Most music theory sounds horrible

[black cobra]

Originally posted by Poparad In this case, I would just see it as a minor chord that is moved to a new root, then down to a major chord that is then moved to a new root. It could have very well been Am Gm F# E using the same principals.

 

 

But what your view is lacking is a system, a logical system. I'm not moving a minor chord randomly to a new root.

 

This next chord progression is in two parts, the first part I used before and a new part:

 

Am- Cm- G- F; Am- Cm- Bbsus- Bb

 

All of these progressions although non-diatonic, are in the key of Am.

[Poparad]

Originally posted by black cobra But what your view is lacking is a system, a logical system. I'm not moving a minor chord randomly to a new root. This next chord progression is in two parts, the first part I used before and a new part: Am- Cm- G- F; Am- Cm- Bbsus- Bb All of these progressions although non-diatonic, are in the key of Am.

 

 

Well, if they are non-diatonic, then they aren't in the key of Am. Just because it starts on Am every 4 bars doesn't make it in the key of Am.

 

When dealing with chromatic harmony, I don't believe there has to be a set 'system.' The point of chromatic harmony is to abandon the system of diatonic, functional harmony. So analyzing it as if it were in a key, or functioning within a key, is to miss the point.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra For example, take this chord progression: A to Bbm, to D. Can anyone tell me why this sounds good even though it shouldn't? Even though it's "wrong"?

 

 

By itself, to my ears, that sounds horrible! It's a succession of chords, not a progression.

 

If we took the obvious approach, that it's the key of D, it's a dominant-flat submediant minor-tonic move (V-bvi-I). The problem with 'justifying' it is that the C# in the A chord is enharmonically respelled as a Db in the Bbm chord, which is a device used to modulate to and from remote regions. Interrupting a V-I cadence with it destroys any sense of resolution...this is called roving or vagrant harmony; the Bbm is a functionless passing chord.

[vote4dicktaid]

Originally posted by black cobra Am- Cm- G- F; Am- Cm- Bbsus- Bb All of these progressions although non-diatonic, are in the key of Am.

 

 

You're contradicting yourself here.

 

That, and I must say those chord progressions sound quite random and without direction, definitely not beautiful to my ears.

[black cobra]

Originally posted by vote4dicktaid You're contradicting yourself here.

 

 

Why? Must a chord progression be diatonic to be in a key?

 

No, this chord progression is clearly in the key of Am.

 

And regarding these progressions sounding "random" and "horrible," that's because you're temporarily baffled.

 

Get used to the new sounds. They are not obvious, you may have to play it a few times to get it. Great music is like that.

[black cobra]

Originally posted by Auggie Doggie By itself, to my ears, that sounds horrible! It's a succession of chords, not a progression. If we took the obvious approach, that it's the key of D.

 

 

No, I meant it to be in the key of A. Perhaps this would have been clearer:

 

A- Bbm- D- A-E; The final A-E get two beats each, a turnaround.

 

Our goal is to find endless riffs and chord progressions that don't sound too obvious yet don't sound too dissonant.

 

This is what the ear craves.

[Poparad]

Originally posted by black cobra And regarding these progressions sounding "random" and "horrible," that's because you're temporarily baffled. Get used to the new sounds. They are not obvious, you may have to play it a few times to get it. Great music is like that.

 

 

Weren't you the one initially saying most music theory sounds bad?

 

My initial response was that maybe how to use it wasn't initially obvious, and you'd have to experiment a little to find a way to use it. Theory is like that.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra Am- Cm- G- F; Am- Cm- Bbsus- Bb All of these progressions although non-diatonic, are in the key of Am.

 

 

 

Neither of those chord progressions contain ANYTHING that would tonicize Am....its dominant triad and leading tone are both missing.

 

They each begin with Am-Cm...a symmetrical leap of a minor 3rd. Symmetrical harmony indicates modulation or atonality (both of which conquer the initial harmony) with TWO exceptions, both of which are called 'superstrong progression':

 

supertonic mediant

subdominant dominant.

 

Those progressions move stepwise (unlike the minor 3rd leap in yours).

 

You could also look at Am-Cm as really being Am-Am7b5...turning your tonic chord into a diminished one. That, too, destroys any tonicity Am once had.

 

So, to say they're 'in the key of A minor' is simply incorrect. The lack of a dominant and/or leading tone results in a failure at tonicizing Am...the other chords, borrowing clearly from the key of C major (in the first example), and Eb major (in the second) only make Am that much LESS of a tonal center.

[Poparad]

Originally posted by black cobra Why? Must a chord progression be diatonic to be in a key? No, this chord progression is clearly in the key of Am.

 

 

No, a progression doesn't have to be all diatonic, however, the more and more non-diatonic a progression becomes, the less it becomes based around a key.

 

The examples you have been giving, while legitimate musical ideas, aren't really in a key. Admittedly it's a gray area determining the line between tonality and atonality, but the examples are a little to divorced from the tonic-centric quality of keys to be really in a key.

 

That V-I you taked on at the end of that one helps to reinforce a key centered sound however. Although, why do you keep posting fragments of progressions, and then in rebuttle adding more claiming that the other responses weren't considering that part? Just go ahead and post the whole progression so we can discuss it in its entirety.

[black cobra]

Originally posted by Auggie Doggie Neither of those chord progressions contain ANYTHING that would tonicize Am....its dominant and leading tone are both missing.

 

 

Except, the ear remembers and wants to return to the starting point.

 

Poor Auggie, you need to be deprogrammed from your music theory classes.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra Except, the ear remembers and wants to return to the starting point. And a skilled composer knows how to get back to that starting point. He also knows what happens when he pulls too far away from that starting point and doesn't do anything to lead back to it, which is what happens when you start grabbing harmonies from very remote keys. Poor Auggie, you need to be deprogrammed from your music theory classes.

You're trying to assign a tonality to atonal music. That approach defeats itself immediately.

[black cobra]

Originally posted by Poparad . Although, why do you keep posting fragments of progressions, and then in rebuttle adding more claiming that the other responses weren't considering that part? Just go ahead and post the whole progression so we can discuss it in its entirety.

 

 

I didn't add the second part to that first progression as a rebuttle, I simply added another section. Sometimes two chord progressions in a hard rock song make a great and rousing intro.

[Poparad]

Originally posted by black cobra Sometimes two chord progressions in a hard rock song make a great and rousing intro.

 

 

Okay, but what does that have to do with this argument. (rhetorical question, btw).

 

I'm just saying, post the entire musical idea you want to discuss, so there isn't any confusion or discrepany between everyone's posts. I just want us to all be on the proverbial same page here.

[black cobra]

you're right. Ending the first chord progression on a D, made it seem it was in the key of D; I didn't want that. So I added a couple more chords to indicate the key of A.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra you're right. Ending the first chord progression on a D, made it seem it was in the key of D; I didn't want that. So I added a couple more chords to indicate the key of A.

That makes the Bbm that much MORE remote; it can be described as the mediant minor of flat mediant minor's five. You cannot get any more remote and harmonically unrelated to A major than Bbm!

But, it CAN be found in the theory books. While its structural name is long and ugly, and its structural function is as remote as can be, it's still in there.

[black cobra]

Originally posted by Auggie Doggie That makes the Bbm that much MORE remote; it can be described as the mediant minor of flat mediant minor's five. You cannot get any more remote and harmonically unrelated to A major than Bbm!

 

 

you are so wrong! Look at the voices.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra you are so wrong! Look at the voices.

Key of A major: A B C# D E F# G#

notes in Bbm: Bb Db F

Not a single note in common! The enharmonically respelled Db is NOT the same as C# due to their functions in their respective chords...and any time you have to respell a note, it indicates a distant and remote region.

Bbm is classified as a Class 5 region: distant.

VERY distant. There is nothing MORE distant.

[black cobra]

What are the notes in D? And how do the voices in Bbm resolve to D?

You are kinda slow, Auggie.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra What are the notes in D? And how do the voices in Bbm resolve to D? Thank you for reiterating my initial point: the Bbm is a FUNCTIONLESS CHROMATIC PASSING CHORD. Each voice moves chromatically (well, one of them quasi-chromatically). You are kinda slow, Auggie.

Far from. It took YOU this long to verify my first point.

[black cobra]

"the Bbm is a FUNCTIONLESS CHROMATIC PASSING CHORD."

Functionless? Why? Notes resolve by step, almost always chromatic. This is good voice leading using contrary motion.

[black cobra]

Also, Auggie, you were calling it a functionless passing chord because it interrupted a V-I cadence in the key of D, you thought.

How about some honesty from you?

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra Also, Auggie, you were calling it a functionless passing chord because it interrupted a V-I cadence in the key of D, you thought. How about some honesty from you?

 

 

Even if it was in the key of D, it would STILL be a functionless passing chord, as I had originally pointed out.

 

Further, you've essentially admitted that it 'resolves to D'...which means you ARE, in fact, temporarily tonicizing D.

 

In either the key of A or the key of D, that chord, in its context, is merely a passing chord...it has no function of its own. Hence the word 'functionless'.

 

How you can spin that into me somehow being dishonest, I do not know, nor do I really care. But I thank you for the unwarranted personal attack; I'll keep that in mind when evaluating the integrity of anything you say from this point on.

[black cobra]

Originally posted by Auggie Doggie How you can spin that into me somehow being dishonest, I do not know....

 

 

Dishonesty and denial from you. The F in Bbm resolves up to F#. the Bb resolves down to A. This resolves as well as an A7.

 

But because you have never seen anything like this before, you dishonestly label this as "functionless."

 

Prove your honesty and take this back, because it is unfairly rejects an important musical discovery.

[Auggie Doggie]

Originally posted by black cobra Dishonesty and denial from you. The F in Bbm resolves up to F#. the Bb resolves down to A. This resolves as well as an A7. But because you have never seen anything like this before, you dishonestly label this as "functionless." Prove your honesty and take this back, because it is unfairly rejects an important musical discovery.

 

 

You, sir, are completely full of {censored}.

 

You said you have 100+ texts. I suggest you get cracking and find out what functional harmony is, and how it pertains to tonal music.

 

You have made no 'discovery'...chromatic passing chords are nothing new, nor is voice-leading. ANY two chords can be connected via voiceleading; that doesn't give them any further structural or functional identity, nor does it assure resolution.

 

By the way, your 'Bbm' chord (as you called it) can, and should, be renamed. Surely you are aware of that, and were calling it 'Bbm' just to intentionally mislead us?

[black cobra]

"You said you have 100+ texts. I suggest you get cracking and find out what functional harmony is, and how it pertains to tonal music"

This is your profound weakness, unoriginal thinking. If it's not found in a book, you feel a musical idea is not valid, has no function.

And as far as "renaming" a Bbm chord, that's more music theory sophistry. It's a Bbm chord.

They laughed at Dr. Frankenstein, too. And look what he created.