Chord Progression Help.

Hi, im pretty new to music theory, so forgive me if this question sounds stupid.

When should you move from one chord, to the next? I see pieces where the chord changes once per bar and sometimes pieces where the chord changes twice per bar (and sometimes more). So this has got me confused, and uncertain as to when to move to the next chord in my progression. I would appreciate any help.

Yikes! That's a pretty... vast... question. I guess it depends on what impression you want to give the listener!

For example, during the Baroque period, there tended to be a harmonic rhythm, where the harmony would change mainly on strong beats, at regular intervals (1 and 3 in 4/4, every measure in 3/8, so on and so forth), so the music had a kind of "pulse" to it. Of course, not all music respected that principle, but a great number of Bachès preludes and fugues illustreate the principle:

Some music during the classical period also had that same tendency:

As the art progressed, the rhythm at which harmony changed would get freer. Composers would have melodies above very slow-moving harmonies, not changing regularly:

Or the music could become very agitated, and the chords would change more rapidly:

In any case, the examples I'm giving are probably not the best ones to illustrate what I'm trying to say, but the general idea is that your harmony should serve the music in general, providing atmosphere and emotion - depending on what character you want to give your piece, you could choose to use faster chotrd changes, slower chord changes, irregular chord changes... there are many possibilities, but you need to choose the one that is the most appropriate to your music.

I hope I was able to help a little bit, at least :)

Yikes! That's a pretty... vast... question. I guess it depends on what impression you want to give the listener!

For example, during the Baroque period, there tended to be a harmonic rhythm, where the harmony would change mainly on strong beats, at regular intervals (1 and 3 in 4/4, every measure in 3/8, so on and so forth), so the music had a kind of "pulse" to it. Of course, not all music respected that principle, but a great number of Bachès preludes and fugues illustreate the principle:

(harmony changes each measure int he prelude, each beat in the fugue)

Some music during the classical period also had that same tendency:

(every measure during the first theme)

As the art progressed, the rhythm at which harmony changed would get freer. Composers would have melodies above very slow-moving harmonies, not changing regularly:

Or the music could become very agitated, and the chords would change more rapidly:

In any case, the examples I'm giving are probably not the best ones to illustrate what I'm trying to say, but the general idea is that your harmony should serve the music in general, providing atmosphere and emotion - depending on what character you want to give your piece, you could choose to use faster chotrd changes, slower chord changes, irregular chord changes... there are many possibilities, but you need to choose the one that is the most appropriate to your music.

I hope I was able to help a little bit, at least :)

Thank you for your help.

You have to understand, this is like asking, "what instrument should I give the melody to?" or "what rhythms should I use?" It's your composition - do whatever you feel like! Change chords every bar, every beat, every note, or don't follow any patterns at all! The other problem with your question is that it begs the question of there even being chords at all - what about a solo piece? What about an atonal work? The idea that pieces even have to have "chords" at all is (and don't take this as an attack on you in any way) an entirely outdated notion. I mean, pieces don't even have to use notes anymore.

The answer is, chords change whenever you, the composer, feel they need to. That is the only answer anyone can really give.

If, however your are trying to emulate a certain style, or write a pop song, or something like that, then there is a more concrete answer we can give.

Well, im going for a baroque style. I don't know if that changes anything.

Ah, I don't see how you will be able to go for a baroque style when you are unsure when to change a chord. It is an excellent question for someone who loves to listen to music but doesn't have much foundation in the elements of music itself. I mean can you hear the difference between augmented chord, diminished chord or just major and minor in various inversions? Can you identify non-harmonic tones? Also, it is knowing when a chord has a function. For example in Frescobaldi the chord progressions don't follow anything codified sometimes - it comes from improvisation. Here is an example

and this is considered early Baroque.

And then we have say Purcell, where the chords implied do have a stronger function in that the harmony is more what we are attuned to in some popular music and 18th - late 19th century classical music:

Finally Bach

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHuzLO5nnts

So, I think it would be best to get down some basic theory first. Give a shot at writing music deifnitely but start simple - for one instrument or piano. I advise not trying to write for a 100 piece orchestra or even a string quartet.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. I would say i have a pretty good grasp of theory, at least enough to know what this is all about.

OK, well then if someone gave you a movement of a Mozart piano sonata could you give a harmonic analysis?

OK, well then if someone gave you a movement of a Mozart piano sonata could you give a harmonic analysis?

Depends on what you mean by "harmonic analysis" Besides, i don't see how that relates to my question.

Composer Phil - good answer but my concern is if the original poster has the pre-requisite tools to do so.

By harmonic analysis, would you be able to identify when a chord moves from I - V or when it is moving to a seconday dominant, etc. I think you do have some idea from your initial post but it isn't clear at what level. Why not look at the F major piano sonata of Mozart and see what harmonic rhythmn he starts with and then how it changes. Use that as a model for a piece of your own.

Dominus - I agree about thinking I know more than I really do. Even now I am working with a theorist to review theory and I realize either how much I have forgotten or really didn't know. But the point of being a composer is you don't have todelve into until that is all you do.

Composer Phil - good answer but my concern is if the original poster has the pre-requisite tools to do so.

By harmonic analysis, would you be able to identify when a chord moves from I - V or when it is moving to a seconday dominant, etc. I think you do have some idea from your initial post but it isn't clear at what level. Why not look at the F major piano sonata of Mozart and see what harmonic rhythmn he starts with and then how it changes. Use that as a model for a piece of your own.

I can't figure out when to move to the next chord in my progression, so how could i possibly tell when others, much less Mozart, does it?

If you could tell where the chord changes happens, i could give you the roman numerals, but that would be defeating the purpose.

Well then you need to learn more theory. Either privately or try a school near you. In the meantime check out the pinned threads in Advice and techniques.

You would know when Mozart does it by the pitch content of the music.

I'd recommend some reading. The local library is your friend, wikipedia and the internet for the most part in this case are not. But I doubt you'll follow through anyway, most people actually don't really care enough about music to study it and learn anything about it. They want quick results, and that begets terrible music.

What book(s) should i read?

I liked Schoenberg's book. I would recommend that. Atributes like "dry" and "longwinded" seem to me to be misnomers as this is how theory books often are perceived ;)

Thanks for the reccomendation, i will probably get it. But doing my search for a place to buy the book, i also came across one written by Jean-Phillipe Rameau, who was a famous baroque composer. And since i am going for a more baroque sound, maybe that one would be better?

I read his book "structural functions of harmony". That book gives a sort of description of the history of harmony. From baroque to late Romanticism. I do not know Rameaus but because Schoenbergs has a wider scope I'd say it is more beneficial.

It contains examples with analisys from pieces of Bach, Beethoven, Schuman, Brahms, Wagner, etc... It also includes some examples from his own hand, but has little to nothing to do with 12tone technique, it that is what you are afraid of ;)

Rameau is a great historical theory text and a great read. As for helping your harmony and theory, not so sure. I'd say read it through for an understanding how modern music theory developed.

However, one of your best bets would be Adlwell and Scachter's Harmony and Voice Leading ... with a huge provision, you need someone to guide you through it as it has a ton of information in each chapter. With that text I would practice some of the drills in Progressive Sight Singing by Carole Krueger - the latest edition.

For the Aldwell, Unit 1 section 1 - 14 contain a wealth of info about major keys. If it all seems old hat then you can move at a faster pace but not too fast. The exercises should be done at the end of each chapter.

The Schoenberg is a good text if you have patience for his philosophizing (which is actually interesting but delays the lessons). There are some wonderful exercises in it. Yet it is best read with some basic understanding of theory.

So, another option is to choose a text and work with someone from YC who is in college or at a Masters level to guide you.

Sigh, The Aldwell and Schachter is very good. The main fault is it presents a ton of info at a very fast rate. But it is very straighforward and recognizes that one excellent way of creating an illusion of musical flow is by a consistent methodology to relate the vertical and horizontal movement of tones.

Every theory book will have its limitations - Aldwell book will sometimes state "the sense of tonic is greatly diminished" without clearly specifying until you re-read the text a few times. Then you realize the Schenkerian bias of it which the authors do state in the fopreward. In that section they also explain why they do not go into 20th century music and beyond - too large a subject. Also Schenkerian analysis was never meant to be applied to the majority of 20th century music and beyond. BTW, I do strongly advise reading the foreward of textbooks.

For Mikrya's sake I think the Aldwell with the Creuger, which does present at a much slower rate theory and ties it to aural skills - with the emphasis on aural skills. is a good match. For the teacher I'd supplement exercises and some commentary from Schoenberg's text as I agree with Dominus the periodically no-nonsense approach is very helpful.

For the more advanced composer interested in theory, SSC has alluded to some texts in addition to the Rameau which are worth looking at. Music theory is as everchanging as the music it studies.

As for Kosta, don't know it and never used it.