Modal chord progression functions

[thared33]

I understand the I-ii-iii-IV-V-vi-vii tonic, subdominant, dominant functions. But I'm uncertain as to how these functions change once you start basing your music on a mode. The ii becoming the i, the V becoming the I, etc. I don't believe the functions stay the same because if in a Dorian mode, the ii becomes the i chord, so that means it's the tonic function chord.

Tonic chords are I iii and vi, subdominant chords are ii and IV, and dominant chords are V and sometimes vii. But for example, let's say you want a dorian-based piece of music. Since the ii chord has become the i chord, does this mean that ii IV and vii are tonics, iii and V are subdominant, and vi and I are dominant chords? And does that system work for every mode that you're playing in? I'm guessing this because of the original order of tonic-subdominant-tonic-subdominant-dominant-tonic-dominant

If not, where can I see a list of the modal chord functions for every mode and why chords take on other functions when in a mode?

[JonnyPac]

Well, "modal-jazz" and classical modal music are pretty different- It causes a lot of heated arguments on forums actually. I'll sidestep my own views for now and quote my buddy Dogbite from AAJ when I asked a similar question.

Here's the thread: Dogbite's Thread - Page 98 - Jazz Bulletin Board

Modes and Functional Harmony

Ionian
I ii iii IV V vi vii°

Dorian
i ii bIII IV v vi° bVII

Phrygian
i bII bIII iv v° bVI bvii

Lydian
I II iii #iv° V vi vii

Mixolydian
I ii iii° IV v vi bVII

Aeolian
i ii° bIII iv v bVI bVII

Locrian
i° bII biii iv bV bVI bvii

1 is tonic

2 is supertonic

3 is mediant

4 is subdominant

5 is dominant

6 is submediant

b7 is subtonic

7 is leading tone because of it's unique function in tonal music.

further thoughts:

i personally would not call a #4 subdominant any more than i would call a b5 a dominant. i know that calling a non (1 3 5 b7) chord "dominant" makes some nervous but the natural minor (aeolian) minor chord on the five is common enough and in the early-period harmony methods commonly used in the college system, the harmonic minor seemed to be the sole source of harmony for us to analyze; therefore, i cannot say what is "proper." remember the definition(s) of "dominant" in tonal music:

1) the fifth scale step

2) the major minor seventh chord

everything would be just peachy if all music was written in the unaltered major mode but...

to answer one of your questions:

Am D7 is tonic and subdominant in A dorian???

my answer is a resounding yes!!!

modern usage of modes resembles liturgical chant and plainsong very little, so i'm just not going to get sucked into yet another history lesson about gregorian chant. i don't play gregorian chant; i am a guitarist in the 21st century playing mostly solid-body electric guitar and often with a fair amount of distortion. so be it...

disclaimer:

some of the language above deliberately worded to deflect potential criticisms of what is meant by "modal music." what do you mean by "chord" anyway... argh. you know what i mean

so in "Am," C is mediant and Cm is a chromatic mediant as is C# and C#m

in "A," C#m is mediant but C#, C, and Cm are chromatic mediants.

from the imperial march: Gm Gm Gm Ebm Gm Ebm Gm, tonic and chromatic submediant. creepy but real cool

edit:

so the term chromatic dominant makes sense to me in the locrian mode for bV and chromatic subdominant for #iv° in lydian - i've not seen these terms in official academic settings but like i said, they make sense to me...

bII is often referred to as neapolitan but the term more specifically refers to a bII major triad in first inversion (the so-called neapolitan sixth) in a sudominant setting: Am Bb/D E; although it looks like a phrygian mode's bII, it's not really behaving that way.

[JonnyPac]

The irony is that most modal jazz is in fact "non-functional" or a hybrid of some functional changes mixed with non-functional "colorful" chords (or chord-scales). There is no pure period or significant collection modal-jazz that rules out the use of non-mode tones for ornamentation, etc.

From Kieth Waters Studio Recordings of the Miles Davis Quintet Oxford University Press 2011:

MODAL JAZZ

1. Modal scales for improvisation (or as a source of accompaniment)
2. Slow harmonic rhythm (single chord for 4, 8, 16 or more bars)
3. Pedal point harmonies (focal bass pitch or shifting harmonies over a primary bass pitch)
4. Absence or limited use of functional harmonic progressions (such as V-I or ii-V-I) in accompaniment or improvisation
5. Harmonies characteristic of jazz after 1959 (Suspended fourth- "sus" - chords, slash chords, harmonies named for modes; i.e., phrygian, aeolian harmonies)
6. Prominent use melodic and/or harmonic perfect fourths

[thared33]

Thanks for the post

It seems to be matching up with what I thought if I'm interpreting it correctly. So the 1 through 7 chords still retain their original functions no matter which mode you use as the 1 chord. If that is so, would it be true that you can get a roman numeral progression of any kind, then apply that to ALL modes? Because that seems like a timesaver for composing ideas.

If taking the standard roman numeral progressions and applying it to a mode thing isn't right, it would be great to have a book that covers how to form progressions for each mode and that explains the differences between them.

I've got Ligon's book on the way, hope it clears some of that up.

[bako]

Avoiding the traditional function names on purpose.

Drawing on harmonies from a fixed scale/mode:

There is a central note and chord
There is a chord(s) that lead back to the central chord
There are additional harmonies derived from the scale/mode to wander around
Some of them share common tones with the central chord
Some contain the notes that define the characteristic intervals of the scale/mode

Practice voice leading using the harmonies available in each mode.
If you become familiar with the sounds then understanding how they might interact will become clearer

"If that is so, would it be true that you can get a roman numeral progression of any kind, then apply that to ALL modes?
Because that seems like a timesaver for composing ideas."

Try taking a song that you know, that derives from a single mode/scale.
Adjust the notes and harmonies to different modes. It is not always musically successful and in fact some modes will sound downright strange, but it is informative and fun.

[Reg]

I understand the I-ii-iii-IV-V-vi-vii tonic, subdominant, dominant functions. But I'm uncertain as to how these functions change once you start basing your music on a mode. The ii becoming the i, the V becoming the I, etc. I don't believe the functions stay the same because if in a Dorian mode, the ii becomes the i chord, so that means it's the tonic function chord.

Tonic chords are I iii and vi, subdominant chords are ii and IV, and dominant chords are V and sometimes vii. But for example, let's say you want a dorian-based piece of music. Since the ii chord has become the i chord, does this mean that ii IV and vii are tonics, iii and V are subdominant, and vi and I are dominant chords? And does that system work for every mode that you're playing in? I'm guessing this because of the original order of tonic-subdominant-tonic-subdominant-dominant-tonic-dominant
If not, where can I see a list of the modal chord functions for every mode and why chords take on other functions when in a mode?

Your missing one of the most important aspects of modal playing or composing... those typical functional terms don't apply.
When we decide to call or use a collection of notes a mode or in a modal style... we're implying a different harmonic and melodic method of guiding principles...
In a nut shell;
The I chord is always the center of the modal universe. (somewhat tonic)
The rest of chordal structures built on each scale degree are chords on their own.
Modes have characteristic pitches... Chords built from scale or mode degrees either have the characteristic pitch as chord tone or they don't.
There are a few methods or approaches to modal application, one is calling the chords which have that characteristic pitch... cadence chords. Not in traditional tritone resolution style... Chords with C P want to resolve back to modally implied Tonic or tonal center... the I chord.
In D dorian, E-7 or Cmaj7 resolving back to D-7.
The other method is somewhat the reverse, using that CP as defining characteristic, more in melodic applications.
The most difficult aspect is getting away from standard tritone resolutions as defining tonal center... Usually once your ears and brain are comfortable with concept and begin to hear in modal style... becomes easy to combine different concepts, such as dominant and modal concepts when playing or composing. Throw in use of Modal interchange, as concept , not simple borrowing chords, and Melodic Minor and you begin to hear and understand in a jazz style. Reg

[brwnhornet59]

That was some good food for thought Reg. T/y!!

[thared33]

You kinda lost me there, Reg :P

those typical functional terms don't apply.

I'm not sure why, because in some books that I have, they still keep the tonic-supertonic-mediant-etc formula for 1-2-3-4-5-6-7 no matter the mode chosen.

The rest of chordal structures built on each scale degree are chords on their own.

But don't they have a function, or shall I say, 'pull' to different chords just like in the Ionian mode?Like how the IV wants to go to the V.

There are a few methods or approaches to modal application, one is calling the chords which have that characteristic pitch... cadence chords. Not in traditional tritone resolution style... Chords with C P want to resolve back to modally implied Tonic or tonal center... the I chord.

So any chord in a modal progression that has any of the accidentals/flats/sharps that make the mode what it is, want to point back to the tonic?

In D dorian, E-7 or Cmaj7 resolving back to D-7.

The E-7 has a B in it which gives the Dorian its sound. The CMaj7 also has the B. Both are a major 6th. So again, these want to go back to the tonic because they contain the actual 'mode' notes?

The most difficult aspect is getting away from standard tritone resolutions as defining tonal center... Usually once your ears and brain are comfortable with concept and begin to hear in modal style... becomes easy to combine different concepts, such as dominant and modal concepts when playing or composing. Throw in use of Modal interchange, as concept , not simple borrowing chords, and Melodic Minor and you begin to hear and understand in a jazz style. Reg

Lost me totally

I'm still reading through Jazz Theory Resources by Ligon. I hope it explains some of this stuff. I really need to find a course that takes me through all of these different borrowed/modal/substitute chords so I can have these chord choices at my disposal when composing. I'd like to be able to just blast a chord out without thinking of which mode I'm borrowing it from. Have it 2nd nature, you know.

[bako]

Reg,

How do you define the difference between modal interchange and extreme borrowing?

Thanks,
Bako

[Reg]

Hey Theared33..sorry if I lost you... I'll try and be clear... I'll try and address each issue, but from quick read of your post, your still trying to approach from a traditional concept... which can and will work... But you won't be hearing/understanding from a jazz point of view. No right or wrong, good or bad. Simply missing a different perspective of seeing, understanding and what really matter most with jazz the actual playing part.... Your 1st comment...
1)"I'm not sure why, because in some books that I have, they still keep the tonic-supertonic-mediant-etc formula for 1-2-3-4-5-6-7 no matter the mode chosen."
One of the differences between hearing, using or hearing jazz with modal concepts is there are different methods or concepts of using or implying the mode being used.
Let me give some basic info...
Generally Tonality refers to the relationship of tones, (the key), Modality refers to the choice of tones between which this relationship exists.
Tonality is not simply using the tones of a particular scale,(or mode), It is how we organize the relationships between those tones... and one of those pitches generally is the tonal center.
Each scale, (or mode), degree has it's part in the scheme of defining that scale or mode.
So when we use the terms Tonic, supertonic, mediant, subdominant, dominant, submediant or super dominant and subtonic or leadingtone... we're implying a particular scheme, a concept, an organized understanding with implied root motion, resolutions, voice leading etc... When we, as jazz players use the term modal or playing in a modal style... we're not implying those traditional relationships between the tones with implied tendencies. We can and may sometimes, but we combine different methods of the relationships between different tones, and generally the terms work only... for a reference. (to traditionally educated musicians), again not good, bad, right or wrong, just a reference.
Your 2nd comment about chords built on scale or mode degrees...
"But don't they have a function, or shall I say, 'pull' to different chords just like in the Ionian mode?Like how the IV wants to go to the V."
They can have a function... depending on how we organize the relationships, as I said...one method is using the Characteristic Pitch as defining character and have a function somewhat similar to dominant style, or as you said, " chords pull to different chords"...
So as I said generally there is one Tonic, the one chord, then there are chords with that CP, which pull towards the I or tonic chord, but can also pull to chords with out that CP. So we have two relationships, (or functions), a relationship between chords with CP and with out CP and also have a relationship between Chords with CP and The I or tonic chord.
The CP can somewhat be thought of as, or function like the tritone, and we could also call the chords without the CP somewhat Subdominant in character... But trying to use terms with accepted meanings and implied relationships usually will crash and burn the further you go and even gets worse when moving on to more levels of context or understandings.
My comments should also clear up your next comment.
Your next comment...
"The E-7 has a B in it which gives the Dorian its sound. The CMaj7 also has the B. Both are a major 6th. So again, these want to go back to the tonic because they contain the actual 'mode' notes?"
Yes... that is one method or choice as to how to organize what we as Jazz player hear and use to define modal playing. There are many and most of the time there are many being employed simultaneously. You need to be aware of the possibilities and are almost used in a plug and play style. The difficulty is you also need to be aware of how they work,(function), together and usually make choices with not nearly enough info. This may begin to sound complicated... but it's all constructed or employed from simple single ideas and concepts. And as with many things... once your aware of the parts the whole becomes somewhat simple.
That class your looking for... good luck. First of all your dealing with a lot of info... Most Jazz players want to play... we don't want to teach. Most players, composers etc... reach a level of understanding and musicianship... which takes years, and you only have a short window... Hell... I should be composing etc... But I feel it's somewhat a responsibility for experienced players, composers/arrangers to give back, to help educate... so I try...Reg

[Reg]

Reg,

How do you define the difference between modal interchange and extreme borrowing?

Thanks,
Bako

hey bako... I could define the difference as in how I define the relationships between tones, I guess one could also apply implication to borrowing chords.The main difference for me is my understanding of the use of term "borrowing chords" is pretty much on one level of reference... the term applies to the chord and the source with standard relationships between notes and intervals... typical western functional harmony... Modal Interchange is a concept with unlimited applications and can have multi-level implications... not simply traditional functional harmony. Generally doesn't using the term Borrowed chord have traditional reference with traditional relationships... tritone etc... best I can do with out some research... Reg

[brwnhornet59]

hey bako... I could define the difference as in how I define the relationships between tones, I guess one could also apply implication to borrowing chords.The main difference for me is my understanding of the use of term "borrowing chords" is pretty much on one level of reference... the term applies to the chord and the source with standard relationships between notes and intervals... typical western functional harmony... Modal Interchange is a concept with unlimited applications and can have multi-level implications... not simply traditional functional harmony. Generally doesn't using the term Borrowed chord have traditional reference with traditional relationships... tritone etc... best I can do with out some research... Reg

Isn't extreme borrowing just a layered aspect of modal interchange?

Like borrowing from the rel minor of the rel minor of the rel minor. Or like Jacks dodecaphonics where 4 tonic's and their rel minors are all at one's disposal through the symmetrical aspect of minor 3rds, (dim), that relate to the rootless Dom7b9. The same principles could be and is applied to the Coletrane changes in major 3rds, (aug).

Coupled with that and the usage of MM modal interchange, was my understanding of this idea. Am I confused?

[bako]

Thanks Reg,

No research necessary. I just wanted to get a sense of how you delineate between these two.
I have been known take a literal definition of a word like "borrowing" and run with it sometimes beyond it's common musical understanding. My question is a rare attempt on my part to contain it on the straight and narrow.

[JonnyPac]

Interesting thread. I'm so glad no theory-police popped in to argue renaissance modal composition!

Modal jazz is usually characterized by the by the attributes listed above by Keith Waters. Nonfunctional harmony is a big factor as well as slow harmonic rhythms (long periods of chords as opposed to the two-chords-per-beat found in many standards and bop tunes. Functional substitutions are usually disregarded- tritone subs for V7 become kind of meaningless without a target chord, etc. It's all about the "color", tritone subs might be a superimposed semi-outside harmony used for tension/release, but not in the ii V7 I way. In fact, you can superimpose just about any colors, scales, subsets, etc as long as you resolve them. Inside-outside-inside is the golden rule. The pianist in my combo Moondrool plays lots of P4 based outside licks over the changes, whereas I am still fascinated with all of the possibilities of inside sounds via intervallic combinations, etc. Hell, I can play inside on one chord for half an hour and still find new nooks and crannies. Fun stuff- whatever floats your boat.

As far as modal interchange goes, I have a little system that makes a ton of sense. It is nothing really special, and I was elated to find the same content in Bert Ligon's JTR vol I.

This is my take on modal interchange and borrowed chords in a nutshell:

You have one central key signature, say C Major/A Minor. It has seven diatonic chords and one really useful one from Harmonic Minor: E7 (either III7 or V7 of vi aka V7 of i).

The neighboring keys are one key signature away via the circle of 4ths/5ths. This means you can borrow from F/Dm and G/Em key signatures and the relevant harmonic minor chords.

Next stop is the parallel keys. Cm/Eb is parallel C/Am; all of the chords can be borrowed as well. The neighboring key signatures of the parallel key are available too- in this case Ab/Fm and Bb/Gm are up for grabs.

This is six keys worth of chords that revolve around a single central key signature! Six keys of diatonic chords = 42 chords + 6 from the related harmonic minors. 48 chords total.

The inside or default choices per seemingly redundant chords (ie Am appears several times) is the one that allows for the least amount of key signature modification (#1 choice is A Aeolian and then A Dorian from G/Em and A Phrygian from F/Dm - a signifying tone in the melody may give a clue (ie an F# note, the M6 of Am7 is clear indicator that G/Em is the key borrowed from, etc). This may not be the way to get the hippest or jazziest choices, but the basic defaults that coloring in interesting ways makes more sense. A blanket rule like "play Dorian over ALL m7 chords" is total BS; context is everything!

This is still all functional type thinking. Pop tunes use it all day long, etc. True modal jazz can use any harmony the composer chooses. Hope it gives you food for thought. Giving all of these RNA (Roman numerals would be a flipping mess, IMO. Just understand the relationships and play.

[brwnhornet59]

I am with you Jonny, That type of analysis is one I use, among others.

[Reg]

Isn't extreme borrowing just a layered aspect of modal interchange?

Like borrowing from the rel minor of the rel minor of the rel minor. Or like Jacks dodecaphonics where 4 tonic's and their rel minors are all at one's disposal through the symmetrical aspect of minor 3rds, (dim), that relate to the rootless Dom7b9. The same principles could be and is applied to the Coletrane changes in major 3rds, (aug).

Coupled with that and the usage of MM modal interchange, was my understanding of this idea. Am I confused?

I'm not an expert with modern use of term Borrowing or extreme borrowing... But concept is simple enough, I'm not sure the relationship between the notes or tones is implied... My understanding is the term reflects standard or default functional harmonic relationships between the notes or tones and not to the choice of notes which define those relationships... Two different methods of affecting source...of harmony, chords. Where as Modal Interchange does or can define which note(s) are used to define the relationships. We're talking about two different aspects... which have a difference with applications.
Again Tonality... relationship between notes...
Modality... choice of notes which define that relationship...
When we use tonic systems, as with Jacks or Coltrane's , or any multi tonic system of organizing chordal or melodic movement or source of movement... we're usually still using standard relationships with standard choice of notes for that relationship... simply combining and/or using more tonal centers. Reg

[Reg]

hey JP I always dig your views of anything... you have that talent of staying on topic... with real applications that you actually use... And what's even better... your always open to something new or a different understanding of something old... Don't change, you're very creative now...
So getting back to borrowed as compared to MI... It appears Borrowed has tonal center reference with implied relationships, you were giving examples of what we generally characterize as modal... descriptions as compared to concept behind which determines. I dig your working examples of both... I always try and understand almost anything by understanding the concept behind as compared to memorizing examples of... Examples obviously become memorized from use or whatever method of association we use... but when one understands the concept or source of as in... Borrowed or MI, for me I can apply the concept improvisationally without having memorized examples as reference... I'm really thinking out loud... Maybe that's another one of those characteristics of being a jazz player... besides what actual musical characteristics we employ... Jazz player as compared to Jazz material or concepts..
Anyway your use of neighboring Keys is interesting as source of control... very traditional harmonically... easy on traditional ears. And of course Parallel keys... and as you said, all examples of traditional functional tonality.
When you use all large case Roman Numerals and simply reflect root motion and chord tones and tensions which reflect source of chord... becomes very simple. Reg

[brwnhornet59]

I'm not sure the relationship between the notes or tones is implied... My understanding is the term reflects standard or default functional harmonic relationships between the notes or tones and not to the choice of notes which define those relationships... Two different methods of affecting source...of harmony, chords. Where as Modal Interchange does or can define which note(s) are used to define the relationships. We're talking about two different aspects... which have a difference with applications.
Again Tonality... relationship between notes...
Modality... choice of notes which define that relationship...
When we use tonic systems, as with Jacks or Coltrane's , or any multi tonic system of organizing chordal or melodic movement or source of movement... we're usually still using standard relationships with standard choice of notes for that relationship... simply combining and/or using more tonal centers. Reg

I was just using that as an example as to where modal interchange, the borrowing of chords, could be cited and drawn from. We can also draw from rel maj or min or parallel major/minors etc..

This is the gist is it not?

[Reg]

Could be... to me the word Modal implies more than the borrowing of chords... it also implies a source of controlling relationships between notes not just notes... But sure for simplicity... source of chords. Reg

[brwnhornet59]

[QUOTE=Reg;175617 it also implies a source of controlling relationships between notes not just notes... [/QUOTE]


Well yes, I would think that that would be so. Otherwise wouldn't borrowing chords just for a measure or two until it resolves back into the parent key be boring if it was not for setting up a new control relationship between the notes for us to take advantage of?

I guess if I was strictly composing that would be good enough, but I want to see and know all of the layers of these basic ideas so as to see and take advantage of these harmonic ramifications as we go deeper down the rabbit hole.

[AmundLauritzen]

There are some simple tricks you can use for creating modal vamps. For, say D dorian you can play Dm7 to Em7/D. You want to keep the bass centered around the tonic of the mode. If there's a bass player, he'll be sure to keep the gravity where it should be.

E phrygian: Em to F/E for example. Very simple, but effective.

F lydian: Fmaj7 to Gmaj7/F

G Mixolydian G7 to Fmaj7/G.

These are the most used ones from the major scale.

[wolflen]

"Modal jazz is usually characterized by the by the attributes listed above by Keith Waters. Nonfunctional harmony is a big factor as well as slow harmonic rhythms (long periods of chords as opposed to the two-chords-per-beat found in many standards and bop tunes. Functional substitutions are usually disregarded- tritone subs for V7 become kind of meaningless without a target chord, etc. It's all about the "color", tritone subs might be a superimposed semi-outside harmony used for tension/release, but not in the ii V7 I way. In fact, you can superimpose just about any colors, scales, subsets, etc as long as you resolve them. Inside-outside-inside is the golden rule."

one can see the why of the modal debate...if your thrown into it and do not have a very firm diatonic harmony understanding..

how i explain it to a new player .."the harmonic rules are suspended for a few moments..while you go on melodic kaleidoscopic adventures.."

i use miles as a prime example..bitches brew..he would play a fairly simple harmonic/melodic head that could be diatonic in nature..and then..that progression goes into suspension so to speak..but aspects of it are in the backround..the bass usually holding a pattern-a blank screen or pallet for the solos to paint on.. its not saying ok this is A13#11..its just saying..if you hear something different .. go for it..now, as others have said..you can literal use any and all of your creative vents..and every trick you know to paint a melodic picture..without a harmonic "traffic cop" telling you where to go or how to get there..but your still connected to the backround..so there is a relationship..your not just floating in free space..

so when i hear people say...i want to play modes..i have to ask them if they know diatonic harmony and its aspects..if that question is a puzzle to them..lets forget modes because you will not have any base to understand them...much like...i want to play like clapton..but i dont know anything about the blues..

i enjoy all you guys on this thread..thanks

wolf

[JonnyPac]

Good points!