Rick Martin said:
What about the rules, man?
we doan need no steenkeng rules.
LICKY MARTING said:
If the ii the iii and the vi are major
Not to pick nits, but if the ii the iii and the vi are major, they'd be the II, the III and the VI. And then you'd be talking about some seriously altered scale..
LA VIDA LOCUST said:
and the song sounds good, doesn't there have to be some kind of explanation like multiple key changes or an arbitrary decision by the Supreme Court?
Well, Yes and no. Functional theory does a great job of explaining what was common practice in that world. You don't analyse a blues in quite the same way as you do a Bach two part, right? You're not playing a blues in Bb just because the first chord is an F7, right? So if the only two chords a song writer knows how to make on guitar are Dmaj7 and Gb7b9#9b13, then the song is going to use those chords in as musical a fashion as it can, right. And you approach it as being in "sort of modal world" and play from chord to chord rather than through the chords by voice leading, altered chords, substitutions etc etc. You have to use a different sensibility to create the "melody" of your line.
RICK E.MORBID said:
"modulating like crazy all over the place without really setting up any modulations" What do you mean by setting up any modulations?
By actually setting up the modulation.
Bb D-/ C-7 F7/ Bb D-/ D-7 G7/Cmaj7/
See how you move to Cmaj? That got set up.
Bb D-/C-7 F7/ Bb / Cmaj7 /
That didn't, you just jumped to the new key. Make more sense? In your example, the change to the second chord was not preceded by any harmonic indicator that you were changing keys. And I don't think the composer was thinking about it as a key change, they're just moving constant structure chords (prolly cause they liked the shape of them) in a consistent fashion.