Principles of Music: Secondary Dominants 

YEEEESSSSSS BEST DAY!!!!! Very important subject!

The more of your videos that I watch, the more delighted I am to have discovered your channel as a new resource :) I really appreciate your work, thank you!

I loved this video also! Keep up the amazing work!

Fascinating information! Thanks for teaching this material in a concise, yet interesting and informative manner. I majored in Music Theory & Composition many years ago, so this video is a great "refresher" to me.

I have to just say thank you, this is some of the most important information I have ever gotten from a video!

Blows my mind! I don't know why this was never explained to me before! Thank you.

Years ago, I've read something about secondary dominants from a Schoenberg book, but your video makes me finally understand this subject. Thank you!

Yay! A new video!

Thank you! Very informative video, pleasant to listen to you

Great presentation! Thank you.

I have seen plenty of people argue that vii dim7 is not it’s own chord, but rather a V7b9 without the root. I see where they are coming from(sharing 4 notes, same function), but I disagree. Especially in minor, it doesn’t just sound like a rootless V7b9, but rather an independent chord. And I’m always like this when I see a harmony that could be V7b9 or vii dim7: If it sounds like a diminished seventh chord and it looks like a diminished seventh chord and it’s in minor and the dominant note only shows up on the weak beats(looking at you Revolutionary Etude by Chopin, interleaving Bdim7 and C minor arpeggios into a descending figure, with the only strong beat G’s being where the bass alternates between C and G notes), or it’s by a composer like Beethoven that I know uses vii dim7 a lot, then it’s *probably* vii dim7. First inversion V7b9(which I have heard plenty of people argue that that’s what the first chord in Chopin’s Revolutionary Etude is) sounds a lot like root position vii dim7. So much so, that it feels like the "root" is so overpowered by the interlocking tritones that it feels like a non-chord tone rather than a chord tone, which further weakens my likelihood of analyzing a chord like that as V7b9.

Great Video! Thanks!

I remember getting a D on my Harmony exam because I didn't know what secondary dominance was. I got so confused, I reverted back to good old 12-bar blues.

Bravo!!!

Very Nice explanation

I loved this video -- particularly the wonderful chart you have composed that I have never seen, which makes these relationships so clarion across the various chord types. Do you have a companion video on Secondary Dominants in minor keys? And can you point me to your source for this chart? I am often amazed how rarely musical theory gives a decent bird's eye view of the lay of the land like this. I am very familiar with large swaths of jazz theory, but find the presentation in many texts is strangely piecemeal and not coherent enough. While the subject is very complex, I feel there could be more vantages of simplification or acuity of perception....

Such a great video!

Really, Really, Great video. One suggestion: You use the words "additional variant" to describe a family of Dominate like chords, including diminished, half diminished etc. Perhaps "sister dominants" would work. Beautiful table of Related Sister Dominates.

👏

That C natural in bass at 8:38 has always freaked me out a bit, it probably would sound much more intuitive as pedal point on organ, considering that there is c# -> d movement later in treble

I always thought that a ii degree its more tense than a iii on its harmonic implications. And de subdominant being the strongest point of gravity in a tonality. ( for example in c major the subdominant almost swalllows the tonic as if it would be its dominant) So when i play a chord progression there is for me more tension in the ii than a vi or iii. Now im a bit confused.

I'm puzzled by the designations for the iii6 chord and the vi 6-4 chord at time 2:13 in the video. For the iii6 the notes shown are e-g-b which are actually the notes of the vi chord in G Maj. And similarly, the notes shown for the vi 6-4 chord are b-d-f sharp, which are the notes of the iii chord. Perhaps they got reversed?

Where can I find a chart as seen at 5:02?

Didn't understand a word of it.