It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
That's exactly what it is.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Ringleader of the Cambridge cartel, pedal champ and king of the dirt boxes (down to 21)
*An Official Foo-Approved guitarist since Sept 2023.
The song has modulated to a C briefly in the chorus section.
The D-A-D-A is from Bminor /Dmajor which moves down by 2 semi-tones. So the intervals are the same.
Ringleader of the Cambridge cartel, pedal champ and king of the dirt boxes (down to 21)
@sundial The whole song is in B Minor not D Major, so you're right; the chorus first modulates temporarily to D major - the relative major as you say - and then progresses to C major (though this is actually G major - I'll explain later), and then to A, then weaves back to D; then ultimately back to Bm. These are indeed modulations, because, as you rightly say, the C natural is not in the key of D major (it would have to be C# to be in the same key as D major). As it's a modulation, the C chord isn't trying to fit into the D/A; we've modulated to a different key. On the other hand, for a modulation genuinely to qualify as such, the piece really has to 'establish' itself in the new key. It's probably best to think of the Bm to D switch as a real modulation, and the D to the C as a 'mini-modulation'. Because if you take a step back, seeing as the chorus starts and ends on D, you could think of it as being entirely in D, with some deviations. It's a bit like if you're walking northwards from London to Cambridge on the M11 and halfway up you decide to take a small deviation and head left, westwards towards Oxford for 2 minutes, then you beat your way back onto the M11 and carry on. Now, you couldn't really say you changed the whole thing and were suddenly on a walk to Oxford. You just deviated for a bit. That's like the C/G part. Oxford is a bit like Cambridge, but slightly lower in quality. So the C/G part resembles the D/A part, but as a mere echo or shadow of the strident D/A, and it is soon forgotten as the listener is brought firmly back the the true intent - that final D. Before ultimately resting again finally on the REAL destination, that forsaken, desolate Bm, or Hull.
Interestingly, although the C/G C/G part is a shadow of the D/A D/A part, and it's convenient to say it's in C at that point, it's not actually quite that simple. Now, the D/A D/A part is of course in D. We know that - the chorus starts and ends on D, the solo starts with that awesome bell-like top F#, which is the 3rd note of D, emphasising the fact we've moved into a Major key. In no way is that D/A part in A major, with that first note being the 6th, that would just make no musical sense. And anyhow, the 2nd note of the solo is G, which is in key of D, but not in the key of A.
However the C/G C/G part is not actually in C. It's in G. You can tell this by listening to the ebb and flow of the music - the 'weighting' of the music. During the D/A part, the D is the tonic (the I), and the A is the dominant (the V). The dominant A (V) is the unstable chord and it 'resolves' to the stable tonic D (I). Dominant chords always tend to lead up to the tonic, which is why V-I is such an effective resolution. The 3rd note in the dominant chord (in this case the C# of the A major), is the 7th note of the D chord, so the A leads up to it. In fact if you sing A, B, C# .... D! landing on the D at the point of resolution, you can see how settled it is. It's called the 'perfect cadence'. BUT another effective resolution is the IV-I resolution. It's called the 'plagal cadence'. It moves from the Sub-dominant, down to the tonic. This is what's happening in the C/G part. The C is the IV, and the G is the I (temporarily, for that modulation). Unlike in the D/A section where the first of the 2 chords is the leader; in the C/G section, it's the second of the two chords. It's a bit like this:
D/A: Statement, question?
D/A: Statement, question?
C/G: Question, statement,
C/G: Question, statement.
If you listen again, you will see that in the C/G part, the more forceful chord of the two is the G. And of course, in the cases where the chorus part is repeated - like when he sings "when I was a boy", we move from the C/G part, which is in G, back to the D/A part, which is in D again, and that cadence is another plagal cadence, because the G is the (IV) of D (I). At other times, the C/G part doesn't return to the D/A, but lands on an A chord, on its wending way back to the chorus's ending on D.
So, the modulations in summary are:
Verses:
in B minor: Bm A G (passing note F#m) Em ... Bm (I - VII - VI - (passing note F#m) - IV ... I)
Chorus:
The part in D ... A (I ... V)
The part in G: C ... G (IV ... I)
The A chord: A ... then a short passing chord - G first inversion, so with B at the bottom (I ...VII)
Another C/G modulation, again in G but starting on a C: C ... G (IV ...I)
Final chord of the chorus, in D (I)
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
@viz have a well earned wisdom
Although I must say the comparrison between Cambridge and Oxford threw me a bit. I got banned from Oxford for raising the tone of the place...........
Ringleader of the Cambridge cartel, pedal champ and king of the dirt boxes (down to 21)
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
One thing I now understand is that there can be chord formulas for minor keys as well as major keys. I always thought that Bm was the VI of the D key. But I take it that you see Bm as the I? If so, how do you formulate a chord formula around a minor key, if you don't treat it as the VI, or aeolian of the relative major?
@SunDial Yep, you can have a chord formula for minor key's as well as major keys.
Using D major you have D Em F#m G A Bm C#diminished D
Starting from Bm you have Bm C#Dim D Em F#m G A Bm, so the same chords, just a different starting/finishing place.
Ringleader of the Cambridge cartel, pedal champ and king of the dirt boxes (down to 21)
Major pieces and minor pieces are both as valid as each other, and if you take 2 pieces, one in E Major and another in E minor, it makes as little sense to say the one in E minor is somehow actually in its relative key G Major, as it would be to say the that one in E major is actually in its relative minor, C# minor.
For a piece in E major the convention is to call the E chord the I chord, or the i chord in the case of a piece in E minor. But most people stick with capitals, because it's taken as read that all agree what the key signature of the piece is and whether it's major or minor to start with because it's obvious by the sharps or flats in the key signature. It runs contrary to all music theory to call the E in the E minor piece the VI.
Bm IS the VI chord of D major, but only if the piece is in D major. And D major is the III chord of Bm, but only if the piece is in Bm.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
And by the way, you're not restricted to the Aeolian or the Ionian scales. The I chord could be the Dorian scale, as in the case of Greensleeves (which is often described as the II of the Ionian, but can also be a root scale in its own right). Or it could be the Mixolydian scale as in the case of Led Zep's Rock and Roll (which is often described as the V of Ionian, but can also be a root scale in its own right). Or it could be the Acoustic scale, which is also the IV mode of the melodic minor scale but can also be a root scale in its own right, such as in the case of the Simpsons.
In the case of Greensleeves, the backing chords are I, VII, I, V Hindu scale (like the Aeolian, but with a sharp 3rd, so thus breaking away from the strict notes in the scale, which is why it sounds so haunting) / I, VII, I, V Hindu, I.
which, if played in G minor which is the original key, is:
G Dorian, F Ionian, G Dorian, D Hindu /
G Dorian, F Ionian, G Dorian, D Hindu, G Dorian.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
When you say the root in its own right, do you mean new chord formulations can be made which differ from the traditional Greek Modes?
For example: Mixolydian is considered the V, but I take it when you say that you can take the root in its own right to mean that now you can make the Mixolydian the I.
But does this change the sound and chord formulations making the Mixolydian which is traditionally a V into a I?
Well the new chord formations don't differ from the greek modes, but yes to everything else. Because if you play a song rooted in any of the 7 scales in the diatonic family, the triad chords of those 7 notes will all be based on the 7 diatonic modal scales.
So if you want to play Norwegian Wood by the Beatles, which is in E Mixolydian (E, F#, G#, A, B, C#, D, E - notice the D natural, not the D# which would have been in E Ionian), the chord formations would be:
E major: E, G#, B
F# minor: F#, A, C#
G# diminished: G#, B, D
A major: A, C#, E
B minor: B, D, F#
C# minor: C#, E, G#
D major: D, F#, A
The above chords are the triads taken from the correct diatonic modal scale of each starting note. Mixolydian is a scale, and so the first triad, in E, is taken from the Mixolydian scale. The next triad, F# minor, is taken from the next mode, the Aeolian scale. After Aeolian comes Locrian, so the G# triad is taken from the Locrian scale and is therefore G# diminished. Then Ionian, Dorian, Phrygian and Lydian. Same modes, same sequence, just different starting point. It works because the notes in that E Mixolydian scale are different from the notes in E Ionian - they have a flattened 7th. So when you come to the 3rd triad, the G# triad, the flattened note is now the 5th, so it's G# DIMINISHED, taken from the Locrian scale, not G# minor taken from Phrygian, as it would have been were Norwegian Wood to have been writtem in E Ionian. If you have a piano you can easily cycle through these triads by starting on G Mixolydian, because G Mixolydian (being the 5th mode of C Ionian) has no sharps or flats, so all the starting notes, and triads, will be white notes.
There are however 65 scale families other than the Diatonic family of 7 Greek modes, for example the Persian scale family, or the Hungarian, or the Hungarian minor, or the Enigmatic, or the Harmonic minor, or the Harmonic major, or the Melodic minor, or or or. Each has 7 modes, ie 7 unique scales (so in the universe there are 462 available unique heptatonic scales - 11 factorial divided by 6 factorial x 5 factorial). And you can take any of the scales, write a piece in it, and the triads will all be 1,3,5 chords taken from that scale's modal family.
For example take the 4th mode of the Persian major scale, in A. Its notes are: A Bb C D# E F G# A. Imagine writing a song with that scale as the root of the song. So its triads would be:
A minor: A C E
Bb: Bb D# F (no idea what to call that - Bb aug 3rd?)
C maj augmented 5th: C E G#
D#: D# F A (no idea what to call that - D# dim 3rd dim 5th?)
E major diminished 5th: E G# Bb
F major: F A C
G#: G# Bb D# (no idea what to call that - G# dim 3rd?)
Now that's broken clearly away from the greek scales. But it's a perfectly reasonable scale to use - check it:
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Ok so when you start to break away from the greek modes, that is where things start to get interesting. So that means that you are no longer following the traditional chord formulas of: I ii iii IV V vi vii(diminished) but can now create completely new chord formulations depending on the modes and scales you are using.
Now out of curiosity, is it possible to modulate from the greek modes into these more exotic scales and still have them sound harmonious? And also, if there are so many different scales, each with their 7 modes and 7 different chord formulations, why do you think most songs follow the greek modes? I am going to try experimenting with these different scales and attempt to see the different chord formulations for each one.
Sorry Branshen for the biggest thread hijack in history!
@sundial - Well sort of, but there's no pretending. It's very easy to be swayed by the stranglehold that Ionian and Aeolian have on western music. You ask why most songs follow the greek modes - well it's only really western music that does. They're entrenched in our musical system. Eastern music doesn't, in fact some eastern music doesn't even have 12 semitones. But we have songs like Doe a Deer, that couldn't be more reinforcing of Ionian as THE root of all music if it tried; the first music we hear in childhood is Ionian (Humpty Dumpty, Polly put the kettle on, Happy Birthday, Frere Jacques, Hickory Dickory Dock, Little Bo Peep; you name it, it's in Ionian). We name Ionian as the "first mode" of the Diatonic scale family with every other scale referenced back to it; we even implicitly mean Ionian and Aeolian when we say major and minor, and when we say the relative minor, we mean the Aeolian VI to the Ionian I, even though Dorian is also the relative minor of Lydian, and Phrygian is the relative minor of Mixolydian.
But referring to Ionian as the I is only an arbitrary convention, probably driven because it is such a pleasing scale, with its happy 3rd and 6th, its perfect 4th and 5th and its natual leading note 7th. (Actually when the ecclesiastical modes were selected for Gregorian Chant, they didn't even include Ionian or Aeolian. They had the 4 modes Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian and Mixolydian, and the 4 hypomodes (though hypolydian is quite close to Ionian hahaha! but that's for another time); Ionian and Aeolian came later.)
The convention of Ionian as being the I is no less a convention than North being up and South being down, or Greenwich being the start and end of the timezone system. We in England think of Paris as being ahead by 1 hour and New York being behind by 5 hours. But in Paris, they see us as 1 hour behind and New York as 6 hours behind. They don't somehow pretend they are at 0 whilst knowing they are actually at -1. For them, they are actually at 0. And Australians don't think they live upside down. It's all relative to your viewpoint. And it's the same with Mixolydian in Norwegian Wood. It isn't pretending to be I; it actually is I, because the song is written in Mixolydian.
I think it's easiest to think of Dorian in these cases because there are some really classic songs written in it. Greensleeves is one; What shall we do with a drunken sailor is another. In Drunken Sailor, Dorian is the I (or i); the next chord is the Ionian (the VII). Dorian isn't the II.
Lots of songs modulate from one scale family to another. A good example is Gates of Babylon by Rainbow. It's written in the Freygish scale of E (which also happens to be the 5th mode of the A harmonic minor scale, and indeed the very last chord actually settles on that A minor, so maybe it's actually in A harmonic minor all the way through! Who knows. Anyway, the majority of it is in E Freygish); but then at 2:47 it suddenly hops right out of the Harmonic Minor family and into A Aeolian which is obviously in the Diatonic family. It makes for a really stark strong chorus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHCdCbTxypU
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
necessarily wired for scales which have too many flats (such as the Super Locrian) because there is no resolve which the diatonic
scales obviously contain.
But this boggles my mind, because if there are as many modal combinations as you say " (so in the universe there are 462 available unique heptatonic scales - 11 factorial divided by 6 factorial x 5 factorial)" it would appear to me that the amount of chord combinations are nearly infinite.
With that being so, notice how the ear tends to not make a melody of scales that diverge too much from the greek modes. A lot of the exotic scales sound atonal and unpleasing to my ear. And many start to just sound chromatic and unresolving. This seems very strange to me given how many unlimited chord formulas and combinations there are. It's as if the human ear can only appreciate a very narrow band. Maybe if we were space aliens or a different species, we could appreciate all these different combinations more naturally.