why this chord progression is so satisfying

D

dastig

New member
on the keyboard I am playing this 2-chord progression:

C-G-G#-C-D-G

to

C-G-C-E-G

assuming that C is the root, the progression would be i6 - I. Now is it just me, or should that progression not be as satisfying as it sounds?? Did i get the chord names wrong??
 
sorry, when i said eg.

C-G-G#-C-D-G, these are the notes of ONE chord, excuse the weird format.

so again the chords are

[C-G-G#-C-D-G] to [C-G-C-E-G]

to me this looks like i6 - I

and i6 : minor chord on the root with a sixth added
I : major chord on the root

i don't understand why this would have such a "conclusive" sound.
 
Last edited:
u could look at the progression like this:

Dmin7b5/C
Cmaj

its basically a subdominant to tonic progression. the resolution mostly has to do with the Ab (not G#)

p.s. i6 is not right, no matter what. you mean Iminb13, but theres no 3, so forget that to. think of it as a slash chord or inversion.

i6 is classical for "minor i chord 1st inversion"
 
StoopidBeatz said:
i6 is classical for "minor i chord 1st inversion"
Click to expand...

There's nothing classical about Nashville convention (with roman numerals, that is), and even if there were, you'd still be wrong.

I've also never seen i6, but Cm6 is a valid chord (only, his chord isn't Cm6, Cm6 is C-D#-G-A). Classical notaton for 1st inversion is the quintsextachord notation (C64, not the computer tho, 6 should be in superscript, and 4 in subscript):

I.e. something like:

_6
C
_4

(best BB representation I can think of anyway).
 
I see the progression slightly differently than StoopidBeatz (not saying his is wrong, it's not. This is just another way to interpret it)

so we're all in agreement that the 2nd chord is C Maj (C-E-G)

I see the 1st chord as a quartal harmony w/ the C on the bottom.
in other words I hear the chord as being built in 4ths instead of the usual 3rds (ex: C-E-G is a chord built on intervals of a 3rd. C-F-Bb is a chord built on 4ths instead)

so I would see the "root position" of the 1st chord as Ab(G#)-D-G-C
so when this chord resolves to C Maj, you get Ab going down to G and D going up to E
this resolution is what gives the "satisfying feeling" It's going from a "dissonant" chord to a "consonant" chord.

the Ab to D is the interval known as the tritone (aka augmented 4th or diminished 5th depending on the spelling of the notes - in this spelling it's an augmented 4th)

this interval has a bunch of historical background with stuff about it having been called the "devil's interval" due mostly to it's harsh sound. and in classical theory you always have to resolve a tritone and that always gives you this "satisfying" feeling.
if you just play Ab-D then G-E you'll hear the resolution there.
and try this too: B-D-F-G to C-E-G.... the B-F is another tritone which gets resolved. and you may recognize the sound of this progression - it's a V7-I which is very common.

so either way you interpret the chords it's the tritone resolution that gives you that satisfying feeling.
-Mike

(PS peejunk- i6 is the figured bass notation for 1st inversion. it's a different convention from the nashville one you mentioned. 6/4 is 2nd inversion. as opposed to Nashville convention which uses Cmin/E or Cmin/G to indicate which inversion it's in and Cmin6 to indicate that the chord includes the 6th scale degree)
 
dastig said:
sorry, when i said eg.

C-G-G#-C-D-G, these are the notes of ONE chord, excuse the weird format.

so again the chords are

[C-G-G#-C-D-G] to [C-G-C-E-G]
Click to expand...


You cannot duplicate notes in diatonic harmony! :) :)

The G# is wrong, it must be an Ab. Also they are not two different chords, they are the same chord. Also the Ab (ur G#) Doesn't go anywhere. The first chord has 6 'voices' the 2nd chord only has 5 voices. Where does the G# go to..............I'm afraid you have completely misunderstood diatonic harmony.

Sorry mate, but although these chords may sound nice on their own, I pretty much doubt you'd be able to use them in a good practical situation.

What you have created is a suspension, albeit a very badly written one. You doubling the G on the octave above which adds harmonic confusion. The Ab MUST AT ALL COSTS descend by step to the G. The G should not be present in the first chord.

Try changing the second chord to a totally different chord, what about using a polychord of F minor and Eb major (as root position triads, F minor on the bottom and Eb major on top.), that way you don't have to suspend the Ab, you can carry it through to the next bar (measure).

I'm afraid what you have written is just wrong and of little use in practical situations to build a song on. Good attempt, anyway.

:)
 
dj funkifize, nice one, man! i didnt even notice that... that chord is in fourths!

also, the first one makes a pretty nice Bb7 voicing, right? (albeit typical)

does the voicing itself really determine what you would label the chord, though?

if you insisted that Ab was the root, i guess it would be Abmaj7#11...
 
I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you James McFadyen

this progression isn't necissarily in classical diatonic harmony, so your points that the Ab has to descend to G isn't valid. And it does descend to the G... well, depending on what octaves you places the chords in, but I'm guessing it is in the right octave for it to go down a half step - although there's nothing wrong with displacing octaves if that's your thing.

what you call harmonic confusion, I call tension, or dissonance - either way, it's almost a must have in music.

I think this progression, if treated correctly, could build nicely into a tune.

the one point where we might agree on is that it could be voiced better.

StoopidBeatz:
you know what, I'm not exactly sure if the voicing would have a direct relation to the label of the chord... I would think so... maybe... I guess it could be an interpretive thing- ultimately how you hear it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top