Scales within Scales

Got a question on a lesson? Don't quite understand what or how or why? Just want some company as you learn? Come join the gang in the lesson forum
Post Reply
jjg
newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: July 7th, 2009, 4:58 pm

Scales within Scales

Post by jjg » July 7th, 2009, 5:18 pm

The 4th paragraph down from the "V of ..." chart says that in a I, V of II, IV, I progression in a G major scale that would equate to G, A, C, G.

after reading the article, my understanding was that it would be G, E, C, G.



which is correct?

User avatar
NoteBoat
Musically Insane
Posts: 5674
Joined: August 9th, 2003, 8:48 pm
Location: SW of Chicago
Contact:

Re: Scales within Scales

Post by NoteBoat » July 7th, 2009, 6:05 pm

In G major, the II is A. If you're in the key of A, the V is E. So a I-V/II-IV-I progression in G would be G, E, C, G.

A G-A-C-G progression would be I-V/V-IV-I.

But both are a stretch in terms of analysis. The "V/x" notation indicates a secondary dominant chord. Dominant chords are built on the dominant tone of the scale - the fifth degree. If you're temporarily leaving the key, and maintaining a sense of overall tonality by using a secondary dominant, that V/II needs to be followed by a II chord - if it isn't, it's not a "V". There can be other analysis of the progression, but it wouldn't be a secondary dominant.

The progression G-E-C-G would usually be analyzed as I-VI-IV-I. (The progression in key would be I-vi-IV-I; you usually use lower case to indicate minor chord types). You'd only call it V/II if the progression was G-E-Am-C-G.
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL

jjg
newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: July 7th, 2009, 4:58 pm

Re: Scales within Scales

Post by jjg » July 9th, 2009, 4:19 pm

thank you note, my scope of knowledge on the matter is too intermediate to really understand however.


someone should probably edit the lesson with the change.

Post Reply