This is a great video! Thank you for putting this together! This is the first time I have seen all the different meanings of "dominant" reconciled in one place.
I wonder why modern books don't explain it. Several 19th century books start immediately with "this is a zero", but in the 20th and 21st centuries only a handful of books mention it.
I'm glad I didn't pass up on your channel! I'm learning the piano, and when I saw the name "MusicTheoryForGuitar," I determined to move along. But then, watching your videos, I truly appreciate the lessons in theory. They're a true blessing, regardless of the instrument a musician uses.
Another really clear lesson. Thank you! I love learning music theory and with your help I have gone from having none to being more advanced than most guitarists I know...practically Im still a long way behind but hey! one step at a time 😆
Thank you. I have been trying to get my head around Phrygian Dominant on piano particularly in the octatonic flamenco style as per Berkeley. I shall now spend some time reconsidering it. What a splendid muddle the 19th century classicists created when they decided to forget modes. :-)
Grazie mille, Tommaso! You took what could have easily turned into a maze of terminology and “abstract” concepts and instead created a lucid, accessible roadmap of useful information. Having said that, I need to take an aspirin and go lie down now. 🎶🤯😁👍🏿🙏🏿🦁🌞
i read somewhere a slightly different explanation: a word dominant refers to a sound of tritone interval which dominates over any other sounds you can create in any scale, introduces a harmonic tension and whenever applied, enforces a harmonic function which is very well known from a diatonic chord on a specific position in known scales.
This. For me, I’ve always thought of the quality of dominance (if that’s even a thing) is defined by the existence of a directional tritone. It’s the case with a V chord as well a tritone sub, a VII diminished, and a flat VII7. The flat VII7 is the oddball because it resolves down to the fifth note of the tonic chord as opposed to resolving to the root note of the tonic chord-but they all resolve by a half step. Maybe I’m missing something tho.
To add more confusion ... the dominant function chord should if anything be called "dominated chord" since it needs so badly to resolve to the chord built on the root, which should be called dominant more than any other.
great vid!!! that history about the zero for diminished chords was not taught to me in music school. fascinating! the professors just called it a degree sign and i figured it was just whatever someone came up with when they wanted a distinctly different look for each pop chord symbol. figured bass has a vestige in pop chord symbols- it refused to b completely left behind! hahaha
I was trying to explain this very thing to someone on Twitter a few months ago... I failed. Even worse, they came out of the discussion thinking they now do understand the meaning of "dominant chord"...
HEHEHE, yes this happens :) Sometime you know you need to explain TWO things so that the other person will understand... and as soon as they understand the first of the two things, they go "I got it" and stop listening :)
In harmonic minor there are two dominant function chords that are a fifth away from the root :) The iv(6) which we also find in natural minor, and the V(7) that is "borrowed" from natural major (in the same way that harmonic major "borrows" a dominant function chord, iv(6) from natural minor). Both have a tritone that collapses to major third in a stable triad built on the tonic. Which is why harmonic scales are so directional to those stable triads built on the root, they've swapped a subdominant function chord (IV in major, or v in minor) for an extra dominant one from the opposite (major/minor) mode.
At 5:30 there are some theories such as the one explained by Jo Anger-Weller in her book "Clés pour l'harmonie" (don't know it it has been translated). This is the most complete and interesting book I had the pleasure to read. It is used to classify chord issued from scale harmonisation. It has only sense within a specific scale with 4-note chords * A tonic chord is a stable chord. It does not have the 4th degree of the scale: I: C E G B iii: E G B D vi: A C E G There are not F in this set * A subdominant chord is a less stable chord. It has the 4th degree (which is the subdominant function of the scale) of the scale but does not have a tritone in it. ii: D F A C IV: F A D E There is a F and no tritone (F-B) in this set * A dominant chord is an instable chord. It hard the 4th degree of the scale and a tritone in it. V: G B D F viiø: B D F A There is a F and a tritone in this set. Some other theory says that * the tonic is built on the first chord. the III and VI share 2 (or 3) notes with I so they are tonic chords. * The subdominant chord is built on the 4th degree of the scale. II and IV share 2 (or 3) notes so they are subdominant chords. * The dominant chord is built on the 5th degree of the scale. VII and V share 2 (or 3) notes so they are dominant chords. However this theory is only true for the Major scale.
Thanks for posting this. Indeed, this theory already has a problem for the natural minor scale. What about the VII in natural minor? (i.e. the G chord in the key of Am?) Also, it works only for SOME chords in major. For instance How about Csus4 in C? It DOES contain the F, so based on this theory we should classify it as subdominant. Yet, most people would agree it's a tonic chord. See, that's the problem I have with several music theory books: they present a theory as if it's 'general', and then it works only for ONE specific case (4-notes tertian chords in the Major scale), but it does not work anywhere else. What's the point of giving a 'general rule' that works in only one case? Might as well just say: "these chords are tonic, these are subdominant, etc". The purpose of a 'general rule' is to work on several (possibly all) cases, not just one.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar That's correct those notations can become messy. an here we are only talking in harmonisation by thirds. Nobody forbids you to harmonise scales by fourths ;-) Minor natural does not have dominant function. The VII (which should be noted as bVIIM7, since G is the b7 of A) is a subdominant chord. Csus4 (aka Isus4 in C) is not from an harmonisation by thirds. I would consider it as a dominant chord (4th degree and tritone for the CM7sus4). It become even more messy when you start with more exotic scales harmonisation and chord substitution become more subjective that relying on theory. I totally agree with you that there is not one-size-fits-all theory for that. Some of them are more global than others. Some of them can be easier to understand for some people.
Nice one! People might like to know that the classic '2-5-1' progression gives us a chance to try out Subdominant, Dominant and Tonic (in that order). A simple but powerful palette of neutral, tension and rest (in that order). Also, the Blues thing is keeping a tension in every chord and the overall sound: A7 has a dominant function leading to D7, which has a dominant function leading to G (and G7 and round the circle of fifths) - but this is denied. The V chord, E7, is the real dominant chord here, but it resolves back to the unresolved A7 and we're never released from the blues feel...
If one divides the string into 3rds the harmonic produced is the second in the Overtone Series. It is the second loudest after the octave. The note will be the Fifth in the major scale. If C is the fundamental the harmonic produced is G. In addition if one continues producing harmonics along the single string the chord produced is a dominant chord. 1,5,3,b7. Divide the string into 3rds, you produce the Fifth. Divide the string into 5ths and you produce the Third. It's as if someone wanted to totally confuse us!
Good one! How about a follow up on dominant V chord substitutions? I can already see that half diminished and diminished 7th chords can work in major and minor respectively.
As you point out in another video, the chord on the seventh degree is in jazz usually taken to be a minor seventh-flat five "pointing to" a dominant three chord, which in turn points to the (minor) VI: i.e., a subdominant function.
Re Rameau, philosophically, I'm neither of the Discover nor Invented party, but a fence-riding Codifier. Why scale degree 5 and V are 'dominant' may simply be due to 5 figuring (not in every work of music, but many) as the starting point of *structural* melodic progressions that tend to go 5-4-3-2-1. So many works (but not all, yes, I am aware), especially of the standard practice period have this basic structure to their melody that we're likely conditioned to expect it (and know it when we hear it, even if we don't intellectually, theoretically 'know' in the sense that I do because I've wasted my precious time on university music school).
I love your videos man.. Really useful and so nice to see and hear someone explaining things clearly and giving enough examples whilst encouraging people to go try it and work it out on their instrument! Spot on... Just a point on this vid with the bit at the end about the Blues in A7 and that A7 not having a 'dominant' function.. Well, I7 is basically V7/IV right? e.g. C7 would 'tonicsize F' - the IV chord in this example - and as long as we cadence back to C to feel that as 'home' and I guess start and end on C so we really know that is home - then we are good, whatever gets 'tonicsized' along the way.. And in a trad 12 bar blues I would be followed by IV right? So the opening A7 would essentially be the V7 of D.. I just wanted to add that.. Absolutely not trolling you at all - your videos are brilliant and the nugget in here about the rootless diminished chords functioning as a dominant chord in major / minor key and the figure of 0 meaning it is a rootless dominant chord is absolute GOLD!! Nice one 😀
As soon as I heard Jean-Philippe Rameau, I hopped to wikipedia and right in the first paragraph: "He replaced Jean-Baptiste Lully as the DOMINANT composer of French opera". Really?!?!
I will add one more point about the so-called "subdominant function," more precise than my last note. The ii chord and the vii chord - which are minor seventh and minor seventh-flat five in quality, respectively, are in jazz generally played over a pedal point of the dominants they resolve to, i.e., the dominant V and the dominant on III. In this they function as suspensions over those dominants, and not as true subdominants (that is, IV major seventh) at all. The true subdominant function applies only to the IV chord, which acts as a weaker secondary tonic center, just shy of a modulation: that is the "subdominant function", properly speaking. This sounds complicated, but it really isn't.
@@christopherheckman7957 that's a good one... Not a hundred per octave, as triads wouldn't sound like chords, but as a pulsation. I bet the tritone would be the less dissonant interval in a 10 note octave 😂😂😂😂
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar Tommaso, when you start that revolution, please, allow people to call chords with extensions after modes 😆 Remember the guy who wanted to forbid me to do so??
Awesome stuff. I would like to see a video highlighting the usefulness of useless chords. Like the four chord harmonized from the hungarian minor scale. The chord outliers.
Nice video! Seems to me that the main confusion is between classifying triads and tritone resolution. In the first sense, the dominant chord is only the V chord. In the second sense, any chord that has a tritone that resolves to the I chord can have dominant function.
In American barbershop arrangements, often a dom7 chord resolves to ... another dom7, which makes all the baroque choral harmonic stuff you learned explode into a fireball... lol
Dominant for me is just “points to the tonic except if it’s a IV or iv chord.” A bVII is “dominant” in mixolydian, and even more so in mix b6, a bII is dominant in Phrygian/Phrygian dominant, a iii7(b9b11) is dominant in major. I use a lot of voice leading and unusual chords while following conventional patterns, so I have to give the standard names looser definition.
The dominant is the point where the next key is begining and the present key is ending. But regardless all music theory questions always need many answers.
From a classical perspective, what create the sensation of Dominant is the presence of the leading tone. There is a reason why this note is called "leading tone". At a cognitive level, this note creates the sensation of incompleteness and the need to resolve to the tonic. Go ahead and play any major scale and stop right before the octave (the upper tonic), right in the leading tone, and see what happens inside your mind.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar It's not. And RU-vid comments are probably not the best platform to explain it. I have given lots of thought to the function of the iii in the context of a major mode since it has always intrigued me why is it classified as a rather far away subtitute for the tonic. This is what I have analyzed so far: In a major scale, the two dominant degrees are V and viio. These to triads share two notes in common: the third and fifth in V dominant are the root and third in viio dominant. These two triads happen to have the leading tone in the 3rd of the triad (in the case of V) and the root (in the case of the viio). The root provides the sensation of "home" or "base" to a chord or triad. The third of a triad is what provides the quality of major or minor, and it is placed in a position of intervalic dissonace in respect to the root of the triad (major thirds are considered dissonances in classical music). This is why the presence of a leading tone in such positions within a triad or chord creates the sensation for "a need of resolution" over the root. The iii is a very special snowflake but for all the wrong reasons, instead of being turly unique, it is rather anbiguous. First of all, the leading tone is in the position of the fifth of the triads. This position provides either instability (dimished or augmented) or stability (perfect fifth). Since the leading tone is in a position of stability in the fifth of a iii, then the need for resolution is damped. Moreover, it is constructed over the note that, in terms of intervals, is at a dissonant distance from the root (as I said above, major 3rds are considered dissoances in classical music). The iii shares two notes with the I tonic, and two notes with the V dominant, contributing to it's ambiguous character. And, it happens to be the dominant of the minor relative, however, in order to fulfill it's domiant character within the context of a relative minor, it must be turned into a major triad, so the third can become the leading tone of the minor tonic (vi), in which case it ends up turning the whole minor mode into a harmonic minor mode. The iii is far too ambiguous to be classified one way or another in tems of harmonic functions in major mode, regardless of having the leading tone in it. It's role as dominant of the relative minor takes more relevance that it's harmonic function in the context of a major mode. Hope this wasn't too long or confusing.
That's a great explanation. Many times in classical music, we analyze them as borrowed chords, especially when the composer modulates to a different key. By the way, my mother cracked up at the 20th century fox stab. On the blue A7 example, is still has the tension and need for resolution of a classical dominant cord. It just leaves the listener hanging.
I always assumed the 12 bar blues was just a fragment of a cycle of 5ths progression? A7-D7-E7 while its usually written I7-IV7-V7 I always thought that was just for convenience of playing and probably because the folk musicians who pioneered that style where obviously not the most theoretically literate (yet still being completely musically literate.) A7-D7-E7 is surely just V-I-v/V right? That would make the D7 the "weird non-diatonic I chord" not the A7 while everything else is diatonic. Otherwise it would be some sort of convoluted v/IV-v/bVII-V chord which is a lot harder to understand imo.
I have “invented” another sense for the term “dominant” for the purpose of talking about tonality systems based on non-octave repetition. viz.: A “Dominant Seventh” scale repeats at a tenth. The “Dominant Ninth” scale repeats at the tritave (3/1) A “Dominant Eleventh” scale repeats at a (minor) fourteenth. *A “Dominant Thirteenth” scale repeats at a (major) sixteenth.
Dominant, Secondary Dominant, and more... To be honest I don't know much about Dominant except "notice a sign to go home" and "something spicy" (2nd Dominant). So this video's be helpful I hope...
Love the channel my friend. I did want to say however, in this video, you say the A7 in an A blues does not have a dominant function in the classical sense and that isn't really true. The IV chord which would come next , so we have a I IV V, the IV in the bar or half bar before it, we can play the A altered scale and then we are treating the A7 as the V and the D7 which is our IV is then feels for the moment as the tonic, since I - IV can also be looked as the V to I. So in A blues, the A7 usually will start out without being Dominant in the classical sense but depending on the player improvising over this, the A7 will take on the function of the dominant V to a new tonic. Anyway, love you stuff, man.
i think it has also been referred to as a major minor 7th chord which used to confuse the shit out of me. If nothing else the chord is very recognizable and distinctive. It is one of those chords you can seem to just put it anywhere and make it work. Someone needs to write something that is all just dominant 7th chords. It will probably sound cool.
Music theory is like language, you just have to accept and re-accept things. It's a frustrating and amusing situation. Diatonic means "of or pertaining to the 12/24 keys (Co5ths/4ths)". Almost everyone uses it to mean "congruent with". For example, "This chord is diatonic to harmonic minor" (technically that would make no sense, yet we've all heard stuff like this). Cadence has at least 5 definitions that are varied, and I've heard unofficial definitions too. Power chords have only 1 harmony (R+5) and so are not chords (chords require 3+ harmonies. Adding just 1 more note makes 3 harmonies). The 'tritone' is from European(?) tones and semitones, but here in the west(er) areas, we use whole steps and half steps, so it should be tri-step. (The tritone is a note 3 whole steps, 3 tones, above the root). Here in 'Jersey, folk go "down the shore" which is some special wordifying. It am what it be. Thanks for the video TZ!
Just from reading the title, a dominant chord (from what I know) is a root, major third, perfect fifth and minor seventh. It is usually applied as the V chord in a major scale, and is good for creating tension and interest in a progression. Correct or no? :D
The ii chord in minor has a tritone but it's considered subdominant. And the Augmented 6th chords have tritones too, and they are (usually) considered subdominant.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar That's interesting, but it sounds to me like it's tritone isn't doing the resolving. It sounds like it falls over the min 2nd to land on the 1.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar Also, when I said resolves from a tritone, I meant that it resolves to something because of the tritone.. My wording was a bit confusing, but I think you understood what I meant
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. There are so many exceptions, there might as well not be any rules at all. Who came up with this term and why? Are musicians all jamming and saying 'Oh quick, go to the dominant or we die."? No they are not. They say: "Go to the Eb." Who cares? If it had a purpose, if it meant you played better, then I'd get it, but I do not.
