The Third Degree

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ke83J_N4vg

.. just to start with :-)

Open content (youtube)

Historical/political issues aside, which I think the "advice" in the video refers to, this anthem is a masterpiece to me.

No, I believe Zedef recommended it simply because it "revolves a lot" around the third degree. Already in the first measure, it appears in the bass even in root position (III-5), and in the following measure in first inversion (III-6).

In my opinion, the most beautiful hymn of all. There are no equals. Setting aside "Il patriottismo," I find that the Italian one makes you laugh by comparison.

Salomon wrote:

I am new, compliments on the beautiful community.

In any case, welcome

Salomon wrote:

I wanted to get some clarification regarding the third degree; it always seems like it cannot be used... but is that really the case?

It seems like a somewhat controversial issue to me, but I haven't understood the criteria yet...

A didactic level, few people use the III because one also needs to know how to explain how to use it... it's like giving a Ferrari to someone who is getting their driver's license. I have happened to know many teachers who don't know what to do with it, so... maybe they ... "forbid" it (I think, it would need to be seen case by case).

I prefer to treat the subject in a historical sense, and the fundamental steps can be summarized as follows:

In the Baroque period, it was used in the form of a first inversion with a cadential function C that moved towards T (Tonic) or I (Deceptive)

Note that it was constructed exclusively with the notes of the relative mode (whether major or minor it was)

Only from Grieg (and by ear, also Schumann), can one find in the major mode the III6 which borrows notes from the minor mode

The III-V-I connections are typically from Russian music or in languages that exploit third affinities, such as Liszt and Schubert (if you feel like it and have De la Motte's manual, go read what he says about the discussion of third affinities... very interesting and well done).

III46, to be clear, in C-Eb-G is essentially used like an appoggiatura and has no functional value.

Since I mentioned De la Motte, I still consider him outdated as a methodology, in the sense that I opt for a more abstract one that allows for the identification of important moments of tonal language:

Tonic (T), Pre-Cadential (PC), Cadential (C), which in turn can go to T or Deceptive (I)

That being said, the III degree has also tended to be used as C, which is why De la Motte's classification does not include it; in fact, he only sees it in the tonic area, and in reality, for a while now I haven't found relevance in reasoning via subdominant and dominant, because the III, for example, can in turn be dominant (...and De la Motte knows this)

An approach like the one I am proposing works very well with Jazz music as well, so I find it more abstract and more "pure."

TheSimon wrote:

(...) in the first measure, it appears in the bass even in root position (III-5), the following measure in first inversion (III-6).

Please note, Piccinesco, that our friend Simone also uses the very civil numbering that I suggested to him there, namely with the functional degree indicated in Roman numerals and the inversion in Arabic numerals.

I do not see any historical-political issues in my proposal.. as The Simon says, the III degree is clearly present in both the "verse" and the "chorus."

I would also add that the III degree changes function if the framework is major or minor.

In minor, in fact, the III (a major triad) is the dominant of the VI and therefore has a much more common use than in major; or it has a "modal" function (can I say "Dorian"?). One version of the Phrygian cadence includes it: I-III-IV-V (with a melodic motion of 8-7-6-5).

In major, the III degree has an important characteristic, namely that it contains the leading tone, which however often does not behave like a leading tone: it is not uncommon even in Bach and his contemporaries for the III to be used to harmonize a descending melodic motion of 8-7-6 with the degrees I-III-IV.

Obviously, I am not taking into consideration progression contexts in which the degrees lose their function until one reaches the conclusion.

Fantastic Zedef the Russian anthem, who would have ever thought... the third degree ...

Salomon wrote:

I'm new, compliments on the beautiful community.

I wanted some clarification regarding the third degree; it always seems like it can't be used... but is that really the case?

It seems like a somewhat controversial issue to me, but I haven't understood the criteria yet...

It's not that it can't be used, but rather because it's an chord that is found 'in the middle' of the key, so to speak; that is, it's neither on the side of the tonic nor on the side of the dominant, and if it is used too much or in the middle of too many other secondary chords, it confuses the key. But it is certainly used, in many 60s pop songs, for example in the I, iii, IV, V progression.

Ironically, this pop example is perfect because it follows the rules of classical music: the chord is 'prepared' by another degree having common notes, in this case I, and is followed by VI, a sort of deceptive cadence (yes, I know that in a cadence the V must be major, but in the case of iii the semitone progression helps a lot, almost like a leading tone).

What I've been trying to remember for a while is how to use III in the harmonic minor, which is an augmented triad. I learned it somewhere but I don't remember, I need to review.

Anyway, the basic rule is that primary chords are preferred more than secondary ones. Secondaries are used only to vary the frequency of the primaries, i.e., so as not to always use the same chords, but it also depends on other things; I am speaking in a simple context. The primaries are degrees I, IV and V; the secondaries are all the other degrees. The most useful secondaries are ii and VI........iii and vii are not used much, they are considered weaker versions of I and V for other reasons. For example, in many cases instead of iii you can use the first inversion of I, or even Imaj7, both, in many cases, a better choice than iii.

But iii is fine even if IV follows. In this case, it would be a sort of passing chord between I and IV, just like in the pop song. If you emphasize it too much (it lasts too long, or becomes too frequent, or there are already too many secondary chords), it starts to weaken the key; practically, it starts to sound 'useless'. A lot also depends on the progression of the tonics.

furthermore, there are things that are a 'better version' of iii; for example, instead of playing I, iii, IV, V, I would play: I, Imaj7, IV, V..... in which iii is still contained, but the chord has a nice 'passing dissonance', and furthermore it resolves to the third of IV. I have done nothing more than 'add' a third below iii.

Another 'better' thing could be Imaj7 in first inversion, so as not to repeat the bass person.

pianistamaggiorenneDi38 wrote:

in addition, there are things that are a 'better version' of iii; for example, instead of playing I, iii, IV, V, I would play: I, Imaj7, IV, V..... in which iii is still contained, but the chord has a nice 'passing dissonance', and furthermore it resolves to the third of IV. I have done nothing more than 'add' a third below iii.

Another 'better' thing could be Imaj7 in first inversion, so as not to repeat the bass.

Purtroppo non ti seguo pianistamaggiorenneDi38. when you say "I, Imaj7, IV, V", do you mean I V/IV IV V... therefore I7, which if we were in C would be a C7 that tonicizes F... because maj and not 7?

Poi, ma il III non si usa come domiante secondaria o di volta fra due primi gradi?"

Dante wrote:

Unfortunately I don't follow you, pianistamaggiorenneDi38. When you say "I, Imaj7, IV, V", do you mean I V/IV IV V... therefore I7, which if we were in C would be a C7 that tonicizes F... because maj and not 7?

Also, isn't the III used as a secondary dominant or a turnaround between two first degrees?

as I wrote before, I was speaking specifically in the simplest possible context, i.e., diatonic, using only the notes of the scale..... if someone is still confused about something like the third degree (which is perfectly understandable), it's useless to throw secondary dominants at them, which are a more advanced concept.... Obviously you can use C7 to tonicize F, as you said. If that's the case, you could also use C augmented to tonicize F.

Just as I can also simply use Cmaj7.... note that the seventh is passing; one of the voices plays C-B-A in the Imaj7, IV progression, and it is the passing note (which should also be accented on a strong beat) that makes the progression interesting. C7 resolves well to F, for obvious reasons, just as Cmaj7 does too....

As for your second question, I didn't quite understand what you mean..... in any case, secondary dominants are already a concept beyond the use of the third degree; I think if Salomon hasn't understood the reasons why the third degree is considered a 'weak' chord, he should first properly understand all the strengths and weaknesses of diatonic chords before moving forward

... things gradually become clear

Thanks again to everyone.

Salomon wrote:

... things gradually become clear

Thanks again to everyone.

don't worry, keep studying a little every day and you'll see that one day everything will be clear; it was the same for me as it was for you. Often with these things, you don't understand everything well in a linear way.... it's not as if you study A, understand A well, then move on to B, understand B well, etc.

In reality, it often happens that you study A, have some doubts, but sooner or later you move on to B, have some doubts, but move on to C; here, however, what happens is that now you understand A well, and so you can now use A easily. Then after a certain amount of time, A, B, and C no longer have any secrets for you.

The important thing is not to spend 5 minutes on one thing and 5 on another