Mike Gross

In the example, at least in the revised edition, he does assign II to G7 in reference to the key of F. But he explicitly says in the footnote that it's not to be thought of as an altered chord on II in F, but as a secondary dominant, as V of V. Gm-A7 is resolving like a deceptive cadence in the key of C with a minor v-ViI, that part's cool. But you're already in the key of F. The minor v lacks the leading tone, so it's not actually doing anything to tell us that we're in the key of C. A7 is now hinting at Dm, but Dm doesn't become a tonic, it becomes the predominant in C, followed by the dominant G7. The F/A is I. Some of the resolutions are peculiar, but that's the harmonic world you're dealing with borrowing from other modes and altering chords. One chord can follow another without them having anything to do with each other.

Key is happening on a smaller scale in chord progressions and over sections of pieces. Tonality is generally referencing much larger portions and entire pieces. I can go through a number of keys without changing the tonality. But that principle isn't very well applied to this example, especially because the key of C isn't actually established in any significant way. Don't worry about that for right now, the book talks about it a little later. Now, the simple answer, not every secondary dominant means you're modulating. I can put an A7 in front of a dmin without modulating to the key of Dm. I'm just expressing it for a split second and I'm on to something else, perhaps to express another key for just a second. This is the only part of the exercise we could really say references d minor. We just aren't there long enough and It makes more sense to analyze it as being F. Dm: (iv) - (V) - (i) - (V/V/bVII) - (VI) F: (ii) - (V/vi) - (vi) - (V/V) - (I) Gm/Bb A7 Dm G7 F/A

Screw off.

You said "or something like that". You said it wasn't mean to be interpreted as being in F. I'm talking about how Schoenberg himself interpreted it as being almost entirely in F. Just clarifying your speculation.

The Chapter is Chords Derived From The Church Modes. The Example is about secondary dominants, specifically the dominant of the dominant, V of V. In the revised edition, Schoenberg specifically says we're in F before we hit G7 (the V/V). C Maj is really the last remnant of C before that secondary predominant-dominant progression (ii-V), so, he was pretty much interpreting it as being in the key of F.

Arianna makes a really good point. Other than that, make composing the habit instead of procrastination. Set a goal to write something new every day. It doesn't matter if it's just a tiny portion of a piece, a short melody, a chord progression, whatever; just write something. Write even if you don't know what to write. Write especially if you don't know what to write. If it sounds like crap, whatever, just write it. If guided exercises help you, go for it. At this point, your main concern should be producing as much work as possible, not with producing your first masterpiece. Write, write, write.

So here's the progression as Schoenberg meant it, with roman numerals on top and lead sheet below. Each set of ()'s is a chord. It's all in the key of F as Schoenberg intended, except the C, which is regarded as being in both keys. (key of C: I | key of F: V) - (ii6) - (V/ii/V) - (ii/V) - (V/V) - (I6) - (ii) - (I64) - (V43/V) - (V) - (I) CM Gm/Bb A7 Dm G7 F/A Gm/Bb F/C G7/D C F Basically, yes. He's saying the overtone series pretty much establishes the key. Apparently, the first chord here is enough to establish the C tonality for Schoenberg, and it's also apparently the pivot chord for the modulation, since he regards Gm/Bb as a ii of F. But watch out, the effect will be different for different kinds of chords. The Major chord consists of tones with simple ratios, meaning they occur early in the overtone series (the root, the fifth, then the major third). The minor chord isn't quite so natural because the minor third doesn't occur until much later in the overtone series, which means this gravitational effect is weakened some. This will also vary with other chord types. He's not indicating that you have to repeat it at all, but you absolutely should until you hear C as tonic, otherwise you're not going to be able to observe the effect of the modulation. That's why it just sounds modal with a bunch of a altered chords on first hearing. But remember, each successive chord isn't going to establish it's own tonality, it just has this gravitational affect that tends to want to pull things to it's own key, but that doesn't mean we're changing the key center or tonality, we're just passing through a different key. So far as Schoenberg concerns, the actual underlying tonality of a piece very rarely shifts. Each chord is not a modulation. In his footnotes, Schoenberg indicates we're defiantly in F as soon as Gm shows up, and we stay in F for the rest of the excerpt. Gm is ii in F. The A7 is just prepping for the arrival Dm, which is just ii in the key of C, not the minor i chord in it's own key. We're not modulating to the key of Dm. The modulation has to be established by some kind of cadence, not just a single chord. Correct, Dm and G7 are they secondary predominant and secondary dominant respectively and belonging to the key of C. We're just passing through the key of C with these chords, we're not modulating back to it because there's no cadence. In sonority, it's ambiguous because we're floating back and forth between the keys of F and C. It is going to sound like we're in C when we hit the deceptive cadence, Dm - G7, but as soon as we emerge from it, we're going to have a really solid cadence in the key of F to clear up any confusion. He's not calling it the key of C Major because we aren't modulating to C, we're just passing through it while we're in F. He's just calling it II7 as opposed to V7/V just so you can get an idea for the root movement. F/A does kind of fail the key of C, at least it fails what your ears are expecting from a ii-V in the key of C. That's why he considers it deceptive, not because it sounds like a VI chord (which it doesn't). Again, we're just passing through C since we don't really have a cadence, so we're still referring to everything like it were in the key of F, no matter what it sounds like. We've been in F, it just sounds like we're in F now. Gm/Bb is ii of F, and it moves from F/A and to F/C, which are I6 and I64. It's not a typical solution, but it happens. It's really just happening in passing. The Gm/Bb seems to be there to just to help anchor your ear to F a little more before the G7 throws you off your tracks again. The F/C, I64, occurs mostly in cadences, so we can be pretty sure that we're about to cadence in the key of F. G7/D - C isn't modulating, it's just a secondary dominant, V/V - V. Again, we're just passing through it, there's nothing to suggest that we're in the key of C (we would need a C Maj after that G7) It's just there to draw out the conclusion of the cadence a little bit longer, make it a little bit more tense and distract from the resolution for a second. Then we make it from C to F, V - I, and we've finally successfully cadenced in the key of F.

This is what Schoenberg has to say about the example. This was from a footnote added in the revised edition (Appendix, p. 429). "In Example 131C at X a secondary dominant (on II of F; here, of course, F major is already in effect) is resolved like a deceptive cadence." X marks the G7. So you were right, we are pretty much in F right out of the gate. But so was I. Dm-G7-F/A was intended by Schoenberg to be resolved as a deceptive cadence in C.

Sojar, I am not trying to say IV6 sounds anything like VI or that it is truly a deceptive cadence, just that it can be used in place of VI in a deceptive cadence as far as Schoenberg is concerned. in fact I tried to indicate that it doesn't sound like VI, but that's irrelevant anyway. You keep going back to your understanding of theory when we're talking about Schoenberg's. It's about Schoenberg's intentions, not about our analysis. The sound of the chord to you or me or whether or not you or I recognize it as a DC does not change the fact that Schoenberg considers it a DC for the purpose of this exercise. The progression would be appear to be nonfunctional, except that Schoenberg has clearly indicated that there is function, modulation from C to F. I'm not arguing that Gm isn't associated with F major.

The Iv has nothing in common with I? Try C. I understand what you're saying about it missing a leading tone. I know it's not a deceptive cadence as far as most any theory book is concerned, but it is as far as Schoenberg is concerned. Again, any movement away from V that isn't a return to I is deceptive in his opinion. I'm not arguing that he's right or wrong, just clarifying what he meant. You're right. It sounds ambiguous, it is, because of the two altered chords at the beginning of the progression and because C isn't established firmly by any cadence that your musical and ear training would regard as acceptable. It's not a PAC, IAC, HC, DC, it's only a deceptive cadence as far as Theory of Harmony is concerned. ii-V is kinda weak next to a PAC, but it does tells us enough to discern that we're in C.

Sorry Green. The example is modulating, I was just saying Schoenberg has a theory that modulation is pedagogical bullshit (for the most part).

I see what you're getting at, if I saw this as an excerpt of a piece, I would probably call it altered, but... Gm/Bb hints at F, but it doesn't define it and it doesn't necessarily show that that F hasn't been abandoned - we haven't established F as the key (requiring some cadential formula) until the last two chords of the progression (the F 6/4 chord is a hint, but not defining). So how could we possibly abandon it back at the bracketed section? We're still in C there. The G7 chord has to work as a dominant of C in it's first appearance, even if it's behaving differently in it's resolution. If it's not a dominant in C, then we aren't definitively in the key of C, we're just roving. Since Schoenberg's point was to modulate from C to F using a deceptive cadence, I would imagine he intended it to be dominant. IV6 can behave as VI, which makes your bracketed section (Dm - G7 - F/A) a deceptive cadence in the key of C.

By categorizing the music with other experiences, which are typically remembered visually and symbolically; Assigning symbols facilitates organization and memory; The music is relying on this categorization and the associations that it creates in order to have meaning to a listener. It isn't itself happy or sad or whatever your parameter is, it's only happy or sad once your brain has cross-referenced it with your memory which gives it its subjectively perceived meaning.

Remember, Schoenberg regards V moving to anything aside from I as being deceptive. It's not in F because the tone is constantly featured, but because the tonality is regularly featured. Keep reading, Schoenberg goes on to argue that in a lot of wcm and the example, you might not be modulating at all because you're still expressing the same key center, F. At this point in the book, he's more concerned with a piece's overall form than with progressions. He argues you could visit the key of b minor or any series of distant, unrelated keys and still be expressing the same F tonal center (not the key of F) throughout the piece, they're just excursions away from it, like the progression of keys is operating similarly to a really big I-V-I, consonance - dissonance - consonance. But that's another chapter...