Help me break loose from Diatonic progressions

[gnoll]

V7-I, sounds fucking awesome

I hate V-I, especially V7-I. There's barely anything in music I hate more than that.

It's like reading a detective story, and by the end of it you're sure you know what's going to happen. But you think no, it can't be that simple, there must be something more to it. If what I think will happen actually happens it would be so awful that there just has to be something else to it, a twist that I didn't see coming. But there is no twist, it's just as predictable and boring as you thought it was, and it fucking sucks, and you fling the book across the room in frustration. That's V-I.

V should go to vi. Imo V-I should be avoided at all costs pretty much because it sounds insanely boring and cheesy. Plus dominant seventh chords must be one of the ugliest sounding chords in existence. I think they only kind of work for V7-vi. Otherwise they make me want to cover my ears.

Sorry for being so negative, but that cadence kind of ruins a lot of music for me.

 

[Solodini]

Some great responses here already.

If there was one thing I could go back and change about how I learned music theory, it would be the early focus I had on starting from a scale and harmonizing it into chords, and then looking at those chords as a group of chords that worked well together to write with. That's all technically true... but, I think it caused me to downplay something that's as useful if not more so, cadence and resolution, the how and why of why it "sounds good" to go from one chord to another.

Like, the V-I resolution, or more specifically the V7-I, sounds fucking awesome and has this big, final-sounding closure to it. The reason for that ISN'T that they're both chords you can harmonize from the diatonic major scale. The reason is the notes within those chords - in E, the default key for all guitarists, that;s B7 to E major, or B-Eb(D# if you're being technical)-F#-A going to E-G#-B. It sounds big because, while you're holding the B steady, you have two half-step moves working crosswise with each other, a A that descends one pitch to a G#, coupled with a D# that ascends one pitch to an E. The V-I is a pretty big move when you look at it from root to root, but if you look at what's going on inside the chord, it's actually just a couple of really small moves, a half step shift in either direction, and one pitch constant.

Meanwhile, the IV-V movement sounds fine, nothing clashes... but it also feels pretty unresolved. Everything's moving a full step, between the two, so it doesn't have quite the same impact. Go from an A to a B and it's cool and all, but go from an A to a B to a E, and it sounds finished.

So, that's kind of an interesting thing to keep in mind when trying to get outside of the diatonic scale - half-step movements within the chords from one to the next can sound pretty powerful, and done carefully you can really "sell" some things that are absolutely NOT diatonic.

One good way to do this is simply to use a chromatic line, and build chords off that. Tons of classic examples in rock, I'd point to Stairway to Heaven and STP's Plush as good ones.

You can stop well short of that though and just use either a chord change that prominently features a half step move between the two chords, or a short chromatic line, to kind of sell the movement outside of the diatonic harmony. I don't remember the full changes off the top of my head and I'm writing this without a guitar, but Steven Wilson's "The Raven That Refused to Sing" does that quite nicely, with a piano figure in C minor that resolves to C minor the first time, but the next time to C major. Also, I'm trying to think of some of the stuff I've been working on lately and off the top of my head none of them are really great examples, but there was one song that I ended in a way pretty similar to this, where the chorus was in E major, starting on an A (I think, and there were some suspensions and whatnot going on, but basically A - C#m - A/B - E/G#), and to end it on something more interesting, the last time around I went from A to the C#m, up a half step to D major (which creates a feeling of tension), from D major to D minor, resolving down a half step on the major third to the minor third, F# to F, which creates even MORE tension... and from there, continuing down chromatically to the E, making that the 5th of an A, where I had the half step resolution from F to E, the half step resolution from D to C#, the major third of the A, and then an A held steady between the two... and suddenly all that tension you just built up is released and it sounds final.

But, tension and resolution. It's a different mindset, but thinking about how one chord resolves to the other can really open your thinking to moving from chord to chord in ways that build an then resolve tension, that have little to do with a single diatonic scale.

The problem of course is that you then have to figure out how to solo over this stuff.

If you want to be super technical, a lot of this thinking about cadence and resolution is something you see in the jazz world and is something that today we might look at as "jazz" harmony... but it's also something that was a big part of pop harmony until quite recently, and pop (and rock) have gotten gradually simpler and more diatonic in recent years, but there's absolutely no shortage of pop and rock music that doesn't fit neatly into a single scale and is functioning on terms like this. It's no more "jazz" harmony than harmonizing scales into triads and writing songs using triads based on the diatonic scale is.

I just wanted to say that this is a great post. We could all do a lot better from understanding why things work, rather than just copying a few things which work until we're bored of them and need a new tool to use.

 

[Drew]

I hate V-I, especially V7-I. There's barely anything in music I hate more than that.

It's like reading a detective story, and by the end of it you're sure you know what's going to happen. But you think no, it can't be that simple, there must be something more to it. If what I think will happen actually happens it would be so awful that there just has to be something else to it, a twist that I didn't see coming. But there is no twist, it's just as predictable and boring as you thought it was, and it fucking sucks, and you fling the book across the room in frustration. That's V-I.

V should go to vi. Imo V-I should be avoided at all costs pretty much because it sounds insanely boring and cheesy. Plus dominant seventh chords must be one of the ugliest sounding chords in existence. I think they only kind of work for V7-vi. Otherwise they make me want to cover my ears.

Sorry for being so negative, but that cadence kind of ruins a lot of music for me.

Ok, but I hope you also recognize that that's entirely a product of how strong that resolution is, with a series of small half-step resolutions to move crosswise from one chord to another implying a pretty big intervallic shift.

I guess I've always found that looking at music theory as a toolkit makes a lot more sense than looking at it as a set of "rules," as the former is a lot less restrictive than the latter. I think this is a perfect example of why that approach can be useful - you can have a really great screwdriver in your toolkit, and know it's a great, awesome, effective screwdriver with some really good screws that bite and hold really well... and just really prefer using nails or woodglue or something because you just don't like how screws look in a finished product. It's still a good thing to have that screwdriver and understand why it works, even if you'd strongly prefer to use something else.

And 7th chords can be pretty awesome if used in interesting ways - maybe challenge yourself to write a progression with a dominant 7th in it, that doesn't form part of a V7-I resolution, to sort of reframe that chord in a different harmonic context?

I just wanted to say that this is a great post. We could all do a lot better from understanding why things work, rather than just copying a few things which work until we're bored of them and need a new tool to use.

Thanks man - I'm definitely wrestling with a bit of this myself, that in some ways diatonic harmony is kind of a trap, because it's so easy to just stay there and stay in this really comfortable, easy space where everything sounds pretty good no matter what you do. Trying to look for ways to step outside of that framework is IMO a pretty good way to make your music sound a little more ear catching, even if you're writing in a "pop" or "rock" context - I'd say especially if you are writing in a pop or rock context, really.

 

[michael_bolton]

I hate V-I, especially V7-I. There's barely anything in music I hate more than that.

It's like reading a detective story, and by the end of it you're sure you know what's going to happen. But you think no, it can't be that simple, there must be something more to it. If what I think will happen actually happens it would be so awful that there just has to be something else to it, a twist that I didn't see coming. But there is no twist, it's just as predictable and boring as you thought it was, and it fucking sucks, and you fling the book across the room in frustration. That's V-I.

V should go to vi. Imo V-I should be avoided at all costs pretty much because it sounds insanely boring and cheesy. Plus dominant seventh chords must be one of the ugliest sounding chords in existence. I think they only kind of work for V7-vi. Otherwise they make me want to cover my ears.

Sorry for being so negative, but that cadence kind of ruins a lot of music for me.

if there's nothing else going on and we're talking "in your face" type arrangement - there's defo some of that.
same goes for e.g. 1-4-1-5-1which makes standard bluesy stuff boring af at least from the harmony perspective.

if it's done as muted comping with a walking bass line behind a solo - it's way less pronounced. extensions also help - G7b9 to Cmaj7#11 and then some embellishments on the I or breaking it up with a quartal voicing for example - no huge surprise there movement-wise but imo keeps the ear occupied enough to hide the banality of the movement

 

[gnoll]

Ok, but I hope you also recognize that that's entirely a product of how strong that resolution is, with a series of small half-step resolutions to move crosswise from one chord to another implying a pretty big intervallic shift.

Sure! But I think it's also history's obsession with it. People discovered it, decided it was good and that was that. It became what you're supposed to do. For hundreds of years. Enough already, eh.

And 7th chords can be pretty awesome if used in interesting ways - maybe challenge yourself to write a progression with a dominant 7th in it, that doesn't form part of a V7-I resolution, to sort of reframe that chord in a different harmonic context?

Hm, it's an interesting challenge for sure. I don't know if I can do it though, I really don't like the chord. But for sure I will keep it in mind, I like challenges like that.

I agree with lots of what you're saying btw, just not V-I being awesome And I struggle with the diatonic trap for sure, but Idk, I like diatonic music. It's tough, it feels so hard to give up what you like a lot for something you like less. I'm more comfortable taking the diatonic stuff and dressing it up in different clothes, maybe a fancy hat or two, rather than exchanging it for something else. Looking for the best melodies, sweet modulations, tasty extended harmony, some light counterpoint, working with sounds and timbre. But it's hard not feeling like I'm repeating myself between songs. I know what I like so of course I want to do that in every song.

 

[Drew]

Honestly, a lot of my recent kick to "in every song, make sure there's at least ONE section where I'm not following pure diatonic harmony" is driven by the fact that I hit a point a year or two ago where I started to feel like I was just writing the same song over and over again. I mean, you can play Am-F-C-G and it just sounds awesome, but there's only so many times when you can write a song around that before it all starts to feel the same.

Idunno, maybe toss in some suspensions and see if that takes you anywhere interesting, or try some inversions. Or start dropping pitches, and see if you can figure out maybe what particular interval in a dominant chord is bugging you. It's actually kind of an interesting reaction to just be turned off by the sound of a chord - is it just dominant 7ths, or do minor 7ths or major 7ths sit wrong with you too?

 

[c7spheres]

.........cadence and resolution, the how and why of why it "sounds good" to go from one chord to another.

......... tension and resolution. It's a different mindset,.........

I think Drew nails it.


- To be literal, in order break free of diatonic progression you literally just have to play something that's not.


- On the flip side of the coin also focus on just jamming and ignoring theory and progressions for awhile. Focus on being creative, spontaneous, improv, and feel what you want to portray. Try to make a connection with your soul and speak it out your guitar. Suddenly you might be more obessed with making noises than progressions. Stuff that's not even notes maybe.

- Impart more chromatic tones and movement. Play stuff that shouldn't go together and make it work. Doing this can be a challenge but sometimes it's a simple change of rhythm, playing it at the right dynamic, a palm mute, ommiting a note etc. Stuff that sounds like it shoudn't go together initially can totally work together if they're played a certain way.

- How you play things dynamically, techinque-wise, and rhythmically are just as (if not more) important than what you actually play. Silence/rests are notes too. Also, what you play after whatever thing you just played is what will define the impact of the thing you just played. You can play anything. It can be a note, chord, noises, silence etc.

 

[Drew]

- To be literal, in order break free of diatonic progression you literally just have to play something that's not.

On one hand this is dangerous advice, because done literally and without any. discretion, you're going to do a lot of stuff that sounds like shit.

On the other, ehh... it's a good way to learn.

One thing that I've found helpful, is it's sometimes useful to work backwards and start with how you plan on resolving back to your home key or your tonic or whatever, especally if what you're talking about isn't part of a main progression so much as a key change to a different section of a song.

I posted this in another thread talking about something fairly technical related to use of a clipper and limiter, but what the hell:

https://drewpeterson7.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/upbeat-idea-in-e-3.mp3

This is a demo for a song I've been working on, scratch guitars but I've put some work into the drum programming and plan on using that in the eventual final recording.

The song itself is squarely in E major, with a solo section that basically goes A-B a bunch, and on the second repeat goes to a final E chord.

From there, the tonality wanders around a little. The solo section starts off with kind of a blues shuffle in G#, G#-C#. Both of those chords are technically in E major, but with the major 6th coming into play on both, you're adding in a F in place of the E, and a Bb in place of the A, and setting up a Dorian feel. Your ear accepts it though, even though it's hard to imagine two notes that would clash more with your original harmony. From there, ultimately I knew I wanted to get back to a C#, minor technically but only implied by the harmony, so coming back in from a G# again would resolve to the C# with a feeling of resolution. Except, trying to resolve from the tonic of my new harmony to anything was going to sound weird, since that's supposed to be the "resolved" chord in the key center I'm in. So, another key change. After some trial and error, I found moving up another step, to Bb minor, and going with a sort of blues/rock-y walk up, Bb5-C#5-Eb5- then real quick Gb5-F5 (root-m3-4-m6-V), and then on the second pass, not going from the V to the I, but from the V to the vii, Ab5, and sustaining there for a bar, and then going from there, which is the V of C#, which is not my tonic, but which is the first chord of the verse riff, would allow me to kind of backdoor my way into a progression in E major.

Lot of text and it's probably easier to work through this with a guitar in your hand, but none of this sounds that weird, yet there's some pretty big deviations drom your original key there, and I guess it's a pretty good example of how I like to some times work in reverse, by thinking how I want to return to a key, and then figuring out what I have to do to make that happen.

 

[fantom]

Ok, but I hope you also recognize that that's entirely a product of how strong that resolution is, with a series of small half-step resolutions to move crosswise from one chord to another implying a pretty big intervallic shift

There is more to it than that. It's more about the harmonic tension caused by the frequencies that are heard.

A V chord is stable. The fifth and major third notes are the 2nd and 4th harmonics of the root. This is the most stable chord we could want. There is no reason it should want to resolve to a I chord on its own.

If you add the flat seventh, there is all of a sudden a tritone with the 3rd and 7th. The dissonance created here is because the frequencies don't line up as harmonics. Mathematically, we can make the frequencies work out if the 2 sine wave periods would just be multiples of each other. This is why the 3rd pulls up (the frequency increases) and the 7th pulls down (the frequency decreases). It's the smallest change to make the dissonant interval a nice harmonic ratio. Think of it as tuning one string while playing the note on another (like the 5h fret). You hear an unpleasant "wobble", so you raise the pitch of one string to make them sound nice. You can also lower the pitch of the other string. That tritone is doing the same thing on wider disparity.

But note, there are more than 1 chord with this same dissonance of a tritone. One of the approaches is a tritone substitution. You play a bII7 instead of V7. And you also get that nice half step walk down in the root and fifth.

There are other ways to pull it off, as a tritone can be in a diminshed, half diminished, and extended wholetone chords. You can also substitute it. There are also more dissonant intervals than just the tritone, such as a minor second.

My whole point here, saying that one note goes up and the other goes down is overlooking the actual math of the harmonics. If people care about resolutions, explaining why a V7 resolves using sine waves and math may open more options to them than giving a magical rule using notes and intervals.

 

[fantom]

@ the OP

I suggest you make strict rules when writing. If you are overusing the i-v-VI, then force yourself to try a new progression. Force yourself to use no VI or dorian mode. Force yourself to go to at least 2 other chords before the VI. Force yourself to modulate any time you play a VI. Force yourself to replace the VI with a ii, III, bV, etc. Everytime you tried to use it. Make whatever rules you need to to feel comfortable with the result. Give yourself tools to change the way it sounds while still having an opinion if it sounds good.

The art is about finding something that you think sounds good. The interesting part about being an artist is to find something that you like, but making it your own. If you like a VI, find ways to embrace that.

 

[Drew]

My whole point here, saying that one note goes up and the other goes down is overlooking the actual math of the harmonics. If people care about resolutions, explaining why a V7 resolves using sine waves and math may open more options to them than giving a magical rule using notes and intervals.

I will admit that it's been a fucking LONG time since I've studied any of this stuff and I was probably glossing over a lot - the dissonance of a tritone being a pretty great example.

 

[c7spheres]

On one hand this is dangerous advice, because done literally and without any. discretion, you're going to do a lot of stuff that sounds like shit.

On the other, ehh... it's a good way to learn.

One thing that I've found helpful, is it's sometimes useful to work backwards and start with how you plan on resolving back to your home key or your tonic or whatever, especally if what you're talking about isn't part of a main progression so much as a key change to a different section of a song.

I posted this in another thread talking about something fairly technical related to use of a clipper and limiter, but what the hell:

https://drewpeterson7.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/upbeat-idea-in-e-3.mp3

This is a demo for a song I've been working on, scratch guitars but I've put some work into the drum programming and plan on using that in the eventual final recording.

The song itself is squarely in E major, with a solo section that basically goes A-B a bunch, and on the second repeat goes to a final E chord.

From there, the tonality wanders around a little. The solo section starts off with kind of a blues shuffle in G#, G#-C#. Both of those chords are technically in E major, but with the major 6th coming into play on both, you're adding in a F in place of the E, and a Bb in place of the A, and setting up a Dorian feel. Your ear accepts it though, even though it's hard to imagine two notes that would clash more with your original harmony. From there, ultimately I knew I wanted to get back to a C#, minor technically but only implied by the harmony, so coming back in from a G# again would resolve to the C# with a feeling of resolution. Except, trying to resolve from the tonic of my new harmony to anything was going to sound weird, since that's supposed to be the "resolved" chord in the key center I'm in. So, another key change. After some trial and error, I found moving up another step, to Bb minor, and going with a sort of blues/rock-y walk up, Bb5-C#5-Eb5- then real quick Gb5-F5 (root-m3-4-m6-V), and then on the second pass, not going from the V to the I, but from the V to the vii, Ab5, and sustaining there for a bar, and then going from there, which is the V of C#, which is not my tonic, but which is the first chord of the verse riff, would allow me to kind of backdoor my way into a progression in E major.

Lot of text and it's probably easier to work through this with a guitar in your hand, but none of this sounds that weird, yet there's some pretty big deviations drom your original key there, and I guess it's a pretty good example of how I like to some times work in reverse, by thinking how I want to return to a key, and then figuring out what I have to do to make that happen.

That's wild man. To me it just sounds like a "normal" song. Nice positive vibe going on in there. Kinda reminds me of a Satriani vibe. I like the tones too. Good quality.

 

[Drew]

That's wild man. To me it just sounds like a "normal" song. Nice positive vibe going on in there. Kinda reminds me of a Satriani vibe. I like the tones too. Good quality.

Yeah, the solo section is VERY Satriani, though to be fair I suspect it's tough to do a mid/uptempo blues shuffle with some Dorian and chromatic color and NOT have people think of Summer Song. It's also the first time I've ever tried "writing" a solo, mostlyby improvising until I found something I liked the overall structure of, then going back and re-improvising over each lick and gradually refining them into something that felt like "me" but that I could play over and over, etc, and as a blues guy from way back wth an "improvise ALL the solos!" attitude, honestly, this is something I should have done ages ago, because the result sounds like a better version of myself. There's still some issues I need to clean up in the final - there's definitely a drpped note in the first fast section where it needs one or two more notes than it has to keep the tempo up - but it was an eye opening exercise.

But yeah, I was rather proud of how far out I was able to get that solo section, without it sounding like I was doing anything all that unusual.

 

[gnoll]

what particular interval in a dominant chord is bugging you. It's actually kind of an interesting reaction to just be turned off by the sound of a chord - is it just dominant 7ths, or do minor 7ths or major 7ths sit wrong with you too?

It's something with the tritone and the distance from the root. Then combine that with overuse. I really don't like how some music has just triads and then out of nowhere a dominant 7th chord appears. It's so out of place, especially when it's played as open chords on guitar and there's no voice leading.

Minor 7th chords are okay, and maj7 I like a lot and use in my music. But I struggle with jazz where everything has a 7th and it makes the music too loungey and the bigger feelings seem to disappear from the music.

 

[Drew]

It's something with the tritone and the distance from the root. Then combine that with overuse. I really don't like how some music has just triads and then out of nowhere a dominant 7th chord appears. It's so out of place, especially when it's played as open chords on guitar and there's no voice leading.

Minor 7th chords are okay, and maj7 I like a lot and use in my music. But I struggle with jazz where everything has a 7th and it makes the music too loungey and the bigger feelings seem to disappear from the music.

I say this with zero condescension at all, this is kind of fascinating to me. Are there any other chords/voicings/harmonies you find off-putting?

I can't really talk, 80s style harmonized guitar does this to me too 99% of the time.

 

[gnoll]

I say this with zero condescension at all, this is kind of fascinating to me. Are there any other chords/voicings/harmonies you find off-putting?

I can't really talk, 80s style harmonized guitar does this to me too 99% of the time.

Haha, I kinda find it weird that you find it weird. To me it's pretty natural, different chords sound different, some more pleasing and some less.

But hm, I mean, there's certainly dissonant chords that don't sound particularly pleasant, but I don't think it's the dissonance as such that bothers me, but rather the voice the chord speaks with. For example diminished chords are pretty ugly also but not in the same way as dominant 7th chords, which I find ugly in an annoying way. It's like they're saying "ooo look at me I'm a nice and pretty major chord, but somebody screwed me up by adding the ugliest note possible on top".

I can't think of anything else off the top of my head that annoys me like that.

 

[Drew]

Haha, I kinda find it weird that you find it weird. To me it's pretty natural, different chords sound different, some more pleasing and some less.

But hm, I mean, there's certainly dissonant chords that don't sound particularly pleasant, but I don't think it's the dissonance as such that bothers me, but rather the voice the chord speaks with. For example diminished chords are pretty ugly also but not in the same way as dominant 7th chords, which I find ugly in an annoying way. It's like they're saying "ooo look at me I'm a nice and pretty major chord, but somebody screwed me up by adding the ugliest note possible on top".

I can't think of anything else off the top of my head that annoys me like that.

No, it's cool, it's just interesting the different ways people "hear" and "feel" music.