Schoenberg explains it well in the preface to his harmony manual:
I Rest
IV surge towards tension
V tension
I Rest
Therefore tension towards rest... music (especially tonal music) moves on these tracks, namely a play between tension and relaxation
In any case, it is not a progression; eventually, a progression would be II V I IV VII III; in C major considering only the bass note Re Sol Do Fa...
N
Natan
Member
Reply 3 by Natan
Posts
239
Fox wrote:
Why does the music move in that direction? How is it that they established this sequence?
Only a small part of music moves in this direction, as the Abbot says, tonal music.
The I IV V I syntax, however, is very ancient, dating back to the 1600s; subsequently and in the Baroque period, the I II V I was already (ab)used.
The sequence is not established; the cornerstones of tonal music are the opposition of tonic (I) to dominant (V) and vice versa....in between there are all the nuances that even led to the collapse of tonality (late 1800s).
Today, very expanded tonal attitudes are used; tonality in a strict sense tends to move within the circle of fifths without modulating to distant keys, and one of the simplest ways to explore them is through progression (e.g., by descending or ascending fifths). As specified by the Abbot, I IV V I is NOT a progression
Harmony is made up of harmonic sequences, among which are progressions that can be harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic-melodic. When no specifics are given, a rhythmic-melodic progression is intended. Essentially, the latter occurs when a succession of chords and melodies reproduces uniformly, whether ascending or descending, across different degrees.
Furthermore, progressions can be: Fundamental or Derived / Tonal or Modulating. A progression is: -Fundamental: when it is harmonized with chords in root position; -Derived: when one of the initial chords is in an inversion; -Tonal: if it remains in the same key throughout its duration; -Modulating: when it passes through different keys. (there is also semi-modulating. Tonal at the beginning and modulating at the end)
If I understood correctly, Abate says that it is not a progression and Natan speaks of syntax, the I - IV - V syntax "belonging" to tonal music.
So the I degree (which belongs to the tonic group) the IV (subdominant group) V (dominant group) and finally I again if I haven't understood incorrectly, it is just a harmonic sequence, right?
E
Eagle
Member
Reply 8 by Eagle
Posts
264
Fox wrote:
if I haven't understood correctly, it is just a harmonic sequence, right?
Yes, it is a harmonic succession.
The fact is that syntaxes vary from era to era; the Baroque period is full of VI II V; after the fifth you can go to the I but also to the sixth, creating a deceptive cadence, such as II V VI
It is not excluded that one could do I IV II V
You can also integrate other passages like VII V I
I IV I is another syntax
But also II V IV
You can alter some degrees using bII or #IV
As already explained by others, I IV V I is one of the first syntaxes... then everything evolved by delaying the cadence to the I, even denying the tonic until the end of the piece.
C
cromatismo
Member
Reply 9 by cromatismo
Posts
79
Regarding the division you foresee, De la Motte might be useful to you (see his harmony manual) according to which:
Tonic area: I or VI
Subdominant area: IV or II
Dominant area: VII or V
The problem with this approach is the classification of the III; it seems to me that Frank approached it in a slightly different way but succeeded in classifying this chord better.
Of course, but some combinations are more effective than others, so it depends on the context of the piece. If you are in a truly conclusive section, VII V I is better than VII I, which works better in transitional or more open sections.
The balance of all cadences and the tonal paths you manage to draw in a piece determine its effectiveness and quality.
