I would be really interested in hearing peoples take on borrowed chords - chords from outside of the key that still work and sound great.
for example - I always find that the iv (4th chord of the key made from major to a minor) works great in a load of songs -
For example - in the key of C we have
C Dm Em F G Am Bdim
If you take the 4th chord which is F major and change it from teh F major to the F minor t still really sounds great and doesnt seem that far out from the key,
I'm wondering what other outside or borrowed chords people like to use when composing their music?
Borrowed Chords
Olly, I hope you don't mind be dredging up this old thread I found- I'm really into nice chord changes.
I don't write much original material, but I often try to modify/rearrange songs I like.
The kind of minor-ish effect you mention is used in "It won't be Long" (Lennon/McCartney) (47 years ago?!)
It's in E. The chords for each bar of the verse go:
E C7 E C7 C#m E C#m E
C#m A, Bbdim E
The use of C7 make the tune change subtly from straight major to the minorish effect you were taslking about.
The song has an interesting, but easy to play ending too, with a held "E" on strings 1 and 6 while the middle 4 strings play chords sliding down each crotchet through G, F#, F and down to E before ending on Emaj7. When I heard the end of Stravinsky's "Firebird", I realized where the Beatles nicked this particular idea from.
Another similar I found was, to do 2 bars on the key chord, say C, then 2 beats on C#maj7 so a "c" is sustained through the bar before returning to C. This works well as a lazy bridge between 2 verses.
C to Abmj7 and back also works, and so does C to Ab7 and back- the latter being what "It won't be long" uses.
Another
I don't write much original material, but I often try to modify/rearrange songs I like.
The kind of minor-ish effect you mention is used in "It won't be Long" (Lennon/McCartney) (47 years ago?!)
It's in E. The chords for each bar of the verse go:
E C7 E C7 C#m E C#m E
C#m A, Bbdim E
The use of C7 make the tune change subtly from straight major to the minorish effect you were taslking about.
The song has an interesting, but easy to play ending too, with a held "E" on strings 1 and 6 while the middle 4 strings play chords sliding down each crotchet through G, F#, F and down to E before ending on Emaj7. When I heard the end of Stravinsky's "Firebird", I realized where the Beatles nicked this particular idea from.
Another similar I found was, to do 2 bars on the key chord, say C, then 2 beats on C#maj7 so a "c" is sustained through the bar before returning to C. This works well as a lazy bridge between 2 verses.
C to Abmj7 and back also works, and so does C to Ab7 and back- the latter being what "It won't be long" uses.
Another
Not at all! I am pleased you did!Cogs wrote:Olly, I hope you don't mind be dredging up this old thread I found
I will check out the chord progression you mention as it does look interesting. I would personally not even know where to begin to start with analysing this harmonically but I know a man who probably could...
Instructor - are you still around?
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
Hi Olly,
The way I'd break this down, is to look at our chords in an E Major Key:
E F#m G#m A B7 C#m D#o E
The chords we know are from the key of E are E and C#m and the A - the 1 and the 6 and the 4.
While not being familiar with the piece, I would say the C would be a bVI - which is borrowing from the Parallel E Minor Scale.
Where this gets interesting is in the addition of the b7 in C (C7).
C7 would usually signal a change to the F major key, but as you see, no F. So why did they use it?
The next thing I'd do is look at the chords in terms of voice leading, maybe there is a common note they share, or a note is acting as a leading tone.
C E G Bb = C7
E G# B = E
Now if we look at it, not from a key standpoint, we see something interesting.
The B moves to Bb - 1/2 step back
The G# moves to G - 1/2 step back
The E stays where it is.
The C is the remaining note.
What if we took a C and superimposed the notes of an E major with it? This is where theory gets fun, is these what if's.
C E G# and B - I'd have a Cmaj7#5. One might look at the E to C7 as almost a rootless Cmaj7#5 to C7 move.
At any rate we've drawn a possible connection. We have 2 notes that move a half step back, while the others remain unchanged, thus I wouldn't call these substitutes more than I'd say creatively borrowed chords to imply movement.
In terms of substitutions, Olly, the chords that are subs usually share common tones with the chord being substituted. In the Key of C - C being the I chord, we'd see that Em and Am - the iii and the vi fit the bill as possible C subs. Lets see why.
C E G = C major
E G B = E minor (common tones E and G) You could say that using an Em implies a Cmaj7 without the C root, can you see why?
A C E = A minor (common tones C and E) It's can also be a C6, can you see why?
Another common substitution is known as a tritone sub, but thats usually related to Jazz and is built off the tritone of the V.
Now common variations, not subs, are usually chords borrowed from the Parallel Minor scale of a Key. Olly your example using Fm is a prefect example of that.
C Dm Em F G Am Bo C
Cm Do Eb Fm Gm Ab Bb
Notice in Cm, The F is Fm, notice also the presence of the Ab, this is where Cogs example is drawn from (That C to Ab7 or Amaj7)
In C, its not too uncommon to see the borrowed chords from its Parallel Minor.
Instructor
The way I'd break this down, is to look at our chords in an E Major Key:
E F#m G#m A B7 C#m D#o E
The chords we know are from the key of E are E and C#m and the A - the 1 and the 6 and the 4.
While not being familiar with the piece, I would say the C would be a bVI - which is borrowing from the Parallel E Minor Scale.
Where this gets interesting is in the addition of the b7 in C (C7).
C7 would usually signal a change to the F major key, but as you see, no F. So why did they use it?
The next thing I'd do is look at the chords in terms of voice leading, maybe there is a common note they share, or a note is acting as a leading tone.
C E G Bb = C7
E G# B = E
Now if we look at it, not from a key standpoint, we see something interesting.
The B moves to Bb - 1/2 step back
The G# moves to G - 1/2 step back
The E stays where it is.
The C is the remaining note.
What if we took a C and superimposed the notes of an E major with it? This is where theory gets fun, is these what if's.
C E G# and B - I'd have a Cmaj7#5. One might look at the E to C7 as almost a rootless Cmaj7#5 to C7 move.
At any rate we've drawn a possible connection. We have 2 notes that move a half step back, while the others remain unchanged, thus I wouldn't call these substitutes more than I'd say creatively borrowed chords to imply movement.
In terms of substitutions, Olly, the chords that are subs usually share common tones with the chord being substituted. In the Key of C - C being the I chord, we'd see that Em and Am - the iii and the vi fit the bill as possible C subs. Lets see why.
C E G = C major
E G B = E minor (common tones E and G) You could say that using an Em implies a Cmaj7 without the C root, can you see why?
A C E = A minor (common tones C and E) It's can also be a C6, can you see why?
Another common substitution is known as a tritone sub, but thats usually related to Jazz and is built off the tritone of the V.
Now common variations, not subs, are usually chords borrowed from the Parallel Minor scale of a Key. Olly your example using Fm is a prefect example of that.
C Dm Em F G Am Bo C
Cm Do Eb Fm Gm Ab Bb
Notice in Cm, The F is Fm, notice also the presence of the Ab, this is where Cogs example is drawn from (That C to Ab7 or Amaj7)
In C, its not too uncommon to see the borrowed chords from its Parallel Minor.
Instructor
Last edited by Instructor on Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
Thanks.jamesd74 wrote:For my part its nice to see you back Sean.
Let's look at the next part of this progression:
The A to Bbdim to E.
There are a lot of ways a diminished or m7b5 can be used. This one had me thinking.
One way is to pull from the viio to the I So in this instance, the next chord should (logically) be a B. But it's not. Why?
Well this is where theory, I guess paid off. Because through understanding that the B is gone and seeing the next chord was E, it made sense. If the next chord had been some kind of B or .... B7, then it would be acting as the V7 of the I - and the B7 is the V of the....E. So I tend to see the Bbo "cutting to the chase" and going straight to the E.
Instructor
-
NicolaePaul
- I'm rocking
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:44 am
You can try everything you want if you ask me, music is about sound, not about rules (theory). Indeed following theory will make sound good and in key, but i think it is easier if you see it like this: Your music, your ideas, your rules, if it pleases you go for it 
.
.www.guitarlearningtips.org - my website
The Guitar Blueprint to Success - my free 57 pages and 6 chapter Ebook
The Guitar Blueprint to Success - my free 57 pages and 6 chapter Ebook
Instructor - Thanks for such a detailed post. It will take me a while to digest it all but I can follow your analysis.
Great stuff - thanks!
NicolaePaul - This is interesting. I guess in this instance we are using theory to analyse what has been created. I am not sure if theory could really help compose something like this in the first place. Though maybe I am wrong!
Great stuff - thanks!
NicolaePaul - This is interesting. I guess in this instance we are using theory to analyse what has been created. I am not sure if theory could really help compose something like this in the first place. Though maybe I am wrong!
i agree with this 100% ..use theory to analyse music..not to create it ...this should be from withinNicolaePaul wrote:You can try everything you want if you ask me, music is about sound, not about rules (theory). Indeed following theory will make sound good and in key, but i think it is easier if you see it like this: Your music, your ideas, your rules, if it pleases you go for it
not from a set of rules
if you want to write a truly original song write it with an instrument you know
nothing about ..so theory cant interfere ...just the sounds
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
At the risk of being controversial, theory helps you understand better, as to what is going on, and presents a number of insights and options, to help you create music, nothing more.
While it has some rules, as far as what you call it, it doesn't demand that you play using it.
You can call anything anything. If someone wants to call E Major, A minor, let them, whatever works for their understanding works. It just wont agree with any chord books in print.
Theory definitely could be used to compose something. If one learns that their song had a bit of a departure simply by going to the bVII, then thats a creative tool or insight they now possess. If they learned they could extend an exploratory guitar solo for 3 or 4 minutes simply by doing a IV to I (Plagal) then that too can be creative simply through the knowledge of theory, that may not have come about simply wiggling along by ear.
Instructor
While it has some rules, as far as what you call it, it doesn't demand that you play using it.
You can call anything anything. If someone wants to call E Major, A minor, let them, whatever works for their understanding works. It just wont agree with any chord books in print.
Theory definitely could be used to compose something. If one learns that their song had a bit of a departure simply by going to the bVII, then thats a creative tool or insight they now possess. If they learned they could extend an exploratory guitar solo for 3 or 4 minutes simply by doing a IV to I (Plagal) then that too can be creative simply through the knowledge of theory, that may not have come about simply wiggling along by ear.
Instructor
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
Generally to a newbee I try to explain the following:
Avoid Modes for now. They will only serve to frustrate and confuse you.
Here's why.
Modes are not scales, at least in the sense of how you use them. When you use a Major scale you pick a Major key and away you go.
The same with minor. It's very "key" based. You can play what you identify as a modal "shape or scale" and its function not being anything more than a Major scale. That's a fine way of organizing lots of ways to play the major scale, without starting on the root, and lots of people do that. But this is not playing "modes" when it comes down to it, its merely a way of connecting major scales.
The approach with Major and Minor keys are not true with modes. With modes, I explain that they are the scales AND the chords they are played against.
So until they know how to do that (Approach 2 that I described earlier) any understanding of modes will be convoluted at best. Finally I explain the incidence of whole step to half step patterns are what really makes one mode "scale" different from the other.
That in itself, gives the newbee no usable information, however, on playing them, because you need the ability to look at all scales, whilst seeing all the possible chords that can be constructed from them, and then the understanding of how to mix things so that the characteristic notes are reinforced throughout the progression, to reinforce the "modal" sound through the progression. This is challenging, but it's also a lot of fun.
Most people cannot do this beyond a 2 chord vamp that they learn about somewhere, and that's not accidental, because beyond that, everything gets sticky.
Here's what I have come to understand. People do not like being told, that theres something they cannot do/understand. That possibility is simply not an acceptable one. If you tell them "You wont understand" People don't want to hear that. We take that as an affront to our ego, as a challenge to our pride, and thus we set out to "prove" the person wrong, even though we aren't sure how we are going to do that...
Instead of doing that, now, when someone insists they are ready, and they know what is going on, I might say something like, "OK, then play over this, and tell me what Mode it is, and why".
Bm7 | E7 | Dmaj7 | E7 | Amaj7 | Fm7 | Bm7 | Dbm7 E7 :
Instructor
Avoid Modes for now. They will only serve to frustrate and confuse you.
Here's why.
Modes are not scales, at least in the sense of how you use them. When you use a Major scale you pick a Major key and away you go.
The same with minor. It's very "key" based. You can play what you identify as a modal "shape or scale" and its function not being anything more than a Major scale. That's a fine way of organizing lots of ways to play the major scale, without starting on the root, and lots of people do that. But this is not playing "modes" when it comes down to it, its merely a way of connecting major scales.
The approach with Major and Minor keys are not true with modes. With modes, I explain that they are the scales AND the chords they are played against.
So until they know how to do that (Approach 2 that I described earlier) any understanding of modes will be convoluted at best. Finally I explain the incidence of whole step to half step patterns are what really makes one mode "scale" different from the other.
That in itself, gives the newbee no usable information, however, on playing them, because you need the ability to look at all scales, whilst seeing all the possible chords that can be constructed from them, and then the understanding of how to mix things so that the characteristic notes are reinforced throughout the progression, to reinforce the "modal" sound through the progression. This is challenging, but it's also a lot of fun.
Most people cannot do this beyond a 2 chord vamp that they learn about somewhere, and that's not accidental, because beyond that, everything gets sticky.
Here's what I have come to understand. People do not like being told, that theres something they cannot do/understand. That possibility is simply not an acceptable one. If you tell them "You wont understand" People don't want to hear that. We take that as an affront to our ego, as a challenge to our pride, and thus we set out to "prove" the person wrong, even though we aren't sure how we are going to do that...
Instead of doing that, now, when someone insists they are ready, and they know what is going on, I might say something like, "OK, then play over this, and tell me what Mode it is, and why".
Bm7 | E7 | Dmaj7 | E7 | Amaj7 | Fm7 | Bm7 | Dbm7 E7 :
Instructor
Last edited by Instructor on Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This is some great advice and exactly the sort of thing I am trying to work on at the moment.Instructor wrote:Theory definitely could be used to compose something. If one learns that their song had a bit of a departure simply by going to the bVII, then thats a creative tool or insight they now possess. If they learned they could extend an exploratory guitar solo for 3 or 4 minutes simply by doing a IV to I (Plagal) then that too can be creative simply through the knowledge of theory, that may not have come about simply wiggling along by ear.
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
If you do that you'd be successfully playing in the Key of C Major, and nothing more.polyal wrote:so if the seven chords of Cmaj are ...c dm em f g am b..etc....you can jam
the key of C......to each chord to give the modal sound (very very basically)??
The reason it doesn't work the other way, is because of RESOLUTION. If you try that, take any progression in C, and proceed modally, as you described above you'd be hard pressed to get the jam to sound "Resolved" on anything but C.
Instructor
Last edited by Instructor on Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This is exactly what I struggled/struggle with - it is all too easy to think "well I know the notes of the mode", solo along and realise you are simply playing the major key.Instructor wrote:The reason it doesn't work the other way, is because of RESOLUTION. If you try that, take any progression in C, and proceed modally, as you described above you'd be hard pressed to get the jam to sound "Resolved" on anything but C.
This is why I know the modal flavours from the point of a single drone or simple chord vamp and nothing much more than that!
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
Olly,
Understanding this, is the first real "step" towards understanding Modes. How many people spend years thinking one thing, only to find they were wrong, the whole time? That's a lot of wasted time. Once you understand what they are not, you've made the first real step towards understanding. Why? Because this puts us at only one possible place, to proceed:
Use everything you understand about theory to begin to work through what Modes are, and then, how to put it all together, using your ears, to do whatever it takes to bring that Modal sound out in your playing. Once you do that, you'll understand why its so hard to just tell someone how to do it, as if it were some sort of set of rules.
I hope this makes sense. Its not that we are being intentionally obscure, its that there's no way to understand it, short of doing that. But where you are now, I would say you are closer to being able to do that than you might think. Still, the work is yours to do.
Do you see where I'm coming from now?
Instructor
Understanding this, is the first real "step" towards understanding Modes. How many people spend years thinking one thing, only to find they were wrong, the whole time? That's a lot of wasted time. Once you understand what they are not, you've made the first real step towards understanding. Why? Because this puts us at only one possible place, to proceed:
Use everything you understand about theory to begin to work through what Modes are, and then, how to put it all together, using your ears, to do whatever it takes to bring that Modal sound out in your playing. Once you do that, you'll understand why its so hard to just tell someone how to do it, as if it were some sort of set of rules.
I hope this makes sense. Its not that we are being intentionally obscure, its that there's no way to understand it, short of doing that. But where you are now, I would say you are closer to being able to do that than you might think. Still, the work is yours to do.
Do you see where I'm coming from now?
Instructor
Last edited by Instructor on Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I think this hits the nail on the head. This is why it is so hard to tell someone.Instructor wrote:Once you do that, you'll understand why its so hard to just tell someone how to do it, as if it was some sort of set of rules.
Having said that, I think the way that is explained can having a bearing on how quickly someone might start to understand. I ready so many poor books on the subject that did nothing but add to the confusion. This is also true with the internet. Just google "modes for the guitar" and there is loads of confusing and conflicting information!
-
Instructor
- Guitar Legend
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:25 pm
The same can be said for teaching theory to a guitarist. Thats exactly why my school grew to the point where it was neccesary to expand into an online Academy.
Because, I know first hand how it's been presented. My journey took 12 solid years, till I got it. Fortunately my struggles have come to benefit our students, in that I learned a way to present these ideas to others, to save them years of their lives.
Its not just Modes, its theory as well, that's been mangled so many times over, when its been presented to guitarists, outside of a University setting, or private teacher/mentoring situation.
Instructor
Because, I know first hand how it's been presented. My journey took 12 solid years, till I got it. Fortunately my struggles have come to benefit our students, in that I learned a way to present these ideas to others, to save them years of their lives.
Its not just Modes, its theory as well, that's been mangled so many times over, when its been presented to guitarists, outside of a University setting, or private teacher/mentoring situation.
Instructor
Last edited by Instructor on Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Modes are not that confusing if you take it a step at a time. I already addressed this in the other post but if you learn the patterns first and just start by matching the mode with chords in the diatonic scale you will be fine.
In the key of C if you focus a progression around the D chord then play D dorian. If it's E then E phrygian etc... This way you are getting used to playing the actual patterns of the modes. If you were to play a G mixolydian scale over a progression based around the G chord you certainly wouldn't be playing the wrong scale.
The thing here is you are getting used to the patterns of the modes. From there you can get a step deeper by talking about what gives the modes thier distinct sound, what a modal progressions is, how to apply them in different situations etc... This is all much easier if you already have the patterns memorized beforehand. Again if I played an F lydian scale over a progression that had the F chord as the tonic chord I wouldn't be playing the wrong scale. Yes as I learn more about modes I can look at it in a different way depending on what other chords are involved. As I learn more I can gain the knowledge of how to approach and use modes but in the beginning just learning the patterns and using them is the most important part for the time being. By the way when I say I I'm talking from a more beginner student perspective. I already know this stuff pretty well!
I wish I had more time to get more involved with this but I'm just very bogged down with things to work on now. I do enjoy reading this stuff though. I love hearing others perspectives on things!
In the key of C if you focus a progression around the D chord then play D dorian. If it's E then E phrygian etc... This way you are getting used to playing the actual patterns of the modes. If you were to play a G mixolydian scale over a progression based around the G chord you certainly wouldn't be playing the wrong scale.
The thing here is you are getting used to the patterns of the modes. From there you can get a step deeper by talking about what gives the modes thier distinct sound, what a modal progressions is, how to apply them in different situations etc... This is all much easier if you already have the patterns memorized beforehand. Again if I played an F lydian scale over a progression that had the F chord as the tonic chord I wouldn't be playing the wrong scale. Yes as I learn more about modes I can look at it in a different way depending on what other chords are involved. As I learn more I can gain the knowledge of how to approach and use modes but in the beginning just learning the patterns and using them is the most important part for the time being. By the way when I say I I'm talking from a more beginner student perspective. I already know this stuff pretty well!
I wish I had more time to get more involved with this but I'm just very bogged down with things to work on now. I do enjoy reading this stuff though. I love hearing others perspectives on things!
As with any discipline, you have to know the rules first before you can break them.polyal wrote:i agree with this 100% ..use theory to analyse music..not to create it ...this should be from withinNicolaePaul wrote:You can try everything you want if you ask me, music is about sound, not about rules (theory). Indeed following theory will make sound good and in key, but i think it is easier if you see it like this: Your music, your ideas, your rules, if it pleases you go for it
not from a set of rules
Last edited by BriPhi on Sat Apr 30, 2011 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts."
Epiphone Les Paul Standard * Epiphone Sheraton II * Fender Squier Strat * Aria Acoustic * Unknown Acoustic * Oscar Schmidt (Washburn) 3/4 Acoustic * Unknown Mandolin from the '40's or '50's.
Epiphone Les Paul Standard * Epiphone Sheraton II * Fender Squier Strat * Aria Acoustic * Unknown Acoustic * Oscar Schmidt (Washburn) 3/4 Acoustic * Unknown Mandolin from the '40's or '50's.