02-07-2013, 08:06 PM
|
#21 | |
|
UG's Mr Chord Man
Join Date: Feb 2008
|
Quote:
It's a deceptive cadence again. Strictly speaking the following C should be in 1st inversion. If you listen to that song very carefully, the string section gives the impression of triad over bass. G/A (Its like I just stepped outside) - A (when everything was going right) Code:
__________________
Sweet |
|
|
|
|
02-08-2013, 02:29 AM
|
#22 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
|
Quote:
It looks to me like it's just a variation of a minor ii(half diminished) V7 i. Really common, check out Autumn Leaves for an example. |
|
|
|
|
|
02-08-2013, 02:32 AM
|
#23 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
|
ii-V is the most common shit in the universe, besides water and aids.
When you see a ii-V just analyze it as V.
__________________
Check out my band Socrates and the Lava Gods
|
|
|
|
|
02-08-2013, 11:01 AM
|
#24 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2013
|
Quote:
yep. That is a classic tonicizattion of IV (you see it all the way back in Bach's music). Once you've tonicized a harmony, you can base a short progression off it, then pull another tonicization to get to V. If you want to get real prim and proper, label your secondary dominants as V7/? - pronounced "Five-Seven of [whatever]". Last edited by cdgraves : 02-08-2013 at 11:14 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
02-08-2013, 11:08 AM
|
#25 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2013
|
Quote:
I'd do that for a I6/5->V (double sus on the V), but not a ii V. ii and IV are pre-dominants that imply their own harmony. Think voice leading. Analyzing both as V,the ii would be, then, a V6/5 with the bass moving up by a third to the root of V. Very unorthodox. ii prepares a cadence, but I wouldn't analyze it as part of it. That all said, if you're just doing a diatonic ii-V-I you can label the whole progression I until it moves to tonicize another harmony (as in the TS's I-V7/IV-IV example). Last edited by cdgraves : 02-08-2013 at 11:13 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
02-08-2013, 02:44 PM
|
#26 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
|
Bro, we aren't talking CPP voice leading here. We're talking about harmonic motion in music post 1850. Get with the times.
[ii-V] as a grouping can just be reduced to [V] because it's just a distinctive dominant movement the ii is just some extra root motion. You see this in Jazz EVERYWHERE. IF he sees a [ii-V]/vi in a key, there's no point in him trying to separately analyse where this ii chord is pulled from. Like in the example, F#m in the key of G major. is it...vii? No, that misses the point. It's attached to the V that follows, it's really just a ii-V/vi, or just call it V/vi, because that's what the entire harmonic movement implies functionally.
__________________
Check out my band Socrates and the Lava Gods
Last edited by chronowarp : 02-08-2013 at 02:50 PM. |
|
|
|
 |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Rate This Thread | |
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:09 AM.