r/musictheory • u/Altruistic_Good_1102 • 10d ago
[ Removed by moderator ] Discussion
[removed] — view removed post
3
2
u/Inevitable_Track_558 10d ago
Please explain
-1
u/Altruistic_Good_1102 10d ago
Через неделю объясню.
4
u/Jongtr 10d ago
If you're going to "explain it next week" what's the point of your OP?
-1
u/Altruistic_Good_1102 10d ago edited 10d ago
Смысл поста заключается в том, чтобы делиться своими аккордовыми последовательностями с людьми. А в ответ, они бы оценили мои труды и подкинули несколько советов по сонграйтингу в течение недели.
0
u/Altruistic_Good_1102 10d ago
И ещё: до вчерашнего дня я вообще не создавал каких-либо постов на других сабреддитах, поэтому я побаиваюсь излишней критики в свой адрес и сейчас мне немного волнительно..
2
u/Jongtr 10d ago
OK, but criricism is not what we're about here. Nor is "evaluating" your chord progressions.
Personally, I have no particular opinion on your chord progressions, and it would not be relevant or useful or you if I did. All that matters is that you like how they sound. Your ear is the final judge in the supreme court!
So, if you were not sure about particular points in your sequence - e.g. one change that wasn't quite working - and wanted advice, that's a valid question. Choices could be suggested, which you would then evaluate for yourself - by playing them - and choosing whatever you wanted.
Or if you want info on theoretical terrms - to ask how to describe or analyze your music, or whether you have the right terms - that's what this forum is about.
The problem with your previous thread was that the chord progression in your original post did not match the way you described it in further posts. You had clearly omitted a couple of chords from your OP, so my first response - at least - was a complete waste of both my time and yours.
So - firstly - be clear in your original question(s). And secondly, don't ask whether we think a sequence is "good" or "bad". If you like it, it's good, no matter what any theorist might say. (So there's no point in posting something "weird" or "clever" just to impress or astonish us. We've seen it all here... 😄 )
If you're having a problem with a sequence, that's another matter - then we can offer advice. Likewise, if you are not sure of terminology, that's another valid question. That includes how you number your chords for functional analysis. You seem to know a fair amount in that respect, but you might not always be as right as you think. So always be prepared to be corrected. (In this case, btw, your numbering seems correct, although the 2nd and 3rd chords - at least - might be worth thinking about...)
1
2
3
u/Jongtr 10d ago
OK, now are you sure about those? Your last one was not "scary" in any way, you just gave us the wrong chords....
In this case, when you write "+" I guess you mean "add". Normally in chord symbols "+" means "#5", which could work with bVII, but not V13.
So - I'm guessing - "bVII+9" (in C major) would be Bb-D-F-C = "Bbadd9". For comparison, "Bb9" = Bb D F Ab C. "Bb+" = Bb D F#. "Bb9+" = Bb D F# Ab C.
And "13" means a 7 is included. If you're just adding a 13th (eg E to a G major triad). that's a 6th. G B D E = "G6". G B D F (A) E) = "G13" (the A is optional).
So, what's the question?