Guitar.com - A place for guitarists to call home

Forums > Music Theory > Why does this work?

Jump:

Forums > Music Theory > Why does this work?

Code of Conduct Search

Original message:472 days 32 minutes ago

+ 3

Member: shanejohnson2002

1851
WebCred

I heard a song the other day that had this progression at the end:

IV - iv - I

I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out how this works, and why it sounds good. Very beatles-esque.

In C, that would be F, Fm, and C so...

F-A-C
F-Ab-C
C-E-G

I can see the chromatic walk down to the 5th of the root chord, and the IV contains the root note, I suppose the F gives it a little suspension. But is there any other "better" reason why this works? It's very very pleasing when a good melody is put over it.

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

Reply:471 days 7 hours ago
Member: sallan

+ 4

836
WebCred

Part of the reason it works is because the fmi chord contains the fifth and seventh of the fully diminished seventh (Bo7) and that resolution youre hearing Ab-G (b6-5) and F-E (4-3) is half of the dimminished tendency. Futher more the C in the melody, or in the bass for that matter, would act as an anticipation...a useful device and very beatle-esque.

Aside from analysis what it is, is simply modal borrowing from the parallel minor. Essentially you can borrow chords from the parallel minor and mix and match them as you wish. This sort of chord mutation from major to minor and so forth is very prominant in the music of Chopin. Check out Prelude (Op. 28, No. 4) by Chopin for a piece that explores this device to the inth degree...and is very doable as a solo guitar piece.

-sallan

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

I hate your music and/or band

Reply:471 days 6 hours 10 minutes ago
Member: shanejohnson2002

+ 2

1851
WebCred

Thanks! I know enough theory to get by but not a guru by any means. It's good to know that gurus do exist around here ;)

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

Reply:470 days 15 hours 27 minutes ago
Member: JonR

+ 4

33
WebCred

Yes, minor iv chords are very common, especially following the major IV, before going back to I. As you say, the Beatles used them quite a lot, but it's pretty common in jazz standards too.
Quite often (in jazz), you get a bVII following the minor iv:
|Cmaj7 / / / |Fmaj7 / / / |Fm7 / Bb7 / |Cmaj7 / / / |
This is a slightly different sound, because of the b7 on the Fm. A normal minor iv chord would have a maj7 (if any), or more commonly a 6th.
Compare the above with this:
|Cmaj7 / / / |Fmaj7 / / / |Fm6 / / / |Cmaj7 / / / |
Of course, Fm6 and Bb7 are very close in sound, and would take the same scale (F melodic minor). But Fm7 suggests something a little different.

The way the Beatles (and a few other rock bands) use minor iv chords is as m6s, not jazz m7s. (This is because the m6 chord - with an implied maj7 - is closest to the major key tonality. Only the b3 of the chord is chromatic, and although the implied p4 in the scale is the b7 of the key.)
Radiohead are quite fond of minor ivs too. You can hear very prominent ones on "My Iron Lung" and "No Surprises", at least.

Reply:470 days 13 hours 7 minutes ago
Member: sallan

+ 3

836
WebCred

I really like the sound of the Fmi6 with the sixth in the bass in this progression Cmaj7| Fmaj7| Fmi/D| C

and I also like the b7 there as well (Bb7) Try it after the C. Cmaj7| Fmaj7| Fmi/D| C| Bb7 .... a little Debussy esque (try a Bb wholetone over that Bb7 (Bb-C-E-F-Gb-Ab-Bb). Also you have a lot of choices for modulation at that point...go into Eb, or go back into C. Changing a few notes around can generate a lot of ideas, like adding a sixth to the Fmi. Good progression Shane!

-sallan

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

I hate your music and/or band

Reply:470 days 4 hours 13 minutes ago
Member: Zombre

+ 1

901
WebCred

So would you consider that as a good definition of "modal interchange" then? Or would you define it as a modulation, as it could go in a lot of different directions after the Bb7.... That quick min iv chord is simply just a borrowed chord from Cmin, (C Aeolian/nat min)? I guess that's why the Bb7 works so well on the end there, as it's the v in the relative major key... Very cool and some great explanations... Thanks, dudes. I learned a bunch, here!

+1 to all... lol

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

Nyah Nyah na naa Naaaaaaa!!!!

Reply:469 days 22 hours 6 minutes ago
Member: sallan

+ 2

836
WebCred

Good to see you Scott,

Yes, I would definitely say it's a good 'example' of modal interchange (AKA modal borrowing...) the modulation would only apply if it actually tonicized a new key. For example, if we did say go C|FMaj7|Fmi6| C | Bb7|EbMaj Landing on the Ebmaj and establishing a new key center would complete the modulation. In classical music you might stay in the new key for a while, in jazz of course it's possible to modulate through several keys and never call one 'home' for too long persay.

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

I hate your music and/or band

Reply:469 days 4 hours 4 minutes ago
Member: Zombre

901
WebCred

Cool. It's AWESOME to see you theory gurus here, been awhile.

So unless it actually completes a type of cadence it's still just an interchange? By that i guess I mean that it has to resolve somewhere o be considered a modulation? ("Tonicise... I like that...lol)

A question, though... If you were playing that progression, and you wanted to play everything BUT the root note and the 5th, but get the 3rds and 7ths with the cool tensions how would you approach that? Would it be best to just stack up all of the tensions, remove root and 5th, and then just decide what triads/etc are made up of the remaining notes and then define 'em as slashchords?

I guess I'm curious as to what method you'd apply for substitution, always looking to clarify and broaden...

Also, if one were to "passing diminished-ify" this sucker, which ones would you employ? I've monkeyed with a half-step above each chord, below each, etc. with varying results. if y'all had time to break it down, and explain what relationship each diminished chord had to eachchord it was leading to or awy from, that would be cool...
'

(I'll give ya webcred....hehehehehehehehehe)

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

Nyah Nyah na naa Naaaaaaa!!!!

Reply:467 days 6 hours 15 minutes ago
Member: zenguitar

+ 1

6
WebCred

in answer to the original question: it doesn't sound good to us for a scientific reason, at least I don't think we should look at music like that. If it sounds good to you, then you don't need a reason. Music theory is just recognizing, describing and cataloging patterns in existing composed and recorded music. It is not a set of rules, or reasons for why we like, or should like music.

to zombre "So unless it actually completes a type of cadence it's still just an interchange? By that i guess I mean that it has to resolve somewhere o be considered a modulation?"

well when you study the theory of modulation you are generally given specific types of modulation to look out for such as chromatic, sudden, common chord, phrase (some texts use slightly different terminology, then my college text). There may be more, but I forget :) not important really anyways :) So what determines whether something is a modulation is if they meet the criteria of those different types of modulation. And as sallan says, in general the new key will often clarified by something like a cadence which tonicizes the I chord of that key--- though this is not always the case. You can have a modulation or even an entire composition without ever seeing the tonic chord. You have to keep in mind theory is not a strict set of rules, it is just a general reference of patterns commonly used ---that in no way excludes you using a less common pattern, or makes it less "real music".

in my experience, especially in jazz, you generally drop the root and 5th, if you don't need those notes because the bass is for the most part taking care of those notes. With no root and fifth present in the bass, just 3rds and 7ths can be harmonically ambigous (except for the dominant 7 tritone created by the 3rd and 7th). So having the root and fifth is a good thing---they give a reference point for the 3rd and 7th. You don't typically see a chord chart / lead sheet referring specifically to playing a chord without the root and fifth, or as a slash chord ---- it is just something you do based on the situation as described in the first part of this paragraph. And to my knowledge, this is mainly something jazz musicians do. Rockers are the exact opposite, all they play is the root and fifth. When I play a solo jazz guitar piece though, I like to play those roots and fifths too--- some brief passing chords or accents can work fine with just 3rd and 7th, but if I were to play an entire solo piece with nothing but 3rds and 7ths it would sound wierd I think....I haven't actually tried it....don't want to either :)

*edit* I just wanted to add one afterthought --- sometimes the same thing can be analyzed more than one way --- for example, one guy with a DMA will analyze something as a modulation, and another DMA will not....it can sometimes be a matter of opinion and interpretation. Both could be "right" in their analysis.

My music recommendations:

My gear recommendations:

Jump: