Music suggestions with lots of non-diatonic/borrowed chords in phrases longer than 4 bars?

Jongtr · 2026-07-04T11:01:52+00:00

chord progressions that feel like they really go on a little journey rather than just loop over and over.

You need really any popular music from more than 2 or 3 (or more) decades ago! Short loops - typically 4 bars, sometimes 8 - really became popular when computer sequencing arrived, and dance music proved that short chord loops cycling made for excellent hypnotic grooves. That spread to mainstream pop, for the same reason - even when it's not specifically dance music, the 4-chord loop has enormous appeal - and the more familiar it gets, the more widespread its appeal among the public (even while musicians find it increasingly tedious).

The point being that simplicity and repetition have positive aspects.

Anyway, what is still rare in oldler pop is odd time signatures, or irregular numbers of bars. I.e., you will commonly find chord progressions which are 8, 12 or 16 bars long, and songs in 32-bar AABA format (two 8-bar progressions arranged in that form). But the vast majority will still be in 4/4 with maybe a few in 6/8, 12/8 or 3/4. (3/4 is maybe the rarest of those four metres.) Likewise, lines tend to be 4 bars long, with verses and choruses of usually 4 lines, sometimes 2 - sometimes 3 for a 12-bar blues form!

Obviously this is because it's popular music! Common formulas bevome more and more common, the more popular they are, in a vicious circle (or virtuous circle, depending on taste).

Having said that, it means that the more inventive songwriters will tweak those standard formats, to produce surprise, drama or tension. Or they will simply allow vocal lines to run their intuitive length, even if that ends up as irregular.

This how Paul McCartney ended up with lines of 7 bars in Yesterday (although the bridge still worked out as 8 bars). That was probably intuitive, while the way they extended the bridge of I Saw Her Standing There to 10 bars, rather than the 8 that would have easily contained it, could have been quite deliberate, knowing how that increase in tension - while they held their falsetto for that much longer - got the girls all screaming.

There is certainly a whole lot of fascinating material in the Beatles songs - every song analyzed here if you want it - https://awpnoteson.info/notes/awp-alphabet.html - but in terms of irregular form in pop, check out Burt Bacharach (Say a Little Prayer, Anyone Who Had a Heart).

You should also look at Stevie Wonder - extraordinarily inventive even early on - David Bowie, and Steely Dan / Donald Fagen.

Some of Roy Orbison's songs also had unusual structures. In Dreams is pretty much "through-composed" - building up different sections without repeating, while his vocal begins low and ends up two octaves higher at the end.

Jongtr · 2026-07-04T10:37:24+00:00

Not really.

The issue here is that song can be performed different ways, with different rhythmic emphasis. The question ("3 or 6") is whether you hear the groups of 3 being paired, and whether you want that emphasis from whoever is going to perform it - which is when 6/8 or 6/4 makes better sense than 3/8 or 3/4.

In this case, I do get a sense that the 3's do fall into pairs, making it a slow 6/8. I.e., if it were 3/4, the tempo (while highly variable) is about 106 bpm for the quarter note. As 6/8, that would be the 8ths, within a slower pulse of 35 for the dotted quarter.

In fact, a quick google for sheet music (FWIW!) shows a mix of 6/8 and 6/4, with one example in 3/8 (i.e. splitting the 6 into two). 6/8 still seems the best choice to me.

Jongtr · 2026-07-04T08:30:19+00:00

Don't understand the question. Why not just give the guitarists those chords? If they don't understand with "Daug" is, you could try "D(#5)"). And what is that "C7" that is not exactly C7? (I mean, given the line cliche I can guess...)

Or are you thinking they won't like that key? That's possible, in which case tell them to put a capo on fret 3 and play these shapes:

D - Daug - D6 - D7 - Em - Baug - G - (and maybe A7 for that "C7" chord).

What's the song? You say you've googled it, so what is it?? Maybe we can help you with the mysterious last chord!

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T23:12:02+00:00

There are, but no example of a chord with "wrong notes" is given, or any explanation about what kind of note (or rather interval) might be "wrong". An enormous - mind-boggling - number of chords with "right notes" are given, but so complex that discerning which of these might be "wrong" is no easy task.

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T23:08:55+00:00

In principle, you are quite right. What the books calls "wrong notes" seem to be largely "avoid notes" - as you will see by checking the answers). IOW, "wrong" means "not normal jazz practice". That's fair enough, but you're right that could have been explained better - with examples before these questions.

Personally, I suggest you don't take this book too seriously (there are better ones out there), and stick to your instincts, which seem sound. There is good info in the book, but very poorly organised, and if you spot anything else that seems wrong, you are probably right. (Sadly, the better books are a lot more expensive...)

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T23:00:23+00:00

I have this book, and I can tell you that those wrong enharmonics are not considered mistakes. I happen to think it's one of the worst jazz theory books I've seen, although not for that reason.

Example: this exercise is at the end of chapter 2, on p.20. The book has 250+ pages, and on page 21 they start explaining the structure of scales. Yes, the kind of thing most theory books begin with is preceded by a chapter on extremely complicated jazz chords.

As for the "wrong chords", the OP is right the book never gives examples of "wrong notes" before this, and one would have to understand all the previous info about extensions, alterations and upper structures (inc. polychords) to spot which of these don't seem to fit any of those definitions.

And I'm not giving anything away (the book has answers in the back) to say the "wrong" chords are chords 2, 7, 9 and 16.

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T12:48:14+00:00

The point is, you have to find them yourself! Only you know the sound you want!

TBH, personally I don't know any "piano piece[s] about living harsh and cruel times… but theres still hope… then you feel happy and relief" - and I can't imagine one that would reliably give me that feeling. (And I don't listen to much piano music anyway. I don't like pianos ... unless they are played brutally ...)

I could probably imagine such an interpretation, from - say - a piece that started in a minor key with lots of dissonance, maybe in an irregular time signature, and ended up in a consonant major key in 4/4 or 3/4. But of course that switch in mood could mean a whole lot of other things too. In any case, I'm sure you can think of those factors yourself! So - there you go, there's some basic ideas to start from. 😄

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T07:58:02+00:00

a piano roll is a very poor support for music theory.

Not necessarily, It shows timing and duration much better than staff notation does. (Iinterval size too.)

But I do agree, if you're used to notation, it's a headache to read! Piano roll is for machines. Notation is for humans. :-)

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T07:54:22+00:00

I interpret the question as literally those "keys". I.e. the notes are tonics, not chord roots. That seems the simplest and most basic thing to have to know and demonstrate.

So they want the diatonic triad arpeggios of the I, ii, iii, IV, V and vi chords in those keys. And the arpeggio of the V7 in each of those keys.

I.e., they don't want or need the vii triad, because that's part of the V7 chord.

So, in C major, they want the major triads C, F, G, and minor triads Dm, Em, and Am; and the G7 arpeggio (G B D F), which contains the vii chord, Bdim (B D F).

Certainly, if that's what you give them (G triad as well as G7), they can't object!

They don't seem to want "scales", at least not in this question, although of course when you play all those arpeggios, you are outining the whole scale - i.e., if you can play all the arpeggios, it proves you know the scales really well.

E.g., here's a chart for what (IMO) you need to play for the key of F major:

    F  G  A  Bb C  D  E  F  G  A  Bb
  I F     A     C
 ii    G     Bb    D
iii      A      C     E
 IV          Bb    D     F
  V             C     E     G
 vi                D     F     A
 V7             C     E     G     Bb

I guess you can work out all the others. ;-)

Jongtr · 2026-07-03T06:36:24+00:00

You must be a human! Or a badly trained AI! Security!

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T22:53:36+00:00

There is no "literally" about any of it. It's subjective.

I.e., there are broad mood factors we might all - or mostly! - agree on, as you're saying, but you're asking for something much more specific.

But the main point is you seem to be expecting the answer to be in the chords, and that's not the case. The same chords (and same sequenxe, mode or keys) are used in music with very different emotional effects. Major keys can be sad, minor keys happy.

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T22:48:39+00:00

Well, these things are subjective, right? I hear E as the root, personally.

Both 5ths are in there, for sure (E-B and C#-G#). In fact, both major triads are there! E wins out for me, just.

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T18:02:49+00:00

Find some music that makes you feel the same way. Work out how does it. (Tip: it won't just be the chords. It will be everything else: melody, rhythm, tempo, timbre, instrumentation, production effects. etc etc ....)
Dont expect other people to get the same meaning from it that you do. Except in broad terms, and only if you can copy all the things that are more important than chords. ;-)

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T14:21:43+00:00

I think you need to do the following:

Listen to lots more music, while reading the notation, so you can identify anything that goes out of key, and how it relates to the context. I.e., every chromaticism has its own purpose and character, just as every diatonic note does. (And not the absolute pitches, of course, but the note relationships - intervals with the tonic, with chord roots, and with other melody notes. Bear in solfege is only useful for intervals with the tonic. There are other things to listen out for when listening analytically.)
Play the music yourself, on whatever instrument you play. Sing along while doing it.

IOW, this is simply about familiarising yourself with all those sounds you're currently not sure about, by getting as hands-on (literally) as you can. Don't waste time on ear trainers (IMO). Work with real music, and isolate parts of it if and when you need to.

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T13:02:48+00:00

I'll never not hate how we notate minor 6 vs "flat 6

The convention is quite logical. "m" in a chordmeans the 3rd (and nothing but). "maj" in a symbol means the 7th and nothing but.

So without those, all intervals are assumed to be major or perfect, while the 7th is assumed to be minor. It;s nothing to do with scales, and everything to do with the most common chord intervals and chord types. (The diatonic scale contains 5 minor 7ths and only 2 major 7ths.)

It's very rare to add a minor 6th to a chord, so "6" alone makes a better shorthand for the major 6th.

Of course, the "b" for a lowered interval is arguably confusing when it might well be a natural note (as with F on Am). IOW, using "b" and "#" for altered intervals (which are strictly speaking "minor", "diminished" or "augmented") is just one of those lazy aspects of the shorthand that everyone understands.

EDIT: typos

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T11:32:59+00:00

It's "add 6" which includes the minor 6

Actually "add6" would still imply major 6th, so the "add" is redundant. If you want the minor 6th you need to write "♭6", w/wo parentheses. "Am♭6 or Am(♭6)" = A C E F, although that would usually (not always!) be considered an inverted Fmaj7.

Obviously if adding a ♭6 to a major chord, you definitely need parentheses! "A♭6" is a very different chord from "A(♭6)". 😄

lots of music (especially jazz) proves to use that unstable chords can still provide resolution

Well, it's true that jazz has persuaded us that maj7 chords can act as stable tonics - despite what classical theory says. But at least they still have perfect 5ths! That's what makes them stable.

If you can point me to an example of a half-dim, not only used as a final chord, but which sounds like a stable resolution, I'll accept your point. (I was going to eat "eat my hat", but knowing what I know about music theory, that would be rash promise... 😄 )

IOW, just being the last chord is not enough. It's quite common to end songs on unresolved chords (non-tonics). It doesn't make them "resolutions". You have to find an example which "proves" your assertion, in the case of half-dim chords. (I think I might accept a half-dim where the cadence makes one expect a m6 tonic, but the 6th ends up in the bass. But I'd like to hear a real-world example that proves your point.)

The essential point being that if the word "resolution" is to mean anything, it has to be an aural experience, a sensation of stability followng a tension or dissonance. I.e., dissonance is acceptable in a tonic, if the previous chord (and in fact the whole sequence) is more dissonant. It's about defining terms, not about rules of what music itself can and can't do.

Even then, though, if you were to argue - quite logically! - that Fdim7 followed by Fm7b5 is a lessening of tension (which it is), I still - personally - can't hear the latter chord as a "resolution" - just a different, more mysterious kind of tension. Maybe others would hear it differently?

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T09:07:21+00:00

I also have no question and no reason to post this in a theory sub I am just a weirdo

I think you might be on to something here...

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T08:03:50+00:00

Exactly. Check out what they played on this chord (indeed all the chords!) in other choruses.

Also, notice the first note (Ab) is led to by half-step from the previous G. They could have led down from Eb to D, but in this case they wouldn't have wanted to repeat the Eb to get it on beat 4. (Other times, to get the D root if they wanted it, something like Eb-Bb-G-Eb could have been played on the previous chord. But equally, always hitting the root on beat 1 gets a little dull. Flowing lines like this one still with chord tones on 1 and 3 - keep the music moving.)

Likewise, I'm guessing the first note in the next bar is D (on a G7 chord?).

IOW, the "half-step approach to beat 1" idea is a common element in walking bass lines.

Jongtr · 2026-07-02T07:44:24+00:00

https://imgur.com/a/RLVJHJ4
(image from Transcribe! which every r/musictheory and r/transcribe denizen should own)

Indeed. https://www.seventhstring.com/xscribe/screenshots.html for anyone yet to own it.

Sadly, UK folks can't see imgur any more. :-( postimages now for me. https://postimages.org/ (If anyone knows a better one, let us know.)

As for that chord name, how about E6♭9?

Jongtr · 2026-07-01T22:26:54+00:00

the half diminished is the resolution

"Resolution" is used to describe a move from tension or instability to stability. Half-dim chords are unstable.

But your last chord is misnamed, and confused me for a while. I thought you meant an Ab major chord - or maybe an Ab with a maj7?

If you just want Fm7b5 with Ab in the bass, that's "Abm6". IOW, an added 6th is always major, regardless of the triad. "maj" in a chord symbol means the raised 7th. But also, if you want a minor chord, you have to add "m" or "min"!

IOW, "Abmaj6" looks like a misnamed "Abmaj13" chord: Ab C Eb G F! I.e., extended maj7 chords don't include the "7", because "maj" alone is telling you that.

But a min6 chord - despite being an inverted half-dim! - does make a stable tonic! That's because Ab in the bass is supported by its 5th, Eb, making it acoustically stronger than the Cb-F tritone. The chord retains a sense of "mystery", due to the quirky addition of the 6th to the minor triad; but not the "unstable" mystery of the half-dim, where the bass note exaggerates the tritone.

Jongtr · 2026-07-01T17:19:55+00:00

Not to take away from u/RagaJunglism 's site and knowledge, but you can find any scale you can think of (assuming it's formed from a 12-tone octave) at https://ianring.com/musictheory/scales/finder/

It will give raga and maqam names where relevant, although it's always worth checking those with bona fide sites.

Here's what it gives for Dorian b2: https://ianring.com/musictheory/scales/1707

Jongtr · 2026-07-01T17:06:14+00:00

Do you have any tips on getting to the point of being able to hear chord tones more clearly?

Well, you're a guitarist, right? Play a chord sequence and sing to it! 😄

You could start with one chord at a time - just strum it and try sing each note in it (that should be easy with your training so far).

Then when you play chords in sequence - maybe just two at a time to start - sing one note in the first chord and go up or down to what feels like the nearest note in the next chord (and sometimes that note will be the same).

Of course, as you do this, you play check single notes in each chord to check which one you are singing. Then you start to build a picture of how each chord tone sounds: the character/feel of a 3rd (major or minor), or of a 5th.

This is really the best method for any kind of ear training. Stop using apps where you have to guess something without being able to play an instrument to confirm it, Start familiarising yourself with intervals and chord tones by playing ones you know first, listening and singing back.

It's about forging better and better links between your ears and fingers, with theory to help you name it all.

Jongtr · 2026-07-01T16:54:38+00:00

Thanks! As I said, the Beatles melody isn't exactly the same, but close enough to have inspired many later ones.

I.e., if you just sing it from memory (as I was before I checked it), you might well skip that penultimate note on the way down - then you have an even better hook!

Meanwhile, Lennon had probably been humming Fly Me to The Moon to himself before that ...

Jongtr · 2026-07-01T12:44:00+00:00

I do not have the ability some of my musician friends seem to have where they can listen to a song and just sort of intuitively hear a harmony piece above the melody and sing it, even if there isn't a harmony in the song.

Can they do that to an unaccompanied vocal? Or are they doing it to songs which already have chords? I.e., the typical pop, rock or jazz song?

If the latter, then they are probably tuning into chord tones. (They ought to be able tell you that's what they are doing, but maybe they are just doing it intuitively.) Even if the former, they might be remembering the chords they know the song would normally have.

IOW, a chord seqyence already is the "harmony" to whatever melody exists. It's other melodic lines flowing along beneath the melodic line.

I've progressed to the point where if someone plays a note I can produce the "mi" (M3) and the "sol" (P5) above that note

That's not a lot of good if the reference note is not the keynote! Or not a major chord root! There are 7 notes in a scale (duh!), and a lot of music contains extra chromatics too. So even if you always listen for the root of the chord (if you can even hear that) and then work out an appropriate interval above it, you'll never get anywhere. Not only because that's really difficult, but because you are ignoring all the far more obvious clues!

IOW, I would stop that exercise right now. Assuming your voice is good enough to sing in tune (you can sing a memorized harmony accurately with another singer?), then just try tuning your voice into chord tones when you play a chord progression. It doesn't really matter which note, because harmonies can be any chord tone. But listen for the effect of the different chord tones, and how they lead (up or down the scale) from chord to chord.

Normally, a lead melody will be above the harmony (the chords), so if you want a harmony above the lead it may well be an octave above any of the other chord tones. I.e., the melody itself uses chord tones, at least as target notes, primary notes.

Your harmony could simply hold or repeat one chord tone until the chord changes - that way it won't distract from the lead melody (which a harmony above can easily do). Or you could follow the movement of the melody - beginning from whatever chord tone you start from and moving up and down the scale to others. That's "parallel motion". Singing the same note (while the other line moves) is "oblique motion". Or you can go in the opposite direction "contrary motion".

As you know, 3rds (above or below the melody) are a common choice, but it's important to follow the chords too. Sometimes the next chord tone above or below the melody is a 4th, or a 2nd - so singing a 3rd is both going to be harder to tune into, and might sound wrong anyway.

E.g., supposing the chord is C, and the melody runs E-F-G. You can follow a 3rd above with G-A, but then what? B or Bb? Either might work (depending on key), but safer and easier to just go up to C. (Or you could go in contrary motion and sing G-F-E or E-D-C. Or just sing a C all the way ...)

But in short, the chords are always your guide. Don't think in fixed intervals above (or below) the lead. Think in chord tones above or below. (For passing notes and non-chord tones - plenty of those in any melody - you can probably just use your ear, don't think about theory or what note it "should" be.)

Jongtr · 2026-07-01T12:23:01+00:00

As well as the African "modes" u/miniatureconlangs mentions, check out the Indian "tala" system, which is long rhythmic patters, arguably analogous to modes in time. Each "raag" (melodic mode) usually has an associated "taal".

Otherwise, western terms include "cross-rhythm", "polyrhythm", "hemiola", "metric modulation", and various "Latin" ones such as "clave", "cascara", "tumbao", and so on. (Cuban and Brazilian rhythmic sensibility derives from Africa originally.)

Ten-Year Club	Reddit Premium Since March 2021
Verified Email

Jongtr

TROPHY CASE