#1
I've seen from time to time a suggestion to vamp on I-IV or variations thereof.

Isn't the V-I relationship stronger and wouldn't this actually tonicize the second chord.

So why is it described as I IV when the tonic is the second chord. Wouldn't it be better to call it V-I?

For example would a modal exercise vamping on Dm-G imply G Mixolydian rather than D Dorian? Or will it depend on what I do with the melody?

I will have to play around with this a little myself I think, but any ideas welcomed.
Si
#2
Interesting, I clicked on this just before reading your response in the other thread.

Well, consistent use of the leading tone would make it a I IV outright of course. But simply the two chords, I do believe plagal cadences to be fairly strong, and in most cases, simply the order of the chords can change the tonic.

Well I wouldn't think that's a very fitting example, as a good chunk of the V I's strength comes from the third of the V leading into the tonic. But I get your point. As far as I can see, it's the same principle as the I IV.
#3
Remember that this is a minor key, so the 1 - 4 is a i - IV, with the IV likely to be a dominant 7.
Lets say the vamp is Dm - G7.

If you invert this progression it becomes G7 - Dm

I would have thought that depending on the voicing and the rythmn you can create either a i- IV or a V - i.... but if you think of the strongest cadence (the V - i) then surely the tonal centre is more liekly to stay on D?

calling this vamp Mixolydian would imply a half cadence with the tonal centre lying on the G7
#4
Yeah I do realize that the v-I is weaker than the V-I that was just one example from a different thread. And it probably isn't the best example.

But even in a major key I-IV would be better described as V-I wouldn't it?
for example vamping on D-G would tonicize the G wouldn't it? So it would be best described as V-I. In what circumstances does I-IV become a better description?
Si
#5
Quote by 20Tigers
Yeah I do realize that the v-I is weaker than the V-I that was just one example from a different thread. And it probably isn't the best example.

But even in a major key I-IV would be better described as V-I wouldn't it?
for example vamping on D-G would tonicize the G wouldn't it? So it would be best described as V-I. In what circumstances does I-IV become a better description?
Well one circumstance for sure is if a C# is introduced at any point(and a lack of C naturals). Other than that, I think simply the D coming first is enough, since it's already kind of a gray area.
#7
Quote by 20Tigers
I've seen from time to time a suggestion to vamp on I-IV or variations thereof.

Isn't the V-I relationship stronger and wouldn't this actually tonicize the second chord.

So why is it described as I IV when the tonic is the second chord. Wouldn't it be better to call it V-I?

For example would a modal exercise vamping on Dm-G imply G Mixolydian rather than D Dorian? Or will it depend on what I do with the melody?

I will have to play around with this a little myself I think, but any ideas welcomed.
I see your point.

Without taking into account beat, or melody or anything but the chords, IV - I is the same as I - V.

But...

If I was to do a two (or three, in a phrygian progression case) modal chord vamp, I would spend more measures on the supposed I chord than any other chord. So my Dorian progression would be Dm-Dm-Dm-G7 instead of Dm-G7. If I wanted a mixolydian sort of vamp, I would use G7-G7-G7-Dm.

Thats just how I do modal progressions...
#8
Quote by 20Tigers
I've seen from time to time a suggestion to vamp on I-IV or variations thereof.

Isn't the V-I relationship stronger and wouldn't this actually tonicize the second chord.

So why is it described as I IV when the tonic is the second chord. Wouldn't it be better to call it V-I?

For example would a modal exercise vamping on Dm-G imply G Mixolydian rather than D Dorian? Or will it depend on what I do with the melody?

I will have to play around with this a little myself I think, but any ideas welcomed.


this is just a ii-V in C, so the next chord would be C, so if i saw this in a chart, id be thinking outlining the chord (arpeggiating) into a C major lick.

Theres a lot of harmonic possibilities, but that is basically just a ii-V in C