Secondary dominants and modulation

I have a question about secondary dominants, If you use a secondary dominant like V/V, but before it, use a chord that is common to both the original key and they key that the secondary dominant tonicizes,

for example, I - V/V- V,

In common practice do you automatically modulate to the key that the secondary dominant would be the dominant in? So if the example I gave was in C major, could you still continue in C major even after this progression or does common practice have you modulate to G major?

I have a question about secondary dominants, If you use a secondary dominant like V/V, but before it, use a chord that is common to both the original key and they key that the secondary dominant tonicizes,

for example, I - V/V- V,

In common practice do you automatically modulate to the key that the secondary dominant would be the dominant in? So if the example I gave was in C major, could you still continue in C major even after this progression or does common practice have you modulate to G major?

Secondary dominants CAN be used for the purpose of modulation, but they are actually more commonly used as variation in the original key. Basically establishing a secondary (hmmmm:)) key for a measure or even a single note (through the V-I quality of V/V-V) and reverting back into the original key. Even more specifically secondary dominants (in first inversion) are used create more chromaticism in the bass line.

two words. Study Franck.

two words. Study Franck.

Why on earth do we have this forum if questions cannot be addressed?

Well, I really cannot add much to what pianoman said. Secondary dominants are a popular flavor in music and can be used for many things - it really depends on where you go from V whether or not you've modulated.

It is not uncommon to see IV(or ii) - V/V - V - I in a cadence (you can also use #vii

pianoman already adressed the basic question. I decided to top what he said off with "study Franck"...he's the absolute master of modulation...along with Wagner, it would be great to study the ways in which "incomplete ninths" (diminished and half diminished schords) can be used, especially for modulation

Ah, I'm sorry. Just sounded like one of those "go read the book" answers you see far too often. :)

Secondary dominants CAN be used for the purpose of modulation, but they are actually more commonly used as variation in the original key. Basically establishing a secondary (hmmmm:)) key for a measure or even a single note (through the V-I quality of V/V-V) and reverting back into the original key. Even more specifically secondary dominants (in first inversion) are used create more chromaticism in the bass line.

Yes but when you revert back to the original key from the secondary one, do you use the same sort of modulation as was necessary to get to the secondary key? Or do you just do it?

And since you establish a secondary key I guess you embellish it as if it was in that key?

Also diminished ninths = diminished and half diminished?

If you want you can go from V to your original key, f.ex. I (IV/V) - V/V - V - vi etc..

Since V belongs to your original key you don't need to worry much unless you've used a lot of chords borrowed from the V-key. You can just call it an emphasis, not a modulation.

Also diminished ninths = diminished and half diminished?

I'm not sure I know that well enough to teach, I'm sorry.

Secondary function chords are simply chords that belong more closely to tonics build on the other diatonic notes of the principle key.

Suppose you have a ii V cadence. To change this up one could use the dominant of the V chord which is very similar to the ii chord but has a stronger tonicization ability. For the most part is just a different "flavor" most of the time.

Of course if the secondary function is crucial to a modulation then its function is different than just an altered diatonic chord. So in some cases a ii and a V/V are very similar and in other cases they are distinctly different. This is why there is so much confusion and a lot of people wanting to write V/V as II. In some cases the V/V is just a change in "color" of the supertonic. (its still a V/V if acting like a dominant function but its sorta just a ii chord too)

In other cases there can be no mistake that its a secondary dominant functioning as a dominant. I imagine that the main difference is that of chromatic alteration, tonicization, and modulation.

About your specific question: You can do anything you want! A secondary function can help modulate because it is "outside" the diatonic harmonies(its actually a pivot chord to some degree because we don't know if its an altered supertonic or if its a true secondary dominant and it really doesn't matter in most cases).

But by no means do you have to modulate to the harmony it is preceding.

For example,

I ii V ---

The minor supertonic is not directly related to the key of the dominant(it should be a major chord)

So the ii chord is cannot really be a strong indicator of a tonicization or modulation to the dominant.

But the moment we change it to

I V/V V

We have the possibility of it being reinterpreted to

IV V I

(there are other possibilities of course which is the whole point)

a ii - V progression is unique to the and describes a key exactly (the notes are all there). In C, D-F-A - G-B-D. Which is 6 of the 7 notes and only one missing is C... but we said we were in the key of C so its implied(a ii7 makes it even stronger).

but what about a V/V V? That sounds like a it was taken from the dominant key(and it is). But since its fleeting its not necessary that its a modulation.

Remember, a modulation must be confirmed with a cadence. So it is a tonicization of the dominant which we could confirm with a cadence(authentic) so actually modulate to the dominant.

So something like

I vi ii V I*

(* means cadence)

does not tonicize or modulate to the dominant, but just by changing the ii into a V/V we have

I vi V/V V* ...

and from here we can choose to confirm a modulation to the dominant,

I vi V/V V* iii vi V/V V*

(The last part is really vi ii V I in the dominant)

Or we could say in the tonic key,

I vi V/V V* vi ii V I

The V/V here is acting more like a supertonic chord because changing it to such does not really effect anything but color

I vi V/V V* vi ii V I

is very similar to

I vi ii V* vi ii V I

Of course there is a different and the context could actually make a big difference but functionally they much closer than the example that actually modulates. For example, if the raised 4th is an integral part of the melody then the secondary dominant function is much stronger than if the raised 4th was a subordinate tone, which then it could be replaced by an f without having a negative impact(although it would change the "color").

If you have a lot of cpp sheet music, try looking through the first few measures of several pieces and find the first chromatic note and chances are its a secondary function(dominant). You can try and replace the it with its diatonic "version" and see if it works. You'll find that in most cases it will if the secondary function is not signaling a modulation. (it still can work but depends on the piece and how it introduces the key differences(no pun intended).

Also diminished ninths = diminished and half diminished?

"Incomplete ninths" refer to both diminished and half diminished...Diminished=minor third, minor third, minor third...half diminished=minor third, minor third, major third...the name "incomplete ninths derives from for example, a V7 chord (we'll say in C major) extended with an additional interval of a minor third or major third to make a ninth, and just as importantly the root of the chord is omitted from the chord...the dimished of V would be Bdim7 (B, D, F, Ab...no G root there!), and the half diminished would be Bm7-5 (B, D, F, A...no G root)...incomplete ninths open up new "tonal gate" if you will, and also can be seen in their inversions, and aren't only subject to the V chord but secondary dominants too...imcomplete ninths were most common in late romanticism, and to connect this back to the original point of your thread, are great for expanding modulation technique...I advise you study Wagner's Prelude and Liebestod to Tristan and Isolde, and Franck's Violin Sonata if you're interested

"Incomplete ninths" refer to both diminished and half diminished...Diminished=minor third, minor third, minor third...half diminished=minor third, minor third, major third...the name "incomplete ninths derives from for example, a V7 chord (we'll say in C major) extended with an additional interval of a minor third or major third to make a ninth, and just as importantly the root of the chord is omitted from the chord...the dimished of V would be Bdim7 (B, D, F, Ab...no G root there!), and the half diminished would be Bm7-5 (B, D, F, A...no G root)...incomplete ninths open up new "tonal gate" if you will, and also can be seen in their inversions, and aren't only subject to the V chord but secondary dominants too...imcomplete ninths were most common in late romanticism, and to connect this back to the original point of your thread, are great for expanding modulation technique...I advise you study Wagner's Prelude and Liebestod to Tristan and Isolde, and Franck's Violin Sonata if you're interested

So basically (in the case of the diminished) you're just using vii*7 right? If you ommit the root it I dont think it really can be considered a dominant function. The chords you have demonstrated would be considered leading tones, which do resolve to I and can function as a secondary, but not as a secondary dominant.

Thats why they are considered incomplete dominants. Your ear will "fill in" the missing root movement of a 5th if everything is setup in the right context. Bo7 = incomplete minor G9, B%7 = incomplete major G9. You can then add the extensions and such.

In general the chord cannot just be arbitrarily voiced and get the dominant effect. But any where a dominant is used you can use an incomplete dominant.

In fact, when you get to something like a G13 that contains all the scale tones then what? Obviously its not the notes themselfs but the voicing and resolution that makes it different than a Cmaj13. (Of course because of the increased dissonance it is more likely to be functioning as a dominant chord)

Thats why they are considered incomplete dominants. Your ear will "fill in" the missing root movement of a 5th if everything is setup in the right context. Bo7 = incomplete minor G9, B%7 = incomplete major G9. You can then add the extensions and such.

In general the chord cannot just be arbitrarily voiced and get the dominant effect. But any where a dominant is used you can use an incomplete dominant.

In fact, when you get to something like a G13 that contains all the scale tones then what? Obviously its not the notes themselfs but the voicing and resolution that makes it different than a Cmaj13. (Of course because of the increased dissonance it is more likely to be functioning as a dominant chord)

gotcha. Thats really interesting. Oh, and V7-9-11-13/V-V sounds REALLY cool :) I used one in a choral piece I'm working on right now.

So we can embellish the chords that secondary dominants tonicize in either their key or the key of the real tonic.