- This topic has 5 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
I have some egghead theory questions about the chords in EP 602.
Brian goes from an A to a C#7 to D in the first round of the progression and from A to B7 to Dm in the second round.
Neither the C#7 or B7 are within the key and neither is a secondary dominant leading to the D or Dm. Both have an uplifting kind of sound and, to be honest, I can barely hear the difference.
I know the III7 is common in gospel, not sure about the II7, but I’m wondering if there’s some theory behind their use here.
Interestingly, when you write out the notes of the chords, for the C#7 to the D and the B7 to the Dm, two of the notes in the leading chord are within 1 fret of the next. Is that a kind of resolution and the reason why C#7 was chosen the first time and B7 the second? (although that’s also true for the C#7 to the Dm). Are the two different dominant chords chosen just for variation then?
Why am I never satisfied with “because it sounds good”?😒John
-
-
-
Hi John,
You can view C#7 -> D as a deceptive resolution where V7/vi resolves to IV (D) instead of vi (F#m). This is rather common; you’ll find it, for example, in Otis Redding’s “Dock Of The Bay” or Lennon’s “Imagine”. You’ll also find it almost everywhere in the classical and romantic repertoire.
One way of looking at it is to start from the diatonic progression C#m -> D (iii7 IV), which is not unusual, and then alter the iii7 chord and turn it into III7, which is in fact V7/vi.
Remember that the iii and vi chords don’t have any predefined function in tonal harmony — their function, if any, depends on the context. Therefore, they are prone to chromatic alterations.The B7 is a bit more tricky.
It is borrowed from the Lydian mode, but it is a pure Neighbouring chord between I and iv; it doesn’t have any functional purpose, other than prolonging the tonic chord. In the functional analysis below it is notated “N”.
Pay attention to the voice leading of the upper parts of B7 and Dm and notice how they gracefully progress: the soprano stays on A, the alto goes F# F E and the tenor goes D# D C#. The iv I ending is of course a minor plagal cadence.
I don’t know how Brian actually voiced the chords in the backing track, but notice that you could replace the C#7 chord by a C#7/B (third inversion); you would then have the exact same progression in the bass for the two parts, i.e. A B D A.
Hope this helps.
-
J-M,
“Deceptive resolution in music theory refers to:
A dominant chord not resolving to its tonic, creating surprise and tension.
Occurs when a G7 chord (fifth degree) does not resolve to C (tonic).
Similar to a deceptive cadence (V7–vi or VI).”I remember you discussing that “cadences” end musical phrases. A deceptive resolution,then, would occur within a phrase.
So what you’re saying is “because it sounds good”😉.
Just kidding. Actually, I’m not kidding. I guess music theory analyzes and describes and labels musical sounds (pleasant or unpleasant) so that they can be recreated and communicated as needed by composers. I’m starting to understand how AI can generate music.I’ll keep the concept of “deceptive resolution” in mind but the main takeaway for me was the concept:
“Remember that the iii and vi chords don’t have any predefined function in tonal harmony — their function, if any, depends on the context. Therefore, they are prone to chromatic alterations.”Thanks, as always, for your explanations.
John
-
A cadence involving a dominant 7th chord is deceptive when the tritone doesn’t resolve as expected; simply put: V7 -> “anything but the tonic chord”.
This concept applies equally to secondary dominants. In EP602, C#7 strongly suggests a resolution to F# or F#m, because such is the nature of a dominant 7th chord with its built-in tritone (in this case, the interval E# – B). The fact that the chord does not resolve to F#m but to D instead makes it deceptive.But “anything but the tonic chord” still needs to have some sort of musical consistency — it has to sound good! In our case, the half step root movement C# -> D, and the voice leading of the other voices, tie the two chords in a very musical way. The voice leading aspect is (in my opinion) the real reason why “it sounds good”.
“I guess music theory analyzes and describes and labels musical sounds (pleasant or unpleasant) so that they can be recreated and communicated as needed by composers. I’m starting to understand how AI can generate music.”
That’s probably a fair statement, yes.
In fact, most so-called “rules” in harmony stem directly from melodic voice leading considerations. This is even more true for chromatic harmony where lots of chords don’t have a “function”. Once you realize this, the “rules” become a lot less arbitrary.I think you are advanced enough to dip your toes into species counterpoint and how it eventually (but naturally) leads to harmony…
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
