If I am playing a i, iv, vi progression in the key of Em and I suddenly start playing those same chords but in another order while sharpening or flatting certain notes in those chords; can it be considered that after the change I am now playing in another key?

I do not yet understand this concept, so forgive me if this question makes no sense. And if you are reading this, thank you for taking time from your life to answer.
The order that you play the chords in doesn't really have anything to do with the key, but I think I can see where you are getting that idea from... allow me to explain.

We refer to the IV chord as such because it is a chord built off of the fourth note of a key using only notes that fit within that key (another way you could say that is, "within the context of diatonic harmony") and we refer to chords as IV chords and V chords sometimes so we can discuss cadence and how tension and resolution develop during a chord progression. I will illustrate my point.

While the IV chord in the key of A major and the IV chord in the key C major are two different chords (D major and F major, respectively), they serve the same function in the progression. because they are both built on the fourth note of the major scale. As far as what their "function" is, in layman's terms I am saying what chord they want to go to next or what chord would lead into that chord well.

For instance, a really common progression in music is I-IV-V. One reason why that sounds "good" without getting into tension and resolution is because, quite simply, the IV chord wants to go to the V or the vii chord next. That's what I mean by function. Also, the I chord will want to go to the IV chord or the ii chord next.

Now, bringing it back to the other part of your question; yes, if you change the notes in the chords you are using, you could potentially change the chord itself to one that is not within the key and potentially change to a new key.

So, let's say we are playing our I, IV, vi progression you brought up in the beginning. So I can illustrate this better, we'll use the key of C major, so our progression is...

C - F - Am

Now let's say after that A minor chord, we want to change things up a bit and change the key. What happens if we do this?

C - F - Am - A

Now you could potentially change keys. It really depends. You can pick chords after the A major that would lead you back to the key of C major if you wanted to, or you could continue by picking chords from the key of A major.

C - F - Am - A - D - E

The above progression is really just I-IV-V still, only when we change from A minor to A major, we change the key. By the end of the progression, we've firmly established that, as D major and E major don't exist within our original key either.

Hope that helps.
So roman numerals refer to intervals? And musicians use these numerals to better anticipate where music wants to resolve to?

I found that for chords in major keys I can use:

1. major
2. minor
3. minor
4. major
5. major
6. minor
7. dim

and for chords in natural minor key i can use :
1. minor
2. dim
3. major
4. min
5. min
6. maj
7. maj

Should I rely on these formats?

Also, thank you for explaining so well and objectively.
Yes.

Roman numerals represent the scale degrees that the chord is built on.
An upper case roman numeral is a major chord while a lower case roman numeral indicates a minor chord. You would also write any further notation (sevenths sus add notes etc)
E.G.
The chords of the major scale are as you listed but using roman numerals we can write them as...
I ii iii IV V vi viidim

However occasionally you will see all upper case with the "m" to denote a minor chord.
I IIm IIIm IV V VIm VIIdim

The first way is the most common.

You have your chord types pretty much right. Those are the diatonic chords for the major and natural minor scales.

However, it is quite common in a minor key to use a major V chord instead of a minor v chord usually when resolving to the I chord. The reason is that the major third in that V chord is the major seventh interval above the tonic chord and resolves to the root of that chord by a half step.

For example:

In the key of Am:
The A minor scale is A B C D E F G A
The i chord is Am made up of the notes A C E.
The v chord is Em made up of the notes E G B

When analysing chord movements it is useful to analyse a few things: The movement of the root note from one chord to another. The movement of the bass (does it follow the root movement or is a different note used in the bass). And not least we would analyse how each note in the chord can lead to the nearest note in the next chord.

So if we went from Em to Am we would have
E G B moving to A C E. The E stays the same. The B moves by a half step to B and the G moves by a whole step to A.

However if we raised the third in that Em to make it an E major chord we would have E G# B

The movement from E major to Am would now be: E stays the same. B moves by a half step to C and G# moves up a half step to A (The tonic/root note).

Although half steps make good resolution this half step from G# up to the key note A is particularly strong.

Thus it is very common to use a major V chord in a minor setting. It is so common in fact that we account for this alteration to natural minor harmonies by writing out an altered scale that we call the harmonic minor scale. The harmonic minor scale in A is A B C D E F G# A.

So when we think of the minor scale we actually have the natural minor scale but then we also have this alteration to account for the commonly raised seventh degree in a V chord that is heading into the i chord.

Note that when it is not going to the tonic the v chord is often minor because that G#-A resolution isn't needed.

This alteration does create a problem though. When the V chord is major going into the Am tonic the melodic line from E up to A becomes disjointed. E F G# A is made up of a half step(E to F), a whole+half step (F to G#), and a half step (G# to A). This creates a disjointed melodic run.

We want the half step resolution and so we want to keep the G# to A. We want to keep the E which is the perfect fifth the solution is to raise the F to an F# so we then have a melodic run up to the tonic that is a lot smoother. E F# G# A.

This is another common alteration to the minor scale. It is called the melodic minor scale. It is typically used to for melodic purposes as we ascent to the tonic note, usually over a V-i cadence.

Anyway...the point was that your chords are mostly correct.

Major diatonic chords are...
Major minor minor Major Major minor minor diminished

I ii iii IV V vi viidim

minor diatonic chords are...including major V chord.

minor diminished Major minor minor Major Major

i iidim bIII iv V bVI bVII

They all come from the natural minor scale except the V which is from the harmonic minor scale.

Note: Some people treat the harmonic and melodic minor as unique scales and use them to create harmonies and melodies entirely from the notes of the harmonic and melodic minor scales. This was not the original intent of those scales but there is nothing that is wrong when writing music, so using the harmonic or melodic minor scale as the sole source for the tonal material of a song is perfectly permissible.

Probably way too much information. But sometimes when I start writing I can't stop...such is the case now. So if it's too much - sorry about that.

Good Luck all the same.
Si
Quote by villanovablues
So roman numerals refer to intervals? And musicians use these numerals to better anticipate where music wants to resolve to?

I found that for chords in major keys I can use:

1. major
2. minor
3. minor
4. major
5. major
6. minor
7. dim

and for chords in natural minor key i can use :
1. minor
2. dim
3. major
4. min
5. min
6. maj
7. maj

Should I rely on these formats?

Also, thank you for explaining so well and objectively.

Intervals are the "building blocks" that make chords, so no the roman numerals are not intervals. The next thing you said is correct though, and I'm going to use your knowledge to impart new knowledge on you. Follow me step by step.

1. Grab a pen and paper, or something like that.
2. Start at the sixth chord of your major scale and start writing down the chord types as you have until you get to the sixth chord (once you get to the 7 chord, go back to the 1 chord and keep moving in order)
3. Compare the list you just made with the list you already made for the chords you can use in a natural minor key.

Identical, right? Meditate on that little insight a bit. See what the ramifications of this revelation are.

Now, back to your response: the roman numerals are just a way to look at chords in a relative way because a I-IV-V progression in the key of A major won't sound exactly the same as a I-IV-V progression in the key of C major, but it will have the same feel or emotion because many times we look at chord function based on what the root note is relative to the order of the notes in the scale.
I think he's talking about playing an augmented 5th for all the chords.

I usually have to toss 1/2 of the theory out.lol
It's kind of like playing the 5 chord or sus4
If you do it with an augmented 5th...it's like you're just playing a major 3rd inversion.haha

If you solo off of the 3rd then to the 5th. Thats like a minor 3rd interval.
If i hit the 4th on my way to the 5th.
It depends how I look at it...the 3rd can act like a leading tone.
Or the 4th can act like a -2.lol
If i hit the -6 after the the 5th,...A belly dancer might appear.haha

I look at it as creating tension and releasing tension.

So im just going to play over those chord as if I would playing 12bars blues
and phrase it.
Last edited by smc818 at Feb 11, 2014,
Quote by smc818
I think he's talking about playing an augmented 5th for all the chords.

I don't think he's just limiting it to augmented 5ths.

Just to add to this thread, The option that has been covered is changing the key. There's an alternative. Let's use a simple example, a I-IV-V progression in C major; namely C, F, G. But what if we want to make our chord progression sound more interesting? We have many different options; one being changing notes. (Another being adding notes, but I'll just cover changing notes.) A common modern thing is to do something like play C, F, Fsus4, G. So, now we have a bit of a different sound.

What if we want to use chords that don't contain strictly notes from the key (aren't diatonic) but still want to stay in the same key? Well...that's easy. We can "borrow" from another key. Maybe we would play C, F, Gm, C. (Assume each chord is played for 1 bar.) Gminor is clearly not in the key of C major. But, since we've firmly established the key as C major, we can't say that we have changed keys, really. A common use of this practice in certain styles of classic music is the Neapolitan Chord.
If I am playing in Em and I Begin my chord progression with the iv chord (Am), does this mean I'm now playing in Am, or did it just not change at all and the key is still Em?
One chord by itself is not enough to tell you the key. Am not only appears as the vi chord in the the key of C major, but it also occurs as the ii chord in the key of G major as well as the iii chord in the key of F major. By that logic, we could use any of those three keys to play over an Am, but we would be emphasizing certain notes within those scales to make it fit, namely the ones that are contained within the chord itself. If this is new to you, you should take this information, record yourself playing a simple Am chord to a drum track, and practice soloing over it using those three different scales to experiment.
Yes, I can stay in key using any chord extension. It just a simple matter of finding
overlaping arpeggios from one chord to the next.

Put your ring finger on the D note (B string/third fret)
In I, IV, V movement....
Just use the Middle finger to hit the root note and index to hit the 3rd. (all in open position). It dosnt clash and sounds rather nice. All notes are still in the key of Cmaj.

But music dosnt sit still. It's in motion. Example...The I and IV chord.
Gmaj and Cmaj.....If I play Amin or Emin, you're not going to know what sequnce
these 2 chords are.

That still gives me options to play the (Bmin or Bdim) or (Dmaj or Dmin)
Until I do so...it's up in the air whether if it's in the key of Gmaj or Cmaj
The samething with the F or F#....

If i go back to Cmaj, Gmaj, Emin, or Amin.....by the time I get back to
play a Bmin...your ear already forgot that I played a Fmaj 8 bars previously.
It's still the same principle as the sus4. The root is up in the air.

I even put it to the test. I wrote backing tracks with those chords in the key of
Cmaj. The reason why it works because I simply havnt introduce the note F# or F
into the progression.

The first chord is a Cmajadd9. I can strum an Emin, Emin7, Amin, Amin7 over that
chord, even. I can also play in the key of Gmaj or Emin and introduce the F# while playing a solo over that entire progression.
I can even strum a Bmin while over the Asus9add6 or a Dmaj while over the Gmaj
Last edited by smc818 at Feb 12, 2014,
Quote by villanovablues
If I am playing in Em and I Begin my chord progression with the iv chord (Am), does this mean I'm now playing in Am, or did it just not change at all and the key is still Em?

The key is still E minor.
Quote by STONESHAKER
One chord by itself is not enough to tell you the key. Am not only appears as the vi chord in the the key of C major, but it also occurs as the ii chord in the key of G major as well as the iii chord in the key of F major. By that logic, we could use any of those three keys to play over an Am, but we would be emphasizing certain notes within those scales to make it fit, namely the ones that are contained within the chord itself. If this is new to you, you should take this information, record yourself playing a simple Am chord to a drum track, and practice soloing over it using those three different scales to experiment.

No. No. No.

We can't just go, "Am is diatonic in the following keys...Therefore, we can play scales from those keys over it". (Well...we could, but it's inefficient and certain notes will clash with the Am chord.) But that's very much losing sight of the big picture. Assume the progression is Em, Am, Bm (as TS originally suggested). Where does the progression resolve to? (Where does it sound like it's "home"?) Clearly, Em. Now, assume the progression is Am, Bm, Em or Bm, Am, Em. Where does the progression resolve? Still Em. Therefore, the logical thing to play over any of these progressions is one of the Eminor scales. (That alone gives you several options, and we can add in any non-diatonic notes for "color", if we want.)

One shouldn't look at single chords in general; instead, one should look at chords in the context of harmony. It is more efficient to view it as the "whole", determine the key, and then play in the key.

Note: "playing in the key" does NOT mean we're limited to 7 notes. We can play any of our 12 notes in any key. It's just that a key will always resolve to a certain tonic. The key of Eminor always sounds "at rest" when you play the Em chord. This is why we can use non-diatonic notes to add some "color" to our piece. Just be careful not to let non-diatonic notes clash too much.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Feb 12, 2014,
Dude, I've had this discussion with you in a previous thread and I'm not going to do it again because your method of arguing a point is akin to a small child trying to ram a square peg into a round hole with a rubber hammer.

I already know your view on applying CST -- think of the home key and "borrow" notes from the other key. Cool. Good for you. It's not wrong to change scales entirely with chord changes as long as you know how to make the new scale work over that particular chord by emphasizing the right notes and avoiding the wrong ones. Many virtuoso players do it and teach their students to. Satch (the book of articles he published to that guitar magazine, forget name), Petrucci (Wild Stringdom), and Guthrie (Cutting Edge Guitar) have all written lessons on playing chord changes with different scales and those are just the few that pop into my head immediately.

So Sam: Just because you don't like to think of it that way doesn't mean it's wrong. I'll listen to advice from any of those three astounding players over listening to advice over the internet from some guy behind a keyboard.

Now, TS, just to clarify:

A single chord on its own cannot tell you 100% what key the song is in because a single chord on its own has no context in which you can listen for tension and resolution. Ignore Sam, I am correct here.

You can use any of those three scales to solo over the chord provided but you will end up emphasizing and avoiding certain notes in each scale. The notes you emphasize regardless of what scale you use would probably be the notes contained within the chord as well as any additional coloring you wanted to add. I am correct again and I still advise you to go experiment.
Last edited by STONESHAKER at Feb 12, 2014,
Quote by STONESHAKER
You can use any of those three scales to solo over the chord provided but you will end up emphasizing and avoiding certain notes in each scale. The notes you emphasize regardless of what scale you use would probably be the notes contained within the chord as well as any additional coloring you wanted to add. I am correct again.

Which means that you're emphasizing the notes OF THE KEY. The non-diatonic notes (such as, for example, the Bb note in F major) would just act as "color" notes that clash with the Aminor chord. But the sound would really just end up (regardless of whether you play the notes F, G, A, Bb, C, D, E or the notes A, B, C, D, E, F, G) sounding like it was in Aminor, because IT IS.

However, the issue is, notes like that Bb I mentioned earlier. In general, that's going to sound terrible. Even if it only played for a short time (say, the length of a 16th note), it will be instantly noticeable. Furthermore, calling it the "Fmajor scale" in this context is actually wrong, due to the fact that the key is Aminor. Keys > scales.

I think my main contention with you is that you look at a chord and go, "I can play X, Y, & Z scales over this chord!". I look at a chord and go, "What's the key? Where does it fit in the context of the song/piece?"
Assume we have a C, F, G progression (to keep it simple). You can pick out different scales of choice for each chord. But is it not more efficient to just look at it as being in the key of Cmajor? Then, one doesn't have to 1) pick scales for each chord and 2) make sure said scales don't clash with each other. I'm thinking in terms of efficiency. You can think however you want, but your method is very inefficient and probably wouldn't be very helpful for someone like TS.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Feb 12, 2014,
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Which means that you're emphasizing the notes OF THE KEY. The non-diatonic notes (such as, for example, the Bb note in F major) would just act as "color" notes that clash with the Aminor chord. But the sound would really just end up (regardless of whether you play the notes F, G, A, Bb, C, D, E or the notes A, B, C, D, E, F, G) sounding like it was in Aminor, because IT IS.

You're right, it means I am emphasizing the notes of ANY OF THOSE THREE KEYS because they ALL CONTAIN THE NOTES OF* THAT CHORD.

I swear to god, arguing with you people about this shit is such a waste of time because you just make redundant points without considering any rebuttals. It's like trying to shout at a brick wall. I'd rather go teach a deaf kid how to play. All your previous post did was confirm that you don't really know how to play the chord changes using different scales and so you discourage other people from doing it.
Last edited by STONESHAKER at Feb 12, 2014,
^
See my edit.

Also:
Quote by STONESHAKER
All your previous post did was confirm that you don't really know how to play the chord changes using different scales and so you discourage other people from doing it.

How does it prove that?

All it proves is that I prefer a more efficient method. For the record, I used to bother dealing with chords and picking scales as you suggest, but then I realized making it more complex is ridiculous.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Feb 12, 2014,
Quote by crazysam23_Atax

I think my main contention with you is that you look at a chord and go, "I can play X, Y, & Z scales over this chord!". I look at a chord and go, "What's the key?" See, the problem with your method is the following:

Assume we have a C, F, G progression (to keep it simple). You can pick out different scales of choice for each chord. But is it not more efficient to just look at it as being in the key of Cmajor? Then, one doesn't have to 1) pick scales for each chord and 2) make sure said scales don't clash with each other. I'm thinking in terms of efficiency. You can think however you want, but your method is very inefficient and probably wouldn't be very helpful for someone like TS.

... it IS the key of C major. That doesn't mean you have to use a C major scale to play over the whole thing! Is it easy to teach a beginner how to improvise this way? Yes, but do the best jazz and blues players improvise this way? No, they don't. I get that he might be newer. He's here to learn though, so I'm teaching him.

The way this guy is going to discover what those "color notes" are is by experimenting with those three scales over that chord like I said so he can find which notes work over the chord relative to each scale. Once he experiments like that a bit, he will probably be able to recall a few "borrowed notes" he discovered by playing with those three scales over the single chord and eventually he could even become comfortable playing with modes and using different scales for chord changes.

All your argument boils down to is, "Don't think of it in terms of those scales outside the home scale because some of the notes in those scales won't sound good!" The simple rebuttal is that you can use an A minor scale to play over an A minor chord. and there are even notes in the A minor scale that will sound tense over it too.

I guess my major contention with you is you want to turn artistic expression into something neat and efficient at the cost of sacrificing a greater range of expression for the ease simplicity can provide and so I bid you good day.

TS, if you have any questions about what I said, send me a private message.
Last edited by STONESHAKER at Feb 12, 2014,
Do you guys ever get the feeling that whenever you are playing blues in Em, it sounds like you are playing little wing, even though you are not trying to?
^ lol...that is the perfect post after reading all this
Quote by villanovablues
If I am playing a i, iv, vi progression in the key of Em and I suddenly start playing those same chords but in another order while sharpening or flatting certain notes in those chords; can it be considered that after the change I am now playing in another key?

I do not yet understand this concept, so forgive me if this question makes no sense. And if you are reading this, thank you for taking time from your life to answer.

It's hard to know, what you're sharpening or flattening, but possibly. "What does the progression seem to resolve on?", is a better way of determining the key of the piece.

Best,

Sean

PS: A i iv vi, in Em is Em Am and C#m If you maintain C#m, and change Am to A, resolving on E you're suggesting a parallel key change to E Major.
That parallel key change thing is nice.

In order to play E minor, instead of playing G major, do I just highlight the intervals that correspond to E minor; I mean, is that all the difference between Gmaj and Em, that they have a different order (G major's IV is E minor's VI) of notes. Or, is there something more?
It has to do with resolution. A song is in a certain key when the corresponding chord sounds resolved, i.e. "at home", to use a useful cliché.

So there will be a chord where it feels like the progression has "ended" in some way; a chord that it sort of "wants" to go back to. If that chord is G major, you're in the key of G major. If that chord is E minor, you're in the key of E minor.

It's something you have to listen for, and often not something you can be sure of just by theoretical analysis.

So basically, when there's a key change (or modulation), it means that the chord that the progression wants to go back to has changed.

(I feel like I'm not explaining this very well )
Last edited by sickman411 at Feb 13, 2014,
Quote by STONESHAKER

A single chord on its own cannot tell you 100% what key the song is in because a single chord on its own has no context in which you can listen for tension and resolution. Ignore Sam, I am correct here.

So you're saying if there was a song that just had a single chord, G major, in it, you couldn't tell what key the song was in?
Hah, you smartass.

I should have specified "Looking at only a single chord in a progression cannot tell you the key."
Quote by villanovablues
That parallel key change thing is nice.

In order to play E minor, instead of playing G major, do I just highlight the intervals that correspond to E minor; I mean, is that all the difference between Gmaj and Em, that they have a different order (G major's IV is E minor's VI) of notes. Or, is there something more?

Throw in a B7 and move to Em, or F#m to B7 then to Em. It's a way of suggesting a new key change using a V i or a ii V i. It's helpful to understand cadences.

Best,

Sean
Quote by STONESHAKER
... it IS the key of C major. That doesn't mean you have to use a C major scale to play over the whole thing! Is it easy to teach a beginner how to improvise this way?

That's the whole point...TS is a beginner. So, why go over his head?

Yes, but do the best jazz and blues players improvise this way? No, they don't.

Um...most blues players improvise using the minor and major pentatonic. Many of the "greats", such as Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Albert King, etc. used those scales exclusively. (A few notable exceptions, of course.)
Jazz players, of course, tend to be a bit more complex in their playing, especially if we get into Bebop or Free Jazz and such. That said...I've not studied a lot of Jazz guitar, so that's all I'm saying on that matter.

The way this guy is going to discover what those "color notes" are is by experimenting with those three scales over that chord like I said so he can find which notes work over the chord relative to each scale. Once he experiments like that a bit, he will probably be able to recall a few "borrowed notes" he discovered by playing with those three scales over the single chord and eventually he could even become comfortable playing with modes and using different scales for chord changes.

That's one way to discover it. I'm suggesting he discover it by using a bit of theory, so he can understand what's actually going on. Knowing "why something works" is often more important than knowing "how it works".
The part about modes...not touching that. I have a very strict view of modes (and how they should be used), and you can look at my post history to find that stuff and PM me if you want.

All your argument boils down to is, "Don't think of it in terms of those scales outside the home scale because some of the notes in those scales won't sound good!" The simple rebuttal is that you can use an A minor scale to play over an A minor chord. and there are even notes in the A minor scale that will sound tense over it too.

Actually, all notes in the A natural minor scale will sound good over the Aminor chord. (The melodic minor and harmonic minor scales can create some tension [not to mention other minor scales], but let's keep it simple for TS's sake.) Yes, some notes in the A natural minor scale sound more tense than others, but none of the notes would outright clash with Aminor chord.
But you're still hung up on scales. I'm talking about keys here. As in, "In the key of Aminor, everything resolves to the tonic of Aminor." Therefore, regardless of what 'scale' I use, it's all in the key of Aminor. I could use the Bb locrian scale* or play a Bbdim7 arppegio; it would sound terrible and would clash a ton. But I would still be in Aminor. It would just sound like shit, and therefore I should probably pick something that would sound better. (Unless, of course, my purpose is to make it sound like shit. )

Regardless of the key, I have complete and utter freedom to use any of the 12 notes available to me, in any combination, order, pattern, etc. But if the tonic is Aminor, the key is Aminor. Always, without exception. That is what I'm trying to stress to TS here.

*Note I said "locrian scale", not the locrian mode -- there is a difference; PM me if you want to discuss this.

I guess my major contention with you is you want to turn artistic expression into something neat and efficient at the cost of sacrificing a greater range of expression for the ease simplicity can provide and so I bid you good day.

If you say so. I'm not, really. But whatever.

Quote by villanovablues
That parallel key change thing is nice.

In order to play E minor, instead of playing G major, do I just highlight the intervals that correspond to E minor; I mean, is that all the difference between Gmaj and Em, that they have a different order (G major's IV is E minor's VI) of notes. Or, is there something more?

Well...let's say you have a song in Eminor. The progression could be, for example: Em, Am, Bm. If you play a simple melody with the notes E, F#, G, A, B, C, & D (emphasis on the notes E, A, & B; because those are your root, major fourth, and perfect fifth respectively [and because we're keeping it simple here by not emphasizing other notes right now]), the melody is in the scale of Eminor. Assume we now play the notes in the order G, A, B, C, D, E, F# (emphasis on the notes G, C, & D). What happens, in terms of what the listener hears? Is there a difference in sound?

NO! A perceptive listener might hear that you changed the emphasis of certain notes, but any listener will still hear the song as being in the key of Eminor and hear the melody as being the scale of Eminor. Why?
Because, the song in is the key of Eminor. Remember, we're still using the chord progression Em, Am, & Bm. The entire song still clearly resolves to Eminor. We can call the scale Eminor or Gmajor or anything else. But it doesn't matter, because the song is IN the key of Eminor.

Now, if we switched up the chord progression to be Gmaj, Cmaj, & Dmaj...and then played the notes E, F#, G, A, B, C & D? What happens, in terms of what the listener hears? Well, the song is now firmly in the key of Gmajor. So, the scale (regardless of the order of the notes or which notes we place the emphasis on) the listener hears is now the Gmajor scale.

The most important thing about scales and keys is that keys>scales. Meaning, one should probably consider the key of a song/piece first. And, the key can change (as my example of changing from Eminor to Gmajor), of course. There's way to do this more smoothly than my above example, but I'm trying not to get too complex here.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Feb 14, 2014,