Emaj, Amaj, Bmaj... Dmaj?

[pepito]

Thanks everyone. I'm going to print this thread and study it tonight.

Just to clarify: none of the chords in this progression are extended beyond the 5th.

P.S. I guess I have to start giving my guitar player more respect.

 

[pepito]

Originally posted by Phil Smith
The E - A - D can be looked at as a 2 5 1 in D,

Okay. Using this approach, do you have any pointers as to how I may play through this part of the progression that aren't as obvious as the original line I came up with?

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

What Phil is saying is that those 3 chords could all be seen as coming from one scale - D - so you could just choose any notes from that scale. However as bass player you have a responsibility to play a line that makes sense in terms of outlining the chords - otherwise it just sounds like you are playing notes at random and the overall result will not be very musical.

But it does mean you only have one scale to memorise and can see this as your "palette" - it is an approach. Of course - in many styles you might want to include notes not in this scale - like chromatic passing notes which can give a very string feeling of resolution when a chord changes.

In the end though, as people have said - it's what sounds good to you - if it doesn't, you probably won't make it sound convincing to others - no matter how much theory you read.

 

[moley]

Except the E is a major triad, not minor - so it's not really 2-5-1, and those chords don't all fit in the scale of D.

IMO, it's misleading to say that you could look at the E-A-D as a 2-5-1, because it's not functioning that way.

 

[Richard Lindsey]

It seems pretty clear that the tonal center is E, so analyzing a three chord sequence as suddenly shifting into D doesn't make sense to me. It would seem simpler to think that the tune shifts from E major into E mixolydian briefly.

Quite a lot of rock and folk music is not actually conventionally major and minor but modal.

I don't think the tritone sub argument works either, first because the two chords would not both be dominants and thus would not share the key notes that make that substitution work (the 3 and the b7), and second because then you would have what is functionally a iii-V progression, which is not strong chord movement.

Finally, you can in fact have a major 2 in a 2-5-1, even though it is not diatonic. A major 2 (II) works as a secondary dominant (the V of the V). But again, given that the tonal center seems clearly E, that wouldn't be what's happening here.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by Richard Lindsey
It seems pretty clear that the tonal center is E, so analyzing a three chord sequence as suddenly shifting into D doesn't make sense to me. It would seem simpler to think that the tune shifts from E major into E mixolydian briefly.

Quite a lot of rock and folk music is not actually conventionally major and minor but modal.

Yeah, I'd agree with you on that one. Rock tends to contain a lot of b7s. It's not unusual at all for a rock song in E to use D chords.

I don't think the tritone sub argument works either, first because the two chords would not both be dominants and thus would not share the key notes that make that substitution work (the 3 and the b7), and second because then you would have what is functionally a iii-V progression, which is not strong chord movement.

Yes, that's exactly what I was trying to say. But much more concise

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by moley
Except the E is a major triad, not minor - so it's not really 2-5-1, and those chords don't all fit in the scale of D.

IMO, it's misleading to say that you could look at the E-A-D as a 2-5-1, because it's not functioning that way.

It's precisely working as a 2-5-1(figured bass notation) because of the root movement by fourths.

 

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally posted by Phil Smith


It's precisely working as a 2-5-1(figured bass notation) because of the root movement by fourths.

No, because D can only be a 1 if the tonal center is D, if only even briefly, which it doesn't seem to be at any point. You could make that argument if the chords established a "local" key of D for even a measure, but IMO they don't. In other words, it never sounds as if D is the tonal center. This is what moley means when he says that it's not functioning as a 2-5-1.

The fact that the numerical relationships could be interpreted as 2-5-1 doesn't mean that that's how they 're working in the sequence. They could also be interpreted as 5-1-4 in A, but they don't seem to be working that way either.

 

[moley]

Exactly - there is no modulation to D here.

If that E chord were minor, then it could be viewed as a brief modulation to D, but as it is here, the only chord non-diatonic to E major is the D chord.

Listening to that sequence in my head, that A chord isn't a secondary dominant, and there is no implied b7.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
What Phil is saying is that those 3 chords could all be seen as coming from one scale - D - so you could just choose any notes from that scale. However as bass player you have a responsibility to play a line that makes sense in terms of outlining the chords - otherwise it just sounds like you are playing notes at random and the overall result will not be very musical.

No, I'm not saying to play D major over the last four chords, though he could play roots, 5ths, 6ths and octaves thinking D major over those four chords and still sound in, adding a cool augmented sound to the last chord by playing a G in the bass.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Richard Lindsey


No, because D can only be a 1 if the tonal center is D, if only even briefly, which it doesn't seem to be at any point. You could make that argument if the chords established a "local" key of D for even a measure, but IMO they don't. In other words, it never sounds as if D is the tonal center. This is what moley means when he says that it's not functioning as a 2-5-1.

The fact that the numerical relationships could be interpreted as 2-5-1 doesn't mean that that's how they 're working in the sequence. They could also be interpreted as 5-1-4 in A, but they don't seem to be working that way either.

Okay it's not a 2-5-1, it's just movement by a fourth.