Jump to content

Major root chord in minor scale?


Bwremjoe

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

Usually when I write a composition, I work "top-down"; I write a nice chord-progression and then come up with a melody. To challenge myself a bit more, I now wrote a piece of harmonic melodies first (counterpoint), and then decided which chords would fit.

 

Now I find myself with the following, which confuses me (see picture). I figured that writing in A minor would make things easy for me on the piano (yes I'm lazy). However, the dominant melody line has an accidental C# in bar 4. The chord that felt natural to add there is A-major, but theory-wise this doesn't make any sense to me. However, I've only done some basic musical theory classes, so maybe I'm just confused for nothing.

 

So to formulate 2 questions:

 

  • Does the A-major chord fit in here? Or is it secretely a C# minor with a minor sixt and suspended 5th?
  • Is there any consensus on what chords you use with accidentals, or is it so just anything that feels natural?

Harm.png.75155ebcdf128c45283b8ae322416ffd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my way of thinking, "if it sounds good, it is good." Maybe someone would say that your song takes a one-measure excursion to a key of "D" or "G," in which C is sharped (but D is not). Anyhow, if C# works in your melody and "A" sounds good against it, I'd simply play A-major as you have written and think no more about it. ("Spell it" any way you like.)

 

Sometimes, indeed, it is nice to inject a major chord into an otherwise minor phrase. Coming on the downbeat of the measure and lasting for two beats, it becomes a chord that the listener will "take notice of," especially since the next note drops "not quite(!) a full octave," and rises to another note in the accompanying chord. Both of these notes deviate from the A-minor chord ... first by a half-step up (from "C"), then by a half-step down (from "E"), before returning to it. That's a musically interesting thing to have decided to do. Go with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, "to my way of thinking," the theory is more descriptive, and explanatory, than "dogmatic." It doesn't tell you what you can or should do: it describes what you (and other people) did, and suggests what you could do or might consider doing. It suggests reasons why something might work, and why it did (or didn't).

 

What you have achieved here is "a pleasant musical surprise," which is always a good thing. First it goes above the "usual, chord" note, then the next note, one octave lower now, goes below a chord note, before returning to a chord note. All in one measure. Very nice! Imaginative changes to "the expected repetition" are something that we all listen for, and find pleasing.

Edited by MikeRobinson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike is right-on. If it sounds good it IS good. Theory is usually written to explain what composers have already done. I would call your Em to A in the 3rd and 4th bars a "deceptive" cadence that appears to be heading toward Dm, but give you F instead (a substitute). It doesn't matter what you call, though, it's a nice ear-catching change in tonality! ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

To be a pedant (because that's what I am), in traditional music theory sense, what you've written doesn't exist in any "standard" keys as it's written, meaning you've got borrowed harmonies, secondary harmonies, or something else. Per those "rules," the use of E- makes it a hard argument to sell that you're in A minor, though the A major in bar 4 could be considered a borrowed picardy third. Also, I'd argue that there's really no harmonic cadences anywhere—the movement from F major to G major to E minor is, quite frankly, weird as all hell in the traditional sense—and with only seven bars shared, I'm assuming this isn't the whole line. Sidebar: there's no C♯ in G, major or minor. (But in G lydian, yes.)

 

But that's just speaking about traditional music theory, as is taught in classrooms.

 

To answer your specific questions: from an entirely holistic perspective, yes, the A major fits. It's unexpected. C♯-(m6) contains the same notes as A∆7 (A-C♯-E-G♯); in triadic harmony, you can't suspend a fifth, and given that the fifth of C♯- is G♯, I'm not even sure you're using the term you mean to use. Either way, with G major appearing just a couple measures earlier and G♮ featuring in the melody, I don't think the argument is there that the chord is any flavor of C♯-. As for your second question, there are so many functionalities that can use accidentals that it's hard to specify any "rules" or "consensus" on when to use them, so really, it comes back to whatever you think sounds good.

 

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I used to struggle with this idea that things had to belong in keys but moving away from a key center is where things get interesting.

 

It can be useful to separate the notion of harmony from theory. Theory, in my mind at least, is a tool to predict things. If I get myself in a pickle to get back to a particular chord I might simply invoke the dominant chord and see how I like it. For whatever reason humans seem to feel some kind of resolution. I don't think we understand why but the theory accurately predicts it.

 

Harmony for me is simply how notes sound against one another and we can use words like lydian to communicate the use of the #4 for example. I find it more tactical in that I worry only about the implied harmony at a given point in time and try to play/write against that.

 

So if you are feeling A major then go for it and just play/think/feel A majory for a bit. The fun part is finding cool ways to connect it to the other chords.

 

Burt Bacharach is a great person to study in this regard. You look at the changes and you sometimes wonder what the f*%@ he was thinking. It may have been simply: I like the way this sounds. "Look of Love" is a fun chart to review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 2 months later...
Personally I think you have to learn theory so you can throw it out the window when you need to...sometimes these things happen through experimentation or by accident. However, trying to break the mould is always a good thing to me because it makes music refreshing to listen to. I say don't worry about it at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...