^ At least they weren't half-baked. Burnt is better than raw! *wink, wink* I really have a habit of doing so myself.

But you do bring up a good point in getting bogged down with technique. I hope Janet doesn't feel this way, but I can see how she can feel like she unindated with techniques and reasoning, etc which is all theory is regarding composition.

Exaggerations do point out some things and I do commend you for doing that

Janet


20 minutes of free time here...Sam, I tried to work thru your first post.  Lots of fascinating stuff. I couldn't get my head around all of it, but I tried some things and came up with some really cool new stuff I never would have thought of.  So maybe I'll go write a song of those before I forget. :) 
 

Lots of information in this thread. Unfortunately for you it's a bit of a barrage.
 
You have to digest slowly. Information that you can't actually apply to the music you play right now goes in one ear and out the other. Start with the basics, expand slowly. So to touch on a few posts so far:
 
Sam mentioned:
1,3,6
2,4
5,7
 
Jeff mentioned the order in which chords appear in a key(Post #31)
 
You mention 1, 4, 5 and 6 (which is minor)
 
So to recap:
 
- every major key has seven naturally occuring chords.
 
In the key of C= C, Dm, Em, F, G, Am, Bdim, C
In the key of A= A, Bm, C#m, D, E, F#m, G#dim, A
 
Therefore relative minor keys use the identical chords in a different order:
 
In the key of Am= Am, Bdim, C, Dm, Em, F, G, Am
In the key of F#m= F#m, G#dim, A, Bm, C#m, D, E, F#m
 
Sam alluded to the musical "function" of chords. These help you to understand the level of tension that chords create. Music, broken down to an atomic level, is insanely simple - you either create tension or release it. Nothing else really exisits.
 
Chords 1, 3 and 5 are Tonic chords. They have little or no tension.
 
Chords 2 and 4 are Sub-Dominant chords and produce some tension.
 
Chords 5 and 7 are Dominant and create the most tension, usually being resolved by returning to a Tonic or Sub-Dominant.
 
The most typical chord progression is a cadence. The most common cadence is the simple I-IV-V
 
So in C major = C, F, G, C 
 
Notice how it SOUNDS though! The C chord has no tension. When we hear the F we sense some movement, a little bit of tension. The G chord produces the most tension and when we return to C we release the tension.
 
So play a longer progression: C, F, C, F, C, F, G, G, C
 
Notice how obvious the tension and release starts to sound?
 
Now based on what Sam wrote, imagine the Am is a TONIC chord just like C. So if we replace the C major chord with Am we get: Am, F, Am, F, Am, F, G, G, Am
 
Even though this sounds "sadder", the pattern of tension is identical.
 
I touch on this a little in a previous thread:
http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?high=&m=2625596&mpage=1#2625705
 
Step #1- know what chords exist in a key before you start playing.
Step #2 - start analyzing the chord progressions in songs you know: what is the pattern of tension and release?
Step #3 - learn to apply this to music you know or are writing
 
For example if you play C, F, G, C try substituting Am for C, or substitute Dm for F, example C, Dm, G, Am.
 
Learn to make the chords suit YOUR needs. Do you want to start with tension? Instead of Am, Dm, E start on the Sub-Dominant: Dm. For example Dm, E, Am, C, Dm, E, Am, Am. Again, learn to follow the tension.
 
If you can digest this let me know and on to lesson  2 :-)
 
Lesson 2 is "extensions versus alterations" or "how to add colour to chords/progressions you already know
 
While I respect the "just play" mentality it's a little, um, limited. A little knowledge goes a long way. Yes, you can use absolutely ANY chord with the key of C major, but realistically you have to know how to approach it and, more importantly, how to RESOLVE it correctly or it sounds bad.
 
So let's get an idea where your theory knowledge actually is before dropping boulders on your head!
 
Regards,
Scott
 
EDIT: From Benni's post "Don't get in the box unless you have to. Any combination of notes is a chord. What is important is sound and purpose. Just experiment and learn anything that sounds interesting. It doesn't matter that a purpose isn't immediately found or that they don't appear to go anywhere."
 
This illustrates my point - tension and release, nothing more. Tension and release ARE "purpose". The main difference is that I'm here to advocate slowly learning to understand the "why's". It's like poetry - most poets don't think "Iambic Pentameter" when they're writing, but studying that concept by analyzing other poetry ingrained that specific "flavour" and for the composer it comes out naturally. You have to do the same - learn it and then forget it.

Rus W


Another example: Em7-A7b9-Dm7-Db7-C. I'm going to sub Eb7 because the Em7 before it is only a halfstep above it while the Dm7 (the target chord) is a halfstep below it. Same with the Db7. Db is in-between C-D or D-C.

Em7-Eb7-Dm7-Db7-C. (Notice the chromatic bass line making the progression smoother. E-Eb-D-Db-C)  On a guitar using the E and A strings: E: 12-11-10-9-8; A: 7-6-5-4-3

 

Of course the "reason" this works is relatively simple and should be explained: this is a common substitution called the "flat five substitution"  - any dominant 7b5 chord is IDENTICAL to the dom7b5 which has it's Root (Tonic) a flat fifth away.
example A7b5=Eb7b5
 
Notating it as you have above, while "valid" and unfortunately too common (for example many written versions of the B section of Autumn Leaves), hides the simplicity of the actual progression: it is nothing more than a II-V-II-V-I. While the chord progression Em7-Eb7-Dm7-Db7-C at first may seem "simpler" it is in fact misleading and detracts from the actual harmonic function.
 

Instead of Am, I'm going to use C#dim7 because my target chord is Dm. So, I'll walk up instead of leap.

CMaj9-C#dim7-Dm-G7-C.
 

Actually, in this case the C#dim7 is acting as an A7. C#dim 7 is simply another name for A7b9 so in reality this progression is actually CMaj9-A7(b9)-Dm-G7-C. The only reason to name it C#dim7 is to try and "suggest" that the bass is to move chromatically, which in a band situation many players would ignore anyways, however, functionally it is still a I-VI-II-V-I. Fundamentally, changing the A7 to an A7b9 (C#dim7) has little effect as far as changing the tension as the Bb would already be inherently included (the A7 literally hands you a D harmonic minor sound). So the reason the A7b9/C#dim7 "works" is that it is in fact functioning for a brief moment as the V chord of D minor. It's not a "real" modulation (I-V-I-V-I) as the Dm becomes a "Dorian" sound so essentially it's still in C major.

I point this out because the simplest way to modulate is to throw in a dominant and this is a good example of exploring how the modulation is functioning. There is usually a way to explain "why" the chord works.

The bottom line is that, for me, in jazz NOTHING exists outside of the following:
1. II-V-I or part of it such as II-V
2. I-VI-II-V
3. IV chord, V chord or I chord

In terms of harmonic functionality, diminished 7 chords are nothing more than misnamed dominants. C#dim7 can be named A7b9, C7b9, Eb7b9 or F#7b9 (disregarding enharmonic names).

As Joe Diorio taught me, every single chord of every single jazz song can be explained as one of the 3 above. Every chord is either a I, a IV, a V, or part of a II-V-I or I-VI-II-V. Of course there are a million esoteric avenues one can explore in terms of analysis of jazz, but when you're sight-reading and improvising over charts, the clearer the harmonic function is the easier it is to improvise.

Anyways, I'm sure that all this is fun, I enjoy it, but is likely of little use to the OP :-)

Tried to EDIT previous post and oops...

SToons...yes, that tension and release idea makes a lot of sense.  I do that without really having thought thru exactly which chords do what...I just know it works.  You've added some helpful ideas.  Thank you.  Bring on Lesson #2. :) 

Scott, you had a way of explaining Lesson 1 that really came through for me.  I have never really thought of chord progessions as tension and release, I guess I just kind of did that naturally, as Janet has said.  This gives me a new way of looking at progressions as I write....thank you.

Bring on Lesson 2.

Hey Rus!

You've inspired the beginnings of a new song tentatively titled "Rusprog": http://bit.ly/OXJu0U

I took the first four bars of the bottom line of my progression (the polytonal version), transposed it down a whole-step and used that for the intro.  I then used the "alternate roots" version for the beginning of the A section.  

Now what am I going to do? ;-D

J

jsaras


Hey Rus!

You've inspired the beginnings of a new song tentatively titled "Rusprog": http://bit.ly/OXJu0U

I took the first four bars of the bottom line of my progression (the polytonal version), transposed it down a whole-step and used that for the intro.  I then used the "alternate roots" version for the beginning of the A section.  

Now what am I going to do? ;-D

I inspired you? Sweet! I knew the explanations (no matter how ramble-like) would pay off. 


To the matter at hand: should I tie this to a key or not? (I'm being playfully sarcastic). If I were, I'd tie it to F most likely - though I could tie it to C given how the intro ends, but since you want it fleshed out - more than likely it'll probably be in F You could either repeat in that same tonality for a verse, then you could either transpose up or down and minor third for the bridge or go to the relative minor (as heard in Georgia On My Mind). Or you could pick a distant key - just not too distant! Surprising the ear is one thing, but in turn you surprise one's noggin as they both "How or Why did THAT happen?" (which isn't a bad thing like you've demonstrated)

Modulations, for example, generally happen in steps (half and/or whole) even if they're many in succession. However, a leap is unexpected. If that is what you decide to go for, great, but hopefully mentally you're taking small steps to get there. Granted, one may know how you did it, it's still seem surprising. Sonority range is an issue - especially if singer are backing you - so handle with care.


In triadic form (I will not use SDs in analysis)


Verse:


F-Dm-Bb-C / F-Dm-Bb-C (I-vi-IV-V)
D7-Bb-Bbm-Eb / Am-D7-Gm-C7 (VI-IV-iv-bVII)


Bridge: (Analysis relative to modulation, er, tonicization)


Db-Gb-Ebm-Ab / Db-Bbm-Gb-F7 (I-IV-ii-V / I-vi-IV-III)
Bb-Eb-Am7b5-D7 / Gm-C7b5-Gm-C+ (I-IV-bVII-III / iv-II-vi-II) - the last four chords are really ii-Vs as they relate to F which you can very easily go back to


Gnaw on this and get back to me! Nice start, btw! :)

Rus, you're trying to put me back in that iii-vi-ii-v-I jail again! :-D. At its core, in my way of thinking each root is its own tonal center. The root movements can be made to conform to a scale, or not, and the scale choices and vertical intervals can be arranged to conform to a key center, or not. The one thing that unifies key-centered thinking and harmonic organization that has no key center is the linear/melodic aspect i.e., the voiceleading conforms to the mathematical organization inherent within the overtone series.

The chord symbols for the introduction are Ab7+4, E7b9-5, Db maj7+4, D7#9 (and Eb maj13). The triads in the treble happen to be simple voice-lead triads in the key of Bb, but the chord progression in no way implies any key center.  Yesterday's rules don't work with today's music.

Hi Rus (and everyone else).

I think that this score will help you better see the nucleus of where I'm coming from.  I wrote this ballad as a bit of a musical puzzle and it's reminiscent of things that Herbie Hancock used to do back in the 60's.  The introduction, measures 3-10 and measures 15-22 should be analyzed until you see the pattern emerge.  I'll give you a hint; analyze just the top voice and see if a pattern develops.  

MP3 audio: http://tinyurl.com/9kqcsx6

Score: