Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
It is extremely common
Children , Grace - not over yet comes to mind.
that whole V I hegemony is just theory bs. You don't need any of those chords to outline a key, Modes and keys are not so different except keys refer to modes used in a way that is more in line with CPE. Again one more reason why studying theory can actually made you think inside the box and make you less creative. Always approach theory as 1 way of looking at things. IT isn't a theory. it is just one particular set of conventions that worked for classical era music. A good foundation but really really limited.
You could see the progression in a minor mode
VI VI i
VI iv i
because you don't get a V what so ever you could call it an aolian mode but since it really does follow tonal tradition, well i think it just makes it more complicated.
Personally, i like to use as few systems of representation as possible and you can represent the same progression as
IV V vi
IV ii vi
in that instance you have a V , just not the normal V to I resolution which isn't needed. This is why i would not call it a mode because it has a textbook tonal outline.
Ahhh I see, thanks! this is exactly why I went with a jazz book, the guy who wrote explicitely said that everything he said are guidelines not rules ive only read about 50 pages out of 400 but it has allready expanded my mind quite a bit
Feb-22-2012 21:35
mathieu
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Oct 2010
Location: Montreal, Canada
quote:
Originally posted by Kysora
Well first of all I dunno how popular of a chord progression that is, I just played it on some virtual piano thing since I'm at work and it sounds a little odd.
The progression sounds more major than minor, considering how it starts. In the relative major C the progression would go IV-V-vi-IV-ii-vi. The IV-V-vi is pretty common in major keys which is probably why I'm thinking this way, but typically the progression would also include a tonic chord. between not having C major anywhere in the progression and ending it on ii-vi, it just sounds awkward to me as is.
Just my two cents, I'm sure it's usable, but I can think of a few chords you can change to make it sound better. I'll leave it up to you unless you really want suggestions.
the F-G-A part is extremely over used there is also a variation that resolves to C which is: F-G-A-C
you can also have F-D-A-C like in this track:
the track is in Gmin tho so its Emaj-C#min-G#min-Bmin always the same intervals, cant tell me youve rarely heard a progression like this in trance
Feb-22-2012 21:53
Kysora
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Hampshire, IL
quote:
Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
well i'm not going to assume i know how you hear music. But i will assume you are just like everyone else and assume you hear it this way. lol
not really sure what that means, but alright. I do know both segments ended on the submediant giving it a minor tonality overall and if by "evaded cadence" you meant the track going from V-vi instead of V-I, that wasn't really hard to miss
actually I'm not really even sure what we're talking about any more. I know it's most likely minor because of the emphasis on the vi chords, just saying it sounded major when I played it, and the analysis seems better that way too. that's all.
Feb-22-2012 22:05
Looney4Clooney
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Apr 2010
Location:
the term minor and major don't really mean anything other than a way to organize things in your head. YOu can represent any minor progression with major and vice versa most of the times although major does seem to encapsulate the minor mode in terms of tonal traditions and what not which is why i do it that way. I would not say it is common practice but common practice actually think music theory is like real. In that like chords actually want to go places. So ya, the way i describe it is what i like and to be honest makes much more sense with less which when creating systems of representation is always better in my opinion.
agreed, and yeah like I was saying, using major was just a way to make sense of it in my head. I know there's nothing that's strictly one or the other.
sounds like we're at least close to the same page then.
Feb-22-2012 22:31
atxbigballer1
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Dec 2006
Location: Austin,Texas
Thanks for the help once more guys about some music theory.
When I get this melody down, I will post a .midi of it.
___________________
Trance Addict 4 LIFE!
quote:
Dr.DRE
"It's not the equipment....it's the muthaf@#%r running it"
quote:
Originally posted by Pagan-za
Fighting online is like winning the special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
Feb-23-2012 05:13
Kysora
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Hampshire, IL
quote:
Originally posted by mathieu
the F-G-A part is extremely over used there is also a variation that resolves to C which is: F-G-A-C
yeah I know that's a common progression and it could resolve to the tonic, I was talking more about the ii-vi resolution at the end. just seemed like an odd way to end it.