The following list of questions and answers was last updated in September 2007.
How will this web site be used?
What is special about this theory?
What is the history of such ideas?
How has this new theory come about?
Do all musical phrases start with static harmony and end with dynamic harmony?
Why isn't the falling second progression included as one of the "strong" chord progressions?
Is there a difference between chord progressions in classical music and in popular music?
Will you add a section on jazz harmony at some point?
Does the theory work for late romantic composers such as Wagner?
Does the polarisation of chord progressions apply to modal music?
What feedback has been received?
This site has been set up as a precursor to publishing and to support my book Syntactic Structures in Music. This presents a new theory that demonstrates that chord progressions in tonal music show patterns that are similar to natural language syntactic structures. I want to get more feedback on the contents and format of the book before approaching publishers.
As well as a summary of the book Syntactic Structures in Music, the site contains an outline thesis which documents some of the research behind the theory. It also contains animated demonstrations and a practical example of how the theory can be used to harmonise a melody. The site includes a section on the relevance of the theory to pop and rock music. The thesis part of the site contains a sample database of analysed pieces. This involves an interactive graph which demonstrates the comparative root progression analysis technique that is the basis of the evidence for the theory. This can also be used to show how the polarisation of chord progressions has taken place on the change from early modal music to tonal music.
How will this web site be used?
By creating this web site I hope to:
- publish my ideas
- illustrate the theory by the use of demonstrations and an example of how to harmonise a melody
- help students of musical theory in their understanding of the subject
- convince academics of the value of the theory by publishing a thesis and database of analyses
- enable people to review the contents of the book
- get feedback on the ideas and book
- use the feedback to improve the writing and layout of the book
What is special about this theory?
Arising out of original analyses of root progressions in tonal music, this web site represents a theory that explains how chord progressions work in tonal music (and to some extent modal music) and demonstrates similarities between chord progression syntax and grammatical structures in language.
The characteristic feature that distinguishes western classical and popular music from that of other forms of music is the comprehensive use of harmony and counterpoint. The site demonstrates that, by the analysis of chord progressions, it is possible to identify structures in tonal music that are similar to the grammatical structures in natural language.
By this theory it is possible to relate chord progressions to the structure of whole musical phrases.
What is the history of such ideas?
Up to the present time, the predominant theories in music have been those of Rameau (1683 - 1764), Schoenberg (1874 - 1951) and Schenker (1868 - 1935). Each of these theorists, in his turn explains something about the way tonal music is structured. Rameau explains vertical harmonic formations; Schoenberg, the relationships between chords and key structures and Schenker the role of counterpoint in creating musical structure. However, none of these theorists fully explains how chord progressions are constructed into musical phrases. i.e. they do not fully explain the syntax of tonal music. For further information about the role of syntax in tonal music please refer to the notes on the connection with linguistics in Chapter 1 of the book section.
Some writers such as Weber, Schoenberg, McHose and Piston have described chord progressions by tables which show the probabilities of chords on each degree of the musical scale moving to chords on other degrees of the musical scale. However, there are problem with all of these tables and there is something unsatisfactory about a theory which is just a tabular description of observed data. A theory is meant to tell you something about underlying principles. Also, these tables describe chord progressions regardless of the position of the chord in the musical phrase and they don't account for aspects of harmony such as chromatic chords or modulation.
There have been attempts by theorists such as Lerdahl and Jackendoff (A Generative Theory of Music) and others to produce a theory based on linguistic analogues. David Cope (Experiments in Musical Intelligence) uses linguistic paradigms to programme computers to compose music in the styles of various composers. There is also work in progress in cognitive science that attempt to utilise scientific techniques to examine the way we hear tonal music. None of these explains how chord progressions work in the context of musical phrases and therefore do not offer theories of the syntax of tonal music.
For further information on the history of these ideas see the outline thesis which explains some of the weakness of these theories in more detail. I plan to expand this discussion and include it eventually in the book section. See also the bibliography and web links section on this site.
The ideas presented on this website and in the book Syntactic Structures in Music demonstrate how chord progressions create syntax in tonal music.
How has this new theory come about?
The author's approach to musical theory as been to evaluate ideas by the analysis of musical data in a similar way to the way scientific data is analysed. The author's conclusions are that when chord progressions (i.e. root progressions) are analysed in this way, common patterns are observed in tonal music. You can see how this technique works in the section: Comparative Root Progression Analysis where you can try out the technique for yourself using the interactive graph tool. To date, I've analysed approximately 100 movements from classical music and about 150 pieces from popular music.
The common patterns observed across this large sample of tonal music forms the basis of the theory presented. The theory thus has an empirical and practical rather than philosophical basis. Some observations have been made about modal popular music in the appendix on popular music.
This site and Syntactic Structures in Music should be of interest to three groups of reader:
- The reader who has a basic understanding of musical theory. He or
she should have no difficulty in following the ideas and examples. This
type of reader would normally be familiar with basic harmonic notation
such as I, V7, IIc or A7, E minor etc. and be familiar with
the names of musical intervals and scales. It is hoped that this type
of reader will be able expand his or her understanding of how tonal
music is structured. In this group, I would include: teachers of music;
music students; performing musicians, (professional or amateur). Feedback
received confirms that members of this group often have an interest
in understanding how chord progressions work in tonal music. This group
of readers should view the Animated Demos
and Example Harmonisation
pages, followed by the Book
Outline.
- The professional musical theorist or analyst. He or she should
read this web site because it will give him or her another tool to evaluate
and use in the quest to attain a deeper understanding of the syntax
of musical compositions. In addition to the sections mentioned above,
these readers should also view the
Thesis section which summarises the evidence for the theory. This
includes the interactive Root
Progression Analysis Graph.
- The general reader who, interested in music, would like to know something about what gives music its internal logic and structure. This reader should be able to follow the Demonstrations and Example Harmonisation at least in outline.
If you find this site interesting then please pass the address of this web site on to your friends and colleagues.
Do all musical phrases start with static harmony and end with dynamic harmony?
Just as there is one basic structure in language that is modified in various
ways, there is similarly one standard structure in tonal music that is
modified in certain ways.
The basic structure is: static harmony, dynamic harmony, cadence, as explained in Chapter 1 and shown in demos 1 and 2.
This basic structure can be modified just as the basic sentence structure in language can be varied, i.e. as follows:
a) Short repeating pieces such as songs sometimes have only static harmony or only dynamic harmony. (Followed by a cadence)
b) The individual components can be expanded (internally) as indicated in chapter 5. and as shown in demos 3 & 4.
c) In longer pieces, incomplete structures can 'conjoin' to form longer complete structures. Please refer to the Mozart analysis in the Thesis section for examples.
I hope to include further examples of these variations as time permits.
Why isn't the falling second progression included as one of the "strong" chord progressions?
It is true that any progression can be used in dynamic harmony, however, it is certainly the case the three strong chord progressions (alpha, beta, gamma) are in practice used almost in exclusive preference to the remaining three progressions. This polarisation appears to be an essential component of tonal music that distinguishes it from modal music (where the same preference is not in evidence). When the Falling second progression is used it is usually associated with certain types of modulation (see Chapter 7.) or better explained by the presence of an appoggiatura chord. For instance, in popular music the falling 2nd progression, from V to IV in the 12 bar blues is really an example of the final chord I being elaboration by an appoggiatura chord IV See Chapter 3. Appoggiatura chord.
Is there a difference between chord progressions in classical music and in popular music?
Most popular music is tonal and therefore uses the same patterns as classical music. However, some popular music (folk influence music and certain types of rock music) utilise modal scales and associated modal harmonies. These modal chord progressions differ in syntax from tonal chord progressions. For more on modal harmony see:
and for more on popular music in general, see
Appendix A: Pop and Rock Music
Will you add a section on jazz harmony at some point?
The way harmony is used in jazz is a big subject in its own right.
I may include a little on the site about jazz harmony but a lot of what is already on the site can be applied to jazz, at least tonally based jazz. This is because a lot of jazz is based on improvisations of tonal popular songs. However, as in other popular music, when modal scales are used, there are some differences. These can be studied as important style variations from the usual tonal norms.
See section on popular music:
There are some references to jazz books in the Bibliography.
Does
the theory work for late romantic composers such as Wagner?
The current list of analyses includes works by Wagner, Richard Strauss
and Mahler as examples of late romantic music.
Based on the works analysed, the theory works well for this type of music.
This is because in order for the chromatic and tonal complexity to work,
underlying syntactic structures
need to be in place to support it. Otherwise we would not be able to make
sense of what is going on.
Most conventional theories concentrate on key relationships or chord classification so they miss these underlying phrase structures.
Does the polarisation of chord progressions work for
modal music?
The polarisation of chord progressions (i.e. the use of alpha beta and gamma progressions in priority to the others) is something that is found in tonal music. This applies to most classical music in the tonal period and to a lot of popular music but music prior to around 1650 and some popular music is based on modal scales and modal harmonies. The same degree of polarisation is not found in modal music. This represents a stylistic variation from tonal music. Other aspects of syntax, however, are sometimes present - such as the way the musical phrases are structured.
There is some information about this at:
and
If you find this web site of interest then please e-mail me your thoughts. Press here for my contact address. I use all such feedback to improve this site and Syntactic Structures in Music.
What feedback has been received?
Feedback received to date has been very positive. Where issues have been raised these have been answered by improving the wording and explanations on the website. Some of the more frequently asked questions are included in the list above.
Ver. 2.4.1a.