Some additional thoughts: 1) This is, as I mentioned, based largely on my experience with the modern usage of the chord. This isn't to say that Riemann is wrong about its classical use. 2) It's based on my own models, or how I like to think about these sorts of things, and there are of course other models out there. For instance, there are certainly arguments to be made for why subdominant _should_ be able to overpower tonic: If you rank the functions by dissonance instead of strength, for instance, it's a natural result. I just like this model better.
I’ve heard the iii chord referred to as the median chord specifically because it’s halfway between the tonic and the dominant such that it can almost be both, but sometimes is neither. I particularly like this interpretation because it highlights the iii as one of the harmonically strangest chords of the scale, and yet it’s just a simple minor triad.
Subdominance is an interesting topic... For example, I like to think of a Csus2 chord going to Cmi, and a Csus4 chord going to C. At least, that's how it feels resolved for me. Maybe you should make a video just talking about subdominant function?
I wonder if all this relates to the tonic ambiguity in Cardiacs' 'Odd Even'. (I know, I harp on about them a lot, but I'd still love you to do a little video on an aspect of their music theory, there's so much to dig your teeth into) 'Dfan' mentions this song very eloquently on his blog post (I'll link it below) "v - I and ♭III - v - I cadences. These are sort of related to whole-tone melodic movement as well. If you play a normal V - I cadence (say, B major to E major) but use a flatted seventh instead of a leading tone (D♮ instead of D♯ in this case), so that you’re moving by a whole step instead of a semitone to get to the tonic note, you get a v - I cadence instead (B minor to E major), which has a much more ambiguous quality. In Cardiacs songs, this frequently comes in the context of the progression ♭III - v - I (e.g., G - Bm - E), which has quite an unstable feel. Often the ♭III has been heavily tonicized, which can make the sudden shift feel like the rug is being pulled out from under you; when repeated, it can also create the impression of shifting back and forth between two tonics, never fully coming to rest on one or the other. “Odd Even”, for example, is fundamentally based on a G - Bm - E progression, and it’s hard to decide whether to take G or E as the key of the song. The coda of “Dirty Boy” is another classic example that just repeats this progression over and over." dfan.org/blog/2010/05/09/cardiacs-musical-vocabulary/
@@corvusmonedulas4895 some talk of subtonic also.. I imagine that as the opposite (tritoned) augmented chord to some augmn chord. As dmaj7 to cmaj7. Having G7 or F as intermediate chords..
The only correct way to use 3m is as the end chord of a piece, played in root position, with the entire band cheesily singing "three minooooooooooooor" with its notes at the same time. Also, EVERY piece should be like this.
This made total sense. So... we can think of IIIm as a "transparent" chord. It picks up the function of the other chords around it. It just allows for more interesting harmonic content without moving to or from a resolution.
@@jamiebertram9744 hmm... latch to me sounds too powerful and satisfying (probably because I associate the sound of latch to that of a lock turning or a door closing which is generally a satisfying sound.) I'd prefer something like auxillary function.
I guess he first wanted to draw the commutative diagram for a monoidal functor whose coherence maps don't fulfill any additional properties... but who would have understood _that_ pun?
I feel like defining a "mediant function" here is the best option. Saying "It's sometimes dominant and sometimes tonic" about a specific chord feels a bit... odd to me. But if we define "mediant function" as "a chord that can function as tonic or dominant in specific circumstances", that feels 'better' because we have a name for that specific instance, rather than having to fudge the tonic/dominant switching thing into the schema... I don't know why, I just feel that naming this "not one or the other" thing makes it feel clearer...
Kinda surprised he didnt say mediant this whole video, I read your comment first before I really watched it so I guess I’m biased in saying that. I do like how he explained it so well without sayin the word tho. Anyway it’s like life, most of what you do should be purposeful and have a clear direction, but sometimes the point is to avoid that level of structure and telegraphed movement, the IIIminor in and flatIIImajor in the minor key both are my go to movements when I’m trying to suspend a cadence or to like ascend and descend the scales with chords, gives progressions room to breathe for a second before going back to work building and relaxing tension , sometimes the level of tension wants to float where it’s at , especially in some kinda modal improvising you can have a real vague 1-3 , vamp instead of the more obvious 1-5 vamps. FlatVImaj7 is my favorite for a useful subdominant and tonic functioning utility chord that was always my autopilot chord before I ever even learned theory and I was just guessing and checking, that’s how I know it sounds good lol
how about calling it subtonic? Subdominant function is unstable like dominant function, but not as directional. So subtonic function can be restful like tonic function but not directional (not as as easy to resolve to).
I think there is something you tend to miss in your videos, not just this one, which is the concept of relative function: If a piece of music is in a certain key (say G major), you almost always try to analyze each chord function relative to that key. But sometimes chords have a function relative to another chord in the progression which is not the tonic, for example: | G | Bm | Em | Am D | Marking the Bm here as the III would be technically correct, but it will be even more correct and more informative to mark it as the V of the Em which comes directly after it. This solves many function ambiguities and can be used to analyze songs.
Great video. I really liked how you tried to attack this at all angles after making your own main argument. Just two weeks ago I wrote a progression using a minor iii that literally took the role of a tonic chord, but then removed the I altogether from the progression [ IV , iii, vi, V, IV ]. Originally that iii was a I, but I subbed it our purely for flavor. Interesting to get schooled in the theory behind that kind of decision :) Thanks for your work!
In my compositions I rarely use the root position iii chord except as a passing chord because of its infamous contradictory nature. I almost always use the III borrowed from the parallel minor or iii6 (V substitute) instead.
@@FernieCanto Let me clarify. In the common-practice style, you want each chord to have a strong function that leads to the next chord. So if you're consciously trying to imitate that style, functionally ambiguous chords are objectively bad. But that doesn't mean that the iii chord shouldn't be used in other contexts.
@@alexshih3747 I mainly use iii if I am going to be moving to V, its relative major. In other words I treat it as a predominant, just like I would treat vi, the relative minor of I as a predominant. Not dominant, not tonic, but predominant. And I'm pretty sure that if Mozart were here with me, he would accept my mediant motion to dominant using iii.
Additional argument : in a way, tonic chords are like the dominant chords from the point of view of the subdominant chords (Which is essentially saying that I>IV is (V>I)/IV, or that the E>F is almost like a leading tone resolution). And iii>IV is a very powerful and widely used tool in chord progressions (E. G. The creep I>iii>IV>iv), so that makes it tonic-y when it comes to preparing subdominant chords - but not so much when it comes to resolving dominant chords. I guess it's essentially the same point being made as your "iii can't create rest but can maintain it" idea.
I always felt something weird about iii. I always preferred III better. Now when I started learning music more in-depth, I realized the reason it sounded good (for me) is because III usually resolves to vi, which is the relative minor of I or the root. Example: C. III is E major. E resolves to A, which is the relative minor of C.
It’s interesting: from the perspective of available tensions, the I & VImi are drawing on the same pool of 7 notes (in the key of C, C Lydian), the IImi and IV are drawing from their own pool (C Major), and the V and VII° from theirs (D Melodic Minor). The IIImi (D Major) has no partners, making it the outlier again. When I’m trying to improvise scale lines that are very “inside” (dull and inoffensive have their place) I try to think of those first three scales as generalized tonic, subdominant, and dominant flavors to move between. The IIIm breaks the model, introducing a color less related to everything else than it is to other keys but still very related (again, purely from the perspective of the available tensions) and making for a great pivot chord.
12tone I can’t seem to find the logic to it, given that the whole available tensions thing comes from people’s somewhat arbitrary distaste for minor 9s, but it is fairly useful to think about in application.
I'm thinking about George Russel lyccoto thing about inner going and out going tension plus the neutral b7. And the blues. And it's tonal freedom F c g d a e b/ c# g#/d# / Bb f# Like when you are at that middle point on d# and both melodic minors plus many scales are at hand but the only thing which borders your "steps" are the surrounding black notes from a tonality , Which blend hard in them so called bebop scales btw All that thing about lydian neutralizing the duality in major scales against this ramifications of scales mixes too logically here with the down up down up thing of harmonic motion
I think the reason the III chord is the porcupine in the petting zoo may be the prickly problem of temperament. At 4:20 in the video, 12tone explains how the leading tone and the primary modal note are battling for functional dominance in the IIImi chord. The leading tone is a melodic idea while the primary modal note is a harmonic idea. So, the IIImi chord is also a battleground of equal temperament (pleasing melodically) against just intonation (pleasing harmonically). My theory here is that the function of the III chord may depend a lot on how you tune the root. For example, with A-440 as the tonic, the equal temperament C# is 554.4 Hz, but a singer will sing the C#--in tune--at 550 Hertz (just intonation), 13 cents flatter. That's not a problem if you move next to a IV or V chord, but if you build a triad on that 550 Hz C#, a singer will sing G# at 825 Hz, 11 cents flat from a melodic, equal temperament G# at 830.6 Hz. It's not going to sound much like a leading tone that wants to lead back to the tonic. We're talking about the fifth of the chord, so it has to be 3/2 the frequency of the root or the chord will quickly sound out of tune. You can't just slide the G# up a little without dragging the root (C#) with it. The V chord has a similar problem with the leading tone, but it's not a big deal to tweak the third of a chord to make it more pleasing melodically--which is largely the reason that the compromise of equal temperament works at all. If my reasoning is valid, then a IIImi chord on a piano should sound more like a dominant chord, with an equal-temperament, in-tune leading tone. Singers will sound more like a tonic chord with the third being in tune harmonically. Admittedly, my ear isn't good enough to detect such a subtlety, but that's the theory I came up with. Thanks for the video.
i think the iii chord in 2nd inversion is when it can shine as a dominant function chord, as the bass movement allows the leading tone in the chord to really come out more, but in root position it's definitely arguable 1st inversion could go either way, since having the dominant of the key in the bass could point towards dominant function but doesn't necessarily have to
Great video!! Some extra thought for the discussion: in Samba harmonies situations like Imaj -IIm - V7 - IIIm -VI7 - IIm - V7 - Imaj are very common. In this case we see the IIIm as a substitution for the Imaj with a tonic function.
I’m a jazz guy and I find it’s definitely used more in non-western harmony based music. Especially gospel, where it’s used in spirituals to uplift the progression. And, of course, it’s the Phrygian mode in jazz, so it’s fun to use the iiim to add a little Spanish spice. My theory teacher in college called music theory vocabulary. Theory is just names to describe sounds, he didn’t view them as rules. He made up own scales and harmonies in his compositions (his name is Dr. Brad Bodine), which we’re really interesting to say the least.
These last few months spent trying to learn to play music must finally be starting to work, because I am actually understanding a reasonable amount of what you are saying. So it's finally starting to stick. Cool.
I would call iii Mediant. As a substitute I consider it having both Dominant and Tonic function depending on context and inversion. Its actually funny the I-iii-I and iii-V-iii examples you gave I felt more satisfied by the first resolution as a dominant one. I guess its a bit subjective. To me the most obvious use of mediant function is to lead to IV or ii from the other.
5:24 - it’s worth noting also that iii has no plagal note: it bears similar relation to the tonic as vi to IV and it does not carry the downward-leading function that the 7 of V has. V is implied as dominant until proven or suggested otherwise (a plagal cadence can still serve sufficient though gentler), but I to iii and back feels like a vacillation between modal colors much like i to bVI, its negative, does.
iii is a tonic and thats that. in blues its oftenly usen in a B7 to Em resolve. Its very pleasant and sounds right. Now ppl will be mad at me for analizing blues in C rather than Em but sometimes it just be like that. In a song i composed the coda was only open guitar chords and its something like that : Am7 x2 E7 x2 D7 x2 A7 x2 B7 x2 and an Em to finish it all. Some ppl would analize as a key change but i dont think so. Also the cadence from A7 to B7 is really bluesy and its really good for setting up a solo for a coda, for instance going down the E blues scale (yes, i know that would contradict my point but now im talking about something different)
Watch the 12tone Bartok video! It's a really cool system for mapping out all of the functions. It goes one step further than tritone substitution, but includes it too. I think you could call it diminished chord substitution.
@@jasonfire3434 Yeah, I myself have done a deceptive motion as a modulation from C minor(the key) to Ab major(the key) via G major(the chord). And it works.
Oh man! Using IIImi as an extension of V (dominant) is going to help me come up with way better cadences. Thank you so much! (I wonder how this will sound with secondary dominant, too.) Nice!
In my little experience as an arranger and composer, I find that the IIIm has a dominant function when you play inversions followed by the tonic, specially in the 2nd inversion gets a very strong resolution to the main tonic.
I do like this video. I also like the idea of the iii chord in a major key being classed as an extender of sorts for tonic or dominant function, because sometimes you're looking for a tone color change but you don't want to leave where you are in the structure. Great video. :)
I think I've been musically indoctrinated really heavily by postmodern trends, so keep that in mind, but I tend to use iii as a step into IV in a major key. The half step movement from the third degree into the fourth and from the seventh back to the tonic makes a lot of harmonic sense to my brain, but I've definitely used iii to extend the tonic and dominant before. I just usually use it as sort of a "subdominant's dominant"--if that even makes sense. I'm a total music theory noob compared to some of the people here, so feel free to enlighten me!
A few hints to help you find the "correct" answer: First, review the origins of the terms dominant and subdominant--where did they come from, and how was it they were created as a consequence of the harmonic series, or in other words, how are they embedded in the physical nature of sound vibration. Then explore the arena of musicolinguistics. You may discover that your harmonic approach to the question, while interesting from the theoretical construct of harmony, is rendered moot when considered from a linguistic approach. Indeed, the very concept of dissonance/resolution is a common thread found in every known language, including music. What you observe as change due to the modernization of music is actually a linguistic one that is merely reflected in the ways harmony is used to express the language. You may also discover that this approach accounts for most changes in approaches to harmony throughout the histories of music in every culture.
Great video! Quick personal preference thought, at around 7:33, I always prefer a I/IV/iii/V7/I instead of a I/IV/V/iii/I... it creates some very satisfying voice leading opportunities, both for harmony or melody, and even if the bass stays playing the root notes the whole time, it doesn't matter cuz it sounds sweet! If we do G/C/Bm/D7/G, you could use notes like D-C-B-C-B or G-G-F#-F#-G or G-E-D-D-D or even B-C-B-A-G... other options exist too obviously but, to me, it just sounds so much nicer than G/C/D/Bm/G... that being said, this doesn't add any more clarity on the function of iii chord. When I first learned chord functions, in the same way that the diminished vii chord is an incomplete V7 chord, and you state that iii is an incomplete Imaj7 chord, my instructor taught me that they were incomplete iii7 chords, or a V chord with an added 6th in second inversion. In G major, a Bm was either seen as an incomplete Bm7 (B-D-F#-A), which does a decent job at resolving to Em (although a B7 would be stronger than Bm7), or a D(no 5) add6 (D-F#-B) but with the B in the bass, which potentially resolves to Em, Eb, C, G, even an Ab, some better than others, but a cool passing chord. Perhaps that's what the iii chord function is... is passing.
You ask, "In this particular song/context, what's the next note I'm likely to sneak in, if I were to add a grace note or accidental to it?" And what that note would be (which will change depending on context) will tell you the chord's function. Maybe IIIm is a separate category, ambiguous
i’ve noticed that in major, iii sounds really good going to IV. perhaps the function could be labeled as “sub-subdominant”, due to its tendency to want to resolve to the subdominant.
This is a topic I am very interested in. I have always had a unique interpretation of this. I always thought the iii chord was dominant functionality but not because it resolves into I, but rather I believe it resolves into vi. vi of course being the relative minor key. My reasoning is this, the relative minor is essentially a transposition with all the primary functional chords changed to minor chords. Using this logic, vi is the Tonic, ii is the subdominant and v (lowercase) is the dominant. Despite not actually being a dominant in quality, it is instead a minor7th chord naturually, but people add a sharp3, borrowed from the parallel key to make it stronger. I think it is counter intuitive to argue if its dominant, I think it is better to ask whether it resolves into a tonal center, and if so which? Again I believe its the vi chord simply because it adheres to the framework. One reason I would disagree that it has tonic functionality is because that would imply iii is the tonal center and i feel in order to be the tonal center it should have the aeolian mode played with it, but its the phrygian mode instead. If you played it with the aeolian mode it wouldnt even be a iii chord at all but rather a vi chord. This begs the question, what does the mode and quality of the chord tell us about its function? I think another important part is correctly identifying the guide tones, IE which not is the third and which is the 7th. As an example, the ii7 chord is the same quality as the iii7, its a minor7th but I think these chords are actually completely different. The reason why: In transformational harmony there needs to be a way to identify whether we are doing a parallel transition or relative etc. If we play a minor 7 chord, and then transform it into a minor 7 b 5 this would seem like a parallel transformation, why is this? Because the function is stayin the same, it is still predominant but it is now minor but in this case we altered the fifrth of the chord not the third, this is why I think it is better to think of ii7 as instead IV6, if we assume its an IV6 then the 6 is the second degree and changing the the third of this chord is consistent with transformational harmony idea, essentially saying IV6 to ivM6 is a parallel transformation makes more sense than saying ii7 to ii7b5 is a parallel transformation . It also allows us to notice/generalize that all extensions (6 or 7) tell us is the harmonic context of the chord and third tells us the quality. Now for the iii7 chord, this chord is different, in this case the chord is not a V6 like you suggest in the video and the reason is because we typically alter the third of the iii chord to turn it into an III7, borrowing it from the parallel key, this would imply that iii7 is the root position if we are trying to remain consistent that the third is always what changes the quality of the chord, and the 7th the function. I think it makes more sense to say iii7 to III7 is a parallel transformation than to say that V6 to III7 is a parallel transformation TLDR; the root position voicing of iii7 is iii7 and the root position voicing of ii7 is actuall IV6, this and the phrygian mode is what distinguishes from any other chord and based of parallel symmetry i think the iii7 chord should resolve into the vi chord. Another bonus point: I think you are confusing what he means by the functions, when he says the ii chord is predominant, i dont think he means its predominant to the V chord, but rather, ii is predominant to the III7 chord. Why? If we assume you are correct and that when we use the tonality cube, and we assume ii being predominant means it resolves into V, then how does vi being tonic make sense? How can it be a tonic with respect to I? Its a totally different tonal center! So why cant ii be a predominant of THAT tonal center? Thats why ii is predominant for the relative minor, based on the tonality cube, not the home key.
The Phrygian mode also functions as tonic minor in the sense that it is a tonicization of Locrian, the “diminished mode”. Without the perfect fifth it loses all stability and becomes pure tension. Likewise, its inverse mode, Ionian, is a tonicization or “de-subdominance” (my term) of Lydian: without the perfect fourth, it loses all need for harmonic movement as it becomes harmonically entirely stable. Aeolian is tonic minor only in the sense that it harmonizes all the chords of Ionian with roots a third underneath, and like Ionian has a central progression of I - IV - V, natural minor has a central progression of i - iv - v. Indeed as far as these two progressions, one can be “modalized” through changing the dominant to minor (Mixolydian, its dominant becoming Dorian) or further tonicized by changing the subdominant to minor, while the other can be tonicized through changing the dominant to major (b7 lest the dominant itself becomes a harmonic major tonic) or “modalized” by changing the subdominant to major (Dorian, its subdominant becoming Mixolydian). Isn’t this fun? 🙂
I have to listen to your videos at .75x and still need to hear some parts twice to fully comprehend I feel bad for anyone finding this video who’s first getting into music theory. I bet your brain melted Still good stuff, the doodles help keep me sane
Without IIImi, Michael couldn't row his boat ashore, nor could Puff the Magic Dragon find his way around. Black sheep or not, those of us learning guitar and similar can't be without it!
Looking at harmony, IIIm with I bass has ratios 8:10:12:15 and LCM of 120. IIIm with the IX added to make it Vadd6 has ratios 10:12:15:18 (or 9:10:12:15) and LCM of 180. On that basis it harmonises with the tonic triad more than the dominant triad. Dunno about resolution but on this basis I'm going tonic!
As fascinating as this is it seems as though the fact that different composers look at this differently amounts to different compositions looking at it differently, which is a good thing
Tonic is home, subdominant is facing the path away before turning back, dominant is turning back to take the path back home, everything else is one step of the track away from any of these points while looking in
I’ve always thought of it as the dominant tonic minor. It fits how it sounds like a root-suspended tonic of the major scale, the dominant of the natural minor mode, and the relative minor equivalent to the dominant all at once. It’s also the harmonic negative of bVI, which is like an additive suspension of i into a Lydian mode as opposed to a subtractive suspension of I into the Phrygian mode.
In other words, I often think of the mediant as the tonic-dominant and the submediant as the tonic-subdominant. That said, when made into dom7 chords as bIII7 and VI7 (not bVI7), they interestingly act in an interesting hybrid of predominant and dominant harmony. Ultimately the mediant and submediant function either as a relative major (bIII), a relative minor (vi), a tonic-dominant (iii) or a tonic-subdominant (bVI). That the functionality changes when you vortically slide the chord into a minor or major parallel (bVI -> vi or iii -> bIII) is no surprise either, as for instance the same happens when the leading tone is flattened into the subtonic, or the supertonic is flattened into a Neapolitan chord. Likewise of course, altering the subdominant and dominant in such a way (#ivm7 & bVmaj7) only creates tonal instability. The subtonic and supertonic in Riemannian terms would likely be considered dominant and subdominant respectively; they are arguably conceivable as being quartal dominant or “backdoor” dominant (IV of IV, step below tonic) or as quintal subdominant (v of V, seventh chord below tonic).
I actually think at 5:27, going I-iii-I that it does feel resolved. The leading tone to tonic movement is kind of convincing. I'm not saying this means iii is clearly a dominant function, but rather I do hear some resolution there, even if it is weak (as compared to iii-V-iii, which has no resolution)
Ah, yes, the dominant parallel as we used to call it. I mean you could play it in a long chain like: I - IIIm - IVm - IIm - V - I for some nice dropping fifth/rising fourths. But I guess it'll usually be changed to III to act as a Dominant chord in a temporary key change to the parallel key (so if playing G-major we're moving to E-minor for a short while). That said, however, most of what I play are hymns, so that might give me some bias. :)
I think it’s still important to think about inversions when thinking about chord function. As a rhythm guitarist changing the note in the bass of a chord can change the direction and drive in a chord progression. For instance a simple I IV V I sounds more interesting if you put 3rd in the bass. Then you have a 3-4-5 walk up in the bass line that helps to build I tension. I find the iii to be tonic in function because when I do this the chord that most easily fits this baseline to my ear is well, the iii chord. 3-4-5 literally becomes iii IV V
However I should disclose do this in DADGAD so there is almost always some sort of pedal tone suspension to help tonicize the chord as well. If you were to stick to the strict triad spelling with no extra notes I imagine this effect would be weakened.
In Radiohead's "Karma Police" they use the 3mi in a really creative way. They suspend tension from the 2, but then go to the 5. The 2, 3, 5 motion makes the 5 almost feel resolved because we're finally back at a place we understand.
I've always been a bit unsatisfied with the cliff notes Tonic, Subdominant, Dominant explanations, and this video has cleared up so much for me. This is exactly why I love this channel 🐘
There is an aversion to church modes when talking tonal usage however, I love to talk about them as the vibe of each is essential. For example and extended dominant 7 melody has a mixolydian flavor. A V4-2 gives a lydian flavor like a IV chord does etc. So when looking at a minor key the VI-V gives a phrygian sound and the VI chord sort of function as dominant. Even stronger made by German its Italian or French6 versions. So a phrygian cadence of sorts. So if the V chord were not major but rather MINOR quality, it’s a totally different vibe. Now the chord sounds unresolved like a half cadence. So... to me, there is no ambiguity when I hear v-VI nor iii-IV.... both are a sort of “lydian cadence”. So iii minor always functions as a pull to IV chord or lydian vibe, and if you don’t go there it feels quite unsatisfying.
Judging from my experience the III mi is a strange beast that can take on various functions depending on surrounding chords. Juxtaposed against the IVmi it gets rather dominant. Against the VIIth it gets tonical, especially when extended with 7ths. Against the V it becomes rather subdominant and even kind of pulls the V into a subdominant function, unless you use the 7ths extension. However grouped together with subdominants it will happily play as one of them. And if you set up a directional movement of chords it will just as happily play whatever role is required. Due to that property I usually treat it as a subdominant in the catch-all sense, as it does behave like the catch-all subdominants in minor.
I remember back in university, during harmony class, we discussed how the IIImi chord works. A small note: we didn't really use the roman numeral system for analysis, but function analysis instead. All of the triads in a major scale have only one clearly defined function, T S or D and substitutions by thirds above or under (you add the suffix m or s depending on if you are above or below the primary function). This did give us a problem, though, which was the IIImi chord (Tm or Ds in our system). The simple version of the answer er got is "it depends on the context". Do you have a IIImi followed by a VImi (Ts) chord? Then it has an aeolian dominant function, and is considered a Ds function. Is it followed by a IV (S) chord? Then you have to look at what's before. Is it a tonic function? Then it's a Tm. Is it a dominant function? Then you can choose if it is Tm or Ds because it's not clearly defined and both functions work in that context.
The bIII major chord in natural minor has kept me thinking lately too. Even though (I think) it should have a tonic function (Bartok's axis system), it feels as though it actually has a dominant function. For example, bVI - bIII - Im works pretty nicely as a substitute for bVI - V(m) - Im.
In my mind there are only two harmonic functions within the major scale: Tonic or Dominant, and for me the iii chord is tonic. When you view the I chord as a Maj6 and harmonize the major scale as an 8-note scale which also contains the #5, that harmonic function becomes even more apparent.
A IIImi-VImi progression in Major is the same as a Vmi-Imi progression in Minor. So yeah, technically it is. However, Western Functional Harmony usually would make it into III-VImi if transposed to the relative Major.
Riley McGinn The problem with iii resolving to vi is that there’s no leading tone motion between them. If we were to look at that progression in the relative minor, it would change to v-i, and as has been established many times by music theorists, when building chords around the minor scale, usually minor v is changed to major V to add the strong sense of resolution that comes with the major scale into a minor context. So if we were to switch back to major, that progression would change to III-vi, which doesn’t really work in the context of a major scale. However, III to I does have strong leading tone motion as there’s two notes in the chord that can resolve by half steps.
Joe Romano I don’t think you really need a leading tone to have dominant function. For example, in a V-vi progression, V still has dominant function despite not having a leading tone to the root of the vi chord. Therefore iii can have dominant function when going to vi as well
I am late to the party on this discussion, but I am writing this to try to organize my own thoughts on this matter. I agree with most of the points in your video. I definitely think of iii as being in a category of its own. To me, it is a pre-pre-dominant function, in that it wants to be followed by some sort of pre-dominant chord (usually vi IV or ii). It is abysmal as a pre-dominant (ie iii-V). It doesn't work as a tonic chord very well at all, which is surprising since it's really just a 1maj7 chord without the root, and in jazz and many forms of pop, Imaj7 is a perfectly acceptable tonic chord (the presence of the leading note isn't a big deal IMO), but the bass line you get from V - iii is functionally very weak, which is probably why it doesn't work as a tonic in that context (although you can, ans often do, use an em triad as a voicing for a Cmaj7 chord, if you also have a bass player laying-down the tonic) iii is very commonly used after the tonic in a lot of pop songs (eg "puff the magic dragon" or "what a wonderful world" etc) . the rising I - iii bass line is 'uplifting'. And, as stated before, it is invariably followed by a pre-dominant (vi IV or ii). Of course, the chromatic-mediant variation (ie III instead of iii) is commonly used in a lot of songs to modulate to vi (eg "Georgia on my mind"), but it can also be thought of as a more potent form of iii-vi (or perhaps the other way around: iii-vi is a "milder" form of III-vi). Also, III can commonly go to IV as well (eg "sittin by the dock of the bay") Anyway, all very interesting. the iii chord seems innocuous but it is the only one that doesnt fall into the category of either tonic, pre/sub-dominant, or dominant. Let's just call it the "mediant" category.
Hearing what you thought was the defining note of each function was fascinating, mostly because I've always heard it very differently. To me, subdominant is built off of 6, as that's the only scale degree not found in the I or V7 chords. Scale degree 4 instead defines dominant to me, as it is found in more dominant function chords than 7 (think V7sus, bVII, the or IVmi). This actually leaves 3 being the defining feature of tonic function, as emphasized by 4 falling to it. That downward motion always feels more resolved than the rising of the leading tone. Though of course, this leads me to the same conclusion as you, IIImi sounds much more tonic than dominant as it has the tonic note and not the dominant one
3 роки тому
I-iii-I is my favourite progression in the world. It sounds so melancholy.
This was a great video to pop up for me today. Thank you. Right now, I'm literally working out a "cover" version of a friend's song which was originally, intentionally, rambling with how the melody fits over the harmony. And so I had just worked out a "consistent" progression that basically just uses chords in exactly the way you are playing with here as demonstrations (ie: inverting some basic "pedaling" substitutions into phrases). However, this song I'm working out is clearly in a dorian mode and the harmony is all shifted from the ideas here. Still... The same thoughts said out loud has helped, and I very much appreciated the random moment of delving into your discussion while trying to not bang my head against the wall of "neo-psychedelic-cafe-jamming" analysis.
I think that de la Motte sees the iii as having qualities of both tonic and dominant function, having the character 3rd of both (the "agent" of a chord). So yeah, I would not rule it completely as either, without context we can simply say that it has some functions of both. As for the subdominant function, I really think that a strong subdominant function (like the iv in a major key) has just as strong gravitation toward the tonic as a strong dominant has. A dominant chord with a seventh even lends some of the subdominant functions features to make it resolve with more clarity. The overlooking of the subdominant function, I think, is a big misstep in the history of western music theory, dating back to the debates of Rameau and Rousseau in which Rousseau that saw the subdominant as a "pre-dominant" function eventually won due to more elaborate rhetorics
The iii does honestly sound fine in the I - iii - I progression. Seems dominant to me, the presence of the 7th just overpowers the quality to me. But, I do believe it is how it used, the iii chord's job seems to change based on context.
How can you analyze a chord's function divorced from an actual chord progression? To find its use, see how it's used. In my experience, iii chords most often move toward either the vi (in which it works as V of vi) or IV (in which it seems to extend the I chord, almost a V of IV without the tritone). It seldom seems to move to a ii or V let alone vii dim.
I've always thought of it in the way you described in your conclusion -- it can be either, depending on the context. That's how I've made sense of chords "resolving" down by a third, like the Bm to G in the chorus of Hotel California.
5:30 ok I think you're being a bit too subjective here, and using it as your primary example as to why it can't be dominant is kind of a weak argument. To my ears, that progression works fine, I hear the iii clearly resolving to the I. Is it as strong as the V? Of course not, as you said movements of a 3rd are functionally weak, however I still hear the G clearly resolving from the Bm, even just putting it in 1st inversion can make the resolution stronger. I do agree with you that it can kind of act as both, it's like a blend of the two functions. So I think that yes it can act as dominant, as well as tonic, it just depends on use and context. Personally I think it leans more to the dominant, especially since its primary use is to resolve to the vi, however I think it's a dominant chord that can sit still, at least for a little while. Like the chord feels like it wants to go somewhere, it's just not always sure where, or when.
Just a small opinion by a noob, but on my PC and to my ear, it really sounds like it wants to resolve upwards to an unstable (dominant?) chord, so it is dominant relative to the dominant? Would that classify as subdominant? I guess it doesn't fit the role of I or V in I - IV - V - I, as you demonstrated, but I wonder how it sounds in place of the IV.
I’ve learnt a chord progression, | I-vii•-iii | vi | IV | V-V7-I | ( add some rhythm to this progression, I didn’t know how to put it forward in the text, but it sounds cool) For the first time I’ve actually seen the use of the three minor chord so, what do you say, it’s like taking us to the six minor so is it a dominant or subdominant??
5:51 Actually, it does. In my song Waiting For Knocking, I resolved like this: G G7 Em, where Em is the root. The move of the minor 3rd down is actually great to have, because it introduces the chromatic chord in Phrygian, the bIII7.
I'd never even thought about this before, but it seems to me that it really is entirely based on context with the III chord especially As you showed, it can fit in both tonic and dominant function, so it has it's place and it's function. It just doesn't really fit into any of the three others. It's unique.
Re: Symbology used in the illustrations: I have not figured out these symbols that 12tone uses: The one that is used for "history" (looks like a triangle over a complicated rectangle), and what's the "butterfly" mean?
I haven't looked through all you're videos, so I'm not sure if you've covered this already or not but I was wondering if you could do a video on the "mixolydian chord": a chord like A/B, where the root is on whole step above the rest of the major chord.
The iii is not uncommon at all! The Weight by The Band starts I-iii-IV-I. Verses in The Boys Are Back in Town also start off I-iii-IV-vi-iii-vi-ii-V, then repeat a variation. It's also used several ways in the bridges. Playing around on vi & iii before going to V, sometimes passing through ii or IV is something I've played in many classic rock songs. She Loves You by The Beatles goes I-vi7-iii-V7 in the verses. That's just a few from memory. Look around! It's not just used, it's prominent in major hits.
in just intonation, a minor triad's tuning is 10:12:15. This means it's literally the 3rd, 5th and Maj7th of a CMaj7 chord. And at least to me that's the way I hear it most of the time-as an incomplete Cmaj7 chord, and thus having tonic function. On the other hand, G-B-E can't be tuned to the harmonic series of G unless you abandon the perfect 4th/5th of the minor triad. To me this makes the argument for tonic function more supported than the argument for dominant function. In addition, if iii minor is dominant, then that would seem to imply that iii->V isn't really a functional motion, since they're both dominant. But that sus6->5 motion sounds functional to me, more like a plagal cadence than something non-function-changing like a change of inversion.
In general, I think a lot of these function arguments get easier if you make sure to separate the major and minor chords of the same root. Minor chords are really just incomplete Maj7 or dom9 chords and function like the extended major chord they're implying. That, plus the Bartok axis system is the best way to categorize functional harmony in my opinion.
Paul Keller no because I7 is still a special case of the I chord. I would never substitute the root (unless it is an inversion), only extend the chord. But III7 has nominated function. I can't buy an argument based on the overtone series since it contains no pure fourths, and besides the 4/5/6/7 chord actually has a flattened (extra flattened) 7th. I prefer to think of the mediant that as a separate category in itself.
Paul Keller how do you find out the tuning of an interval in just intonation? Is there a program for comparing Just Intonation vs Equal Temperament triads?
The fonction (the sens, the meaning) of something usually depend on the context. In the case of IIIm, we could say that is absolute fonction is inconclusive, so its fonction is always relative. Relative to its context.
Whenever music snobs in the 90's would complain that bands like AC/DC or Geen Day played only three chords, I'd l say, "Primus has, like, zero chords. But their musical geniuses, right?". Haha! That always pissed them off! Anyways...Primus has always been a rhythmic band first and foremost. I doubt 12tone would be up for that, but it would be interesting.
The solution is poss... "Mirroring" phenom... In minor, VI is not a family substitution of tonic function [since e.g am key resolving to F doesn't work] (despite what riemannians think) but the III in minor [am resolv to C (esp via viio [bdim])] is. In major that is reversed where we don't see a resolving function for the iii but we do see resolution to the vi (deceptive cadence). ....Mirroring (or straddling the tonic) in music. I.e profound; infinity. The same math /cosmic phenom that causes 12/T ET to be necessary if one wants to modulate from key to key over octaves without "wolves" -- the endless circle won't sync up without fudging the tuning. [3.14159__ forever] (Same phenom ultimately that causes chromatic mediant the sub dom direction [e.g am to cm] to be more closely related to tonic key [am/C] than the chrom-med the dom direction [am to f#m]. ...But only for harmonic minor, tho hrm min is cultural not 'natural'. hmmm.) What do the deep13 music brains think? Should I adjust my music-trons left or right? (The iii in major can be an elongation of I OR V as you show. BUT in other major key instances in can be a type of pre dom funct in that it meanders away from I or V.) The iii is the oddball of the family in major; and the VI in min is ultimately lydian [a type of oddball ...the devil masked with a happy face].
At about 5:40 when you say that the motion is considered weak because so few notes change, from a voice-leading perspective would that be considered “smooth” rather than weak? It doesn’t “work” from a functional perspective that expects tension and resolution, but it sounds good as a transition. I guess that would be more of a neo-Riemannian way of looking of things?
Yeah, I think "smooth" and "weak" are kinda two sides of the same coin here. It mostly depends on whether or not the effect is what you're looking for, but in the case of dominant resolutions you want something bigger and more dramatic, so one note moving a half-step doesn't really do what you want. In the context of extending a function, though, it's a very valuable effect, so in that case it's probably better viewed as smooth.
If you look at how it’s used in ragtime and gospel music, it almost always has a sharped 3rd because it’s a secondary dominant leading to the vi (or VI7 if we wanna get real jazzy with it). If the vi is a tonic, and III7 is a secondary dominant that leads to it, then we would call III7 dominant. So what’s iii? I don’t know. Let’s call it boneless dominant. It’s still a dominant chord, but it lacks the only feature that makes it good for what it’s actually used for, which is the #5 leading tone moving to the 6. I can’t speak to classical music cause I’m a jazz and folk guy, but in vernacular music, iii is definitely a dominant chord (because it almost always precedes a vi) it’s just the shittiest version of that chord. It’s like taking a useful non-diatonic chord and then forcibly making it diatonic, and in the process, making it worse. That’s why it’s a gray area: it’s a non-diatonic chord that has been made diatonic and is also bad.
In modern music I hear the progression IV-V-vi-iii and then endlessly loop a lot. In this progression, the iii minor chord is extremely tense. If the iii minor precedes IV major in this way, it acts as a sort leading chord, maybe a "pre-sub-dominant" or however you might define it
This comment may have been made already -- the difference between iii as tonic and iii as dominant is clarified when everything is in the minor mode... III clearly does not contain the leading tone, since it has the subtonic instead, and so it is clearly a tonic chord. III+, on the other hand (and I'm tempted to use scare quotes on that function, since it is virtually non-existent) has dominant and leading tone in it. In fact, if this constellation of notes had the dominant in the bass, no one would likely even try to argue that it was a III+ at all. So... if the "leading tone" in iii in major is descending, it's not really functioning like a leading tone at all -- more like a subtonic -- and so it clearly has a tonic function.
I for one (and that's what I've got taught in music school) tend to think in major and parallel chord functions: I is tonic, IV is Subdominant, V is Dominant - and 3 steps below each chord is its minor parallel - VImi is the TP (tonic parallel, logical since c major and a minor are parallel scales), IImi is SP and IIImi is DP. It doesn't have the strong dominant function as V in the major scale, but I find one can use it just fine as such, in the right circumstances. In minor it is a strong dominant, even more if you play it as a IIImajor, but that's a different topic. I was kind of surprised that you didn't bring up this whole functional parallel thing to be honest! But great video nonetheless, this inversion thinking was new for me, even if I personally don't find it to be very compelling, but that's just the way I hear it... peace!
Riemann's model _is_ the functional parallel model, I just didn't use the term because in English "parallel minor" describes a different phenomenon so I thought using it here would be confusing. Same concept, though.
Some additional thoughts:
1) This is, as I mentioned, based largely on my experience with the modern usage of the chord. This isn't to say that Riemann is wrong about its classical use.
2) It's based on my own models, or how I like to think about these sorts of things, and there are of course other models out there. For instance, there are certainly arguments to be made for why subdominant _should_ be able to overpower tonic: If you rank the functions by dissonance instead of strength, for instance, it's a natural result. I just like this model better.
I’ve heard the iii chord referred to as the median chord specifically because it’s halfway between the tonic and the dominant such that it can almost be both, but sometimes is neither. I particularly like this interpretation because it highlights the iii as one of the harmonically strangest chords of the scale, and yet it’s just a simple minor triad.
Subdominance is an interesting topic...
For example, I like to think of a Csus2 chord going to Cmi, and a Csus4 chord going to C. At least, that's how it feels resolved for me.
Maybe you should make a video just talking about subdominant function?
I wonder if all this relates to the tonic ambiguity in Cardiacs' 'Odd Even'. (I know, I harp on about them a lot, but I'd still love you to do a little video on an aspect of their music theory, there's so much to dig your teeth into)
'Dfan' mentions this song very eloquently on his blog post (I'll link it below)
"v - I and ♭III - v - I cadences. These are sort of related to whole-tone melodic movement as well. If you play a normal V - I cadence (say, B major to E major) but use a flatted seventh instead of a leading tone (D♮ instead of D♯ in this case), so that you’re moving by a whole step instead of a semitone to get to the tonic note, you get a v - I cadence instead (B minor to E major), which has a much more ambiguous quality. In Cardiacs songs, this frequently comes in the context of the progression ♭III - v - I (e.g., G - Bm - E), which has quite an unstable feel. Often the ♭III has been heavily tonicized, which can make the sudden shift feel like the rug is being pulled out from under you; when repeated, it can also create the impression of shifting back and forth between two tonics, never fully coming to rest on one or the other. “Odd Even”, for example, is fundamentally based on a G - Bm - E progression, and it’s hard to decide whether to take G or E as the key of the song. The coda of “Dirty Boy” is another classic example that just repeats this progression over and over."
dfan.org/blog/2010/05/09/cardiacs-musical-vocabulary/
How do you like the idea of sub-sub-dominant function?
@@corvusmonedulas4895 some talk of subtonic also.. I imagine that as the opposite (tritoned) augmented chord to some augmn chord. As dmaj7 to cmaj7. Having G7 or F as intermediate chords..
The only correct way to use 3m is as the end chord of a piece, played in root position, with the entire band cheesily singing "three minooooooooooooor" with its notes at the same time.
Also, EVERY piece should be like this.
This made total sense. So... we can think of IIIm as a "transparent" chord. It picks up the function of the other chords around it. It just allows for more interesting harmonic content without moving to or from a resolution.
If I invented music terms (I suppose I can, just not expect anyone else to use them), I'd call this function the "latch" function.
@@jamiebertram9744 hmm... latch to me sounds too powerful and satisfying (probably because I associate the sound of latch to that of a lock turning or a door closing which is generally a satisfying sound.) I'd prefer something like auxillary function.
Wildcard.
Context is king!
After seeing the Feynman diagram for weak neutron decay at 3:42 I could no longer concentrate. What a cool Easter egg!
Thank you so much for saying it, I had no idea what it was
Damn, i missed that. Das cool.
I guess he first wanted to draw the commutative diagram for a monoidal functor whose coherence maps don't fulfill any additional properties... but who would have understood _that_ pun?
I learnt the meaning of this diagram through Sithu Aye and SciShow. 3 years of high school physics didn't even touch on this lol
Sounds like an esoteric way to say "this mad my brain hurt". The whole video sure hurt mine, lol
I feel like defining a "mediant function" here is the best option.
Saying "It's sometimes dominant and sometimes tonic" about a specific chord feels a bit... odd to me. But if we define "mediant function" as "a chord that can function as tonic or dominant in specific circumstances", that feels 'better' because we have a name for that specific instance, rather than having to fudge the tonic/dominant switching thing into the schema...
I don't know why, I just feel that naming this "not one or the other" thing makes it feel clearer...
I had the same thought lol. Creating a seperate type of function that is variable depending on the surrounding chords.
And termed it mediant function.
Or perhaps contextual???
Kinda surprised he didnt say mediant this whole video, I read your comment first before I really watched it so I guess I’m biased in saying that. I do like how he explained it so well without sayin the word tho. Anyway it’s like life, most of what you do should be purposeful and have a clear direction, but sometimes the point is to avoid that level of structure and telegraphed movement, the IIIminor in and flatIIImajor in the minor key both are my go to movements when I’m trying to suspend a cadence or to like ascend and descend the scales with chords, gives progressions room to breathe for a second before going back to work building and relaxing tension , sometimes the level of tension wants to float where it’s at , especially in some kinda modal improvising you can have a real vague 1-3 , vamp instead of the more obvious 1-5 vamps. FlatVImaj7 is my favorite for a useful subdominant and tonic functioning utility chord that was always my autopilot chord before I ever even learned theory and I was just guessing and checking, that’s how I know it sounds good lol
how about calling it subtonic? Subdominant function is unstable like dominant function, but not as directional. So subtonic function can be restful like tonic function but not directional (not as as easy to resolve to).
Man, my music theory class just told me that we never use it and left it at that.
I think there is something you tend to miss in your videos, not just this one, which is the concept of relative function:
If a piece of music is in a certain key (say G major), you almost always try to analyze each chord function relative to that key. But sometimes chords have a function relative to another chord in the progression which is not the tonic, for example:
| G | Bm | Em | Am D |
Marking the Bm here as the III would be technically correct, but it will be even more correct and more informative to mark it as the V of the Em which comes directly after it.
This solves many function ambiguities and can be used to analyze songs.
Great video. I really liked how you tried to attack this at all angles after making your own main argument. Just two weeks ago I wrote a progression using a minor iii that literally took the role of a tonic chord, but then removed the I altogether from the progression [ IV , iii, vi, V, IV ]. Originally that iii was a I, but I subbed it our purely for flavor. Interesting to get schooled in the theory behind that kind of decision :) Thanks for your work!
3:40 you already had my attention, but the moment you used a Feymman diagram to help describe music, you had my respect.
In my compositions I rarely use the root position iii chord except as a passing chord because of its infamous contradictory nature. I almost always use the III borrowed from the parallel minor or iii6 (V substitute) instead.
@@FernieCanto Let me clarify. In the common-practice style, you want each chord to have a strong function that leads to the next chord. So if you're consciously trying to imitate that style, functionally ambiguous chords are objectively bad. But that doesn't mean that the iii chord shouldn't be used in other contexts.
@@alexshih3747 I mainly use iii if I am going to be moving to V, its relative major. In other words I treat it as a predominant, just like I would treat vi, the relative minor of I as a predominant. Not dominant, not tonic, but predominant. And I'm pretty sure that if Mozart were here with me, he would accept my mediant motion to dominant using iii.
Exhaustive yet comprehensive. That's why I love *12tone.*
"Argue that viewing the three chord as dominant is kinda mis*leading*"
MisLEADING ehhh???
Additional argument : in a way, tonic chords are like the dominant chords from the point of view of the subdominant chords (Which is essentially saying that I>IV is (V>I)/IV, or that the E>F is almost like a leading tone resolution).
And iii>IV is a very powerful and widely used tool in chord progressions (E. G. The creep I>iii>IV>iv), so that makes it tonic-y when it comes to preparing subdominant chords - but not so much when it comes to resolving dominant chords. I guess it's essentially the same point being made as your "iii can't create rest but can maintain it" idea.
Hello 12tone, may I ask for a in depth look on time signatures? Thank you and great vid :))
I always felt something weird about iii.
I always preferred III better.
Now when I started learning music more in-depth, I realized the reason it sounded good (for me) is because III usually resolves to vi, which is the relative minor of I or the root.
Example: C.
III is E major. E resolves to A, which is the relative minor of C.
It’s interesting: from the perspective of available tensions, the I & VImi are drawing on the same pool of 7 notes (in the key of C, C Lydian), the IImi and IV are drawing from their own pool (C Major), and the V and VII° from theirs (D Melodic Minor). The IIImi (D Major) has no partners, making it the outlier again.
When I’m trying to improvise scale lines that are very “inside” (dull and inoffensive have their place) I try to think of those first three scales as generalized tonic, subdominant, and dominant flavors to move between. The IIIm breaks the model, introducing a color less related to everything else than it is to other keys but still very related (again, purely from the perspective of the available tensions) and making for a great pivot chord.
Interesting, I hadn't thought of that angle!
12tone I can’t seem to find the logic to it, given that the whole available tensions thing comes from people’s somewhat arbitrary distaste for minor 9s, but it is fairly useful to think about in application.
I'm thinking about George Russel lyccoto thing about inner going and out going tension plus the neutral b7. And the blues. And it's tonal freedom
F c g d a e b/ c# g#/d# / Bb f#
Like when you are at that middle point on d# and both melodic minors plus many scales are at hand but the only thing which borders your "steps" are the surrounding black notes from a tonality
, Which blend hard in them so called bebop scales btw
All that thing about lydian neutralizing the duality in major scales against this ramifications of scales mixes too logically here with the down up down up thing of harmonic motion
Thank you so much for using the Feynman diagram of weak force for that pun there. Please do more subtle jokes like that in the future.
I think the reason the III chord is the porcupine in the petting zoo may be the prickly problem of temperament. At 4:20 in the video, 12tone explains how the leading tone and the primary modal note are battling for functional dominance in the IIImi chord. The leading tone is a melodic idea while the primary modal note is a harmonic idea. So, the IIImi chord is also a battleground of equal temperament (pleasing melodically) against just intonation (pleasing harmonically). My theory here is that the function of the III chord may depend a lot on how you tune the root.
For example, with A-440 as the tonic, the equal temperament C# is 554.4 Hz, but a singer will sing the C#--in tune--at 550 Hertz (just intonation), 13 cents flatter. That's not a problem if you move next to a IV or V chord, but if you build a triad on that 550 Hz C#, a singer will sing G# at 825 Hz, 11 cents flat from a melodic, equal temperament G# at 830.6 Hz. It's not going to sound much like a leading tone that wants to lead back to the tonic. We're talking about the fifth of the chord, so it has to be 3/2 the frequency of the root or the chord will quickly sound out of tune. You can't just slide the G# up a little without dragging the root (C#) with it. The V chord has a similar problem with the leading tone, but it's not a big deal to tweak the third of a chord to make it more pleasing melodically--which is largely the reason that the compromise of equal temperament works at all.
If my reasoning is valid, then a IIImi chord on a piano should sound more like a dominant chord, with an equal-temperament, in-tune leading tone. Singers will sound more like a tonic chord with the third being in tune harmonically. Admittedly, my ear isn't good enough to detect such a subtlety, but that's the theory I came up with. Thanks for the video.
i think the iii chord in 2nd inversion is when it can shine as a dominant function chord, as the bass movement allows the leading tone in the chord to really come out more, but in root position it's definitely arguable
1st inversion could go either way, since having the dominant of the key in the bass could point towards dominant function but doesn't necessarily have to
Great video!! Some extra thought for the discussion: in Samba harmonies situations like Imaj -IIm - V7 - IIIm -VI7 - IIm - V7 - Imaj are very common. In this case we see the IIIm as a substitution for the Imaj with a tonic function.
I’m a jazz guy and I find it’s definitely used more in non-western harmony based music. Especially gospel, where it’s used in spirituals to uplift the progression. And, of course, it’s the Phrygian mode in jazz, so it’s fun to use the iiim to add a little Spanish spice.
My theory teacher in college called music theory vocabulary. Theory is just names to describe sounds, he didn’t view them as rules. He made up own scales and harmonies in his compositions (his name is Dr. Brad Bodine), which we’re really interesting to say the least.
These last few months spent trying to learn to play music must finally be starting to work, because I am actually understanding a reasonable amount of what you are saying. So it's finally starting to stick. Cool.
I would call iii Mediant. As a substitute I consider it having both Dominant and Tonic function depending on context and inversion. Its actually funny the I-iii-I and iii-V-iii examples you gave I felt more satisfied by the first resolution as a dominant one. I guess its a bit subjective.
To me the most obvious use of mediant function is to lead to IV or ii from the other.
5:24 - it’s worth noting also that iii has no plagal note: it bears similar relation to the tonic as vi to IV and it does not carry the downward-leading function that the 7 of V has. V is implied as dominant until proven or suggested otherwise (a plagal cadence can still serve sufficient though gentler), but I to iii and back feels like a vacillation between modal colors much like i to bVI, its negative, does.
iii is a tonic and thats that. in blues its oftenly usen in a B7 to Em resolve. Its very pleasant and sounds right. Now ppl will be mad at me for analizing blues in C rather than Em but sometimes it just be like that. In a song i composed the coda was only open guitar chords and its something like that : Am7 x2 E7 x2 D7 x2 A7 x2 B7 x2 and an Em to finish it all. Some ppl would analize as a key change but i dont think so. Also the cadence from A7 to B7 is really bluesy and its really good for setting up a solo for a coda, for instance going down the E blues scale (yes, i know that would contradict my point but now im talking about something different)
I agree with this, but I still think bVI in a minor key is subdominant, not tonic.
Watch the 12tone Bartok video! It's a really cool system for mapping out all of the functions. It goes one step further than tritone substitution, but includes it too. I think you could call it diminished chord substitution.
What about the deceptive cadence though? bVI definitely substitutes for the tonic function there
@@jasonfire3434 Yeah, I myself have done a deceptive motion as a modulation from C minor(the key) to Ab major(the key) via G major(the chord). And it works.
Please make a video explaining more the whole part about classical functions of inversions where they are treated as different chords.
That moment when you see someone using a Feynman Diagram to explain music theory.
And if you wanted to toss in yet another discipline, you could possibly describe III minor as the umami chord.
Yeah right? Next level teacher righ there
Well music theory is harder than physics so it helps.
Oh man! Using IIImi as an extension of V (dominant) is going to help me come up with way better cadences. Thank you so much! (I wonder how this will sound with secondary dominant, too.) Nice!
In my little experience as an arranger and composer, I find that the IIIm has a dominant function when you play inversions followed by the tonic, specially in the 2nd inversion gets a very strong resolution to the main tonic.
Pretty sure you win the prize as the only channel to use Feynman diagrams to explain music theory lol love it
As someone who never ever went to music camp, I thought this was a cool art video.
I do like this video. I also like the idea of the iii chord in a major key being classed as an extender of sorts for tonic or dominant function, because sometimes you're looking for a tone color change but you don't want to leave where you are in the structure. Great video. :)
I think I've been musically indoctrinated really heavily by postmodern trends, so keep that in mind, but I tend to use iii as a step into IV in a major key. The half step movement from the third degree into the fourth and from the seventh back to the tonic makes a lot of harmonic sense to my brain, but I've definitely used iii to extend the tonic and dominant before. I just usually use it as sort of a "subdominant's dominant"--if that even makes sense. I'm a total music theory noob compared to some of the people here, so feel free to enlighten me!
A few hints to help you find the "correct" answer:
First, review the origins of the terms dominant and subdominant--where did they come from, and how was it they were created as a consequence of the harmonic series, or in other words, how are they embedded in the physical nature of sound vibration.
Then explore the arena of musicolinguistics. You may discover that your harmonic approach to the question, while interesting from the theoretical construct of harmony, is rendered moot when considered from a linguistic approach. Indeed, the very concept of dissonance/resolution is a common thread found in every known language, including music. What you observe as change due to the modernization of music is actually a linguistic one that is merely reflected in the ways harmony is used to express the language.
You may also discover that this approach accounts for most changes in approaches to harmony throughout the histories of music in every culture.
If "semi-tonic" isn't a thing already, i think it might be a good term for it!
Sounds too much like semitone. I think I'll stick with mediant as it's somewhere in between the tonic and dominant.
Great video! Quick personal preference thought, at around 7:33, I always prefer a I/IV/iii/V7/I instead of a I/IV/V/iii/I... it creates some very satisfying voice leading opportunities, both for harmony or melody, and even if the bass stays playing the root notes the whole time, it doesn't matter cuz it sounds sweet! If we do G/C/Bm/D7/G, you could use notes like D-C-B-C-B or G-G-F#-F#-G or G-E-D-D-D or even B-C-B-A-G... other options exist too obviously but, to me, it just sounds so much nicer than G/C/D/Bm/G... that being said, this doesn't add any more clarity on the function of iii chord.
When I first learned chord functions, in the same way that the diminished vii chord is an incomplete V7 chord, and you state that iii is an incomplete Imaj7 chord, my instructor taught me that they were incomplete iii7 chords, or a V chord with an added 6th in second inversion. In G major, a Bm was either seen as an incomplete Bm7 (B-D-F#-A), which does a decent job at resolving to Em (although a B7 would be stronger than Bm7), or a D(no 5) add6 (D-F#-B) but with the B in the bass, which potentially resolves to Em, Eb, C, G, even an Ab, some better than others, but a cool passing chord. Perhaps that's what the iii chord function is... is passing.
You ask, "In this particular song/context, what's the next note I'm likely to sneak in, if I were to add a grace note or accidental to it?" And what that note would be (which will change depending on context) will tell you the chord's function.
Maybe IIIm is a separate category, ambiguous
i’ve noticed that in major, iii sounds really good going to IV. perhaps the function could be labeled as “sub-subdominant”, due to its tendency to want to resolve to the subdominant.
This is a topic I am very interested in. I have always had a unique interpretation of this. I always thought the iii chord was dominant functionality but not because it resolves into I, but rather I believe it resolves into vi. vi of course being the relative minor key. My reasoning is this, the relative minor is essentially a transposition with all the primary functional chords changed to minor chords. Using this logic, vi is the Tonic, ii is the subdominant and v (lowercase) is the dominant. Despite not actually being a dominant in quality, it is instead a minor7th chord naturually, but people add a sharp3, borrowed from the parallel key to make it stronger. I think it is counter intuitive to argue if its dominant, I think it is better to ask whether it resolves into a tonal center, and if so which? Again I believe its the vi chord simply because it adheres to the framework. One reason I would disagree that it has tonic functionality is because that would imply iii is the tonal center and i feel in order to be the tonal center it should have the aeolian mode played with it, but its the phrygian mode instead. If you played it with the aeolian mode it wouldnt even be a iii chord at all but rather a vi chord. This begs the question, what does the mode and quality of the chord tell us about its function? I think another important part is correctly identifying the guide tones, IE which not is the third and which is the 7th. As an example, the ii7 chord is the same quality as the iii7, its a minor7th but I think these chords are actually completely different. The reason why: In transformational harmony there needs to be a way to identify whether we are doing a parallel transition or relative etc. If we play a minor 7 chord, and then transform it into a minor 7 b 5 this would seem like a parallel transformation, why is this? Because the function is stayin the same, it is still predominant but it is now minor but in this case we altered the fifrth of the chord not the third, this is why I think it is better to think of ii7 as instead IV6, if we assume its an IV6 then the 6 is the second degree and changing the the third of this chord is consistent with transformational harmony idea, essentially saying IV6 to ivM6 is a parallel transformation makes more sense than saying ii7 to ii7b5 is a parallel transformation . It also allows us to notice/generalize that all extensions (6 or 7) tell us is the harmonic context of the chord and third tells us the quality. Now for the iii7 chord, this chord is different, in this case the chord is not a V6 like you suggest in the video and the reason is because we typically alter the third of the iii chord to turn it into an III7, borrowing it from the parallel key, this would imply that iii7 is the root position if we are trying to remain consistent that the third is always what changes the quality of the chord, and the 7th the function. I think it makes more sense to say iii7 to III7 is a parallel transformation than to say that V6 to III7 is a parallel transformation
TLDR; the root position voicing of iii7 is iii7 and the root position voicing of ii7 is actuall IV6, this and the phrygian mode is what distinguishes from any other chord and based of parallel symmetry i think the iii7 chord should resolve into the vi chord.
Another bonus point: I think you are confusing what he means by the functions, when he says the ii chord is predominant, i dont think he means its predominant to the V chord, but rather, ii is predominant to the III7 chord. Why? If we assume you are correct and that when we use the tonality cube, and we assume ii being predominant means it resolves into V, then how does vi being tonic make sense? How can it be a tonic with respect to I? Its a totally different tonal center! So why cant ii be a predominant of THAT tonal center? Thats why ii is predominant for the relative minor, based on the tonality cube, not the home key.
The Phrygian mode also functions as tonic minor in the sense that it is a tonicization of Locrian, the “diminished mode”. Without the perfect fifth it loses all stability and becomes pure tension. Likewise, its inverse mode, Ionian, is a tonicization or “de-subdominance” (my term) of Lydian: without the perfect fourth, it loses all need for harmonic movement as it becomes harmonically entirely stable. Aeolian is tonic minor only in the sense that it harmonizes all the chords of Ionian with roots a third underneath, and like Ionian has a central progression of I - IV - V, natural minor has a central progression of i - iv - v. Indeed as far as these two progressions, one can be “modalized” through changing the dominant to minor (Mixolydian, its dominant becoming Dorian) or further tonicized by changing the subdominant to minor, while the other can be tonicized through changing the dominant to major (b7 lest the dominant itself becomes a harmonic major tonic) or “modalized” by changing the subdominant to major (Dorian, its subdominant becoming Mixolydian). Isn’t this fun? 🙂
There may be a compromise: you can add letter 'p' to notice the relative chord, e. g. in major I = T, IV = S, V = D, ii = Sp, vi = Tp, iii = Dp
to my ear, iii can also be a sort of "pre-sub-dominnant". Something about hearing a I chord, then a iii chord just makes me want to hear a IV.
Woah I came back to this channel a year later and it has over 200,000 subscribers!
I have to listen to your videos at .75x and still need to hear some parts twice to fully comprehend
I feel bad for anyone finding this video who’s first getting into music theory. I bet your brain melted
Still good stuff, the doodles help keep me sane
Without IIImi, Michael couldn't row his boat ashore, nor could Puff the Magic Dragon find his way around. Black sheep or not, those of us learning guitar and similar can't be without it!
Looking at harmony, IIIm with I bass has ratios 8:10:12:15 and LCM of 120. IIIm with the IX added to make it Vadd6 has ratios 10:12:15:18 (or 9:10:12:15) and LCM of 180. On that basis it harmonises with the tonic triad more than the dominant triad. Dunno about resolution but on this basis I'm going tonic!
As fascinating as this is it seems as though the fact that different composers look at this differently amounts to different compositions looking at it differently, which is a good thing
Tonic is home, subdominant is facing the path away before turning back, dominant is turning back to take the path back home, everything else is one step of the track away from any of these points while looking in
I’ve always thought of it as the dominant tonic minor. It fits how it sounds like a root-suspended tonic of the major scale, the dominant of the natural minor mode, and the relative minor equivalent to the dominant all at once. It’s also the harmonic negative of bVI, which is like an additive suspension of i into a Lydian mode as opposed to a subtractive suspension of I into the Phrygian mode.
In other words, I often think of the mediant as the tonic-dominant and the submediant as the tonic-subdominant. That said, when made into dom7 chords as bIII7 and VI7 (not bVI7), they interestingly act in an interesting hybrid of predominant and dominant harmony. Ultimately the mediant and submediant function either as a relative major (bIII), a relative minor (vi), a tonic-dominant (iii) or a tonic-subdominant (bVI). That the functionality changes when you vortically slide the chord into a minor or major parallel (bVI -> vi or iii -> bIII) is no surprise either, as for instance the same happens when the leading tone is flattened into the subtonic, or the supertonic is flattened into a Neapolitan chord. Likewise of course, altering the subdominant and dominant in such a way (#ivm7 & bVmaj7) only creates tonal instability. The subtonic and supertonic in Riemannian terms would likely be considered dominant and subdominant respectively; they are arguably conceivable as being quartal dominant or “backdoor” dominant (IV of IV, step below tonic) or as quintal subdominant (v of V, seventh chord below tonic).
I actually think at 5:27, going I-iii-I that it does feel resolved. The leading tone to tonic movement is kind of convincing. I'm not saying this means iii is clearly a dominant function, but rather I do hear some resolution there, even if it is weak (as compared to iii-V-iii, which has no resolution)
Suggesting that the iii chord acts to prolong whatever chord came before makes me think its function is like a suspended chord. That's cool!
Cool! Agreed! Thank you!
Great video! I always jump on your videos when they're uploaded.
Ah, yes, the dominant parallel as we used to call it. I mean you could play it in a long chain like: I - IIIm - IVm - IIm - V - I for some nice dropping fifth/rising fourths. But I guess it'll usually be changed to III to act as a Dominant chord in a temporary key change to the parallel key (so if playing G-major we're moving to E-minor for a short while). That said, however, most of what I play are hymns, so that might give me some bias. :)
I think it’s still important to think about inversions when thinking about chord function. As a rhythm guitarist changing the note in the bass of a chord can change the direction and drive in a chord progression. For instance a simple I IV V I sounds more interesting if you put 3rd in the bass. Then you have a 3-4-5 walk up in the bass line that helps to build I tension. I find the iii to be tonic in function because when I do this the chord that most easily fits this baseline to my ear is well, the iii chord. 3-4-5 literally becomes iii IV V
However I should disclose do this in DADGAD so there is almost always some sort of pedal tone suspension to help tonicize the chord as well. If you were to stick to the strict triad spelling with no extra notes I imagine this effect would be weakened.
This is an example of what I’m talking about, albeit I’m not nearly as skillful as Aodan.
ua-cam.com/video/olS8qxojvBk/v-deo.html
In Radiohead's "Karma Police" they use the 3mi in a really creative way. They suspend tension from the 2, but then go to the 5. The 2, 3, 5 motion makes the 5 almost feel resolved because we're finally back at a place we understand.
I've always been a bit unsatisfied with the cliff notes Tonic, Subdominant, Dominant explanations, and this video has cleared up so much for me. This is exactly why I love this channel 🐘
There is an aversion to church modes when talking tonal usage however, I love to talk about them as the vibe of each is essential. For example and extended dominant 7 melody has a mixolydian flavor. A V4-2 gives a lydian flavor like a IV chord does etc. So when looking at a minor key the VI-V gives a phrygian sound and the VI chord sort of function as dominant. Even stronger made by German its Italian or French6 versions. So a phrygian cadence of sorts. So if the V chord were not major but rather MINOR quality, it’s a totally different vibe. Now the chord sounds unresolved like a half cadence. So... to me, there is no ambiguity when I hear v-VI nor iii-IV.... both are a sort of “lydian cadence”. So iii minor always functions as a pull to IV chord or lydian vibe, and if you don’t go there it feels quite unsatisfying.
Judging from my experience the III mi is a strange beast that can take on various functions depending on surrounding chords. Juxtaposed against the IVmi it gets rather dominant. Against the VIIth it gets tonical, especially when extended with 7ths. Against the V it becomes rather subdominant and even kind of pulls the V into a subdominant function, unless you use the 7ths extension. However grouped together with subdominants it will happily play as one of them. And if you set up a directional movement of chords it will just as happily play whatever role is required. Due to that property I usually treat it as a subdominant in the catch-all sense, as it does behave like the catch-all subdominants in minor.
I remember back in university, during harmony class, we discussed how the IIImi chord works. A small note: we didn't really use the roman numeral system for analysis, but function analysis instead. All of the triads in a major scale have only one clearly defined function, T S or D and substitutions by thirds above or under (you add the suffix m or s depending on if you are above or below the primary function). This did give us a problem, though, which was the IIImi chord (Tm or Ds in our system). The simple version of the answer er got is "it depends on the context". Do you have a IIImi followed by a VImi (Ts) chord? Then it has an aeolian dominant function, and is considered a Ds function. Is it followed by a IV (S) chord? Then you have to look at what's before. Is it a tonic function? Then it's a Tm. Is it a dominant function? Then you can choose if it is Tm or Ds because it's not clearly defined and both functions work in that context.
The bIII major chord in natural minor has kept me thinking lately too. Even though (I think) it should have a tonic function (Bartok's axis system), it feels as though it actually has a dominant function. For example, bVI - bIII - Im works pretty nicely as a substitute for bVI - V(m) - Im.
In my mind there are only two harmonic functions within the major scale: Tonic or Dominant, and for me the iii chord is tonic. When you view the I chord as a Maj6 and harmonize the major scale as an 8-note scale which also contains the #5, that harmonic function becomes even more apparent.
12tone, would you consider iii to be dominant if it resolves to vi?
A IIImi-VImi progression in Major is the same as a Vmi-Imi progression in Minor. So yeah, technically it is. However, Western Functional Harmony usually would make it into III-VImi if transposed to the relative Major.
Riley McGinn The problem with iii resolving to vi is that there’s no leading tone motion between them. If we were to look at that progression in the relative minor, it would change to v-i, and as has been established many times by music theorists, when building chords around the minor scale, usually minor v is changed to major V to add the strong sense of resolution that comes with the major scale into a minor context. So if we were to switch back to major, that progression would change to III-vi, which doesn’t really work in the context of a major scale. However, III to I does have strong leading tone motion as there’s two notes in the chord that can resolve by half steps.
@@JVR10893 Better-put than me, and that's a strange feat to accomplish! :P
The mediant is also used as a resolution for the dim vii as is softens the dissonance and aids to its singability.
Joe Romano I don’t think you really need a leading tone to have dominant function. For example, in a V-vi progression, V still has dominant function despite not having a leading tone to the root of the vi chord. Therefore iii can have dominant function when going to vi as well
I am late to the party on this discussion, but I am writing this to try to organize my own thoughts on this matter.
I agree with most of the points in your video.
I definitely think of iii as being in a category of its own.
To me, it is a pre-pre-dominant function, in that it wants to be followed by some sort of pre-dominant chord (usually vi IV or ii).
It is abysmal as a pre-dominant (ie iii-V).
It doesn't work as a tonic chord very well at all, which is surprising since it's really just a 1maj7 chord without the root, and in jazz and many forms of pop, Imaj7 is a perfectly acceptable tonic chord (the presence of the leading note isn't a big deal IMO), but the bass line you get from V - iii is functionally very weak, which is probably why it doesn't work as a tonic in that context (although you can, ans often do, use an em triad as a voicing for a Cmaj7 chord, if you also have a bass player laying-down the tonic)
iii is very commonly used after the tonic in a lot of pop songs (eg "puff the magic dragon" or "what a wonderful world" etc)
. the rising I - iii bass line is 'uplifting'. And, as stated before, it is invariably followed by a pre-dominant (vi IV or ii).
Of course, the chromatic-mediant variation (ie III instead of iii) is commonly used in a lot of songs to modulate to vi (eg "Georgia on my mind"), but it can also be thought of as a more potent form of iii-vi (or perhaps the other way around: iii-vi is a "milder" form of III-vi).
Also, III can commonly go to IV as well (eg "sittin by the dock of the bay")
Anyway, all very interesting. the iii chord seems innocuous but it is the only one that doesnt fall into the category of either tonic, pre/sub-dominant, or dominant.
Let's just call it the "mediant" category.
Hearing what you thought was the defining note of each function was fascinating, mostly because I've always heard it very differently. To me, subdominant is built off of 6, as that's the only scale degree not found in the I or V7 chords. Scale degree 4 instead defines dominant to me, as it is found in more dominant function chords than 7 (think V7sus, bVII, the or IVmi). This actually leaves 3 being the defining feature of tonic function, as emphasized by 4 falling to it. That downward motion always feels more resolved than the rising of the leading tone. Though of course, this leads me to the same conclusion as you, IIImi sounds much more tonic than dominant as it has the tonic note and not the dominant one
I-iii-I is my favourite progression in the world. It sounds so melancholy.
Oh my god, I was gasping out loud at this video, so many theory plot twists! Your take on it is perfect!
This was a great video to pop up for me today. Thank you. Right now, I'm literally working out a "cover" version of a friend's song which was originally, intentionally, rambling with how the melody fits over the harmony. And so I had just worked out a "consistent" progression that basically just uses chords in exactly the way you are playing with here as demonstrations (ie: inverting some basic "pedaling" substitutions into phrases). However, this song I'm working out is clearly in a dorian mode and the harmony is all shifted from the ideas here. Still... The same thoughts said out loud has helped, and I very much appreciated the random moment of delving into your discussion while trying to not bang my head against the wall of "neo-psychedelic-cafe-jamming" analysis.
I think that de la Motte sees the iii as having qualities of both tonic and dominant function, having the character 3rd of both (the "agent" of a chord). So yeah, I would not rule it completely as either, without context we can simply say that it has some functions of both. As for the subdominant function, I really think that a strong subdominant function (like the iv in a major key) has just as strong gravitation toward the tonic as a strong dominant has. A dominant chord with a seventh even lends some of the subdominant functions features to make it resolve with more clarity. The overlooking of the subdominant function, I think, is a big misstep in the history of western music theory, dating back to the debates of Rameau and Rousseau in which Rousseau that saw the subdominant as a "pre-dominant" function eventually won due to more elaborate rhetorics
Why didn't you write the key signature? Especially when your talking about functional harmony in G major! (Sorry to criticize, love the channel.)
The iii does honestly sound fine in the I - iii - I progression. Seems dominant to me, the presence of the 7th just overpowers the quality to me. But, I do believe it is how it used, the iii chord's job seems to change based on context.
How can you analyze a chord's function divorced from an actual chord progression? To find its use, see how it's used. In my experience, iii chords most often move toward either the vi (in which it works as V of vi) or IV (in which it seems to extend the I chord, almost a V of IV without the tritone). It seldom seems to move to a ii or V let alone vii dim.
This is a really great explanation
I've always thought of it in the way you described in your conclusion -- it can be either, depending on the context. That's how I've made sense of chords "resolving" down by a third, like the Bm to G in the chorus of Hotel California.
5:30 ok I think you're being a bit too subjective here, and using it as your primary example as to why it can't be dominant is kind of a weak argument. To my ears, that progression works fine, I hear the iii clearly resolving to the I. Is it as strong as the V? Of course not, as you said movements of a 3rd are functionally weak, however I still hear the G clearly resolving from the Bm, even just putting it in 1st inversion can make the resolution stronger. I do agree with you that it can kind of act as both, it's like a blend of the two functions. So I think that yes it can act as dominant, as well as tonic, it just depends on use and context. Personally I think it leans more to the dominant, especially since its primary use is to resolve to the vi, however I think it's a dominant chord that can sit still, at least for a little while. Like the chord feels like it wants to go somewhere, it's just not always sure where, or when.
I agree. The I-iii-I sounds at least as "correct" to me as the iii-V-iii did.
Just a small opinion by a noob, but on my PC and to my ear, it really sounds like it wants to resolve upwards to an unstable (dominant?) chord, so it is dominant relative to the dominant?
Would that classify as subdominant?
I guess it doesn't fit the role of I or V in I - IV - V - I, as you demonstrated, but I wonder how it sounds in place of the IV.
Man, i love your videos
I’ve learnt a chord progression,
| I-vii•-iii | vi | IV | V-V7-I |
( add some rhythm to this progression, I didn’t know how to put it forward in the text, but it sounds cool)
For the first time I’ve actually seen the use of the three minor chord so, what do you say, it’s like taking us to the six minor so is it a dominant or subdominant??
5:51 Actually, it does. In my song Waiting For Knocking, I resolved like this: G G7 Em, where Em is the root. The move of the minor 3rd down is actually great to have, because it introduces the chromatic chord in Phrygian, the bIII7.
I'd never even thought about this before, but it seems to me that it really is entirely based on context with the III chord especially As you showed, it can fit in both tonic and dominant function, so it has it's place and it's function.
It just doesn't really fit into any of the three others. It's unique.
4:11: Hah, "using the fourth".
("Use the Fourth, Luke!")
It seems like just both a fragment of G (Gmaj7) and a fragment of D (Bmi7). Whether a G or an A is nearby determines which.
I was taught that it was the "mediant" that goes before a subdominant. It goes especially well before IV.
Re: Symbology used in the illustrations: I have not figured out these symbols that 12tone uses: The one that is used for "history" (looks like a triangle over a complicated rectangle), and what's the "butterfly" mean?
I actually love the iii chord. The Beatles used it a lot- often preceded by or after the ii chord.
I haven't looked through all you're videos, so I'm not sure if you've covered this already or not but I was wondering if you could do a video on the "mixolydian chord": a chord like A/B, where the root is on whole step above the rest of the major chord.
The iii is not uncommon at all! The Weight by The Band starts I-iii-IV-I. Verses in The Boys Are Back in Town also start off I-iii-IV-vi-iii-vi-ii-V, then repeat a variation. It's also used several ways in the bridges. Playing around on vi & iii before going to V, sometimes passing through ii or IV is something I've played in many classic rock songs. She Loves You by The Beatles goes I-vi7-iii-V7 in the verses. That's just a few from memory. Look around! It's not just used, it's prominent in major hits.
in just intonation, a minor triad's tuning is 10:12:15. This means it's literally the 3rd, 5th and Maj7th of a CMaj7 chord. And at least to me that's the way I hear it most of the time-as an incomplete Cmaj7 chord, and thus having tonic function. On the other hand, G-B-E can't be tuned to the harmonic series of G unless you abandon the perfect 4th/5th of the minor triad. To me this makes the argument for tonic function more supported than the argument for dominant function.
In addition, if iii minor is dominant, then that would seem to imply that iii->V isn't really a functional motion, since they're both dominant. But that sus6->5 motion sounds functional to me, more like a plagal cadence than something non-function-changing like a change of inversion.
In general, I think a lot of these function arguments get easier if you make sure to separate the major and minor chords of the same root. Minor chords are really just incomplete Maj7 or dom9 chords and function like the extended major chord they're implying. That, plus the Bartok axis system is the best way to categorize functional harmony in my opinion.
Leading tone that does not resolve? It defeats the point of harmonic functions.
@@Hecatonicosachoron so would you also classify CMaj7 as dominant function (in c major) since it has a B?
Paul Keller no because I7 is still a special case of the I chord.
I would never substitute the root (unless it is an inversion), only extend the chord. But III7 has nominated function.
I can't buy an argument based on the overtone series since it contains no pure fourths, and besides the 4/5/6/7 chord actually has a flattened (extra flattened) 7th.
I prefer to think of the mediant that as a separate category in itself.
Paul Keller how do you find out the tuning of an interval in just intonation? Is there a program for comparing Just Intonation vs Equal Temperament triads?
The fonction (the sens, the meaning) of something usually depend on the context. In the case of IIIm, we could say that is absolute fonction is inconclusive, so its fonction is always relative. Relative to its context.
Love the channel, I know next to nothing about music yet I really do enjoy this videos. Would like to see some Primus analysis !!
Whenever music snobs in the 90's would complain that bands like AC/DC or Geen Day played only three chords, I'd l say, "Primus has, like, zero chords. But their musical geniuses, right?". Haha! That always pissed them off!
Anyways...Primus has always been a rhythmic band first and foremost. I doubt 12tone would be up for that, but it would be interesting.
What a nice community this channel has
I’d like to see a video about the use of III in modern music.... and the application of the Phrygian mode...
So... the IIIm chord is a limbo chord, or purgatory chord if u prefer?
The solution is poss...
"Mirroring" phenom...
In minor, VI is not a family substitution of tonic function [since e.g am key resolving to F doesn't work] (despite what riemannians think) but the III in minor [am resolv to C (esp via viio [bdim])] is.
In major that is reversed where we don't see a resolving function for the iii but we do see resolution to the vi (deceptive cadence).
....Mirroring (or straddling the tonic) in music.
I.e profound; infinity. The same math /cosmic phenom that causes 12/T ET to be necessary if one wants to modulate from key to key over octaves without "wolves" -- the endless circle won't sync up without fudging the tuning. [3.14159__ forever]
(Same phenom ultimately that causes chromatic mediant the sub dom direction [e.g am to cm] to be more closely related to tonic key [am/C] than the chrom-med the dom direction [am to f#m]. ...But only for harmonic minor, tho hrm min is cultural not 'natural'. hmmm.)
What do the deep13 music brains think? Should I adjust my music-trons left or right?
(The iii in major can be an elongation of I OR V as you show. BUT in other major key instances in can be a type of pre dom funct in that it meanders away from I or V.)
The iii is the oddball of the family in major; and the VI in min is ultimately lydian [a type of oddball ...the devil masked with a happy face].
At about 5:40 when you say that the motion is considered weak because so few notes change, from a voice-leading perspective would that be considered “smooth” rather than weak? It doesn’t “work” from a functional perspective that expects tension and resolution, but it sounds good as a transition. I guess that would be more of a neo-Riemannian way of looking of things?
Yeah, I think "smooth" and "weak" are kinda two sides of the same coin here. It mostly depends on whether or not the effect is what you're looking for, but in the case of dominant resolutions you want something bigger and more dramatic, so one note moving a half-step doesn't really do what you want. In the context of extending a function, though, it's a very valuable effect, so in that case it's probably better viewed as smooth.
If you look at how it’s used in ragtime and gospel music, it almost always has a sharped 3rd because it’s a secondary dominant leading to the vi (or VI7 if we wanna get real jazzy with it). If the vi is a tonic, and III7 is a secondary dominant that leads to it, then we would call III7 dominant. So what’s iii? I don’t know. Let’s call it boneless dominant. It’s still a dominant chord, but it lacks the only feature that makes it good for what it’s actually used for, which is the #5 leading tone moving to the 6. I can’t speak to classical music cause I’m a jazz and folk guy, but in vernacular music, iii is definitely a dominant chord (because it almost always precedes a vi) it’s just the shittiest version of that chord. It’s like taking a useful non-diatonic chord and then forcibly making it diatonic, and in the process, making it worse. That’s why it’s a gray area: it’s a non-diatonic chord that has been made diatonic and is also bad.
In modern music I hear the progression IV-V-vi-iii and then endlessly loop a lot. In this progression, the iii minor chord is extremely tense. If the iii minor precedes IV major in this way, it acts as a sort leading chord, maybe a "pre-sub-dominant" or however you might define it
This comment may have been made already -- the difference between iii as tonic and iii as dominant is clarified when everything is in the minor mode... III clearly does not contain the leading tone, since it has the subtonic instead, and so it is clearly a tonic chord. III+, on the other hand (and I'm tempted to use scare quotes on that function, since it is virtually non-existent) has dominant and leading tone in it. In fact, if this constellation of notes had the dominant in the bass, no one would likely even try to argue that it was a III+ at all.
So... if the "leading tone" in iii in major is descending, it's not really functioning like a leading tone at all -- more like a subtonic -- and so it clearly has a tonic function.
I for one (and that's what I've got taught in music school) tend to think in major and parallel chord functions: I is tonic, IV is Subdominant, V is Dominant - and 3 steps below each chord is its minor parallel - VImi is the TP (tonic parallel, logical since c major and a minor are parallel scales), IImi is SP and IIImi is DP.
It doesn't have the strong dominant function as V in the major scale, but I find one can use it just fine as such, in the right circumstances. In minor it is a strong dominant, even more if you play it as a IIImajor, but that's a different topic.
I was kind of surprised that you didn't bring up this whole functional parallel thing to be honest!
But great video nonetheless, this inversion thinking was new for me, even if I personally don't find it to be very compelling, but that's just the way I hear it... peace!
Riemann's model _is_ the functional parallel model, I just didn't use the term because in English "parallel minor" describes a different phenomenon so I thought using it here would be confusing. Same concept, though.
@@12tone okay... I guess that leaves me pretty ignorant ^^ thanks for clarifying
I would love for you to do one of these on non-dominant seventh chords and their uses/functions.