It is basically saying that dominant must go to tonic or to the vi chord in a deceptive resolution but what about V - IV? This is a common chord progression too right? So why is it not in my voice leading book?
-
As suggested previously - speak with ABRSM. They're amenable, and should give valid reasons.– TimSep 27, 2021 at 13:29
-
If your books is from the ABRSM, are you specifically prepping for some ABRSM purpose?– Michael CurtisSep 27, 2021 at 14:15
-
1If the textbook is old-school, and many are, the progressions used by Bach and his contemporaries form the basis of the many rules proposed. V-IV is very uncommon in this era.– cruthersSep 27, 2021 at 15:38
-
I am learning from several books. One is ABRSM but this particular one is Harmony and Voice Leading 5th edition.– armaniSep 28, 2021 at 5:00
-
We might think this comes from studying common-practice harmony, however it is actually a problem with non-theoretical theory text books, and even more so with monist models of music theory. If this problem were the result of having too narrow a view of the common practice then how would we explain real theory books which do contain this progression? Riemann for instance does theorize the so called V to IV which for him would be termed dominant to subdominant (in the minor mode).– OotaguSep 28, 2021 at 19:23
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
...It is basically saying that dominant must go to tonic or to the vi chord in a deceptive resolution
That's just basic functional harmony: pre-dominant to dominant to tonic.
Depends on how the book defines "deceptive" cadence or progression, but the dominant moving to any chord not the tonic in a cadence is by some definitions a deceptive cadence.
The book may have an example of a passing IV chord, like V IV V. From the functional perspective that would not really be a progression but a prolongation of a V chord.
When the functional flow of pre-dominant to dominant to tonic is backwards - like V IV it can be called a retrogression instead of a progression.
...This [
V IV] is a common chord progression too right?
Bars 9-11 of a typical 12 bar blues will go |V|IV|I| that's pretty common.
Lot's of people get bent out of shape that functional harmony would label that a retrogression, some kind of "wrong" progression. But they also fail to point out that the completion and repetition of the 12 bar form (bars 9-12 and back to bar 1) is very commonly |V|IV|I|V:|:I which conforms to functional harmonic progression.
If your textbook really does not show an example of V IV - even an example to show that while rare in common practice music it can be found if you look long and hard enough - it's probably just a matter of the book presenting the most common, idealized style of classical harmony.
Piston's Harmony covers the V IV progression in two places: one is about avoiding the cross relationship of the tritone, and the other is the irregular resolution of V7. In a nutshell, to avoid the cross relationship, when the progression is root position V IV don't put the leading tone of V in the soprano. And regarding irregular resolution Piston says: "more often the subdominant is found in first inversion." He then gives Mozart K. 279 as an example (no measure number given) in F: | ii6 I6/4 V7 | IV6 V6/5 I |. The seventh of V7 can be a held, common tone when it becomes the root of IV.
answered Sep 27, 2021 at 13:55
-
"it's probably just a matter of the book presenting the most common, idealized style of harmony." Just noting there should probably be a qualifier here: the most common, idealized style of "CLASSICAL" harmony. V-IV progressions are all over pop and jazz in a lot of contexts. They're perfectly normal. They just tend to be "outlawed" in textbooks trying to teach classical or pseudo-classical styles and norms. Sep 28, 2021 at 1:09
-
Thanks, V7 to IV6 is covered but then again isnt IV6 more related to vi than to IV?– armaniSep 28, 2021 at 5:07
-
-
@armani, of course the bass is the same for
IV6andvi, and functionally both a pre-dominant, so there is a similarity. I think the subtle difference isviwill provide that minor, modal region of the key thatIV6does not. I think it's good to develop a sensitivity to that difference. It's a personal choice of "color" which to use. Sep 28, 2021 at 13:04 -
@Athanasius and indeed the progression was not entirely unknown in the period, for example at the end of Praise the Lord with Harp and Tongue from Handel's Solomon.– phoogSep 28, 2021 at 16:32
The "classical" problem with this sequence occurs when the chords are in root position. It's difficult to move chords in parallel without producing parallel fifths or octaves. The sequence V-IV does occur with both chords in first inversion; V7-IV6; there are no parallel fifths or octaves.
-
-
Any two chords a step apart can be connected in 63 positions (complete chords, no parallel problems.) As mentioned in other answers, the V-IV sounds "backward" from the usual IV-V but is fine if the voice-leading is good.– ttwSep 27, 2021 at 20:06
-
In fact, it seems like V-IV might even have better voice leading since the leading tone B in the G chord can move up to a C as long as another voice completes the chord. That's basically what you brought up in V7-IV6, although note that your V7 is not in first inversion (for that, should be V65, no?). Good perspective on the question. Sep 27, 2021 at 21:36
-
The two chords in root position do pose a problem, but it is not insoluble; see, for example, the end of Praise the Lord with Harp and Tongue from Handel's Solomon.– phoogSep 28, 2021 at 16:34
Your textbook is telling you how to write 'safe' harmonies in the particular style required for elementary theory examinations.
You have noticed that there are other styles. Good!
answered Sep 28, 2021 at 13:40
-
In fact, however, the sequence IV-V may occur even in common practice styles.– phoogSep 28, 2021 at 16:35