# Progression Theory



## Mr. Big Noodles (Sep 16, 2008)

At the request of TonalArchitect, and by suggestion of me, I've created this thread to explore chord progressions until hearing a V7-I cadence makes you vomit.

-----------------------------------

Okay, I've edited this to be a little more digestible. I'm going to lay the groundwork, talk about a basic chord progression, and let the discussion begin. Once the progression is understood, I'll introduce another progression, or somebody else can do so.

First, let's make sure we all know our major scale chords. Let's take, for example, C major.


```
C D E F G A B
```

There are seven tones in that scale, which we may represent with numbers: 


```
C D E F G A B
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
```

If we take every other number, we end up forming what are called triads - chords formed from stacked thirds. Thus, these are our possibilities:


```
C E G = 1 3 5
D F A = 2 4 6
E G B = 3 5 7
F A C = 4 6 1
G B D = 5 7 2
A C E = 6 1 3
B D F = 7 2 4
```

Most of the time, when you see this, the chord will be spelled starting from 1. We can modify the spelling of a chord in the manner of adding accidentals (sharps and flats) to achieve any chord tonality that we want. A major chord will be spelled 1 3 5, a minor chord is 1 b3 5, and a diminished chord is 1 b3 b5.

Now, for our purposes, we will be converting these triads into roman numerals. They are thus:


```
In a major scale:
I ii iii IV V vi vii°

In a natural minor scale:
i ii° III iv v VI VII

In a minor scale that borrows from harmonic minor:
i ii° III iv V VI vii°
```

The size of the numeral tells you what kind of chords are in the scale. A capitalized numeral tells you that it is a major chord. A lowercase numeral tells you that the chord is minor. A lowercase numeral with a ° at the end of it is diminished. If you see a + at the end of the chord number, it tells you that the chord is augmented. Augmented chords do not occur in the major scale, and are thus not shown here, although I will be bringing it up in the next part of this post. if you don't understand this concept still, let me know.

--------------------------------

Now, our first progression: V-I. This is the most common progression in major scale music, and is often touted as the strongest harmonic resolution. If we look at this in the key of C, our progression is G B D -> C E G. We can immediately see that both chords share a G, but having notes in common doesn't make a progression good at all. For example, the iii chord of C, E, has the notes, E G B, the E and G being common between I and iii. However, if you play iii-I and compare it to V-I, you'll hear that iii-I does not have a very strong pull.

So, G and C have one note in common, but the resolution must lie elsewhere. If we look at those notes again,
G B D -> C E G, there is an interesting tone in there: B. B is the seventh tone of a C major scale. 7 is called a tendency tone, as it is a half step away from the tonic. If you play the white notes on a piano from C to B, and stop there, your ear will want to hear the C above it to complete the octave.

iii still has that B, though, so that's not it. The remaining tone to consider in V is D. There is a major second (whole step/tone) relationship between D and E. Seconds tend to want to pull into other notes, and a V chord sounds nice, because it's major, a fact that would be upset if the D were to become a D#, though an augmentation would decrease the distance between the 5 of G and the 3 of C to a minor second. A V+ chord (G B D#) creates a lot of tension, but I can't tell if it resolves any better than V does, seeing as I've ruined my ears with bastardous atonal music. Somebody look into that.


Alright, I think that's one down. Any questions? comments? corrections?


----------



## DDDorian (Sep 17, 2008)

You're going to want to break what you just wrote down. Like, _right_ down. I'd wager that half of the people who check out this thread won't even know the meaning of those chord symbols. I'm not trying to suggest that what you've written is wrong or that people need to be spoken down to or anything, but if you want to write a definitive article you'll probably have to start right at the very begnning.


----------



## TonalArchitect (Sep 17, 2008)

I have school 'til 10pm tonight and even then will have homework for the next day, which admittedly starts at 1pm. So it may take me a while to read, think, and write a response, but I'll get to it!


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Sep 17, 2008)

Thanks for the input, DDDorian, I made this thread on the fly, and will probably edit my first post when I have a bit of time to deconstruct it. Part of my objective is to help myself better understand this stuff, too. I'll probably have to reduce the first post down to an analysis of V-I, and try to take it up from there.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Sep 18, 2008)

Alright, I've edited.


----------



## TonalArchitect (Sep 21, 2008)

Well, now that I've a bit o' time to look over it, you haven't given us a chord progression to examine in the revised version.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Sep 21, 2008)

V-I, it's as basic as a chord progression can be. Think we should move on to IV-V-I?


----------



## TonalArchitect (Sep 21, 2008)

Oh crap... I somehow missed the "our first progression" bit. 

Sorry. 


I really can read, I mean. . . . 





This is not my day. . . .


EDIT *Enough moping. I'm going to form an insightful response, goddammit!*


EDIT 2

A HA!!!!!! 

So after playing around with the notes in these chords, I have determined that the resolving power of the V chord comes not from the position of the notes in the scale, but their intervallic relation to the chord to which they're resolving. 

So as I systematically sharped and flatted the notes in the V chord, one at a time, I thought "what if it's because they're fifths?"

C E G

G B D 

The root, third, and fifth of the dominant chord are all one perfect fifth above those degrees of the tonic chord. 

So I thought to myself that perhaps perfect consonances had something to do with it.

And so I started to tinker and I found that D minor could, after a I - IV chord progression, kinda resolve to C. Perhaps that's because the D of D minor pulls toward the G of C major. 

I tried sharping each note of the V chord and felt how it pulled toward the tonic, after a I V-- by holding the G# chord out. Didn't pull too hard. 


Now this is likely because of the structure of the diatonic scale. It is impossible to construct chords without the degrees either being the same note, or one fifth above the notes of the tonic chord. The scale only has seven notes, and this would exclude six. 

So, I can't really revise this and make it cohesive, comprehensive, and altogether sane, for I am hopped up on coffee and home-made apple pie, but I'll offer this. 

If you're working with crazy extended chords, especially when you don't adhere strictly to the diatonic scale, and you want to make the chords pull to each other, make sure that some of the degrees between them are one fifth apart.

Hurray!


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Sep 22, 2008)

Good observation. A much more vertical mode of thinking.

I'd contribute right now, but I'm feeling a bit under the weather, and I can't cope with illness worth a damn, so all my focus disappears.


----------



## octatoan (Mar 8, 2015)

And this, too, uh, Mike (may I?) 

I'm extremely interested, since I know precisely nothing about chord progressions.


----------



## Solodini (Mar 9, 2015)

Octotoan, do you know how to construct chords?


----------



## Poltergeist (Mar 9, 2015)

This was very well written, and I feel I understood it a good bit .. However I need examples of how to practice this stuff correctly.. Should I try different chord positions/inversions or keep it basic chord forms just to learn how the notes pull towards each other?

I remember you posting a chart something similar to this... Is this a good way to learn how progressions work ? If I wanted to start on the ii chord that would become my tonal center right? now I could follow this chart all the way down to the I chord.. But I wouldnt want to do that because I started on the ii chord an that would be home base (tonal center) not the I chord. Or am I over thinking this? Is that type of approach getting into the concept of modulation? If I start on the ii chord that implies Dorian, no?


----------



## octatoan (Mar 9, 2015)

Solodini said:


> Octotoan, do you know how to construct chords?



Yes, fairly well. But weird/interesting progressions are another matter altogether.


----------



## Solodini (Mar 10, 2015)

Poltergeist said:


> This was very well written, and I feel I understood it a good bit .. However I need examples of how to practice this stuff correctly.. Should I try different chord positions/inversions or keep it basic chord forms just to learn how the notes pull towards each other?
> 
> I remember you posting a chart something similar to this... Is this a good way to learn how progressions work ? If I wanted to start on the ii chord that would become my tonal center right? now I could follow this chart all the way down to the I chord.. But I wouldnt want to do that because I started on the ii chord an that would be home base (tonal center) not the I chord. Or am I over thinking this? Is that type of approach getting into the concept of modulation? If I start on the ii chord that implies Dorian, no?


 
Start a sentence with the word "well". Doesn't mean your subject is holes filled with fresh water. Your chord I is your tonal centre. If your ear tells you that another chord is your tonal centre then trust it: if what you think is chord I doesn't seem to resolve the sequence then it's probably not chord I; if the chord which resolves your sequence wasn't described as chord I, it probably should have been called chord I so adjust the naming of the rest of your chords. 

You don't need to follow that sequence right through. That just tells you which chords will probably flow well in what direction, but sometimes you want angularity, not flow. Most successful music has a mix of tension and resolution. All one and none of the other is usually either boring or overwhelming. If an angular chord change sounds good to you then go for it. There'll probably be a more advanced theoretical description of it which you just don't know yet.



octatoan said:


> Yes, fairly well. But weird/interesting progressions are another matter altogether.


 
What do you class as weird/interesting? Are you fine with following I IV vii iii vi ii V I derivatives in various keys?


----------



## octatoan (Mar 10, 2015)

Actually, I have very little experience with _any_ progressions at all, but - by "interesting" I mean progressions with borrowed chords, substitutions and whatever all of that is. I know how to construct, say, a C#11 chord or a b7b9 chord, but I have *no* clue where I would use that in an actual song. I'd love a series of examples, beginning from, say C - F - G and ending at things like Cadd9 - F6 - D - G - Asus2 - Bb - G - Cadd9, each introducing a new idea (which is what I think MBN's plan was with this thread, anyway).


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Mar 11, 2015)

octatoan said:


> And this, too, uh, Mike (may I?)



You may.



Poltergeist said:


> I remember you posting a chart something similar to this... Is this a good way to learn how progressions work ?



This one is better:






(That diagram is also shown in this thread, which might be of interest to people who want to read great long posts about chord progressions by yours truly.)

This is what it looks like for major keys, by the way. The qualities of the chords change in different modes. You can swap out the major mode numerals for any of the other modes and it will basically work the same.

Major: I ii iii IV V vi vii° (C Dm Em F G Am B°)
Natural Minor: i ii° &#9837;III iv v &#9837;VI &#9837;VII (Cm D° E&#9837; Fm Gm A&#9837; B&#9837
Harmonic Minor: i ii° &#9837;III+ iv V &#9837;VI vii° (Cm D° E&#9837;+ Fm G A&#9837; B°)
Dorian: i ii &#9837;III IV v vi° &#9837;VII (Cm Dm E&#9837; F Gm A° B&#9837
Mixolydian: I ii iii° IV v vi &#9837;VII (C Dm E° F Gm Am B&#9837
Phrygian: i &#9837;II &#9837;III iv v° &#9837;VI &#9837;vii (Cm D&#9837; E&#9837; Fm G° A&#9837; B&#9837;m)
Lydian: I II iii #iv° V vi vii (C D Em F#° G Am Bm)



> This was very well written, and I feel I understood it a good bit .. However I need examples of how to practice this stuff correctly.. Should I try different chord positions/inversions or keep it basic chord forms just to learn how the notes pull towards each other?


The best advice, aside from enrolling in theory classes, is to learn this stuff and use it as often as you possibly can. When I was in junior college, I did innumerable voice leading exercises with paper and pencil, starting with diatonic progressions using primary chords and ending with the full gamut of chromatic harmony. I can&#8217;t say that it is for everyone, but it worked for me. It certainly is easier when you&#8217;re doing it for a grade, too. Voice leading is more important to take away than the actual chords. The chords are nice, but you get the reason for the chords once you see how the voice leading works out.

It&#8217;s probably not a bad idea to get a ton of chords and their inversions under your fingers. After all, you have to apply this stuff somehow.



> If I wanted to start on the ii chord that would become my tonal center right? now I could follow this chart all the way down to the I chord.. But I wouldnt want to do that because I started on the ii chord an that would be home base (tonal center) not the I chord. Or am I over thinking this? Is that type of approach getting into the concept of modulation? If I start on the ii chord that implies Dorian, no?


That chart represents diatonic progressions in the major mode. Different modes come later, but this is how it works.

Major: I vi IV ii V I
Minor: i VI iv ii° V i
Dorian: i vi° IV ii v i
Mixolydian: I vi IV ii v I
Generic: 1 6 4 2 5 1

See what&#8217;s going on here? The numbers are all the same, but I&#8217;ve changed the quality of the chords. Mode in harmony is not defined by where you start. Rather, it&#8217;s about relationships between the notes. I&#8217;ll show you some dorian mode.

Kevin Burke - Tuttle&#8217;s Reel / The Bunch of Green Rushes / The Maids of Mitchelstown


(The chords I&#8217;m providing in my transcriptions are guesses at best, by the way. Irish Traditional Music is melody first, without much regard for chords. That said, it is not too difficult to extrapolate that the chord for a certain measure is Dm if the melody is going &#8220;D F A&#8221;. Oh, and the transcriptions are in ABC notation. Copy-paste the text into the field on this link to render it into dots.)

 0:00 - Tuttle&#8217;s Reel


```
X:26
T:Tuttle's Reel
R:Reel
M:4/4
K:Ddor
|:"Dm"A,DDE FEFG|A2Gc Ad~d2|A,DDE F2dB|"C"cAGE FDEC|
"Dm"A,DDE FEFG|A2Gc Ad~d2|fded dcAB|1"C"cAGE FDEC:|2 "C"cAGE "Dm"EDD2||
|:"Dm"d2dB "C"c2cG|"Dm"AddB "C"cAGA|"Dm"d2dB "C"cdcA|GEcE "Dm"EDD2|
"Dm"d2dB "C"c2cG|"Dm"Addc "C"d2de|"Dm"fded dcAB|1"C"cAGE &#8220;Dm&#8221;EDD2:|2"C"cAGE FDEC|]
```
I don&#8217;t really know what to say about these, so let me know if you have any questions. To me, this _feels_ dorian. It _feels_ like that because of ear training and doing forty-seven levels of scale identification in MacGamut. I don&#8217;t get how one can _feel_ that the modality is something like &#8220;C major starting on D,&#8221; because there is absolutely none of that in here. In fact, it&#8217;s not until the last beat of the third measure that we can say for a fact that this is D dorian. The B is the only thing separating this modality from D minor (which has B&#9837. D is clearly the tonic, and my ear fills in the information as it comes. I hear a minor tonic triad, which means that the mode is from the minor family, then I hear a 2, a 4, and a &#9837;7, which eliminates phrygian or harmonic/melodic minor (or some other weird mode), then the 6 comes along and clears up the ambiguity between the remaining two choices. As far as the chords go, there are only two of them. Since D is the tonic, that means that Dm is i and C is &#9837;VII.

 1:12 - The Bunch of Green Rushes


```
X:28
T:The Bunch Of Green Rushes
M:4/4
L:1/8
R:Reel
K:Ddor
d|:"Am"cAGE "Dm"~F3d|"Am"cAGc "Dm"AddB|"Am"cAGE "Dm"F2ag|"D"^fdec AddB:|
|:"Dm"AddB "Am"cAGE|"Dm"~FGAc "Am"{d}cAGc|"Dm"AddB "Am"cAGA|1"Am"cdeg {a}gedc:|2"Am"cdeg {a}gecA||
"D"d2^fd adfd|"C"c2ec gcec|"D"d2^fd adfd|"Am"cAGc "D"Addc|
"D"d2^fd adfd|"C"c2cB cdeg|"D"g^f (3gfe fded|"Am"cAGc "Dm"Add2|]
```
I like this rendition of this tune because the tonic chord changes quality between minor and major. This effectively yields both D dorian (D E F G A B C) as well as D mixolydian (D E F# G A B C). This is another argument against &#8220;Dorian = ii&#8221; or &#8220;Mixolydian = V&#8221;, because the Roman numeral analysis looks much cleaner once you discount the relative, rotational view of modes in favor of the parallel view. Dm is i, D is I. How much simpler can you make it?

The C section is straight up mixolydian (D C would be analyzed as I &#9837;VII), until the turnaround where it switches back to dorian. The only thing separating those two modes is F/F#.

 2:33 - The Maids of Mitchelstown


```
X:49
T:The Maids of Mitchelstown
R:Reel
M:4/4
L:1/8
K:Ddor
|:"Dm"D2AG EEG2|"Am"A2GA cAGE|"Dm"D2AG EEG2|"Am"A2GE EDDC:|
|:"C"EGAB c2AG|"Dm"Adde f2ed|"Am"cAGE "Dm"F3G|1"Am"AcGE "Dm"EDD2:|2"Am"AcBd cAGE|]
```
The A part is pentatonic, and so is ambiguous as to whether it is ultimately D minor or D dorian. It&#8217;s not until the B section that the B comes in and cements this as a dorian tune. I think the ear is already expecting dorian, since the context calls for it.



octatoan said:


> Actually, I have very little experience with any progressions at all, but - by "interesting" I mean progressions with borrowed chords, substitutions and whatever all of that is. I know how to construct, say, a C#11 chord or a b7b9 chord, but I have *no* clue where I would use that in an actual song. I'd love a series of examples, beginning from, say C - F - G and ending at things like Cadd9 - F6 - D - G - Asus2 - Bb - G - Cadd9, each introducing a new idea (which is what I think MBN's plan was with this thread, anyway).



Your guess is as good as mine. This thread is almost seven years old. I&#8217;m not really sure what I was going for back then. I was probably trying to get a discussion going about progressions involving the diatonic chords, then getting into chromaticism and stuff that isn&#8217;t so basic. From where I am now, this is the order in which I would suggest learning harmony:

Functional diatonic progressions with
1. Primary triads
2. Cadences
3. Secondary triads
4. Voice leading with inversions
5. Seventh chords
6. Inversions of seventh chords
7. Non-harmonic tones

Chromatic progressions:
1. Secondary functions
2. Modulation
3. Neapolitan chord
4. Borrowed chords
5. Augmented sixth chords
6. Enharmonic modulation
7. Tritone substitution
8. Chromatic mediant relationships
9. Altered chords (not like the jazz definition of &#8220;altered&#8221;, though that ends up falling under the same term)
10. Non-functional chords and harmonized non-harmonic tones
11. Planing
12. Chords of the ninth, eleventh, and thirteenth
13. Chords with added and substituted members
14. Polychords and polytonality
15. 20th century scale resources
16. Da blues.

The thing about 20th and 21st century harmony is that it&#8217;s complicated and doesn&#8217;t fit neatly into a little box like 17th and 18th century harmony does. Our modern ears are accustomed to hearing harmonies that were unimaginable (or at least unheard of) just a couple hundred years ago. That&#8217;s all fine and good, I like my chords like I like my women: crazy and repulsive to normal people. However, the more modern harmonies wouldn&#8217;t be here without the vanilla harmonies of yesteryear, so it&#8217;s a prerequisite that you learn how vi IV V I works before delving into something more akin to this:


----------



## octatoan (Mar 11, 2015)

Thanks, but would it be possible for you to post a few progressions, slowly getting more and more complicated, without explanations? That way, I could try to gauge how far I've come.

Apart from Kostka/Payne, what is another nice book for harmony?


----------



## ElRay (Mar 11, 2015)

Poltergeist said:


>



Oh no! Don't make me whip-out the full map  

Ray


----------



## Solodini (Mar 12, 2015)

octatoan said:


> Thanks, but would it be possible for you to post a few progressions, slowly getting more and more complicated, without explanations? That way, I could try to gauge how far I've come.
> 
> Apart from Kostka/Payne, what is another nice book for harmony?


 
Why don't you write something and share it with us so we can see how far you've come and help you to progress?


----------



## octatoan (Mar 12, 2015)

I'll try.
Any idea about the books?


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Mar 12, 2015)

octatoan said:


> Thanks, but would it be possible for you to post a few progressions, slowly getting more and more complicated, without explanations? That way, I could try to gauge how far I've come.



Sure thing. I'll do this in the key of C, without analysis. Have fun.

C F G C

C F Dm B°/D C

C/E F Dm/F G/B C

Cm Fm G Cm

F&#8710; Bø7 Em7 Am7 Dm7 G7 C

Cm Cm/E&#9837; C7/E Fm F#°7 Cm/G G7 Cm

G C F Dm D Em C D7/A G

A&#9837;7/G&#9837; D&#9837;/F G7 Cm

C F Fm B&#9837; G7 C

Cm A&#9837;7(#11) G7 Cm

C Am Dm7/F F#°7 E&#9837;/G A&#9837;m F+/A B&#9837;7 Dm/A A7 Dm Bm G#m Fm Dm

Mind you, it&#8217;s easy to barf out a bunch of chord symbols. Putting a harmonic analysis to them is the next step. Realizing a figured bass is another skill entirely. If you want to see what I&#8217;m talking about, have a look at the practice exams that various music departments put up for their prospective candidates:

http://www.peabody.jhu.edu/conservatory/musictheory/AP-UgradX.pdf

Basic Tonal Harmony | School of Music

http://finearts.uky.edu/sites/default/files/pictures/Grad%20Entrance%20Exam%20PRACTICE%20exam.pdf

Theory and Analysis Exam | USC Thornton School of Music

(Most of these are graduate entrance exams, but after working through Kostka & Payne or a similar book, you should be able to do all of the tonal stuff without any problem.)

I also found this page, which has some useful study guides.



> Apart from Kostka/Payne, what is another nice book for harmony?


Walter Piston, third edition.

Hal Leonard's Pocket Music Theory is less formal, without a lot of extra fluff, but also without much on voice leading. Probably more than the average pop musician will ever need, but it still does not get very in depth. Voice leading is what it&#8217;s all about, so I would recommend that you eventually read a harmony book from Piston, Kostka/Payne, Aldwell/Schachter, Schoenberg, or Miguel Roig-Francoli. You can find Tchaikovsky's harmony book on IMSLP, if you aren't keen on spending the money. (I have no experience with Tchaikovsky's book. It looks like it is written with consideration to counterpoint and composition, which is interesting.)


----------



## JustMac (Mar 13, 2015)

I can dig it but if a triad must be 3 stacked this, what do you call 3 notes that are just partially (or totally eschew) thirds?

Eg, 

C E F (root, 3, p4)

or, no third at all, like

C D G (root, 2, 5)


Typically I would say that the first instance was a Maj. 4th triad, and the latter a suspended 2nd triad, but maybe it's not the right term .


----------



## Solodini (Mar 13, 2015)

5ths are often not that necessary, as they don't usually give any tonal character. Cadd11, is what I'd call the first, but it depends on if C is intended to be the root. If there's another instrument playing an A, it could be implying Fmaj7.

The second chord is a sus2, yeah.


----------



## Poltergeist (Mar 13, 2015)

Thanks Mr. Big Noodles for that response.. That cleared up a lot of confusion. I'll be re-reading it again after work and just checking up on this thread in general on and off.. thanks again.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Mar 13, 2015)

JustMac said:


> I can dig it but if a triad must be 3 stacked this, what do you call 3 notes that are just partially (or totally eschew) thirds?



Non-tertian sonorities, possibly mixed interval chords, or even a mislabeling. You might still have a tertian chord.



> C E F (root, 3, p4)
> 
> or, no third at all, like
> 
> ...


These don't have standardized names as standalone sonorities, and it depends entirely on context anyway. The first one could easily be heard as C or F&#8710;. It could even be a part of a different chord. And C D G could be anything. Is it Csus2, G sus4, or D7sus4? What if it's a quintal chord (C3 G3 D4, for example)? What if it's a quartal chord (D3 G3 C4)? Does it really matter? Speaking as a composer, I don't find it too important to put labels on that sort of thing. C, Cadd9, Cadd6, Cadd4, Csus4, and Csus2 all function the same way. Triads are the basis for the harmony and everything else is just color. Chord symbols are shorthand. If I need to write a book every time I want to express a chord, it defeats the purpose. At that point I might as well use standard notation and do away with all ambiguity.

Dealing with those kinds of chords in composition or analysis present their own set of challenges. However, we're building on a tertian harmonic language to begin with. I tend to approach non-tertian harmony from a tertian perspective still. If nothing else, look for root movement and go for that.



Poltergeist said:


> Thanks Mr. Big Noodles for that response.. That cleared up a lot of confusion. I'll be re-reading it again after work and just checking up on this thread in general on and off.. thanks again.


----------

