Tonic Aria, subdominant, dominant

These terms come from the nomenclature of scale degrees: I degree (Tonic), II Degree (Submodal), III degree (Modal), IV degree (subdominant), V degree (dominant), VI degree (subtonic), VII degree (leading tone if we are in a minor key, i.e., with an altered 7th that is a diatonic semitone away from the tonic) or simply "seventh degree" if we are in a major key.

The tonic area is a "zone" of chords where there is no tension to proceed toward other chords, particularly when one is exactly on a chord or an inversion of a chord on the first degree.

The subdominant area, as you correctly wrote, tends toward the dominant, meaning a tension is created to return to the V degree of the scale. The dominant area is usually used with sevenths; in the case of the fifth degree, it is harmonized in root position with the major seventh (in the key of C major, at the 5th degree we would have the G-B-D-F chord harmonized with 3/5/7). In this case, we are dealing with mandatory notes. The seventh must necessarily descend, otherwise it is an error. Therefore, the F descends to E, the B which represents the seventh degree of C tends to rise to C, the G remains stationary and the D descends to C; we thus find ourselves in the key of C major, so the dominant very often resolves to the tonic. The same practice is used for the VII degree where the first inversion of the chord harmonized with 3/5/6 is used, so we have the starting seventh degree (B), the D, the F and the G; so as you can see, the notes are the same as the root position chord on the V degree which again resolves to the tonic (the first degree). This is why the dominant area creates this tension because, keeping in mind the key we are in, once we arrive at the dominant one feels the need to close on the tonic; it's like having a sense of being suspended and needing to touch ground somewhere (the tonic).

Summarizing with examples of some chords (assuming for simplicity that we are in C major).

In the tonic area we find: C Major, A minor, E minor. They do not require resolution and give a sensation of rest.

In the subdominant area: F Major, D minor. A subtle tension area that tends toward the dominant.

In the dominant area: G major seventh major, B minor diminished fifth (it is simply the G major seventh chord in first inversion). It communicates strong tension that tends toward resolution on the tonic.

In any case, these are meaningless discussions because one must always see how the bass moves; indeed, the dominant does not always resolve to the tonic. For example, in a deceptive cadence, one has the V degree (the dominant with 3/5) which rises to the sixth with 3/5 and doubling of the third (one of the few cases where doubling the third is permitted). Even in the subdominant area, one should rise to the dominant, but even in this case, especially on the fourth degree, one can conclude on the tonic (plagal cadence). As you can see, things must always be evaluated from a harmonic point of view; one must observe how the bass moves. The discussions about areas are correct, but classical harmony is something else entirely. The areas only speak of sensations to the ear and thus apply well to catchy little songs...

Regards

hiii simon and thanks again..... so:

- ''The tonic area is a "zone" of chords where there is no tension to proceed towards other chords'' can they be used to open a cycle but also to close, such as for example the closing chord of the verse, the closing chord of the chorus, the closing chord of the entire song ?!?!

- subdominant area: can I define these passing chords (a bit like notes outside the pentatonic)

- dominant area: the cycle is about to close and therefore I must obviously resolve into a chord that gives me a sense of rest (return to the tonic area). if there are three chords belonging to the tonic area, I could resolve into one of the three....

example:

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

this song is in the key of D maj

uses D maj I as tonic area

G maj IV as subdominant area

A maj V as dominant area

in this piece all three areas are present.....

the verse lines are harmonically all 4 the same but I don't understand:

the lines open with a tonic area I, then there is an A maj V which is a dominant area, so at this point since there is tension it should resolve to a tonic area (I III VI) instead it goes to G maj IV, therefore a subdominant area where the tension is low, and instead of going to a dominant area it goes to a tonic area in D maj I

the chorus opens with a G maj IV subdominant area which resolves into a tonic area D maj I even though it shouldn't since it hasn't finished telling the story..... from D maj it goes directly to A maj V dominant without passing through a subdominant. at this point it should resolve but instead it goes to a subdominant G maj IV and therefore closes the chorus with a tonic area.

the piece sounds good but in my opinion there isn't much coherence between the piece and the areas.... one passes from a tonic area directly to a dominant area and from there instead of resolving because there is tension, one goes back to a subdominant area but then resolves into a tonic area. I don't understand!

Perfect, you understood exactly what I told you in the other post. The areas placed like this on their own don't mean anything. They only make tavern-style little songs. As you have seen, even the IV can resolve to I (I am always talking about how the bass moves, I don't know this song) and it is called a plagal cadence.

When studying Harmony, even in Complementary studies, several paths can be followed. The Neapolitan school moved forward significantly with the "harmonized scale" system. That is, an chord is built on every degree of the scale and so on. A very limited system. The Roman school, and particularly that of De Ninno, Ravinale, etc... is based on the classification of chords, especially seventh chords. A classification that depends on their structure. E.g., 1st species 7th (also called dominant seventh) 3M-5P-7m and so on up to the 5th species. The 1st species is formed on the V degree, the second on the second, etc. There is a wonderful treatise by De Ninno in two large volumes. The rules for part movement are those enunciated by Simone, but the most curious thing is noting the "hierarchy of chords."

In tonal harmony, it is curious and interesting to grasp the "hierarchy" of the degrees of the scale, of the tonality. The tonic and the chords built upon it give a sense of rest because it is the "sovereign" destination of all definitive cadences. Its first Minister (the dominant) is always by its side, announcing the arrival of the King in person! The second and fourth degrees, well-dressed, are precious advisors. Everyone can have an opinion, but while respecting the hierarchy; we warn of the correct and logical cadences that lead sooner or later to the Sovereign. We must think that with the beginning of the twentieth century, and precisely with that famous chord at the beginning of Wagner's Tristan, everything becomes relative, it shatters. Everything avoids the banal resolution and, in history, Monarchies fall, just as Newton's laws fall. A contemporary period opens up, where the "correct" logical relationships no longer seem to apply.

Today, even in jazz, light music, and contemporary music, there is a vague nostalgic return to harmony, dressed in retro or Vintage, as they say. The different areas being discussed concern these "hierarchies" that we "discover" because we feel them inside us and because they anchor themselves to the "beauty" of music and to consequential logic. Listen to Puccini. Studying Puccini teaches us how, while remaining within tonal Harmony, the Maestro found new solutions and new flavors that had never been proposed before. Bold and debated, Puccini enters the twentieth century on tiptoe with rich harmonies and captures the "tired" taste for obvious solutions.

In short.... this time I have truly spoken too much.. it is worth listening more!!!!!

yes, but what is the point of knowing so much theory if there is no connection with reality?

if it's explained to me that if I am in a dominant area then I have tension and must resolve in a tonic area, I see that the chord resolves in a subdominant area, what is the point?

knowing things by heart, in my opinion, shouldn't be a problem for anyone, knowing which chords belong to the tonic area or knowing harmonic progressions by heart etc., the problem is when there is no connection between what has been studied and concrete reality.... it makes me wonder what the point of studying is? it's not a criticism but a question I have asked myself since I started studying harmony and music theory

You are simplifying the concept a lot. The study of composition is a course of study that lasts 10 years! As pianists, for the biennial complementary harmony exam, we have only done two, and I assure you it is not a simple exam at all. The awareness of intervals and chords is only the first chapter of the first book of the first year. Composition does not teach what one must write, but what one must NOT write; there is a big difference—what one knows they must write depends on the author's sensitivity and is not dictated by harmonic rules... In the field of rock or light music in general, it can be summarized as not teaching you which chord to insert, but which ones not to insert, i.e., which ones constitute a serious error. Even the fifth progressions, as we saw in the score of 'Someone Like You', are errors, but all in all they do not excessively disturb the ear; the voices move in parallel when they should instead take other paths to avoid these errors, but all in all, in light music, one can get away with it. An augmented fourth is always heard!! In short, the rules must be known, and knowing chords and areas is absolutely reductive for such an enormously vast subject.

I should preface that I haven't taken a harmony exam, but I want to try to explain why the song "sounds good anyway": in reality, even the "so-called tavern songs" might be simple (and they have an immediacy that classical music, despite its great splendor, fails to achieve), but sometimes they hide things that perhaps don't immediately catch the eye and/or ear.

Let's try to analyze the chords: so the verse doesn't have a sectional structure, but is it in D major? Apparently yes, but when you hear the D chord, you don't get a sense of "rest," but rather of movement towards something else.

The reason for this is that the verse is built on the A Mixolydian scale (A, B, C#, D, E, F#, G, A), which is the scale built on the dominant of D major.

In fact, D, A, G, D can be built on this scale. You might ask: but why then is there no sense of rest in A? Simply because it isn't intended to be created, by omitting the resolution to A to create a continuous unresolved drive, aided by the rhythm section, towards the chorus. It begins in G, which is the subdominant of D major, to create tension that is immediately resolved in D. Then A, G, D.

In fact, the piece has a verse-chorus structure repeated 3 times, namely:

intro: D, A, G, D (1/4 of the duration of the verse)

verse chorus

verse chorus

verse chorus

outro: chorus

I hope I haven't talked too much harmonic nonsense. 🙂

thanks andrea......but excuse me, saying D maj and saying D Mixolydian is not the same thing? they have the same alterations (F# C#)...... it's just that you start from the V of the D maj scale......

Everything is correct; in fact, it is called Mixolydian because it starts from A, but the scale is that of D major. It uses this scale because, not having an altered seventh degree and being built starting from the dominant of D major, it does not need to resolve, and therefore the progression can proceed...

So: first, let's clarify a concept.

Scales are subdivisions of octaves according to a succession of notes separated from one another by well-defined intervals. The succession of these intervals is called a "mode".

There are multiple modes: one of the most used in Western music is the major mode (because the interval between the first and third note is T+T=2T) consisting of T T s T T T s. If I want, for example, to construct the D major mode, I do nothing more than respect the succession in red.

We will therefore have:

T T s T T T s

D E F# G A B C# D

We come then to the Mixolydian mode, which is also major, defining this succession of intervals: T T s T T s T. If I want, for example, to construct the A Mixolydian mode, I do nothing more than respect the succession in blue.

T T s T T s T

A B C# D E F# G A

The fact that they have the same key signature does not mean they are the same scale, and in fact the succession of intervals is not the same, so they are different scales.

Furthermore, if you analyze the two resulting scales, the Mixolydian mode is obtained starting from the fifth degree of any major mode: it is easier to construct mentally if major scales are known.

I hope I have been clear.

P.S.

T= tone

s= semitone

2*s=T

thanks camy but honestly you haven't been satisfactory because I continue not to understand the difference between saying D major or D Mixolydian......if I say D maj is it D Dorian !? or D maj is F# Phrygian !? or D maj is G Lydian !? or D maj is A Mixolydian!? or D maj is B Aeolian (or relative natural minor) !? or D maj is C# Locrian!?

I know how a major scale is formed and its harmonization in three or four voices......the discussion of modes I use when improvising but for example in this case I don't understand what you mean.....

The difference is that they are simply different scales. If one uses the Mixolydian mode, there are different harmonic solutions compared to using the major mode. It is not a simple concept to explain, also because perhaps I do not have the knowledge and skills to explain it: maybe Simone or someone else can try to explain it to you.

If you understand a bit of English and have a free hour, I recommend watching this:

Open content (youtube)

Let's try to delve deeper into this topic...

Today we know and frequently use the major mode and the minor mode, which is subdivided into melodic minor and harmonic minor modes. However, in antiquity, and specifically in Gregorian chants, many more modes were used. The concept of a scale obtained from a note by proceeding by step up to the same note of the upper octave is an ancient concept. What has changed from yesterday to today is the number of divisions of tones and semitones within the octave that constitutes the scale. In particular, today we know 2 major modes for 30 keys, for a total of 90 major, harmonic minor, and melodic minor scales, not excluding homophonic keys. In antiquity, there were 7 modes for every major key and 7 modes for every harmonic and melodic minor key, for a total of 630 scales, not excluding homophonic keys. Sensitivity to sound was once much greater than it is today. Indeed, each mode evoked a feeling in the soul of both the listener and the composer, and the birth of these modes was due precisely to this need as well as to logical-mathematical evidence. But what are these modes? Let's analyze them together...

Modal diatonic scales built on the major scale (for simplicity, C major)

Let us therefore consider the key of C Major

Starting from the tonic, we find the Ionian mode or major mode (the one most common to us)

W W H W W W H

Starting from the subtonic or supertonic, we find the Dorian mode

W H W W W H W

Starting from the mediant, we find the Phrygian mode

H W W W H W W

Starting from the subdominant or super-mediant, we find the Lydian mode (modernly renamed Neapolitan) and, regarding the sensations we spoke of earlier, I invite you to play it to hear its effect.

W W W H W W H

Starting from the dominant, we find the Mixolydian mode

W W H W W H W

Starting from the superdominant, we find the Aeolian mode

W H W W H W W

Finally, starting from the leading tone, we have the Locrian mode, also called hypophrygian

Summarizing with the degrees, we have this situation

1. W W H W W W H

2. W H W W W H W

3. H W W W H W W

4. W W W H W W H

5. W W H W W H W

6. W H W W H W W

7. H W W H W W W

As one can easily argue, the position of the semitone changes in different modes; however, this changes the harmonic relationships within the scale. In essence, it is true that they are built starting from the degrees of a scale in a key, but effectively these starting degrees are considered tonics for the new mode, which is why we obtain a change in the harmonic relationships. Let's see it in detail...

Ionian 1 2M 3M 4m 5m 6M 7M 8

Dorian 1 2M 3m 4m 5m 6M 7m 8

Phrygian 1 2m 3m 4m 5m 6m 7m 8

Lydian 1 2M 3M 4# 5m 6M 7M 8

Mixolydian 1 2M 3M 4m 5m 6M 7m 8

Aeolian 1 2M 3m 4m 5m 6m 7m 8

Locrian 1 2m 3m 4m 5b 6m 7m 8

In the diagram, let's see how the harmonic relationships within the scale between the tonic (acquired) and the other degrees of the new mode change for each subsequent mode. The exact same procedure should be applied to all major keys and to all harmonic and melodic minor keys.

At this point you will ask yourself: if they were used in Gregorian chants, what sense does it make for us to use these modes today?

The point is that, as you well said, these scales can be used in improvisation; in fact, some of these scales are used in jazz, while other times they are used to avoid the necessity of having voices move in a mandatory way. For example, as in the example you posted, an altered seventh degree must always ascend to the tonic; however, we can use the Mixolydian mode which, as you see, has a relationship with the tonic of minor seventh, therefore not having the altered seventh degree, it may not resolve on the tonic and can move elsewhere. In classical harmony, secondary dominants are often found...

In short, harmonic rules aside, it is always the composer's spirit that suggests the right harmonic methods to apply when composing a piece.

I hope your ideas have become a bit clearer...

Regards

thanks camy and thanks simon.....

now I'm posting three progressions:

1-Dmin Gmaj Amin Fmaj

2-Gmaj Cmaj Fmaj Bdim

3-Emin Fmaj Dmin Emin

can you tell me what key they are in?

it's not to test you but I want to see if I understood 🙂

Mmmm we're not there yet... The bass line is one thing, the chords you play on a guitar are another thing... Because the guitar chords are all in root position, while the bass line needs to be harmonized and a fourth degree could be a first inversion with the seventh going to the dominant... To evaluate which key we are in while having chords in root position, one must have a melodic line; in fact, it is that which, in most cases (in these instances), indicates the key—whereas in the case of a bass in classical harmony, it is the bass. Aside from this, I stopped at the first cycle because even there I saw an infinite mess and it's also quite late... In addition to all this, what you have written are not "canonical" progressions; canonical progressions in root position are those that can all be harmonized in root position; e.g.: I - VI - II - V - I or I - VI - IV - II - V - I or I - IV - II - V - I. My harmony teacher used to say that a bass in root position is harmonized when passing through the progressions: the progressions are the VI degree, the IV and the II degree; all these progressions then go to the dominant (V degree) and resolve on the tonic or on the third degree in first inversion for an imperfect cadence, or from the IV you can go straight to the tonic with a plagal cadence. Here, at least in the first cycle that I saw you posted, I don't see any of these harmonic relationships; or rather, D minor and A minor have a bass that moves well but they are harmonized poorly. Starting from A minor I have: I - VI - IV - VII - I which could work if G were sharp and the chord were a first inversion VII/V with the seventh. For D minor it is analogous and I have also developed the correct harmonization in the first sheet, obtaining the chords Dm - Em7 - A - Dm. So seeing them like this, I could say that if appropriately harmonized, these bass lines could be good for D minor or for A minor.

So, speaking of the bass line,therefore I am not considering whether the chords are major or minor, and assuming they are all in root position, i.e., harmonized with 3-5-8.

We have this situation:

As you can see, already in the second chord we should have G minor since D minor has B-flat in the key signature, but instead in your progression we find G major. This is not possible. Moving forward, it then becomes a festival of errors. In the second and third measures, there are two fifths by direct motion; if you avoid fifths, you do octaves—in short, however you move, you're wrong—and moreover, a leading tone that doesn't ascend could be delayed, but by necessity it is replaced by a leading tone from another voice. Furthermore, I cannot double the fifth in the last measure, otherwise I get two D minor leading tones that should both ascend, thus creating two unisons by direct motion. In short, it's not possible...

Below you see the correct harmonization with the same bass line but the chords harmonized as they should be; in particular, I want to point out that it closes the progression with an imperfect cadence V - III with 3-6

Let's move on to the next sheet...

Here too, the situation does not change...

At this point a question occurs to me spontaneously... Did you write these progressions yourself? Or did you find them in some song? If you let me hear the song, I can tell you immediately what key we are in, but with guitar chords, unless we find a standard progression, I see it as difficult to come out alive. If you have referred to an ancient-style progression, I think it will be hard to find it since there are more than 600 and one would have to waste time... which I don't have.

Now I'm going to sleep because it's getting late,

Regards

thanks simon now I'll explain to you:

''The bass line is one thing, the chords you play on a guitar are another thing... Because the chords on the guitar are all in root position''

it's not said that there are also inversions on the guitar.....

as far as harmonic progressions go, I invented them by taking inspiration from camy86's response, which speaks specifically about the interpretation of a harmonic progression in a mode of the scale.

so, staying in the same key of C major, I wrote three harmonic progressions taking into account the areas and how each chord must resolve according to harmonic rules.

if this is the scale belonging to:

Cmaj Dmin Emin Fmaj Gmaj Amin Bdim

Dmin Gmaj Amin Fmaj ---- C IN DORIAN

Emin Fmaj Dmin Emin -----C IN PHRYGIAN

Gmaj Cmaj Fmaj Bdim -----C IN AEOLIAN

as you can see, in all three progressions I respected the rules written on

tonic area I III VI ------> TENDING TOWARD REST

subdominant area II IV -----> TENDING TOWARD DOMINANT

dominant area V VII -----> TENSION

I don't think there are any errors since they don't go out of scale and respect the harmonization of the key of C.

it's true, there is no melody as a reference, but I could also tell you that while playing this music without any melody, I can tell you it is an instrumental without any melody. If I asked you for an analysis of those three progressions, for example, what key they are in, would it be correct to answer as I wrote? If not, why?

My friend, we are really not understanding each other here... You are mixing up potatoes with carrots.

1. It always depends on what you are playing.

2. Whether you want to respect harmonic rules or not... Debussy did not respect harmonic rules and he did it on purpose because he "followed his musical taste".

3. If you play atonal music and ask to justify those progressions, in classical harmony those progressions are errors

4. Yes, in the guitar as in all instruments capable of producing chords, inversions exist, but in those progressions if you don't use strategies such as sevenths for example or the doubling of 5ths and octaves, you won't make it out alive and I have even demonstrated to you why...

I do not deal with atonal music. Atonality is found in jazz, fusion, blues, contemporary music, but here we have gone from Eros Ramazzotti to atonality... As I was telling you, by combining modes and scales in the ancient system, there are 620 different ancient modes, of which in "catchy" music—that is, that respects classical harmonic rules—well, 590 are not used, not to mention the fact that new scales can always be created (for example, pentatonic ones). In this case, without having a vocal line, it becomes impossible to find a single reference key starting from a 4-chord progression designed on atonal modes... In that progression, based on atonal modes, I can play a vocal line for you in several keys and if you want, I can prove it to you. Can you find a unique one?

Good morning, reading this forum I realized that there is a bit of confusion ...

Tonic area: I can play all chords except for the second and fifth degrees.

Subdominant area: I can play all chords except for the first and fifth.

Dominant area: I can play all chords except for the second and first.

I can decide to compose only in the tonic area, so I have all the chords of the chromatic scale at my disposal except for the degrees not to be played, which are the second and the fifth ..

Same thing if I want to play with more tension: I play in the subdominant area, so I have all the chords of the chromatic scale except for the fifth and first ..

If I want to play with even more tension, I will play in the Dominant area, avoiding the second and fifth degrees.

Since music plays on this, namely tension and quiet, and (usually) one starts from quiet to reach a climax and then descends back to quiet gradually with the subdominant or directly to the tonic area ..

bye

Good morning. I believe the point is that harmony is not an exact science... especially if we step outside of the most rigid classical repertoire.

In the twentieth century and in contemporary music, these distinctions between modes and tonalities often become nuances of color... fewer dogmas and more sonic sensitivity. Thanks to anyone who wishes to respond.