- This topic has 12 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
WARNING: music theory ahead!
In one of his recent lessons (EP478), Brian ventures into the vast world of “chromatic harmony”.
We talk about “chromatic harmony” whenever chords foreign to the chord family are used in addition to or instead of “diatonic” chords.
It’s certainly not a new concept: chromatic harmony appeared in music as early as the mid-Renaissance period (around 1500).Because it is such a broad topic it is a little hard to categorize chromatic harmony. In general however, chromatic chords tend to have three main applications:
– as passing chords
– as extended dominants or dominant substitutes
– as modulation pivots
We have several examples of the first two usages in EP478.1. Chromatic mediant chords as passing chords
The B7 that appears for the first time in bar 3 (and in several other bars later in the song) is an example of a chromatic mediant chord used as a passing chord.What the heck is mediant chord?
The notes of the major scale have names; 1 = tonic, 2 = supertonic, 3 = mediant, 4 = subdominant, 5 = dominant, 6 = submediant, 7 = leading tone.
So the mediant is the note located a (major) third above the tonic and the submediant is the note located a (minor) third below the tonic. The (diatonic) chords built on these two notes (the iii and the vi chords) are called “mediant chords”.Consequently, a chromatic mediant is an altered chord built on the 3rd scale degree (the mediant) or the 6th scale degree (the submediant). If we alter the root and/or the third in these chords we can have:
– iii(7) becoming III(7) or bIII(7) or biii(7)
– vi(7) becoming VI(7) or bVI(7) or bvi(7)EP478 is in G Major, so the diatonic mediant chord is Bm. Its chromatic counterparts can therefore be B(7), Bb(7) and Bbm(7).
The diatonic submediant chord in G Major is Em; its chromatic counterparts are therefore E(7), Eb(7) and Ebm(7).At bar 3, we have B7 –> C. Let’s look at the chord tones:
– B7: B D# F# A
– C: C E G
Can you see how B goes to C, D# goes to E and F# goes to G? This progression has quite a bit more juice than the diatonic counterpart Bm -> C!There are hundreds of examples of songs that contain these chromatic mediant chords. For example “Hey Joe” (Hendrix version) is |C G |D A |E E |. The tonal center is E.
The chord family in E Major is E F#m G#m A B C#m D#°, so the chord progression is
|VI III |bVII V |I I |.
The C and G chords are chromatic mediant chords; D is a borrowed chord from E Mixolydian and E is the tonic chord.2. Chromatic chords as extended dominant chords
At bar 5 we have something interesting: an A7 going to G, i.e. II7 -> I. That’s not a chromatic mediant chord, it’s a chromatic supertonic chord.
As a chromatic approaching chord, that A7 doesn’t work very well IMO… Just play A7 followed by a stock G chord and decide for yourself if your ear is happy. Mine isn’t.
And yet what Brian plays seems to work just fine…
In fact, the voicing of the chords is very important here; we actually have A7 in 2nd inversion (A7/E); the bass E then first goes down to D before the G chord is played in the next bar. So in fact there is an implied resolution to a D or D7 chord (which is not played but suggested) and so the A7 chord functions as an extended dominant V7/V. We actually “hear” V7/V -> V -> I and not II7 -> I.
Just play A7 -> D7 -> G and compare with A7 -> G to decide which one you like best.At bar 15 we have another sequence of chromatic chords: E7 -> A7 -> D7 -> G.
The E7 is a chromatic submediant which clearly functions as an extended dominant. The A7 is a chromatic supertonic that also functions as an extended dominant (see above).
The whole sequence can be written |V7/II |V7/V V7|I |.3. Borrowed chords
Borrowing chords from parallel modes is another frequent way to add chromaticism.
At the end of the song, Brian plays G -> Cm -> G13; the diatonic counterpart would be G -> C -> G13.
You can view that Cm chord as a borrowed chord from the parallel G Minor mode, providing a plagal cadence I -> iv -> I (instead of I -> IV -> I).
You can also view it as a chromatic mediant chord functioning as a passing chord between I and I13.EP478 also contains a dim7 chord: C#°7 (a #IV°7). But I’ll leave that one for another post, as there’s so much to say about it and this post is already long enough!
In Summary:
– Chromatic mediant chords are very effective as passing chords in addition to being frequent extended dominant chords
– Chord inversions can dramatically change the way a piece of music soundsI hope you found this interesting.
-
J-M,
Thanks as always for your music theory reviews, especially as they relate to a recent lesson. One progression that I found interesting in Brian’s 478 composition was bars 10 through 13. He goes from the tonic G to the chromatic submediant B7 to C (the IV) and then A (?the chromatic supertonic). That seems to be an unfinished cadence, ie kind of leaves you hanging. Is there a name for that type of cadence from the IV. It’s almost like an Interrupted(Deceptive) Cadence ie. like the V moving to a vi, instead of back to the 1. It seems to serve the same function but doesn’t fit the strict definition.
Also, in the “Hey Joe” example, I always thought of that as a chord progression following the Circle of 5ths, which has been used in a few songs. Thanks for your input.
John -
Hi John,
Thanks for pointing that out – I completely forgot to mention it!
You are absolutely right: this passage leaves you hanging…From a theoretical perspective, the diatonic supertonic chord (the ii-chord) is a pre-dominant chord: in principle it resolves on the dominant (the V chord), or possibly on the I-chord in cadences such as I – ii – I. The fact that Brian plays a major II instead of a minor ii only amplifies the tendency of that chord to go to V, because of the #4. IOW, it amplifies its pre-dominant function. Even more so considering that he comes from C. Starting from B7 the bass goes B7 -> C -> A/C#… That C# is dying for a resolution on D!
But Brian steers it to a B instead (he plays G/B)… I suppose he’s willing to take full responsibility for this 😉Re. “Hey Joe”, you are absolutely right: the chord roots all go down by 4th along the circle of fifths (or fourths). Another interesting observation regarding these chords is that they are all major chords built on the notes of the C Major pentatonic scale… FWIW !
Rgds.,
JM -
-
Your theory posts are very interesting, J-M, keep them coming! I thought I was fairly reasonable on theory but I’m not in your league!
I would also be very interested in your view on a totally unrelated point that has puzzled me a bit over the years, if you have a moment. As you know, classical guitarists have always been very keen to transcribe music written for other instruments but obviously some music is not suitable. Lots of piano pieces will have a harmonic content that is too rich to be fitted on the guitar. Do you know what conventions apply to more successful transcription? Obviously it would be wrong to just jettison some of the composer’s harmony, but do you have a sense of where the boundaries are? Is it just a matter of good taste to sense whatever adjustments are justified? We know for example that Bach’s music for unaccompanied vioin and cello works well on the guitar and some added harmony is justified to allow for the instruments’ different strengths and characteristics. I believe Bach himself provided examples of this when he made arrangements of his own music for the lute.
Any thoughts you have on this subject would be welcome.
-
As a quick afterthought, Tarrega of course made masses of transcriptions but I believe he came in for some criticism in later years for attempting arrangements that were not really suitable. I am not really clear what the issues were here, but are you aware of any background to this?
-
Hi Brian,
I’m glad you find my stuff interesting.Your question also is very interesting, but it is a huge topic. I am certainly not a specialist at transcribing for the guitar, so just consider my answer below as a personal opinion.
Some people are unfortunately principally against any form of transcription, especially for the guitar which they consider a secondary folk instrument. But considering the relatively small genuine guitar repertoire (compared to the piano, the cello or the violin) transcriptions are a quasi necessity. The massive contribution of Tárrega is essential in that respect.
But yes, eventually he probably went too far: Beethoven, Wagner, Bizet, … are probably inappropriate for transcription for the guitar.
The question then is: why is that?I think a lot has to do with the intrinsic limitations of the guitar (compared to a piano, for example). When you run into these limitations you need to make compromises and the more compromises you make, the farther from the original piece you get, to the point where you begin to betray the spirit of the piece. But it’s a thin line.
One of the major constraints on the guitar is the maximum right hand span of about 6 frets. This increases somewhat as you move up the neck, and you can potentially take advantage of open strings, but this limitation is still very relevant when you try to transcribe piano sonata’s for example.
When barring chords, this span is obviously reduced even more (to about four frets), and barre chords above the 10th fret are not really feasible (except if the guitar has a cut-away). Not to mention the fact that the lower strings don’t sound very good high up the fingerboard.Contrapuntal and harmonic content are another potential limitation. Two-part harmonies are absolutely playable, but exclusive parallel or contrary motion quickly gets you into spanning problems. Three-part harmonies are doable as well, but bigger harmonies will quickly sound like a succession of block chords and won’t sound very good. They will also prove very difficult to play at high speed. So, very dense and rich harmonies will not work out well on a guitar, usually. If you are trying to transcribe a piece with a very rich harmonic content, you will have to make severe compromises.
I think that any transcription begins with a deep analysis of the piece to transcribe, both at the melodic and harmonic levels. What are the essential features of the melody? Are there counter-melodies and are they important? What are the important cadences? What are the most important chord tones? How does the bass progress? What makes this piece unique? What is its “spirit”, as I called it above? This is not just technical; it takes great musicianship too.
Next, you’ll have to evaluate to what extent all these characteristics can be implemented on the guitar and what compromises you have to make in the process.As I said above, it’s a thin line.
The Baroque repertoire for lute, cello, violin, etc. obviously transcribes easily for guitar because these instruments are all rather close to the guitar. Bach himself made transcriptions and they are usually considered best in class and probably show the way for successful transcription for guitar.
The Romantic repertoire (Chopin, …) also usually transcribes well. Purists will always look down on those transcriptions, but I believe that it is possible to capture the essence of the music of that period and render it on a guitar, even if it proves extremely difficult to play.
Sometimes transcriptions for the guitar will arguably even sound better than the original piece! This is notably the case of many pieces composed by Spanish composers (De Falla, Gránados, …) and that’s probably because they had the guitar in mind when composing on their instruments.…just my 2 cents (of a euro)!
-
-
-
Thanks very much, J-M, for taking the time and trouble to provide such a carefully considered and interesting reply to my query.
On your concluding point about transcriptions potentially sounding better, Segovia tells us that Granados actually said this, and it is difficult to imagine Albeniz feeling much different!
Just a quick final comment about the lingering prejudice about the status of the guitar which you mention. Despite its limitations (how many instruments work as well musically as a solo instrument?) it seems to me that if the guitar was good enough for the many prominent composers who wrote for Julian Bream (in particular) it should be good enough for anyone. (Britten, Walton, Tippett, Malcolm Arnold, Lennox Berkeley, Henze etc. etc.). Just my 0.2 cents’ worth!
-
Just a quick final comment about the lingering prejudice about the status of the guitar which you mention. Despite its limitations (how many instruments work as well musically as a solo instrument?) it seems to me that if the guitar was good enough for the many prominent composers who wrote for Julian Bream (in particular) it should be good enough for anyone. (Britten, Walton, Tippett, Malcolm Arnold, Lennox Berkeley, Henze etc. etc.). Just my 0.2 cents’ worth!
Absolutely!
But they are prominent contemporary composers. For some, that doesn’t count, unfortunately.
And of course the guitar never had any Bach, nor Mozart, nor Beethoven, nor Chopin, nor… You get my point. Even Sor who is probably one of the most prolific composers for the guitar ever, came after the “big names” and is comparatively insignificant.As for Julian Bream, I wonder how many people ever heard of him…
If you take the trouble to look them up, you will find hundreds of “The N best guitarists ever” lists on YouTube and even in guitar magazines. But sadly you’ll be hard pressed to find any classical guitarist in those lists. -
I take your point entirely about the position of the guitar in earlier centuries, and as you say in the world of music as a whole Sor (let alone lesser guitar figures) was a minor composer. I am however horrified by your revelation that there are people whose musical tastes are so “elevated” that they would deny the brilliance and significance of Britten in particular. The names I mentioned
produced some terrific music, not just for guitar, and are hardly bang crash wallop avant garde are they? What about Stravinsky? Would they still say he was beyond the pale? I must have lived a sheltered life!!-
This now sounds more of a rant than I intended, but the reactionary attitudes J-M refers to are a bit ridiculous.
-
-
-
Thanks Jean-Michel G for your theory contributions to the forum. The synopsis of ep478 and the format in which you laid down the break-down was eye-opening. An anthropologist of the fretboard neighbourhood on how a 1.42 sec tab can open up another world of explanation. This could become a lesson feature on the forum. It also invites other contributors of interest to the mix. Appreciated your recent tweaking pdf worksheet of three examples on how a base lick can be modified to repetition, octave displacement and articulation has given an understanding and label to the action in a bite size package. Is there a name for when the lick is done in reverse.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
