"In the Key of"

[Rockhouse]

Hi. OP here.

 

SHA was not really a good example of what I was asking. No Quarter was my example, but few players knew the tune.

 

Instead, perhaps some of you know the main riff from Low Spark, by Traffic.

 

It's a C scale, to be sure. The root is D. It's D Dorian.

 

Would anyone say this is in the key of C just because of the key sig?

[CEB]

I have not played it in years but no I think it was in it is D minor.

 

 

But given all that FWIW when I do chart stuff I use a roman numeral system based on key signature so the opening chord of the tune would be in my notebook as ii7. This is mainly because it makes it easier to use the same charts for any key.

 

But no the song is in D minor.

[Cygnus64]

Instead, perhaps some of you know the main riff from Low Spark, by Traffic.

 

It's a C scale, to be sure. The root is D. It's D Dorian.

 

Would anyone say this is in the key of C just because of the key sig?

 

I don't know the song offhand, but: In 99% of cases, the key sig will be D or dminor or whatever. Learjeff and I discussed this a while ago on HC: It's extremely unusual for a mode to affect the key sig. HOWEVER, in this case if it doesn't have a key sig, it means it doesn't have a key sig (and not indicating C or A min). I just googled the sheet music- no key sig. clonk

[Joe Muscara]

The technical phrase for this is "common sense". There's a time for fancy book-lernin, and a time for good ol' reality. Neither is correct or incorrect, they exist in tandem. If you ask anyone to play "Lover" in B, not even the most nerdy Poindtexter will say "But, But, I can't find a dominant and I'm confused, help me". That's not theory, that's being an idiot.

 

Theory is just the math behind this stuff. You don't need to know that Blue + Yellow make Green to pick out the color green, it's only the technical mumbo-jumbo behind it. I know basically nothing about cars, but I know if I put gas in the lil hole on the side, the car seems to run. "Car theory" would explain intenal combustion engines, "music theory" explains the technical aspects of music. I don't know car theory but drive a car very well, and someone can play music very well without the math behind it. It's talent and mainly instinct.

 

Nice analogy, bro'.

[stoken6]

Got to say: I'm enjoying this thread. Intelligent, passionate and polite.

 

I was going to launch in to a long exposition of my opinion on the subject, but I realise it's all been said. So... as you were.

 

Cheers, Mike.

 

 

[iLaw]

Instead, perhaps some of you know the main riff from Low Spark, by Traffic.

 

It's a C scale, to be sure. The root is D. It's D Dorian.

 

Would anyone say this is in the key of C just because of the key sig?

 

I don't know the song offhand, but: In 99% of cases, the key sig will be D or dminor or whatever. Learjeff and I discussed this a while ago on HC: It's extremely unusual for a mode to affect the key sig. HOWEVER, in this case if it doesn't have a key sig, it means it doesn't have a key sig (and not indicating C or A min). I just googled the sheet music- no key sig. clonk

I agree with Musicnotes writing "Low Spark ..." with a no-sharps-or-flats key signature. The key signature tells me what keys to push down, not what key/mode the piece is in. As every music student learns the first time they're asked to look at a score and say if the passage is in C Major or A Minor (and they can't quick spot a G anywhere!). "Low Spark ..." is D Dorian (at the spot we're talking about) and if you wrote it as D Minor you'd have to cover the page with accidental B naturals.

 

Larry.

 

[JeffLearman]

I'm missing something here.

 

I like your two examples: Imagine (CFCF) is clearly (to my ear) in C (I IV I IV), whereas Brown Sugar (GCGC) sounds like it's in C (V I V I).

 

I wasn't talking about key. I mentioned Brown Sugar because it doesn't begin on Tonic (and it begins on beat 2), that's all. I could have been more clear, sorry.

I think you were perfectly clear -- that part I totally got; it isn't the part I was confused about. My bad.

 

If you listen to the first guitar riff, it's not in B (The chord. The song IMO is in B). The top note of the riff is G#, which aint in B. What makes it interesting is that riff/chord begins on beat 2 (as does Brown Sugar.) The G# to F" acts as a mini-resolution right at the beginning of the tune. It's not I IV, it's

 

mini-res I IV mini-res I IV etc.

 

OK -- I read the first chord (which comes in on 1) as a B6, but now I think I know what you mean. Thanks!

 

Regarding SHA, the simple truth is that it's not strictly diatonic. When improvising over it, while you *might* get away with belaboring te G blues scale over the changes, that's a pretty boring interpretation (and certainly isn't how the original solos go). So, we're really just picking which is the "most important" to convey "what the key is" so everyone knows where to start. Anyway, I'm happy to call it in D now that I've learned better, though if I were writing it I'd use one sharp. :-) Not that I ever write the dots and lines stuff. I wish that came more easily, but it's not something I've ever spent the necessary time on.

[Eric Jx]

If you listen to the first guitar riff, it's not in B (The chord. The song IMO is in B). The top note of the riff is G#, which aint in B. What makes it interesting is that riff/chord begins on beat 2 (as does Brown Sugar.) The G# to F" acts as a mini-resolution right at the beginning of the tune. It's not I IV, it's

 

mini-res I IV mini-res I IV etc.

 

The G# aint in F# either (the V chord in that key).

 

So the Theory doesn't say you need a V to determine the tonic, however you have to look for a resolution in whatever form it takes?

 

 

[iLaw]

... Anyway, I'm happy to call it in D now that I've learned better, though if I were writing it I'd use one sharp. :-)...

'Cuz you're in D Mixolydian, just like you said way back on page 2 when you injected the song into this thread!

 

Next you gotta talk Lynyrd Skynyrd into ending on a I.

 

Larry.

 

[Cygnus64]

If you listen to the first guitar riff, it's not in B (The chord. The song IMO is in B). The top note of the riff is G#, which aint in B. What makes it interesting is that riff/chord begins on beat 2 (as does Brown Sugar.) The G# to F" acts as a mini-resolution right at the beginning of the tune. It's not I IV, it's

 

mini-res I IV mini-res I IV etc.

 

The G# aint in F# either (the V chord in that key).

 

So the Theory doesn't say you need a V to determine the tonic, however you have to look for a resolution in whatever form it takes?

 

 

It doesn't have to be a V chord. It has to act like a V chord. (Or more accurately, a "dominant" chord). Consider this:

 

read (pronounced "reed")

read (pronounced "red" )

 

The same word but different pronunciation and different meaning depending on what comes before and after that word in a sentence. Chords work the same way. It's all about how a chord works and which ones work as dominant and where. To decide which chords truly qualify and when would open up a geek/nerd/dweeb debate that would knock the earth of its axis.

 

 

I V IV V I

 

The consensus on the above would say that the first V acts one way and the second acts another way.

[kanker.]

I remember when I was first learning about jazz. A great player I know told me that anything that acts like a turnaround, is a turnaround. In other words, anything that acts like it's going back to a tonic, even if it's a temporary tonic, is equivalent to anything else that leads to a tonic. If you take it to heart, it is a priceless, integral part of of everything that is tonal in music. It can be a melody, it can be an unexpected set of changes that exert a draw to the tonic. A dominant is the single, most obvious way to establish tonality. It's the reason the harmonic minor exists - to create a construct to give minor music a dominant harmony that creates suitable draw to the tonic. Standards are full of turnarounds that lead to a tonic, but aren't a simple ii V7 I. An | A-b5 D7 | Ebmaj7 | turnaround, or an | Ab-7 Db7 | Ebmaj7 | turnaround as example of other turnarounds that, in context, help define tonality. In SHA, the little melodic hook in the 4th bar that leads back to the D is a turnaround - it defines a tonality. It *acts* like a V, even though it's single note melodic material.

 

Just because something fits in a box, doesn't mean it actually belongs in that particular box.

[Cygnus64]

I remember when I was first learning about jazz. A great player I know told me that anything that acts like a turnaround, is a turnaround. In other words, anything that acts like it's going back to a tonic, even if it's a temporary tonic, is equivalent to anything else that leads to a tonic. If you take it to heart, it is a priceless, integral part of of everything that is tonal in music. It can be a melody, it can be an unexpected set of changes that exert a draw to the tonic. A dominant is the single, most obvious way to establish tonality. It's the reason the harmonic minor exists - to create a construct to give minor music a dominant harmony that creates suitable draw to the tonic. Standards are full of turnarounds that lead to a tonic, but aren't a simple ii V7 I. An | A-b5 D7 | Ebmaj7 | turnaround, or an | Ab-7 Db7 | Ebmaj7 | turnaround as example of other turnarounds that, in context, help define tonality. In SHA, the little melodic hook in the 4th bar that leads back to the D is a turnaround - it defines a tonality. It *acts* like a V, even though it's single note melodic material.

 

.

 

Well said.

 

A dominant is the single, most obvious way to establish tonality.

 

And anything that acts like a dominant is the second most obvious way.

[kanker.]

A dominant is the single, most obvious way to establish tonality.

 

And anything that acts like a dominant is the second most obvious way.

Indeed