theory question

paywad927 · Post by **paywad927** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:58 pm

jibberish jibberish jibberish, ITS ALL JIBBERISH TO ME , i havent understood one thing in this post

i should give this theory thing a try.

grock · Post by **grock** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:29 pm

dual tonality is when you have both the 3rd and the flatted 3rd present in a chord or progression (at least that's how i have always defined it)

it doesn't always work. if you were in D and started playing Dm chords that wouldn't sound especially right. but when you use the 7th scale degree like D in the key of E you can get away with it more. really you'll know when using dual tonality works and when it doesn't. it is something i would say to just get a feel for.

9 chords are generally single tonality. you are just adding the second at an octave up. that doesn't change what's going on at the third.

fatjack · Post by **fatjack** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:33 pm

grock wrote:9 chords are generally single tonality. you are just adding the second at an octave up. that doesn't change what's going on at the third.

#9 chords!! they have the 3rd and the raised 2nd (also known as the flat third)

maybe you should pay more attention

Pickles · Post by **Pickles** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:33 pm

i understand some, others i have to check my notes

Appfro · Post by **Appfro** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:51 pm

do we really have to show off how much we know guys???

fatjack · Post by **fatjack** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:56 pm

Appsoldier wrote:do we really have to show off how much we know guys???

as long as i prove grock wrong with his long-ass theory posts, then yes it is necessary!!

Appfro · Post by **Appfro** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:58 pm

ok, ill allow it in those circumstances

grock · Post by **grock** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:56 am

fatjack wrote:
Appsoldier wrote:do we really have to show off how much we know guys???
as long as i prove grock wrong with his long-ass theory posts, then yes it is necessary!!

sorry but i'm not wrong, just a bad reader. sorry about that. yeah your definately right about #9. never really thought of it like in the same chord (i know some jazz but not too much). i was thinking more as having it in a chord progression like the question was asking about, rather than in an individual chord.

how would you even play a #9. i can't see a good spot to construct one. 9 chords are hard enough but i can't make the # stretch. any sugestions oh wise fatjack.

fatjack · Post by **fatjack** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:55 pm

grock wrote:
fatjack wrote:
Appsoldier wrote:do we really have to show off how much we know guys???
as long as i prove grock wrong with his long-ass theory posts, then yes it is necessary!!
sorry but i'm not wrong, just a bad reader. sorry about that. yeah your definately right about #9. never really thought of it like in the same chord (i know some jazz but not too much). i was thinking more as having it in a chord progression like the question was asking about, rather than in an individual chord.

how would you even play a #9. i can't see a good spot to construct one. 9 chords are hard enough but i can't make the # stretch. any sugestions oh wise fatjack.

C#9

x3234x

hendrix used these all the time, and i wrote a song based upon it

grock · Post by **grock** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:24 am

fatjack wrote:
grock wrote:9 chords are generally single tonality. you are just adding the second at an octave up. that doesn't change what's going on at the third.
#9 chords!! they have the 3rd and the raised 2nd (also known as the flat third)

maybe you should pay more attention

i like that you almost got mad at me. haha. it's all good brother. anyways, i'll be trying out some #9 chords when i get home today.

AdrianJE · Post by **AdrianJE** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:17 pm

Well.. there is a thing called relative minors. A relative minor is a minor scale that is int he same key as a major chord. FOr example. The relative minor of a C major scale is... tada A minor. This you can go from C major to A Minor and it will not switch keys. That is part of it. The other part is just sounding good. I mean if you go from a major to minor it will work, and it lets you add dimentions to the song. But the above is the actualy theory thing behind it.

fatjack · Post by **fatjack** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:23 pm

AdrianJE wrote:Well.. there is a thing called relative minors. A relative minor is a minor scale that is int he same key as a major chord. FOr example. The relative minor of a C major scale is... tada A minor. This you can go from C major to A Minor and it will not switch keys. That is part of it. The other part is just sounding good. I mean if you go from a major to minor it will work, and it lets you add dimentions to the song. But the above is the actualy theory thing behind it.

i think we know this already

and we weren't talking about the relative minors, we were tlaking about changing the major/minor tonality but using the same root, like being in A and then changing to Am, this completely changes the key

Changing from C to Am isn't much of a change

waffle_house_jam · Post by **waffle_house_jam** » Wed Oct 01, 2003 3:18 pm

i won't pretend to know what you're talking about in terms of the more complex theory, but in my experience key changes in songwriting are all about timing. just put a new key where it fits, and slide, hammer, harmonic, or whatever to change. maybe even change tempo a little bit. it's really not all that difficult.