Chords that fit together (chord progressions)

[Sascha Franck]

A book on harmony can be useful. Make sure you get one that doesn't constantly drift away into some blurb regarding re-harmonisation, pivot modulations, substitute chords and what not. Try to find something analysing the most basic and slightly advanced typical chord progressions used in actual songs.

I for one wouldn't give much of a damn about the cycle of fifths. It's merely an organisation tool to keep keys in order (especially when dealing with sheet music), it's no compositional tool by any means.

Get yourself some songbooks. Make sure they're not exact transcriptions but sort of lead sheet style. For jazz and somewhat connected styles, the Real Book is still a good bet, so are it's follow ups (various Real and Fake Book volumes). But you may as well get something more traditional.
Play the progressions and try to analyse them.

Have a go at some ofthe most typical chord progressions inside one key. Here's a handful of examples (example key: C):

I-IV-V-I
C-F-G-C
Probably *the* most important progression of all times. Countless traditional tunes use this progression (or little variations of it, such as, say, I-IV-V-IV).

Once you're familiar, start "enhancing" these chords. You may want to start with 7ths.
Imaj7-IVmaj7-V7-Imaj7
Or add 9ths as well.
Imaj9-IVmaj9-V9-Imaj9

Etc.

Use the same progression in minor.
Imin-IVmin-Vmin-Imin
Cmin-Fmin-Gmin-Cmin
Now replace the Gmin with a G(7). Probably the key thing to make this progression more plausible.
Imin-IVmin-V-Imin
Cmin-Fmin-G-Cmin
Add 7ths.
Imin7-IVmin7-V7-Imin7
Cmin7-Fmin7-G7-Cmin7

Etc...

Replace the IV chord by the II chord.
In major (with 7ths applied already):
Imaj7-IImin7-V7-Imaj7
Cmaj7-Dmin7-G7-Cmaj7

In minor:
Imin7-IImin7/b5-V7-Imin7
Cmin7-Dmin7/b5-G7-Cmin7

Another typical basic progression would be I-VI-II-V, doesn't exactly exist often for minor.
Imaj7-IVmin7-IImin7-V7
Cmaj7-Amin7-Dmin7-G7

Again, with all these, try to add option notes (9ths, 11ths, 13ths). You may want to look up a list of a) which options notes are suitable and b) how to "generate" them on the instrument (just adding them will not do the job, they usually replace one of the other notes, such as "13th for 5th").

Have a look at any chord movements that go up a fourth (or fall down a fifth, same result). You can often replace the starting chord (or add another one inbetween) by a dominant 7th variation.
In the last example, this would typically be done to the Amin7, which would then become A7. It could as well be done to the Dmin7.

Explore all the options to move up a fourth (or down a fifth) inside one key. Check where the "make it a dominant" thing could work.

Also try to simply play the chords next to each other. Usually, stepwise or fourth/up (fifth/down) movements seem to work pretty well.

Have a look at "Autumn leaves" (or "Still Got The Blues" or "Europe" - they're basically exactly the same), it's utilizing practically every chord of one key. The formula is:
IImin7-V7-Imaj7-VImaj7-VIImin7/b5-III7-VImin
In C that'd be:
Dmin7-G7-Cmaj7-Fmaj7-Bmin7/b5-E7-Amin
(the original is in Bb)
Because it goes from major to the parallel minor, the last three chords could as well be analysed as IImin7/b5, V7 and Imin (so as a sort of very slight modulation...).

Now you can take small portions out of that progression and fool around with just those.

Some tips I find important to make chords sound nice:

- Really learn about possible option notes and where and how to use them. Just playing a Cmaj9 instead of Cmaj7 at the right time may sometimes result in a completely new feel.

- Make sure you learn all the chord inversions and have a look at voice leading when going from one chord to the other. This is a difference like night and day. Check for yourself:
Cmaj7 to Fmaj7
Cmaj7: C-E-G-B
Fmaj7: F-A-C-E
Play these two and you'll notice how they absolutely *don't* gel together at all.
Now use this for the Fmaj7: C-E-F-A (that's the second inversion). Or E-F-A-C (third inversion).
Notice how much more smooth the transition comes along?
Do that with each and every chord progression you play.

- Learn tunes "lead sheet" style. No transcriptions, just so you can accompany a melody with some chords that you make up on your own with only a chord symbol given. This will teach you a truckload. At least it did for me.

So much for now
Sascha

[wrench45us]

Have a look at "Autumn leaves" (or "Still Got The Blues" or "Europe" - they're basically exactly the same), it's utilizing practically every chord of one key. The formula is:
IImin7-V7-Imaj7-VImaj7-VIImin7/b5-III7-VImin
In C that'd be:
Dmin7-G7-Cmaj7-Fmaj7-Bmin7/b5-E7-Amin
(the original is in Bb)
Because it goes from major to the parallel minor, the last three chords could as well be analysed as IImin7/b5, V7 and Imin (so as a sort of very slight modulation...).

I'm sure that
IImin7-V7-Imaj7-VImaj7-VIImin7/b5-III7-VImin
was mis-typed and meant to be
IImin7-V7-Imaj7-IVmaj7-VIImin7/b5-III7-VImin

(I'm learning walking bass and have been working on 'Autumn Leaves' for a good while and will continue for a good while longer.)

The tips Sascha provides about the occasional adding the 9th (and I would occasionally add the flat 9th in the minor V) is worth paying attention to. Norah Jones signature sound is maybe overuse of 9tyh. But the voice leading is really a very basic princople.
It's one things to learn the chords in root form and beginning one has a tendency to play them in that inversion, but by minimizing finger movement and using common tones and moving amingst inversions, it's a much smoother sound and easier to play.

[manducator]

Hello,

Here are 2 basic chord charts (1 for major scales and 1 for minor scales) for creating lots of progressions. Don't sit there waiting for some inspiration, just start with this:

For major scales:

I Leads to ...............All Chords
ii Leads to ..............ii, IV, V, vii°
iii Leads to .............ii, iii, IV, vi
IV Leads to ..............I, IV, V, vii°
V Leads to ...............I, IV, V, vi
vi Leads to ..............ii IV, V, vi
vii° Leads to ............I, iii, vii°

For minor scales:

i leads to ...............any other chord
ii° (ii) leads to.........i, V (v), vii° (VII)
III (III+) leads to.......i, iv (IV), VI (#vi°), #vii° (VII)
iv (IV) leads to..........i, V (v), #vii° (VII)
V (v) leads to............i, VI, (#vi°)
VI (#vi°) leads to........i, III (III+), iv (IV), V (v), #vii° (VII)
vii° (VII) leads to.......i


If you don't understand a thing what I'm talking about, go to www.musictheory.net and do the free online course (The classic edition is even downloadable for free, for offline learning)

Now, lets use the major scale chart for an example. It's always a good idea to start a song with the I-chord, so here we go:

Let's take the I chord and it can lead to any other chord. Let's pick... the vi chord. according to this chart we can go from vi to ii, IV,V, and vi itself. Let's pick the ii chord. than I choose to go from the ii to the V chord.

So our chord progression is this: I - vi - ii - V

Let's take C-major to keep it simple (no black keys):

I = C major = C E G
vi= A minor = A C E
ii = D minor = D F A
V = G major = G B D

In a chord, you can change the order of the notes (it's called inversions) to get a better sounding melody:

It's a good idea to change the ii-chord (D F A) into A D F and the V-chord (G B D) to B D G. Now the notes are closer to each other by reordering them, which is more pleasant to the ear.


Of course, this is just a start, you can substitute chords, add notes to chords, cut notes, make longer chord progressions... Or add fx to the melodies, whatever you want, make something exciting out of a loop.

So who needs to sit and wait for some inspiration? Play with some chord progressions and help your inspiration a little bit.

Greetz,
manducator

[shankfiddle]

again, sascha, you are thinking about the chromatic circle:
CFBbEbAbC#F#BEADGC...
and you are right, THAT is only really useful to organize keys...

But when we are telling the poster to study the diatonic circle of fifths progressions, we mean these:

Major (with 7ths applied):
I^ IV^ viim7b5 iii- vi- ii- V7 I^

Minor:
i- iv- viio III+^ VI^ iim7b5 V7 i-

1473625-1473625-1473625

So when you say, play with chords whose root change by a fourth or fifth, you are describing the exact concept we are talking about when we say "diatonic circle of fifths"

also note how "Autumn Leaves" is almost literally the minor circle.

ii V I is found at the end of the circle progressions

motion from the I-IV as well as V-I are in the circle. So all I IV V I ("the most important progressions of all time...") songs can be found in the circle- just ignore the chords in parenthesis:
I^ IV^(viim7b5 iii- vi- ii-)V7 I^

All your examples of common generic progressions can be found in the major/minor circles.

[auxend]

I dig this thread thanks for posting and thanks for the replies. I'm finding the study of harmony (chords) to be essential in taking things to the next level composition wise. Topics like this are great food for thought.

[jancivil]

For major scales:

I Leads to ...............All Chords

For minor scales:

i leads to ...............any other chord
[and other chords apparently don't]

Why? There is no context whatsoever here, there is no music referred to, no style brought up, nothing. That particular hypothesis led to this:

It's always a good idea to start a song with the I-chord
Is that a fact? I don't know why. In my experience in music, I have found too many exceptions to this. So it's not possible for me to imagine why this is supposed to be useful to someone lacking the experience and the context. Your 'always' is problematic.

Let's take the I chord and it can lead to any other chord. Let's pick... the vi chord. according to this chart we can go from vi to ii, IV,V, and vi itself. Let's pick the ii chord. than I choose to go from the ii to the V chord.

So, let's "pick" something, or let's automatically follow your chart... Why are these more desirable per se? vi to iii, is there a problem there?

to read this stuff it's as though these chord progressions arrived out of a box of principles, in and of themselves. In music usually there is a melody! What music is a bunch of chord changes and that's that?
the choices for harmonies in a piece of music often have everything to do with putting the tune in its best light (or in a new light).

You don't have bad suggestions here but the idea of a chord chart, through itself, as factual information has led to some problematic assertions. "Always a good idea to start with I." Well if "I" is put onto the tune where it really calls for other harmony, it can't be such a good idea. There is no 'always' in music.

In a chord, you can change the order of the notes (it's called inversions) to get a better sounding melody:

It's a good idea to change the ii-chord (D F A) into A D F and the V-chord (G B D) to B D G. Now the notes are closer to each other by reordering them, which is more pleasant to the ear.

It's a good idea WHEN? For what reason? Is that an opinion because you prefer that position's sound per se? The choice of bass, the choice of position, these are CONTEXTUAL PROBLEMS. there is no real "because" there, itstead you have the opinion 'more pleasing to the ear'. Whose ear? When? I guess you imply that smoother voice leading is easier on the ear but have yet to mention voice leading at all. These kinds of statements made so confidently they are asserted as bare facts are puzzling to me. Smoother might just mean smoother, and lead to less strength in the harmony's movement, we don't know yet.

[jancivil]

the chromatic circle:
CFBbEbAbC#F#BEADGC...
and you are right, THAT is only really useful to organize keys...

Another context-free fact. So, movement by rising fourths/falling fifths is only ever useful within a diatonic usage?

Is that supposed to be true for any cycle? The premise that supplies you here would be 'diatonic music is the be all and end all in music'...

In fact, an entire school of thought arose where the idea to extend diatonic harmony to the chromatic became a goal because that was deemed desirable at some point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltrane_c ... t_Steps.22

they did not do this for no good reason. this was knowledge obtained by extending techiques of tension and release to bring out drama in songs (with predictable changes to begin with often enough) and eventually abstracted into formal principles... The substitution principles are there to bring color, 'chroma', in, and the devices propel the movement, *velocity*...

[shankfiddle]

oh come ON Jan,

the context is the rest of the thread. the reason i posted that contextless fact was because members in this thread were saying things like "ignore the circle of fifths" when the original question was how to come up with better progressions without using blind trial-and-error.

"Ignore the circle of fifths" is bad advice to a beginner who doesn't know theory. Step one is to learn the diatonic progressions THEN start composing post-tonally if you so desire. Even Coltrane is using these standard circles, transposed around to different keys in a clever fashion. ii-V-I's all over the place! Although he's not staying locked in a key, you can tell that he's studied diatonic theory extensively and then explored it further in new ways.

All we're saying is that it is better to educate oneself in the harmonic theory that's been ingrained in your culture, and then later break free into 12-tone, etc. So I clarified that when I said "study the circle of fifths", I meant diatonic progressions, that will help an amateur much more than talking about the genius Jazz composers (who studied diatonic theory! the context of jazz was a reaction to standard diatonic theory).

I'm not saying that this is the ONLY way to compose... I even suggested that the original poster look into Schoenburg in an earlier post (the one immediately above yours on the previous page).

the chromatic circle:
CFBbEbAbC#F#BEADGC...
and you are right, THAT is only really useful to organize keys...

Another context-free fact. So, movement by rising fourths/falling fifths is only ever useful within a diatonic usage?

Is that supposed to be true for any cycle? The premise that supplies you here would be 'diatonic music is the be all and end all in music'...

I don't know what point you're trying to make here... no one ever said that's the only way to compose, it's just where the beginner should start.

[jancivil]

the chromatic circle:
CFBbEbAbC#F#BEADGC...
and you are right, THAT is only really useful to organize keys...

Another context-free fact. So, movement by rising fourths/falling fifths is only ever useful within a diatonic usage?

Is that supposed to be true for any cycle? The premise that supplies you here would be 'diatonic music is the be all and end all in music'...

I don't know what point you're trying to make here... no one ever said that's the only way to compose, it's just where the beginner should start.

You and others have used 'always' and 'only really useful' as if statements of fact.

It [chromatic cycle] is information that can be useful per se and you presented it as if not, as if it was just an organizing principle. In the middle of a thread where other organizing principles were presented as particularly useful per se.

Again there is the problem of abstracting principles to stand for meaning in and of themselves, outside of context, applied to nothing yet.

[jancivil]

I don't necessarily agree that abstract information is where 'the beginner' 'should start'. I think it might be more valuable to study musical principles applied to some music. Or even learn about chord progressions from knowing some songs where they are used.

Information stands for knowledge too often in music theory talk. Someone here has as their signature: "The difference between theory and practice is that in theory there is no difference." ...

[jancivil]

and again, there is an implicit reason you have stated that diatonic music is where you begin, which is ignoring a great elephant in the room: MELODY. The chromatic cycle stretches what you can accomplish for the [usually diatonic] melody to a breaking point unless you know more about harmonizing melody.

This is what I meant by 'context-free'. Talking about chord changes in the abstract is one thing, but this idea 'diatonic cycles rule ok' has that very context that wasn't supplied until I spoke up. So you're talking about it in the abstract, but not really. I beg to differ.

[shankfiddle]

Fine, you are entirely correct, as always. But if you look at the original post, we're trying to help a beginner who doesn't understand the terms "dominant", or "cadence"

When you're trying to teach a beginner it can be useful to break down concepts, so that you don't confuse and frustrate the student by presenting big-picture concepts too soon.

By your logic you wouldn't teach basic arithmetic before geometry before trig
"1+2=3... one what? three what? meaningless facts out of context"
"find the volume of a trapezoidal prism... now where would you EVER encounter that in the real world??? pointless."

Would it make any sense if, while teaching a young child arithmetic you said something like:
"2+3=5. But that information isn't really useful in and of itself, per se. this really only applies to math in base 10, which is the most basic mode of counting. you can count in any base greater than 2. but in base two, you wouldn't be able to use the numerals 2, or 3. In base 4, 2+3=11. In base 5 2+3=10. So even though most math you'll encounter will be in base ten, presenting a statement like 2+3=5 as always true is incorrect!"

I would just say "2+3 ALWAYS equals 5" Even though I would be wrong.

[manducator]

@ jancivil:

The chord progression scheme comes from music theory for dummies. It's a suggestion, no obligation. There are no rules in music just some recommendations. And that's what the OP asked for.

The suggested scheme contains chord progression that are used for hundreds of years. They have proven their usefulness. If you don't like them, don't use them.

The OP says :'I don't know where to go from each chord.' so this scheme could be a help. whether you like the scheme or not, I frankly don't care.

to read this stuff it's as though these chord progressions arrived out of a box of principles, in and of themselves. In music usually there is a melody! What music is a bunch of chord changes and that's that?

Of course melody is important but it can be adapted to popular chord progressions:



A fairly common chord progression used for over 40 years and all songs have a different melody.

[jopy]

of course, the irony is that the chord progression you're showing in that video is a I-V-iv-IV progression that doesn't resolve according to normal voice leading rules.

[jancivil]

If you listen to works of great emotive content and then do a harmonic analysis of the piece you will find no great hidden theoretical harmonic mystery revealed...

That's the truth. And the thing that informs this is that rhythm and melody are the chief pathways to communicate a feel, or 'express'...

The OP has said that the cycle of fifths by itself is boring. Yeah, I would say that about most thord movements spoken of here. there isn't any music to it is why. OTOH listen to Coltrane Giant Steps, that's some interesting shit owing to the intervallic thinking, so the changes generate melodic interest in themselves. That is not easy to talk about.


A lot of chords, this wasn't always something to do... It still isn't in some cultures. This emphasis arose in a great context... of making the most of melodies. Before there were chord progressions in Western European music there were people singing melodically to support a main melody. the harmonies occurring became more and more codified. finally instruments were made to make more chroma available and manageable, temperaments were devised. The idea of harmony abstracted gets a life of its own. Some of the restlessness in western music owes to the boring nature of equal temperament and the fact of so many thwarted resonances...

It's true that a lot of the canon is melodies that aren't as compelling without the clothes they wore and structures propping them up would have you believe, so there is interest per se in how well you treated them...