Can each chord in a progression create its own key? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Difference between keys and scales?I-IV-V blues progressionMinor key and its chordsPlaying scales over I IV V progressionTips on Memorizing Chords that are in Different ScalesConfused about how to know the chord progression for each scaleCan't understand parallel progression. Can explain with example?Parallel chord substitutionsDo scales over progressions change the key of the song?How to turn each chord in a progression into separate scales?Are Secondary Dominants related to Chord-Scales?

How is simplicity better than precision and clarity in prose?

Antler Helmet: Can it work?

Why does tar appear to skip file contents when output file is /dev/null?

Problem when applying foreach loop

What did Darwin mean by 'squib' here?

Working around an AWS network ACL rule limit

What do you call a plan that's an alternative plan in case your initial plan fails?

What are the performance impacts of 'functional' Rust?

I'm having difficulty getting my players to do stuff in a sandbox campaign

What is the largest species of polychaete?

Can a monk deflect thrown melee weapons?

Active filter with series inductor and resistor - do these exist?

Can I throw a sword that doesn't have the Thrown property at someone?

Using "nakedly" instead of "with nothing on"

How does modal jazz use chord progressions?

Slither Like a Snake

How did the aliens keep their waters separated?

How to politely respond to generic emails requesting a PhD/job in my lab? Without wasting too much time

The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551

Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?

Complexity of many constant time steps with occasional logarithmic steps

Array/tabular for long multiplication

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

Interesting examples of non-locally compact topological groups



Can each chord in a progression create its own key?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Difference between keys and scales?I-IV-V blues progressionMinor key and its chordsPlaying scales over I IV V progressionTips on Memorizing Chords that are in Different ScalesConfused about how to know the chord progression for each scaleCan't understand parallel progression. Can explain with example?Parallel chord substitutionsDo scales over progressions change the key of the song?How to turn each chord in a progression into separate scales?Are Secondary Dominants related to Chord-Scales?










2















Say I have a chord progression in C major:

I V vi

C G Am



When I play each of these chords can I potentially play the scale of each chord over it? So for C I'd play C major, for G I'd play G major, for Am I'd play A minor scale. I'm thinking this is possible because secondary dominants work this way by establishing a temporary key on whatever chord you're currently on. But does this happen in practice where people modulate to a different key on each chord change?



Edit: I was confused that a scale can be played over a chord. I thought the moment you play a scale then you're in a new key. I forgot that in order to establish a new key you need to atleast play a progression in the new key. It's just that I saw a video and they were playing different scales over each chord and it mixed me up. I forgot a scale wasn't the same as a key.










share|improve this question
























  • Scales and keys are different concepts. Just because you are playing a different scale over a chord does not mean you change keys.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom what if I said i was playing a key over each chord? does that then mean I'm changing the key? or do you mean in order to establish a new key I need to be playing a progression in the new key.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • That doesn't make sense. You can play a scale and you can play in a key. You don't play a key it's an abstract concept which is why you can play different scales and be in the same key. I swore we've answered the difference between a scale and a key before and if we have, it would most likely be a duplicate of this question.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom yeah I asked a question in regards to establishing a key. But this is different. I'm just asking if a scale can be played over each chord. I've seen jazz musicians do this.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • You typically can't establish a key with one chord (unless you are just playing one chord in a drone or pedal) and in your comment you are using scale and key interchangeably which is making this question make little sense. And it seems like you already know you can change scales over the progression so I'm not sure what more you want to know.

    – Dom
    2 days ago















2















Say I have a chord progression in C major:

I V vi

C G Am



When I play each of these chords can I potentially play the scale of each chord over it? So for C I'd play C major, for G I'd play G major, for Am I'd play A minor scale. I'm thinking this is possible because secondary dominants work this way by establishing a temporary key on whatever chord you're currently on. But does this happen in practice where people modulate to a different key on each chord change?



Edit: I was confused that a scale can be played over a chord. I thought the moment you play a scale then you're in a new key. I forgot that in order to establish a new key you need to atleast play a progression in the new key. It's just that I saw a video and they were playing different scales over each chord and it mixed me up. I forgot a scale wasn't the same as a key.










share|improve this question
























  • Scales and keys are different concepts. Just because you are playing a different scale over a chord does not mean you change keys.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom what if I said i was playing a key over each chord? does that then mean I'm changing the key? or do you mean in order to establish a new key I need to be playing a progression in the new key.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • That doesn't make sense. You can play a scale and you can play in a key. You don't play a key it's an abstract concept which is why you can play different scales and be in the same key. I swore we've answered the difference between a scale and a key before and if we have, it would most likely be a duplicate of this question.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom yeah I asked a question in regards to establishing a key. But this is different. I'm just asking if a scale can be played over each chord. I've seen jazz musicians do this.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • You typically can't establish a key with one chord (unless you are just playing one chord in a drone or pedal) and in your comment you are using scale and key interchangeably which is making this question make little sense. And it seems like you already know you can change scales over the progression so I'm not sure what more you want to know.

    – Dom
    2 days ago













2












2








2








Say I have a chord progression in C major:

I V vi

C G Am



When I play each of these chords can I potentially play the scale of each chord over it? So for C I'd play C major, for G I'd play G major, for Am I'd play A minor scale. I'm thinking this is possible because secondary dominants work this way by establishing a temporary key on whatever chord you're currently on. But does this happen in practice where people modulate to a different key on each chord change?



Edit: I was confused that a scale can be played over a chord. I thought the moment you play a scale then you're in a new key. I forgot that in order to establish a new key you need to atleast play a progression in the new key. It's just that I saw a video and they were playing different scales over each chord and it mixed me up. I forgot a scale wasn't the same as a key.










share|improve this question
















Say I have a chord progression in C major:

I V vi

C G Am



When I play each of these chords can I potentially play the scale of each chord over it? So for C I'd play C major, for G I'd play G major, for Am I'd play A minor scale. I'm thinking this is possible because secondary dominants work this way by establishing a temporary key on whatever chord you're currently on. But does this happen in practice where people modulate to a different key on each chord change?



Edit: I was confused that a scale can be played over a chord. I thought the moment you play a scale then you're in a new key. I forgot that in order to establish a new key you need to atleast play a progression in the new key. It's just that I saw a video and they were playing different scales over each chord and it mixed me up. I forgot a scale wasn't the same as a key.







scales chord-progressions






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago







foreyez

















asked 2 days ago









foreyezforeyez

5,64142689




5,64142689












  • Scales and keys are different concepts. Just because you are playing a different scale over a chord does not mean you change keys.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom what if I said i was playing a key over each chord? does that then mean I'm changing the key? or do you mean in order to establish a new key I need to be playing a progression in the new key.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • That doesn't make sense. You can play a scale and you can play in a key. You don't play a key it's an abstract concept which is why you can play different scales and be in the same key. I swore we've answered the difference between a scale and a key before and if we have, it would most likely be a duplicate of this question.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom yeah I asked a question in regards to establishing a key. But this is different. I'm just asking if a scale can be played over each chord. I've seen jazz musicians do this.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • You typically can't establish a key with one chord (unless you are just playing one chord in a drone or pedal) and in your comment you are using scale and key interchangeably which is making this question make little sense. And it seems like you already know you can change scales over the progression so I'm not sure what more you want to know.

    – Dom
    2 days ago

















  • Scales and keys are different concepts. Just because you are playing a different scale over a chord does not mean you change keys.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom what if I said i was playing a key over each chord? does that then mean I'm changing the key? or do you mean in order to establish a new key I need to be playing a progression in the new key.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • That doesn't make sense. You can play a scale and you can play in a key. You don't play a key it's an abstract concept which is why you can play different scales and be in the same key. I swore we've answered the difference between a scale and a key before and if we have, it would most likely be a duplicate of this question.

    – Dom
    2 days ago











  • @Dom yeah I asked a question in regards to establishing a key. But this is different. I'm just asking if a scale can be played over each chord. I've seen jazz musicians do this.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago











  • You typically can't establish a key with one chord (unless you are just playing one chord in a drone or pedal) and in your comment you are using scale and key interchangeably which is making this question make little sense. And it seems like you already know you can change scales over the progression so I'm not sure what more you want to know.

    – Dom
    2 days ago
















Scales and keys are different concepts. Just because you are playing a different scale over a chord does not mean you change keys.

– Dom
2 days ago





Scales and keys are different concepts. Just because you are playing a different scale over a chord does not mean you change keys.

– Dom
2 days ago













@Dom what if I said i was playing a key over each chord? does that then mean I'm changing the key? or do you mean in order to establish a new key I need to be playing a progression in the new key.

– foreyez
2 days ago





@Dom what if I said i was playing a key over each chord? does that then mean I'm changing the key? or do you mean in order to establish a new key I need to be playing a progression in the new key.

– foreyez
2 days ago













That doesn't make sense. You can play a scale and you can play in a key. You don't play a key it's an abstract concept which is why you can play different scales and be in the same key. I swore we've answered the difference between a scale and a key before and if we have, it would most likely be a duplicate of this question.

– Dom
2 days ago





That doesn't make sense. You can play a scale and you can play in a key. You don't play a key it's an abstract concept which is why you can play different scales and be in the same key. I swore we've answered the difference between a scale and a key before and if we have, it would most likely be a duplicate of this question.

– Dom
2 days ago













@Dom yeah I asked a question in regards to establishing a key. But this is different. I'm just asking if a scale can be played over each chord. I've seen jazz musicians do this.

– foreyez
2 days ago





@Dom yeah I asked a question in regards to establishing a key. But this is different. I'm just asking if a scale can be played over each chord. I've seen jazz musicians do this.

– foreyez
2 days ago













You typically can't establish a key with one chord (unless you are just playing one chord in a drone or pedal) and in your comment you are using scale and key interchangeably which is making this question make little sense. And it seems like you already know you can change scales over the progression so I'm not sure what more you want to know.

– Dom
2 days ago





You typically can't establish a key with one chord (unless you are just playing one chord in a drone or pedal) and in your comment you are using scale and key interchangeably which is making this question make little sense. And it seems like you already know you can change scales over the progression so I'm not sure what more you want to know.

– Dom
2 days ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















3














Yes, sort of, but it's probably better to call it a tonicization rather than changing keys.



Importantly, consider the implications of changing the scale to tonicize each chord.



If you play scales C major, G major, A minor (in this last case let's assume you get the proper raised leading tone in there so harmonic or melodic minor), you will create tonicize each chord. Which means you would relabel...




C:I I/V i/vi
C G Am


On the other hand, if you keep it diatonic and really get the sense of your original chord symbols, you would play all in C major. I don't like describing it this way but the scales will be C major, G Mixolydian, A Aeolian...




I V vi
C G Am


...if you play it that way you should get the feel of a deceptive progression.



You can do it either way, but the effect of where the tonal center lies will change.




EDIT



You changed it to I vi V. Either way demonstrates the concept.



The only difference with this is that the diatonic version should have a feel of a half-cadence, or just an opening progression depending on the phrasing.



The chromatic approach - using G major on the G chord - will have the feel of temporarily changing the tonal focus to G, a tonicization.




It seems like you are asking a series of questions about the interaction of diatonic and chromatic.



Secondary dominants and tonicization is one way to achieve chromaticism.



You may also want to look at chromatic non-chord tones. This will add chromatic notes, but importantly they are harmonically un-essential so they will not cause a tonicization. Chromatic NCT's are a nice way to spice up vanilla diatonicism.






share|improve this answer

























  • it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

    – Michael Curtis
    2 days ago











  • what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago



















5














I often wonder whether before asking your questions you've actually tried out the theoretical ideas in practice. If not, why not. There isn't a lot of theory involved here. What sounds good (to you or others) is what the result will be.



In answer - say you're in C, and the chords are C, G, Am F. Over c, use C scale,, over G use G scale, etc., there are not many notes that will need to change. For the G chord, there's only an F/F# difference. For the F, there's only B/Bb difference. Depending where you place those accidentals will determine whether they will fit into the melody or not. So, basically, this is another theory based question that has very little bearing on the reality of music playing. Please, instead of bombarding us with 'what might happen if...', get playing and discover by listening to what is happening when you actually try these ideas out on piano, or whatever.






share|improve this answer























  • of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

    – Tim
    2 days ago












  • well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

    – foreyez
    2 days ago












  • You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

    – Laurence Payne
    2 days ago











  • He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

    – Michael Curtis
    2 days ago



















2














Not really as suggested by modern theorists. The (clock) time is too short. To establiah a new key, one usually must use noted that were not in the previous key. One can use non-tonic chords in any key; you notation shows that, C-G-Am is a C-major (or A-minor) chord progression. Were one to play, C-E7-Am, things might be a bit ambiguous; the G# is not in the key of C but is in the key of Am (and A and G and D). However, were the Am followed (not to unusually by) Dm-G7-C or even D7-G7-C, that would emphasize the F from the G7 and contradict the establishment of Am. To confirm Am, one would usually follow thing by a B0-E7-Am which uses F# a couple of times and no F natural.



There is a duration effect. One should spend more than a beat or even a few bars in the new key, then "neutralize" (Schoenberg's term, not a bad term for this effect) the note in the old key (F in the case being discussed) and emphasize the new note (F#). This is termed "modulation" (which to me seems, analogously with FM vs AM, to describe a short digression but that train left the airport over 1000 years ago.) Short digressions are usually termed "tonicizations" (why not "tonicickizations" like in "picknicking"?).






share|improve this answer






























    2














    No, secondary dominants don't do that. They might establish a temporary tonic on the chord they lead TO.



    But try. In your example - C, Am, G - try playing some melodies. When you get to the G, does F# or F♮ fit better? I think it will depend on whether you feel you've modulated to G, or whether G keeps its identity as V of C major.



    Let's look at an example that includes a secondary dominant. C, D7, G. It might be a bit more obvious. G7, or G(maj7)? The former keeps us in C major, the latter suggests we've modulated to G major. Both are fine.



    It's also fine to play a succession of maj7 chords, implying the major scale of each. C(maj7), D(maj7), E♭(maj7) ... Use the scales C major, D major, E♭ major ... Not functional harmony any more (we can discard that 'circle of 5ths' thing :-) But nice and funky (or dreamy, depending on style)!






    share|improve this answer























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "240"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f82693%2fcan-each-chord-in-a-progression-create-its-own-key%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      3














      Yes, sort of, but it's probably better to call it a tonicization rather than changing keys.



      Importantly, consider the implications of changing the scale to tonicize each chord.



      If you play scales C major, G major, A minor (in this last case let's assume you get the proper raised leading tone in there so harmonic or melodic minor), you will create tonicize each chord. Which means you would relabel...




      C:I I/V i/vi
      C G Am


      On the other hand, if you keep it diatonic and really get the sense of your original chord symbols, you would play all in C major. I don't like describing it this way but the scales will be C major, G Mixolydian, A Aeolian...




      I V vi
      C G Am


      ...if you play it that way you should get the feel of a deceptive progression.



      You can do it either way, but the effect of where the tonal center lies will change.




      EDIT



      You changed it to I vi V. Either way demonstrates the concept.



      The only difference with this is that the diatonic version should have a feel of a half-cadence, or just an opening progression depending on the phrasing.



      The chromatic approach - using G major on the G chord - will have the feel of temporarily changing the tonal focus to G, a tonicization.




      It seems like you are asking a series of questions about the interaction of diatonic and chromatic.



      Secondary dominants and tonicization is one way to achieve chromaticism.



      You may also want to look at chromatic non-chord tones. This will add chromatic notes, but importantly they are harmonically un-essential so they will not cause a tonicization. Chromatic NCT's are a nice way to spice up vanilla diatonicism.






      share|improve this answer

























      • it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago











      • what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago
















      3














      Yes, sort of, but it's probably better to call it a tonicization rather than changing keys.



      Importantly, consider the implications of changing the scale to tonicize each chord.



      If you play scales C major, G major, A minor (in this last case let's assume you get the proper raised leading tone in there so harmonic or melodic minor), you will create tonicize each chord. Which means you would relabel...




      C:I I/V i/vi
      C G Am


      On the other hand, if you keep it diatonic and really get the sense of your original chord symbols, you would play all in C major. I don't like describing it this way but the scales will be C major, G Mixolydian, A Aeolian...




      I V vi
      C G Am


      ...if you play it that way you should get the feel of a deceptive progression.



      You can do it either way, but the effect of where the tonal center lies will change.




      EDIT



      You changed it to I vi V. Either way demonstrates the concept.



      The only difference with this is that the diatonic version should have a feel of a half-cadence, or just an opening progression depending on the phrasing.



      The chromatic approach - using G major on the G chord - will have the feel of temporarily changing the tonal focus to G, a tonicization.




      It seems like you are asking a series of questions about the interaction of diatonic and chromatic.



      Secondary dominants and tonicization is one way to achieve chromaticism.



      You may also want to look at chromatic non-chord tones. This will add chromatic notes, but importantly they are harmonically un-essential so they will not cause a tonicization. Chromatic NCT's are a nice way to spice up vanilla diatonicism.






      share|improve this answer

























      • it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago











      • what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago














      3












      3








      3







      Yes, sort of, but it's probably better to call it a tonicization rather than changing keys.



      Importantly, consider the implications of changing the scale to tonicize each chord.



      If you play scales C major, G major, A minor (in this last case let's assume you get the proper raised leading tone in there so harmonic or melodic minor), you will create tonicize each chord. Which means you would relabel...




      C:I I/V i/vi
      C G Am


      On the other hand, if you keep it diatonic and really get the sense of your original chord symbols, you would play all in C major. I don't like describing it this way but the scales will be C major, G Mixolydian, A Aeolian...




      I V vi
      C G Am


      ...if you play it that way you should get the feel of a deceptive progression.



      You can do it either way, but the effect of where the tonal center lies will change.




      EDIT



      You changed it to I vi V. Either way demonstrates the concept.



      The only difference with this is that the diatonic version should have a feel of a half-cadence, or just an opening progression depending on the phrasing.



      The chromatic approach - using G major on the G chord - will have the feel of temporarily changing the tonal focus to G, a tonicization.




      It seems like you are asking a series of questions about the interaction of diatonic and chromatic.



      Secondary dominants and tonicization is one way to achieve chromaticism.



      You may also want to look at chromatic non-chord tones. This will add chromatic notes, but importantly they are harmonically un-essential so they will not cause a tonicization. Chromatic NCT's are a nice way to spice up vanilla diatonicism.






      share|improve this answer















      Yes, sort of, but it's probably better to call it a tonicization rather than changing keys.



      Importantly, consider the implications of changing the scale to tonicize each chord.



      If you play scales C major, G major, A minor (in this last case let's assume you get the proper raised leading tone in there so harmonic or melodic minor), you will create tonicize each chord. Which means you would relabel...




      C:I I/V i/vi
      C G Am


      On the other hand, if you keep it diatonic and really get the sense of your original chord symbols, you would play all in C major. I don't like describing it this way but the scales will be C major, G Mixolydian, A Aeolian...




      I V vi
      C G Am


      ...if you play it that way you should get the feel of a deceptive progression.



      You can do it either way, but the effect of where the tonal center lies will change.




      EDIT



      You changed it to I vi V. Either way demonstrates the concept.



      The only difference with this is that the diatonic version should have a feel of a half-cadence, or just an opening progression depending on the phrasing.



      The chromatic approach - using G major on the G chord - will have the feel of temporarily changing the tonal focus to G, a tonicization.




      It seems like you are asking a series of questions about the interaction of diatonic and chromatic.



      Secondary dominants and tonicization is one way to achieve chromaticism.



      You may also want to look at chromatic non-chord tones. This will add chromatic notes, but importantly they are harmonically un-essential so they will not cause a tonicization. Chromatic NCT's are a nice way to spice up vanilla diatonicism.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 2 days ago

























      answered 2 days ago









      Michael CurtisMichael Curtis

      12k744




      12k744












      • it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago











      • what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago


















      • it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago











      • what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago

















      it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

      – Michael Curtis
      2 days ago





      it doesn't matter that much, works the same either way.

      – Michael Curtis
      2 days ago













      what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

      – foreyez
      2 days ago






      what you said about keeping it diatonic and then making everything modes was gold, that's what I saw the jazz players do in chord-scales. In addition what you said about tonicization (vs modulation) was a word I didn't remember. great in depth answer.

      – foreyez
      2 days ago












      5














      I often wonder whether before asking your questions you've actually tried out the theoretical ideas in practice. If not, why not. There isn't a lot of theory involved here. What sounds good (to you or others) is what the result will be.



      In answer - say you're in C, and the chords are C, G, Am F. Over c, use C scale,, over G use G scale, etc., there are not many notes that will need to change. For the G chord, there's only an F/F# difference. For the F, there's only B/Bb difference. Depending where you place those accidentals will determine whether they will fit into the melody or not. So, basically, this is another theory based question that has very little bearing on the reality of music playing. Please, instead of bombarding us with 'what might happen if...', get playing and discover by listening to what is happening when you actually try these ideas out on piano, or whatever.






      share|improve this answer























      • of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago






      • 1





        Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

        – Tim
        2 days ago












      • well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago












      • You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

        – Laurence Payne
        2 days ago











      • He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago
















      5














      I often wonder whether before asking your questions you've actually tried out the theoretical ideas in practice. If not, why not. There isn't a lot of theory involved here. What sounds good (to you or others) is what the result will be.



      In answer - say you're in C, and the chords are C, G, Am F. Over c, use C scale,, over G use G scale, etc., there are not many notes that will need to change. For the G chord, there's only an F/F# difference. For the F, there's only B/Bb difference. Depending where you place those accidentals will determine whether they will fit into the melody or not. So, basically, this is another theory based question that has very little bearing on the reality of music playing. Please, instead of bombarding us with 'what might happen if...', get playing and discover by listening to what is happening when you actually try these ideas out on piano, or whatever.






      share|improve this answer























      • of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago






      • 1





        Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

        – Tim
        2 days ago












      • well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago












      • You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

        – Laurence Payne
        2 days ago











      • He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago














      5












      5








      5







      I often wonder whether before asking your questions you've actually tried out the theoretical ideas in practice. If not, why not. There isn't a lot of theory involved here. What sounds good (to you or others) is what the result will be.



      In answer - say you're in C, and the chords are C, G, Am F. Over c, use C scale,, over G use G scale, etc., there are not many notes that will need to change. For the G chord, there's only an F/F# difference. For the F, there's only B/Bb difference. Depending where you place those accidentals will determine whether they will fit into the melody or not. So, basically, this is another theory based question that has very little bearing on the reality of music playing. Please, instead of bombarding us with 'what might happen if...', get playing and discover by listening to what is happening when you actually try these ideas out on piano, or whatever.






      share|improve this answer













      I often wonder whether before asking your questions you've actually tried out the theoretical ideas in practice. If not, why not. There isn't a lot of theory involved here. What sounds good (to you or others) is what the result will be.



      In answer - say you're in C, and the chords are C, G, Am F. Over c, use C scale,, over G use G scale, etc., there are not many notes that will need to change. For the G chord, there's only an F/F# difference. For the F, there's only B/Bb difference. Depending where you place those accidentals will determine whether they will fit into the melody or not. So, basically, this is another theory based question that has very little bearing on the reality of music playing. Please, instead of bombarding us with 'what might happen if...', get playing and discover by listening to what is happening when you actually try these ideas out on piano, or whatever.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 2 days ago









      TimTim

      105k10107264




      105k10107264












      • of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago






      • 1





        Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

        – Tim
        2 days ago












      • well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago












      • You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

        – Laurence Payne
        2 days ago











      • He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago


















      • of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago






      • 1





        Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

        – Tim
        2 days ago












      • well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

        – foreyez
        2 days ago












      • You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

        – Laurence Payne
        2 days ago











      • He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

        – Michael Curtis
        2 days ago

















      of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

      – foreyez
      2 days ago





      of'course I did. I was trying this on my midi controller before I asked this question and the scales didn't sound half bad. I don't ask ANYTHING without thinking about it for a bit.

      – foreyez
      2 days ago




      1




      1





      Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

      – Tim
      2 days ago






      Thinking a bit really isn't giving it enough time. I'd recommend a good few months of experimentation would be a starting point. And playing with others, trying out some of the ideas, is worth a lot more than a few words in an answer here. I hope you don't actually mean playing scales per se. And in any case, it doesn't mean it's creating its own key. Simply using notes which work well in that particular setting.

      – Tim
      2 days ago














      well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

      – foreyez
      2 days ago






      well this place is my virtual teachers. besides, they never put a limit to how many questions I could ask. in college I was the one always asking all the questions and I finished #1 in my entire school of engineering. questions is my thing. go check out how many questions I ask on stackoverflow.

      – foreyez
      2 days ago














      You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

      – Laurence Payne
      2 days ago





      You're asking 'theory' to give you permission to do something. Just do it.

      – Laurence Payne
      2 days ago













      He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

      – Michael Curtis
      2 days ago






      He isn't asing "for permission", the question is "does it create a new key at each chord?" Of course the simple answer is "no."

      – Michael Curtis
      2 days ago












      2














      Not really as suggested by modern theorists. The (clock) time is too short. To establiah a new key, one usually must use noted that were not in the previous key. One can use non-tonic chords in any key; you notation shows that, C-G-Am is a C-major (or A-minor) chord progression. Were one to play, C-E7-Am, things might be a bit ambiguous; the G# is not in the key of C but is in the key of Am (and A and G and D). However, were the Am followed (not to unusually by) Dm-G7-C or even D7-G7-C, that would emphasize the F from the G7 and contradict the establishment of Am. To confirm Am, one would usually follow thing by a B0-E7-Am which uses F# a couple of times and no F natural.



      There is a duration effect. One should spend more than a beat or even a few bars in the new key, then "neutralize" (Schoenberg's term, not a bad term for this effect) the note in the old key (F in the case being discussed) and emphasize the new note (F#). This is termed "modulation" (which to me seems, analogously with FM vs AM, to describe a short digression but that train left the airport over 1000 years ago.) Short digressions are usually termed "tonicizations" (why not "tonicickizations" like in "picknicking"?).






      share|improve this answer



























        2














        Not really as suggested by modern theorists. The (clock) time is too short. To establiah a new key, one usually must use noted that were not in the previous key. One can use non-tonic chords in any key; you notation shows that, C-G-Am is a C-major (or A-minor) chord progression. Were one to play, C-E7-Am, things might be a bit ambiguous; the G# is not in the key of C but is in the key of Am (and A and G and D). However, were the Am followed (not to unusually by) Dm-G7-C or even D7-G7-C, that would emphasize the F from the G7 and contradict the establishment of Am. To confirm Am, one would usually follow thing by a B0-E7-Am which uses F# a couple of times and no F natural.



        There is a duration effect. One should spend more than a beat or even a few bars in the new key, then "neutralize" (Schoenberg's term, not a bad term for this effect) the note in the old key (F in the case being discussed) and emphasize the new note (F#). This is termed "modulation" (which to me seems, analogously with FM vs AM, to describe a short digression but that train left the airport over 1000 years ago.) Short digressions are usually termed "tonicizations" (why not "tonicickizations" like in "picknicking"?).






        share|improve this answer

























          2












          2








          2







          Not really as suggested by modern theorists. The (clock) time is too short. To establiah a new key, one usually must use noted that were not in the previous key. One can use non-tonic chords in any key; you notation shows that, C-G-Am is a C-major (or A-minor) chord progression. Were one to play, C-E7-Am, things might be a bit ambiguous; the G# is not in the key of C but is in the key of Am (and A and G and D). However, were the Am followed (not to unusually by) Dm-G7-C or even D7-G7-C, that would emphasize the F from the G7 and contradict the establishment of Am. To confirm Am, one would usually follow thing by a B0-E7-Am which uses F# a couple of times and no F natural.



          There is a duration effect. One should spend more than a beat or even a few bars in the new key, then "neutralize" (Schoenberg's term, not a bad term for this effect) the note in the old key (F in the case being discussed) and emphasize the new note (F#). This is termed "modulation" (which to me seems, analogously with FM vs AM, to describe a short digression but that train left the airport over 1000 years ago.) Short digressions are usually termed "tonicizations" (why not "tonicickizations" like in "picknicking"?).






          share|improve this answer













          Not really as suggested by modern theorists. The (clock) time is too short. To establiah a new key, one usually must use noted that were not in the previous key. One can use non-tonic chords in any key; you notation shows that, C-G-Am is a C-major (or A-minor) chord progression. Were one to play, C-E7-Am, things might be a bit ambiguous; the G# is not in the key of C but is in the key of Am (and A and G and D). However, were the Am followed (not to unusually by) Dm-G7-C or even D7-G7-C, that would emphasize the F from the G7 and contradict the establishment of Am. To confirm Am, one would usually follow thing by a B0-E7-Am which uses F# a couple of times and no F natural.



          There is a duration effect. One should spend more than a beat or even a few bars in the new key, then "neutralize" (Schoenberg's term, not a bad term for this effect) the note in the old key (F in the case being discussed) and emphasize the new note (F#). This is termed "modulation" (which to me seems, analogously with FM vs AM, to describe a short digression but that train left the airport over 1000 years ago.) Short digressions are usually termed "tonicizations" (why not "tonicickizations" like in "picknicking"?).







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 2 days ago









          ttwttw

          9,4321033




          9,4321033





















              2














              No, secondary dominants don't do that. They might establish a temporary tonic on the chord they lead TO.



              But try. In your example - C, Am, G - try playing some melodies. When you get to the G, does F# or F♮ fit better? I think it will depend on whether you feel you've modulated to G, or whether G keeps its identity as V of C major.



              Let's look at an example that includes a secondary dominant. C, D7, G. It might be a bit more obvious. G7, or G(maj7)? The former keeps us in C major, the latter suggests we've modulated to G major. Both are fine.



              It's also fine to play a succession of maj7 chords, implying the major scale of each. C(maj7), D(maj7), E♭(maj7) ... Use the scales C major, D major, E♭ major ... Not functional harmony any more (we can discard that 'circle of 5ths' thing :-) But nice and funky (or dreamy, depending on style)!






              share|improve this answer



























                2














                No, secondary dominants don't do that. They might establish a temporary tonic on the chord they lead TO.



                But try. In your example - C, Am, G - try playing some melodies. When you get to the G, does F# or F♮ fit better? I think it will depend on whether you feel you've modulated to G, or whether G keeps its identity as V of C major.



                Let's look at an example that includes a secondary dominant. C, D7, G. It might be a bit more obvious. G7, or G(maj7)? The former keeps us in C major, the latter suggests we've modulated to G major. Both are fine.



                It's also fine to play a succession of maj7 chords, implying the major scale of each. C(maj7), D(maj7), E♭(maj7) ... Use the scales C major, D major, E♭ major ... Not functional harmony any more (we can discard that 'circle of 5ths' thing :-) But nice and funky (or dreamy, depending on style)!






                share|improve this answer

























                  2












                  2








                  2







                  No, secondary dominants don't do that. They might establish a temporary tonic on the chord they lead TO.



                  But try. In your example - C, Am, G - try playing some melodies. When you get to the G, does F# or F♮ fit better? I think it will depend on whether you feel you've modulated to G, or whether G keeps its identity as V of C major.



                  Let's look at an example that includes a secondary dominant. C, D7, G. It might be a bit more obvious. G7, or G(maj7)? The former keeps us in C major, the latter suggests we've modulated to G major. Both are fine.



                  It's also fine to play a succession of maj7 chords, implying the major scale of each. C(maj7), D(maj7), E♭(maj7) ... Use the scales C major, D major, E♭ major ... Not functional harmony any more (we can discard that 'circle of 5ths' thing :-) But nice and funky (or dreamy, depending on style)!






                  share|improve this answer













                  No, secondary dominants don't do that. They might establish a temporary tonic on the chord they lead TO.



                  But try. In your example - C, Am, G - try playing some melodies. When you get to the G, does F# or F♮ fit better? I think it will depend on whether you feel you've modulated to G, or whether G keeps its identity as V of C major.



                  Let's look at an example that includes a secondary dominant. C, D7, G. It might be a bit more obvious. G7, or G(maj7)? The former keeps us in C major, the latter suggests we've modulated to G major. Both are fine.



                  It's also fine to play a succession of maj7 chords, implying the major scale of each. C(maj7), D(maj7), E♭(maj7) ... Use the scales C major, D major, E♭ major ... Not functional harmony any more (we can discard that 'circle of 5ths' thing :-) But nice and funky (or dreamy, depending on style)!







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 2 days ago









                  Laurence PayneLaurence Payne

                  37.7k1871




                  37.7k1871



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f82693%2fcan-each-chord-in-a-progression-create-its-own-key%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

                      Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

                      Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?