back and play the melody over it. With a more "hip" rhythm for your chord it will allow you to explore more hip ways to rhythmically play the same melody and/or it will free your mind to the possibility of different melodic idea's.

A melody is something that is memorable hence both repeatable (repetition) without getting too boring (variation) So a good melody will have aspects of both. Sometimes this is done thru transposition (shifting the melody but keeping the rest the same) and some times it's done via alteration. (changing one or two notes of the melody or changing it by use of dynamics (expression, timing) There are other was too which you can add variance while maintaining a sense of repetition (like leaving a few notes out)

Another nice thing about "locking down" a progression with just the chords and rhythmic flair added is it translates to something other musicians can understand and work with. It's easier for them to get a feel for the piece if they want to add parts. So you've got a great accompaniment but you can't write a melody or a bass line that feels right. Usually a seasoned player can feed into what your doing and be able to add to it without stepping on what you already did.

I'm not saying your method doesn't work. There are situations where I'll have the harmony going on in one hand and the melody in another while trying to work thru an idea. However I find the rhythmic impulses become removed and it drains the idea rather then opens it up.

[fmr]

Hey tapper mike. Great post. Just some doubts from someone almost completely ignorant about the blues and jazz. You wrote:

The Key of C = CDEFGAB
Major blues in the key of C has three fundamental chords C7, F7 and G7
The only chord that actually makes the perfect fit for the key of C is G7
C7 is spelled C E G Bb. Bb is not found in the key of C
F7 is spelled F A c Eb. Eb is not in the key of C either.

Why are you always using minor sevenths? Considering that the C7 chord as you wrote it (C E G Bb) makes it the dominant seventh of F, and also the F7 chord as you wrote it (F A C Eb) makes this chord the dominant of Bb, wouldn't it be better to use the major sevenths? I also think that several jazz musicians use the major sevenths, perhaps because of that. I tried a simple progression C7, F7, G7, and while the progression from C to F would satisfy me (after all, C as you wrote it is the dominant of F) progressing from F7 to G7 was displeasing. OTOH, using the major sevenths, curiously, pleased me more. Sorry but I am not familiar with jazz enough to avoid this question, but here it is, and I will take the oportunity to learn a little.

[tapper mike]

Not in the blues. The blues rarely uses major7's they are always dominants.
Major 7 chords have a sense of rest. Dominant 7's have a sense of motion.

The blues can be played as a minor or a major dominant but not a major7th as major 7's are to "sweet" sounding for the blues earstwhile dominant7's have more a sense or restlesness. It's not me it's the blues. The blues doesn't concern itself with following strict classical form or motion. The blues have their own framework.

Re minors.
The blues is not all sad weepy. There is a place for both minor and major 12 bar blues though typically your more uptempo happy go lucky blues is in the major(dominant) flavor.
In jazz and folk as well as traditional music there is concern over the value of the third which always has to be expressed in the chord for it to be considered a chord. In blues and rock this is less of an issue.

Typical blues phrasing often use both the flat and natural third while playing over a major(dominant) chord.

That being said there are atypical uses of major thirds in "adapted" or 'adopted'
blues approaches they are the exeption not the rule. Such as "Mellisa' by the alman brothers or the jazz standard "All Blues"

The blues doesn't have to justify itself to the constrants of rudimentary theory. The blues does just fine in it's own set of rules governing it's own behavior and has stood the test of time based on the precepts which it delivers the message to. Which gets back to my original point about trying to take rudimentary music theory at face value. Yes there are situations where the rudementary understanding of key structure work. However there is a vast vast amount of music being made that does not ascribe to fundamental theory. Music is somewhat about artistic expression, somewhat about craftsmanship but the one thing it's not about is dogma. You can draw upon ideas that would under rudimentary reading would seem incorrect but are valid for the medium.

Style is more then timing and technique. Each style carries certain unique characteristics. Some characteristics can be grafted onto other styles and others cannot. It's better to embrace the style for what it is and approach it pragmatically then to try and assert conditions not prevalent to the style because they don't fit your initial understanding criteria.

[tapper mike]

Hey tapper mike. Great post. Just some doubts from someone almost completely ignorant about the blues and jazz. You wrote:

The Key of C = CDEFGAB
Major blues in the key of C has three fundamental chords C7, F7 and G7
The only chord that actually makes the perfect fit for the key of C is G7
C7 is spelled C E G Bb. Bb is not found in the key of C
F7 is spelled F A c Eb. Eb is not in the key of C either.

Why are you always using minor sevenths? Considering that the C7 chord as you wrote it (C E G Bb) makes it the dominant seventh of F, and also the F7 chord as you wrote it (F A C Eb) makes this chord the dominant of Bb, wouldn't it be better to use the major sevenths? I also think that several jazz musicians use the major sevenths, perhaps because of that. I tried a simple progression C7, F7, G7, and while the progression from C to F would satisfy me (after all, C as you wrote it is the dominant of F) progressing from F7 to G7 was displeasing. OTOH, using the major sevenths, curiously, pleased me more. Sorry but I am not familiar with jazz enough to avoid this question, but here it is, and I will take the oportunity to learn a little.

Those arent' minor7th's they are dominant 7ths.
CEGBb is a C7 chord.


The key is in C When playing the blues all major chords become dominant7's not major7's

[fmr]

Hey tapper mike. Great post. Just some doubts from someone almost completely ignorant about the blues and jazz. You wrote:

The Key of C = CDEFGAB
Major blues in the key of C has three fundamental chords C7, F7 and G7
The only chord that actually makes the perfect fit for the key of C is G7
C7 is spelled C E G Bb. Bb is not found in the key of C
F7 is spelled F A c Eb. Eb is not in the key of C either.

Why are you always using minor sevenths? Considering that the C7 chord as you wrote it (C E G Bb) makes it the dominant seventh of F, and also the F7 chord as you wrote it (F A C Eb) makes this chord the dominant of Bb, wouldn't it be better to use the major sevenths? I also think that several jazz musicians use the major sevenths, perhaps because of that. I tried a simple progression C7, F7, G7, and while the progression from C to F would satisfy me (after all, C as you wrote it is the dominant of F) progressing from F7 to G7 was displeasing. OTOH, using the major sevenths, curiously, pleased me more. Sorry but I am not familiar with jazz enough to avoid this question, but here it is, and I will take the oportunity to learn a little.

Those arent' minor7th's they are dominant 7ths.
CEGBb is a C7 chord.
The key is in C. When playing the blues all major chords become dominant7's not major7's

Dominant 7ths ARE minor sevenths (with major thirds). Yes, C-E-G-Bb it's a C7 chord, but belonging to the key of F (V7 of F), therefore in your example it's not used as a dominant, for what I understood. Following your previous explanation, i guess this will lead to some kind of tonal fluidity. I also didn't knew that in blues, major sevenths meant rest (curious thing). Is this the same in jazz? If yes, all kinds of jazz or just some styles?

[tapper mike]

No

FAC is an F major chord. Adding a dominant7th to the end does not make it a minor 7th It makes the chord a Dominant 7th.

The value of a chord being minor or major is determined by the relationship of the root and the third not the 7th

In music theory, a major chord (About this sound Play (help·info)) is a chord having a root, a major third, and a perfect fifth.[1] When a chord has these three notes alone, it is called a major triad. Some major triads with additional notes, such as the major seventh chord, *may also be called major chords.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_chord

*May being the operative word the fact that a major chord does not have to have a major 7th to be considered a major chord. All that need be present are The Root, The Major Third and Perfect Fifth.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant_seventh_chord

If a chord is designated as a minor chord then it is expressed as a minor Chord
Cm7 is a C minor 7th chord.
C7 is a dominant 7th chord with a major 3rd and a dominant 7
CM7 or Cmaj7 is a major chord with a major 7th

In music, a minor seventh chord is any nondominant seventh chord where the "third" note is a minor third above the root.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_7th_chord