#1
Sorry I am not the greatest at music theory but I believe the song is in E minor.

The progression goes like this

Em GMaj Fmaj

now If I am not mistaken the if It is in the key of E minor the F should be half diminished?

so would this be and accidental? can anyone explain?
I'm Bored.


tumblr
<- follow me
#3
Quote by chronowarp
Add up the notes from the chords. No #'s or flats. E phrygian.

No,
One does not simply find key centers by the chord it starts on and counting sharps or flats.
it resolves at E minor, it's in the bII chord.
The bII chord builds up tension to E minor because of the half step interval.
So it's E minor with a bII accidental.
#4
Quote by liampje
No,
One does not simply find key centers by the chord it starts on and counting sharps or flats.
it resolves at E minor, it's in the bII chord.
The bII chord builds up tension to E minor because of the half step interval.
So it's E minor with a bII accidental.

Lol.

He can't find the key center. The first step is identifying whether or not the chords are all contained within one diatonic scale - they are. If they aren't then he needs to analyze the very apparent relationships between the chords to establish tonic - not very necessary in this example since it's not particularly functional. Next step; what is tonic. If it repeats and each chord is given equal time, then Em is the tonic. The only notes present in the progression imply E phrygian, there is no indication of minor key, ergo E phrygian.

If this chord progression compromises the entire composition there's no point in even relating it to a key, when it's clearly modal.
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 16, 2012,
#5
Quote by chronowarp
Lol.

He can't find the key center. The first step is identifying whether or not the chords are all contained within one diatonic scale - they are. If they aren't then he needs to analyze the very apparent relationships between the chords to establish tonic - not very necessary in this example since it's not particularly functional. Next step; what is tonic. If it repeats and each chord is given equal time, then Em is the tonic. The only notes present in the progression imply E phrygian, there is no indication of minor key, ergo E phrygian.

If this chord progression compromises the entire composition there's no point in even relating it to a key, when it's clearly modal.


There is more to the chord progression that is just one section of it. I assumed it was in the key of E minor because the riff was played out of the Eminor scale
I'm Bored.


tumblr
<- follow me
Last edited by stevosmusic1 at Mar 16, 2012,
#6
Quote by chronowarp
Lol.

He can't find the key center. The first step is identifying whether or not the chords are all contained within one diatonic scale - they are. If they aren't then he needs to analyze the very apparent relationships between the chords to establish tonic - not very necessary in this example since it's not particularly functional. Next step; what is tonic. If it repeats and each chord is given equal time, then Em is the tonic. The only notes present in the progression imply E phrygian, there is no indication of minor key, ergo E phrygian.

If this chord progression compromises the entire composition there's no point in even relating it to a key, when it's clearly modal.

So how would you find a key center in a song that doesn't match any key signature?
Or in this chord progression I made,
E min D5 Cadd9 Cdim?
Is it E minordorian because I can't find any relative scale?
You are the master, teach me please.
#7
Quote by liampje
No,
One does not simply find key centers by the chord it starts on and counting sharps or flats.
it resolves at E minor, it's in the bII chord.
The bII chord builds up tension to E minor because of the half step interval.
So it's E minor with a bII accidental.


It could be modal for real because with a progression like i-III-bII, there is no strong pull toward the i. A progression like this does not establish a key IMO and I'll trust cronowarp on this since he is usually pretty knowledgeable about music theory. However if there had been a V in there or even a IV it would have changed everything.

EDIT: I'm still unsure I'm not a theory guru yet and I could be wrong.
Last edited by SuperWeirdoUG at Mar 16, 2012,
#8
Honestly I'm gonna have to side with liampje for the first time (congratulations). Thing is, you could consider it modal if the original intention was to write a modal song, but that would also require the rest of the song to perfecty fit phrygian. I'd rather not think of it modally because I don't have to, it works without that thought.

Liampje nailed it in the first post and I'm very proud.

One thing I'd like to say regarding modality: part of the purpose of analyzing a song is to get into the writer's head a little bit. If the writer didn't intend to create a modal song (or if they did but they weren't doing it right) then classifying it as modal will hinder your understanding of the song. When analyzing classical music for example, you take the time period into consideration and if the composer was part of any sort of musical movement you think about that. So a romantic composer (such as Beethoven) may have once written a song without very much going on, and you might be tempted to call it a minimalist composition, but that would be ridiculous if the composer was obviously not a minimalist composer. Making a note, however, such as "the composition is similar to minimalism" and then further studying it can be helpful. It could even lead to a discovery, for example that the composer actually was a big influence to later minimalist writers.

Hope that helped.
Last edited by TMVATDI at Mar 16, 2012,
#9
Quote by liampje
So how would you find a key center in a song that doesn't match any key signature?
Or in this chord progression I made,
E min D5 Cadd9 Cdim?
Is it E minordorian because I can't find any relative scale?
You are the master, teach me please.

You're chord progression is in Eminor (as far as I can tell without playing it and/or hearing it on an instrument) and Cdim is a...Okay here's where I forget some technical terms (I'm not exactly a guru either), but there's a word for when you have a chord (such as Cadd9) and create a different kind of chord on the same root (Cdim). Anybody wanna help me out?
#10
Quote by stevosmusic1
There is more to the chord progression that is just one section of it. I assumed it was in the key of E minor because the riff was played out of the Eminor scale

The Eminor scale doesn't have an F natural. There's no indication of a V-I or strong key based cues. Unless there's more you aren't including - that could be a determining factor in what is the most sensible explanation of what you've got going on...but if it's just those 3 chords it's not really "Key of Em" it's more or less E phyrgian.
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 17, 2012,
#11
Quote by liampje
So how would you find a key center in a song that doesn't match any key signature?
Or in this chord progression I made,
E min D5 Cadd9 Cdim?
Is it E minordorian because I can't find any relative scale?
You are the master, teach me please.

Like I said, if you can't easily relate it back to a diatonic scale then it becomes necessary to pin down function and isolate the tonic.

That chord progression looks like it's pretty clearly in the key of Em, especially with that enharmonic D#dim7 (Cdim7=Eb(D#)dim7) chord you've got going on.
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 17, 2012,
#12
Quote by chronowarp
The Eminor scale doesn't have an F natural. There's no indication of a V-I or strong key based cues. Unless there's more you aren't including - that could be a determining factor in what is the most sensible explanation of what you've got going on...but if it's just those 3 chords it's not really "Key of Em" it's more or less E phyrgian.

Once again, no.
a V-I doesn't imply a minor key, nor a phrygian mode, it implies a major key.
And it IS really key of Em, and it's less E phrygian.
#13
Quote by chronowarp
Like I said, if you can't easily relate it back to a diatonic scale then it becomes necessary to pin down function and isolate the tonic.

That chord progression looks like it's pretty clearly in the key of Em, especially with that enharmonic D#dim7 (Cdim7=Eb(D#)dim7) chord you've got going on.

Chords, you always write them down the easiest way.
#14
Quote by TMVATDI
You're chord progression is in Eminor (as far as I can tell without playing it and/or hearing it on an instrument) and Cdim is a...

.... a rootless V7b9. Very common in minor progressions.
#16
Quote by stevosmusic1
Sorry I am not the greatest at music theory but I believe the song is in E minor.

The progression goes like this

Em GMaj Fmaj

now If I am not mistaken the if It is in the key of E minor the F should be half diminished?

so would this be and accidental? can anyone explain?



It's not going to sound resolved in my opinion as Em, and here's what I mean. You can argue that you end on Em and it sounds good. I'd agree. You could end it on an e Note and it sounds good, I'd agree. I think that what the ear hears is a return from F to C.

So why does it sound resolved and yet not have the C? E is a strong chord tone, it's the 3rd of C Major

You can do it how you want, but as long as this is the progression, and you say it's in Em, I hear it denying the Key Center that's there the whole time.

C Major wins.

What you are doing in my opinion is reconciling the return to Em by going to it from the F in chromatic form. In my opinion, the F and G are the IV and V. The Em suggesting to my ears, yet not resolving as a Rootless C Major 7.

Em is E G B

C Major 7 is C E G B.

So in essence, I see this as an archetype of a V VI I Cadence and that's all.

Best,

Sean
Last edited by Sean0913 at Mar 17, 2012,
#17
Quote by liampje
Once again, no.
a V-I doesn't imply a minor key, nor a phrygian mode, it implies a major key.
And it IS really key of Em, and it's less E phrygian.

Ok, dude, you're really confused. When I write V-I. I'm not describing a major resolution. I'm simply describing a tonic-dominant relationship. If there is no tonic-dominant relationship and a minor chord tonic, then it's not in a minor key.
#18
Quote by Sean0913
It's not going to sound resolved in my opinion as Em, and here's what I mean. You can argue that you end on Em and it sounds good. I'd agree. You could end it on an e Note and it sounds good, I'd agree. I think that what the ear hears is a return from F to C.

So why does it sound resolved and yet not have the C? E is a strong chord tone, it's the 3rd of C Major

You can do it how you want, but as long as this is the progression, and you say it's in Em, I hear it denying the Key Center that's there the whole time.

C Major wins.

What you are doing in my opinion is reconciling the return to Em by going to it from the F in chromatic form. In my opinion, the F and G are the IV and V. The Em suggesting to my ears, yet not resolving as a Rootless C Major 7.

Em is E G B

C Major 7 is C E G B.

So in essence, I see this as an archetype of a V VI I Cadence and that's all.

Best,

Sean

Hmm...can't tell if srs. Did you actually play the chord progression and feel it pull back to C, because I'm not getting that at all?

Just because a iii/vi shares common tones with the tonic, that doesn't mean that they function the same way. Yes, in a string of chords, iii/vi are less restless than IV/ii or IV/V...but a "resolution" to either of those chords doesn't anything reinforce I as tonic.

Em...G..F...Em...

This is so typically E phrygian that I can't even understand where you're coming from. If I play this chord progression, even if I give each chord equal time, it pulls to E very clearly. Play it...and listen.
#19
Quote by stevosmusic1
There is more to the chord progression that is just one section of it. I assumed it was in the key of E minor because the riff was played out of the Eminor scale

Post the whole progression and song structure. It'll just make life easier for all of us.

Short answer: the progression, as it stands, looped over and over, is E Phrygian.

Job done.

Next...
#20
Quote by chronowarp
Hmm...can't tell if srs. Did you actually play the chord progression and feel it pull back to C, because I'm not getting that at all?

Just because a iii/vi shares common tones with the tonic, that doesn't mean that they function the same way. Yes, in a string of chords, iii/vi are less restless than IV/ii or IV/V...but a "resolution" to either of those chords doesn't anything reinforce I as tonic.

Em...G..F...Em...

This is so typically E phrygian that I can't even understand where you're coming from. If I play this chord progression, even if I give each chord equal time, it pulls to E very clearly. Play it...and listen.


No I didn't, I'm just observing that on the surface, it appears to be a rootless C Maj 7 and that's why the V VI to Em might sound right. Typically when I see a V chord in a "modal" question, I suspect that it's not entirely modal.

Em G/E F or F Maj 7 to Em, I'd go with more as a modal sound, because the E maintains throughout.

Or Em to F Maj7 and back, I'd see as a Phrygian Vamp. But as you said, I haven't played the above progression, or seen it in context with the rest of the piece?

Typically as I see it, the V of the derived major key will want to hijack it to a Major resolution, denying it it's modal identity. Since I saw F and G in the progression, I immediately suspect a IV and V in C where Em functions as the iii chord. Well, if this is the case, my understanding sees this is a disguised iii V IV I in C, functionally.

But I haven't played it, so I'll defer to those who have. This is just my "gut level" analysis, without actually trying it.

Best,

Sean
Last edited by Sean0913 at Mar 17, 2012,
#21
You'd be right if it ever resolved to C. But not only is it going G-F-Em, descending down to the Em. But even a G moving to Em doesn't sound anything like a V-I - especially in this context.

It's such a typical phrygian vamp. With thing like this you need to play them and hear them, because analysis is pretty much worthless without an aural context.


Em-F-Em-G :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cZeMdFWpEI
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 17, 2012,
#23
^ Right, that wasn't so hard was it? You have a V - i in that progression, assuming the Bmaj goes back to Em. So...

... your key is Em.

Job done.

Next...
#25
Quote by chronowarp
Ok, dude, you're really confused. When I write V-I. I'm not describing a major resolution. I'm simply describing a tonic-dominant relationship. If there is no tonic-dominant relationship and a minor chord tonic, then it's not in a minor key.

Well you may mean that but other musicians mean a V-I relationship in a major key.
#27
It depends if the progression repeats.

If it does repeat (ie Emi Gma Fma Emi etc.) then its without a doubt a phrygian mode 'cliche'

It isn't E minor liampje, at least I wouldn't say it is. You could argue with me but heres my reasoning.

Fma would be the bII of Emi also known as a Neapolitan sixth. Usually a Neapolitan sixth appears in first inversion and functions as a subdominant chord ie sets up the dominant and substitutes ii or iv. Its not as common to see it in a plagal cadence w/ a neapolitan sixth (i iv i) because then it just sounds like a phrygian mode cliche. That being said you technically could call it a iii bii i which is a plagal cadence with a bii substitution but I think that the phrygian idea fits better.

EDIT:

knowing the whole progression, you could say its in E minor with some modal borrowing from E phrygian because it doesn't truly fit either, its more of a blend of both of these sounds. The analysis is the same regardless

i III bii i III V (i)
Quote by The Spoon
Unless you're sure she likes you, telling her you like her has a 110% chance of failing.

But hey, at least you have a 10% chance of absolutely guaranteeing failure.
Last edited by British_Steal at Mar 18, 2012,
#29
Quote by British_Steal
It depends if the progression repeats.

If it does repeat (ie Emi Gma Fma Emi etc.) then its without a doubt a phrygian mode 'cliche'

It isn't E minor liampje, at least I wouldn't say it is. You could argue with me but heres my reasoning.

Fma would be the bII of Emi also known as a Neapolitan sixth. Usually a Neapolitan sixth appears in first inversion and functions as a subdominant chord ie sets up the dominant and substitutes ii or iv. Its not as common to see it in a plagal cadence w/ a neapolitan sixth (i iv i) because then it just sounds like a phrygian mode cliche. That being said you technically could call it a iii bii i which is a plagal cadence with a bii substitution but I think that the phrygian idea fits better.

EDIT:

knowing the whole progression, you could say its in E minor with some modal borrowing from E phrygian because it doesn't truly fit either, its more of a blend of both of these sounds. The analysis is the same regardless

i III bii i III V (i)

See, I knew he was going to post that, so I said Em.
*ninja*
#30
Quote by liampje
Oh your god, shall I explain?
V-I implies MAJOR chords, v-i implies MINOR chords.


You don't need to explain it to me. I have a degree in music. Non issue.

The problem is how utterly pointless and pragmatic you're being in trying to argue semantics as if it offers anything constructive to the conversation. There are many schools or thought when it comes to roman numeral analysis - believe it or not, some don't even relate upper/lowercase to chord quality! [not that it really matters, as my presentation of the significance of V-I wasn't even related to the harmony in the specific example]

I was describing a tonic, dominant relationship - unspecific of whether the tonic was major or minor. Yet somehow instead of interpreting the point of what I was saying, you chose to purposefully misinterpret and snidely try to correct me as if you had a clue...the guy arguing that a typical Phrygian vamp (without the complete progression the TS later posted) was in a Minor key.
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 18, 2012,
#31
Quote by chronowarp
There we go!


Right, that B changed everything!

And Chrono, I basically agree with you. Like I said, I'm so used to "Is this modal?", that 99 percent of the time it isn't, I'm already looking at things non-modally by conditioning - The last thing that I saw or heard that was actually modal, was a Flaming Lips song.

Best,

Sean
#34
Quote by stevosmusic1
Okay so I was right it is Em but what does the b in bii stand for?

You were right...once you supplied all the information, but still...not entirely. bII means you have a chord built on the flattended (b) 2nd degree of the scale.

That's your F. F#º is what naturally occurs in Em, bII is F. Borrowed chord from phrygian.
#35
Quote by chronowarp
You were right...once you supplied all the information, but still...not entirely. bII means you have a chord built on the flattended (b) 2nd degree of the scale.

That's your F. F#º is what naturally occurs in Em, bII is F. Borrowed chord from phrygian.


Okay thanks that is why I was so confused because I though it should have been F#º but when ever I played that it didn't sound right. I still have alot to learn haha I just finished my intro to music theory class.
I'm Bored.


tumblr
<- follow me
#36
Quote by chronowarp
You don't need to explain it to me. I have a degree in music. Non issue.

The problem is how utterly pointless and pragmatic you're being in trying to argue semantics as if it offers anything constructive to the conversation. There are many schools or thought when it comes to roman numeral analysis - believe it or not, some don't even relate upper/lowercase to chord quality! [not that it really matters, as my presentation of the significance of V-I wasn't even related to the harmony in the specific example]

I was describing a tonic, dominant relationship - unspecific of whether the tonic was major or minor. Yet somehow instead of interpreting the point of what I was saying, you chose to purposefully misinterpret and snidely try to correct me as if you had a clue...the guy arguing that a typical Phrygian vamp (without the complete progression the TS later posted) was in a Minor key.


Welcome to UG bro