Figuring out the key on new songs

[Mark van Allen]

As with most stuff, the more ways you can look at something, the better grip you'll have and the more ways your brain can access the information.

While it makes sense to learn each mode as a "new" scale, ie; Aeolian from a major position you already know, flatting the 3rd, 6th and 7th degrees, that takes some practice time or quick thinking under the gun onstage. Thinking of the Aeolian as the 6th mode of a major position you already know, however, only requires phrasing to or around that 6th tone to bring home the sound. (all the G major phrases and patterns you know simply referencing E notes over E minor changes).
It's also usually much easier to sketch out dorian phrases from a "normal" major key position by backing up two frets, ripping the major scale in that whole-step-down position, then tucking back into the root position you started from.
Can be much less taxing than thinking, "ok, major scale pattern, but don't forget to flat the 3rd, 7th..."
Again, looking at modes both ways should help us to visualize many more ways to get around minors.

On the "Sweet Home Alabama" or "Can't You See" front, I'm one of those who sees those progressions as key of D mixolydian tunes. So, G major scales, or following the changes in D, C, And G (which is how it seems the Skynyrd guitarists were feeling it). I assume a D mixolydian tune would be notated with one sharp, as in G major.

As for the original question about figuring out songs, repeated exposure tunes the ear to the difference in intervallic sounds within a key, where the important thing to "hear" isn't so much that there's a "C" chord in these "key of D" songs, but rather hearing the distinctive sound of a b7 chord within any key. In these cases, there's a very distinctive "going down stairs one step" sound to this change, which with ear training becomes more obvious in any other song where the b7 shows up.

As always, the number system is golden.

[Guy Cundell]

<>

[Dave Mudgett]

To say a progression with the chords G, C and D major is always in the key of G can leave you on the side of the road in many musical situations.

As usual, I agree with Bob, MVA, and others with similar arguments. To me, the question is "Where is home?" On SHA and CYS, home is D to my ears. Sure there's a Mixolydian mode involved, but that's an effect - an interpretation - not a cause, to me.

This is entirely different from transcribing the notes using standard western (classical) musical notation. Purely by the convention of classical western music notation, the Ionian scale and the system of sharps and flats reigns supreme, and if you want to map everything using that system, there's really no other way to do it. When in Rome and all that. But I've seen jazz charts that just say, for example, "D Dorian". Everything is notated as if it's in C, but the interpretation is different.

I don't think the transcription issue is even relevant unless you're dealing with players reading from a score. Somehow, I don't think Skynyrd and MTB were reading from a score.

My favorite is classically trained musicians trying to transcribe blues. Oh, you can do it, but it only takes you so far. If I'm playing a Muddy Waters tune in E, what is it - Emaj? Emin or Gmaj? Or should it be interpreted as E Dorian, and thus be notated in D? Who cares? It's a Muddy Waters tune in E. Don't try to circumscribe a round hole for a square peg and then insist the peg is round.

My opinions, naturally.

[Bo Borland]

home is D to my ears. Sure there's a Mixolydian mode involved, but that's an effect

Exactly!
The mode still does not change the fact that the tune is in the key of G.

[Dave Mudgett]

It depends on how you define "the key". To me, the key is "the home", and my ears say the home is D, not G.

As far as I'm concerned, we are allowed to define keys free from the tyranny of western Ionian scale labeling conventions if we so choose. The kinds of tunes we're talking about here are not western classical music. To communicate to a symphony orchestra, I agree that it would be simplest (for them) to write it as if it were in G. But I still argue that the home, and ergo the key, is D.

[David Doggett]

The mode still does not change the fact that the tune is in the key of G.

To me, the key is "the home", and my ears say the home is D, not G.

I think this disagreement arises from conflicting views of the meaning of "key." When modes are used, the key is no longer the "home," rather the root of the mode is home. The key is then merely a convention in written music that requires the most parsimonious use of accidentals in the written music, and that makes it easiest to remember the "black keys," or the number of sharps or flats in the scale, in other words the key signature. For a standard major or minor, the key and the home root are the same. But for modes they are not. The root of the mode becomes home, and the key merely refers to the key signature, and has nothing to do with the home root. The correct asignation then becomes "key of G, D myxolidian." That correctly states both the key signature and the home root.

Chord oriented players such as rock guitarists think more in terms of the home chord, which is the root of the mode. They do not think much in terms of written notation and key signatures. It is not necessary to even know what the notes are in the chords they play, or to make any distinction between accidentals and the sharps or flats of the key signature. The key signature is not particularly relevant to them - you can play whole songs by just knowing the chord progression, without even a clue what the key signature is. But musicians who are reading music, or thinking of scales and key signatures, place more importance on the key signature, and need to know it. It helps them know which notes to use or avoid.

[Dave Mudgett]

I think this disagreement arises from conflicting views of the meaning of "key." ...

Yes, that's what I said, and I agree. My point is that either convention is reasonable. We are not always strictly bound by western classical music interpretational conventions.

I still argue that it is entirely reasonable to write "the key" as D or G (Dorian or Mixolydian respectively) and still transcribe the notes to the staff (for those who care) as if it's in C, for example. Look at the Real Book chart for "So What" - that's exactly what is done. The opening chord of the of the head is listed as D-7 with a (Dorian) descriptor, but the notes are annotated using the (no sharps/flats) convention of C Ionian. When it modulates up a half step, it changes to Eb-7 (Dorian). What's the key? I say D modulating to Eb and back. But if you wanna say C modulating to Db and back, fine. The notes are annotated as if it's in C, but the obvious home is D. There should be no confusion, either for reading musicians working straight from the staff or for number/chord chart reading musicians.

That latter point is the most critical to me. If you tell a number chart reader - or someone who doesn't care a whit about charts at all - "Hey, it's in Key of G", but the home is really D and the melody is based off some type of pentatonic or modal scale, you're going to confuse the blazes out of them. For them, "1" is D regardless of the fact that orchestral readers want the key signature to be G. I think it's possible to consistently satisfy both needs. But it requires a bit of mental flexibility - something we know is in such abundance, right?

[Matthew Prouty]

The single best thing I learned all year is the single note on the E string to find the key of the song. This works flawlessly!

m.

[David Doggett]

I think it's possible to consistently satisfy both needs. But it requires a bit of mental flexibility...

Yes, that is a quandry isn't it? For the average guitar player you'd want to tell them it's in D, unless you know they are familiar with modes. But for a keyboard or horn player, you'd want to tell them to use the G scale and key signature. Otherwise, they are going to be thinking two sharps (D) instead of one (G). But if you told them key of G, you'd have to tell them the progression is V IV I, if there were no charts (and you'd have to hope the guitar player didn't hear you and start on an A chord). And if you know they are familiar with modes, you could tell them "key of G, D myxolidian." So you have to understand who you are talking to. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

And notice that in your So What example, it's written with a C key signature. Technically that's key of C. Period. The chord it starts on is simply irrelevant to the key signature. It's nice that they give you the starting chord and a mode descriptor. But that doesn't change the key signature. You're never going to win that argument with anyone who reads music and knows even a little theory. I know. I lost that argument and had to eat crow when somebody produced the sheet music for Malaguena.

Now, I suppose the original composer could have written SHA in the key of D, and could have written in an accidental natural every time a C note came along. And it's possible it could have been published that way. Or it's possible a savvy editor would recognize it's modal, and "correct" the composition to publish it with a G key signature. Who knows, maybe that's what happened. So I suppose a composer could write in any key signature he wanted to, and maybe it would get published that way, or maybe not. I really don't know how those things happen.

[Guy Cundell]

My opinions, naturally.

With the greatest respect to you, Dave, these are your opinions but they are derived in part by an acceptance of orthodox music theory. Call me crazy, and you wouldn't be the first, but I challenge the traditionalists.

Modal music predates the diatonic (major/minor) system which is what is accepted as traditional theory. The codification of music theory, "the writing of the book" took place almost three hundred years ago when modal music had almost vanished from Western music practice. Modal music was ignored and as a result is considered a deviation from the norm of major/minor.

The idea of "key" is paramount in the diatonic system. At its most fundamental, the idea of key or tonic is a note by which all other notes are measured. This idea is also paramount in modal music. Who says that a key signature of one sharp is G major or E minor? The book.

Music fashion of Western music in the 17th and 18th century has blinded us. Traditional music theory works very well for diatonic music and can handle wild modulation but as modal elements have gradually crept back into mainstream music practice, the precepts of traditional theory don't always work. They can't handle the scope.

Music score is just a means to an end. I try to write to make things easy to play and that means as little ink on the page as possible. It is just a set of instructions.

If your ear tells you something that doesn't agree with your understanding of theory, something is broke, and it isn't your ear.

[Dave Mudgett]

And notice that in your So What example, it's written with a C key signature. Technically that's key of C. Period.

Not period. It depends entirely on how you want to look at it. To my way of looking at it, the song is obviously in D - the obvious harmonic center is D. In my opinion, it would be more technically correct to key it in D, and then correctly annotate the accidentals - that retains both the correct key center and an exact transcription of the notes on the staff. As far as I'm concerned, notating it in C is purely a kludge to make it easier to read. I'm not against that at all, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the harmonic center, which is obviously D. Harmonically interpreting the song as if it's in the Key of C seriously screws up the analysis of it, to my tastes.

Or it's possible a savvy editor would recognize it's modal, and "correct" the composition to publish it with a G key signature.

"Modal" is simply an interpretation that allows one to think about scale note choices in terms of a different key than the actual one. It's neither more nor less correct than any other interpretation that gets the notes correct.

I fully expect that music publishing editors do frequently re-annotate tunes written by many rock, blues, and other players who think in different terms, to fit someone who wants to play the song on the piano. Who is their audience? Naturally - people who want to just read the tune without having to think about it, and they want to make it as easy as possible for them. That has nothing to do with the key center.

Different musicians have different ways of looking at music. Why is it necessary to insist that there's only one way to look at it? I don't see any advantages whatsoever to that argument - either practical or theoretical - unless you really and truly believe that there is something holy and sacred about taking the scale that matches up with the fewest accidentals as the "one true key center". I don't buy it at all.

Now, I suppose the original composer could have written SHA in the key of D, and could have written in an accidental natural every time a C note came along.

Original composer? Sheet music? Are you kidding? You can't seriously be arguing that Skynyrd was reading the notes off sheet music when they recorded this, are you? Oh, maybe that was for the string section? That's what they call rock and roll.

With the greatest respect to you, Dave, these are your opinions but they are derived in part by an acceptance of orthodox music theory. Call me crazy, and you wouldn't be the first, but I challenge the traditionalists.

Guy - with the greatest respect, I think you've got the wrong Dave! I completely agree with your posts, and I think upon careful reading of my posts again, you'll see that clearly. SHA is clearly in the key of D, not G. The ears' sense of tonal center rules. Everything else is just a kludge to put everything in terms of conventional western classical music theory, as I said earlier.

[The obvious problem is that there are two Dr. Daves from Pennsylvania here.]

[David Doggett]

And notice that in your So What example, it's written with a C key signature. Technically that's key of C. Period.

Not period. It depends entirely on how you want to look at it. To my way of looking at it, the song is obviously in D - the obvious harmonic center is D. In my opinion, it would be more technically correct to key it in D, and then correctly annotate the accidentals - that retains both the correct key center and an exact transcription of the notes on the staff. As far as I'm concerned, notating it in C is purely a kludge to make it easier to read. I'm not against that at all, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the harmonic center, which is obviously D. Harmonically interpreting the song as if it's in the Key of C seriously screws up the analysis of it, to my tastes.

As usual, it's all semantics. Your "kludge to make it easier to read" is what everybody else calls "the key signature." As you say, it's just a convention to make it easier to read, and to remember the sharps and flats. By definition it is simply the sharps or flats assigned in front of the first bar. That's all. It's not necessarily the harmonic center. If it is not the standard major or minor, then I think everyone would agree with you that the root of the mode is the harmonic center, not the tonic of the key signature. So for SHA, the harmonic center is D. But still, the key signature (that bit of printing at the beginning of the first bar) is G. That's the whole point of modes - that they use a harmonic center different from their key signature.

You can't seriously be arguing that Skynyrd was reading the notes off sheet music when they recorded this, are you?

Of course not. I assume that's backwards. It was probably composed on the fly by ear. But at some point, for purposes of publishing and copyright, somebody converts it to written notation. I think we both agree this could be correctly written in D as well as G. You or I might write it in D. But professional music annotators familiar with modal theory might recognize it's modal, and figure out what the ionic root is, and write it in that key, to satisfy convention and minimize the number of accidentals required. That would be technically correct by convention, and that is then the technically correct "key signature," by the definition of that term. But the harmonic center is still the root of the mode. The "key signature" and "harmonic center" are simply not necessarily the same. And that is semantically allowable, and a convention we are not going to be able to change.

[Steve Norman]

bottom line is the SHA has the same notes whether you call it G or D. If you tell a musician that the song "is in D", and that musician has never heard the song before, they may try to play D major, and realise they are playing notes that dont fit in the song real quick. If on the other hand you tell him/her its in Gmajor, or specify D mixolydian, or E minor etc then they have a set of notes to work with. The key signature is the most important aspect as it gives us the note-set. Its like giving a mechanix the proper set of ratchets versus a toolbox full of all different sizes. Later when you write your dissertation on "the modal approach to played Sweet Home Alabama and other 3 chord rock songs" you can make those distinctions. The importance of finding a technique that just simply works was illustrated in Mathew's last post.

[Brint Hannay]

I haven't looked in on this thread for a while, and I had restrained myself from asserting my opinion that saying Sweet Home Alabama was "in G" was really only useful for simplifying putting it on paper, i.e. minimizing the number of accidentals required in the body of the score, and didn't necessarily apply to defining the "tonal center" of the song, but I see others more articulate than I have been hashing that one over.

The problem with SHA seems to arise because the melody gives little guidance, consisting as it does essentially of the same three-note sequence repeated over and over. Other songs with the same repetitive D-C-G chord sequence, e.g. "Can't You See", or Them's "Gloria", or Traffic's "Mr. Fantasy", don't seem ambiguous to me at all, because the melodies leave less doubt the D is the I. (Okay, Gloria almost has no melody, with spoken verses and a chorus "melody" of one note, namely D, to bolster the case, and Mr. Fantasy has a little interlude with an added Bm chord that bolsters the case.) So, although one might put them on sheet music with one sharp in the key signature, if one of them gets called on the bandstand and someone asks "What key?" I'm going to say D.

But, on the other hand, it isn't only a question of distinguishing between written page considerations and tonal center considerations. I hark back to the point Marc Friedland brought up: in one of the guitar solos in SHA it seems clearly that the player was thinking of it as V-IV-I in G and played accordingly, i.e. treated the tonal center as G, in another the player was thinking I-bVII-IV in D. If one were a bandleader, arranger, or producer attempting to inform a session player unfamiliar with the tune (if there were any such person!) as to what feel you wanted on the solo, you'd have to "choose sides"--if he went the other way than what you wanted, you'd have to say "No, x is the I chord", i.e. "No, the song is in x".

For me, on SHA, that would be D. Though I understand intellectually that (I think) the first Skynyrd soloist is thinking V-IV-I in G, I have never been able to orient my ear to HEAR it that way--to me, it always sounds weird, off-kilter, sort of semi-outside.

All the bands I've been in have ended SHA with an emphatic F-C-D. But I just went back and listened to the Skynyrd LIVE version (no fadeout) from "One More From the Road", and they end on an emphatic F-C-G!!!

All of this is what we get for having songs written by guitar players! (Hey, I'm one myself!)

[Dave Mudgett]

As usual, it's all semantics.

Look, any interpretation of the notes is purely analysis and semantics.

Where we differ is in the "technically correct" aspect. I'm not bowled over by the "authority" of classical western music scholarship over anything besides the western classical music for which it was developed. That notational system was developed for the convenience in one specific application. When the sphere of application changes, it is entirely reasonable for the "rules" to change. You and I don't have to change it - as a matter of practice, that diversity already exists.

I agree with Guy's earlier reference to an epistemological paradigm shift - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift. It's as if a large chunk of the music world is arrested in the 17th and 18th century, just like some scientists and engineers are arrested in a Newtonian view of the physical world. To the extent that it fits what they're doing, great. But please don't insist that we all have to look at everything like that.

To illustrate how arbitrary this can be - either of these views get blown to smithereens when applied to a lot of modern music where key centers and the sense of home disappear. I've heard music where one could make a "key" argument for any of the 12-tones - that is, if the music has not freed itself from the tyranny of the 12-tone western scale, in which case one can't map anything from this discussion onto it at all.

If you really believe that SHA is in G, just find a random guitar player (this song was, in fact, written by and for guitar players) who's never played it, tell them you're playing it in G, and then start it up. You can then laugh uproariously when they stumble all over the place because they have no idea what the hell is going on.

Again, my opinions.

[Brint Hannay]

In the light of what you've just written, Dave (which I agree with), perhaps the sentence I just added to my post before yours might be of significance:

"All the bands I've been in have ended SHA with an emphatic F-C-D. But I just went back and listened to the Skynyrd LIVE version (no fadeout) from "One More From the Road", and they end on an emphatic F-C-G!!!"

Skynyrd, of course, having originated the song!!! And I seriously doubt they thought they were ending on a hanging IV chord!

[Dave Mudgett]

I emphatically do not argue, nor have I argued, that there's anything wrong with viewing the key, or even the key center, as G. My point is that it's very easy to make either argument, and I wouldn't call either technically wrong. To me, the song structure says the home key is D, but if someone else views it differently, I don't see why there's anything wrong with that.

As far as ending on a hanging IV, I play tunes all the time that end on a hanging IV. Lots of singer-songwriters do this routinely - an example from shortly after I started playing pedal steel: http://acs.ist.psu.edu/mudgett/files/04 ... e-1999.mp3

For something a bit better known, how about this one ending on ii: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNearEuncU

Or this one ending on a hanging IV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY_5JOEmFK0

I'm sure we could collect examples all day.

[Bob Hoffnar]

In current practice modal means something in particular these days. In rehearsal today with a pop band we were working on tune in a minor groove. The heavily trained and super bad ass piano player was making the tune sound like jazz which was not cool with the singer. I told her to go modal and she dropped the whole 7ths and thirds moving to or away from the dominant chord thing and opened the harmony up.
Worked like a charm. To play a tune in a modal way means to get away from the standard harmonic gravity of leading tones along with some other stuff.

[Steve Norman]

this topic has drifted far from OP's question, which I interpreted as being "how do I find the set of notes that comprises a particular song?" not "how do I find the tonal focus and intent of the composer?" Those 2 are fundamentally different topics, in which the answer to question 2 is a subset of question 1. in other words, finding tonality and mode is something that people do once they know how to find the 7 basic notes that make up most songs. Then they can add all the blue notes, chromatics, hungarian minor accidentals they want, but only after they understand the information a key signature provides.

[Brint Hannay]

Dave, I often get the impression that you think I'm arguing things I'm not. I, like you, hear the tonal center of SHA as D, as I said previously--but I found it interesting, and challenging to my own feel of the song, that Skynyrd ended on G. And I did not by any means intend to suggest that ending on a IV chord was not possible or ever done; only that--in my humble opinion only, of course--given the stylistic personality of LS, the anthemic nature of the song, the fact that they hold the G chord for 20 seconds, hammering home the sense of finality, I doubt that LYNYRD SKYNYRD saw it as a IV chord IN THIS INSTANCE. I'm sure reasonable minds may differ about that. It's JMO.

Steve, the original question was about finding the CHORDS of a song. All this talk about key signatures does seem a bit off the topic, but knowing and recognizing by ear the relationships between chord functions (V, iii minor, etc.), whether one knows them by name or understands key signatures or not, is of great value in quickly finding successive chords once you establish what the tonal center is, so it follows that determining the tonal center is valuable. This naturally applies most to music, such as country songs, that follows long-traditional diatonic patterns and common variants. Sophisticated pop songs of the pre-rock and roll era ("standards") and jazz tunes that pass through multiple keys are a greater challenge to ear recognition, of course, and modern music forms that don't utilize chord "progressions" at all even more so.

[Brint Hannay]

EDIT: double post. I got that "Debug Mode" thing.

[Dave Mudgett]

I don't think we're off-topic at all. Here's the gist of the OP:

I am having an ever increasingly difficult time figuring out the keys on new country songs.

Here is what is happening. We learn a new song and I learn it by ear. We go to practice and the guitarist says the songs in B, but the song sounds to me like its 5544, 1155 or BBAA, EEBB in the key of E. This happens on almost every song, I just play E and it sounds great. I told him to stop giving me a set list because his song keys were messing me up. If it were B wouldn't that be an Adim or Am7b5 or something like that instead of an Amaj?

An example of this song would be Feel That Fire. Which appears to be in Db to me and the guitarist would call this Ab. It looks like 5544 1155 format to me.

This is exactly the type of tune we've been talking about, just listen to it here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSZoKKKQ2Qk. It's that same type of SHA I, VIIb, IV (or ii in places), I progression. To me, the two-bar intro in Ab and establishment of the Ab, Gb, Db, Ab (I, VIIb, IV, I) progression before the vocal starts clearly sets the tonal center and key.

If you're going to argue that every I, VIIb, IV progression has to be written in the key of the IV simply because the VIIb is modal and we can't have that, go for it. I doubt many rock or modern country players are gonna agree, but there's nothing wrong with transcribing it if it helps you feel it better.

Personally, I don't hear this as strongly modal - more like a type of bluesy major pentatonic 1, b3/3, 4, 5, b7, 1 type of scale as used in a lot of modern country and the rock, blues, and bluegrass that influenced it so much. I personally think it is useful to be able to understand the song structure both ways. I would bet money that if someone handed me a number chart on this tune, it would be keyed in Ab. On the other hand, if I was handed a standard score, it might well be keyed in Db. It's very useful to be able to hear this kind of thing, quickly grok it, and then put it into terms I prefer toutes suite. Just my opinion.

Brint - I obviously have no idea how Skynyrd viewed that ending chord, if they viewed it from any music-theoretic point of view at all. My only point was that I think an awful lot of tunes - anthemic or not - are perfectly happy to end away from the obvious I chord.

I guess the point of everything I have said is that I don't think it matters how each of us individually looks at a song. Each of us can insistently argue that everyone should look at it the way we do, and guess what - some of them are not gonna do it. One can reason with them endlessly, chide them, and even finally insult them, but they still will not be moved.

To my perspective - from a purely practical point of view - that only leaves me one choice - learn to understand the different ways one can look at it, and then if necessary, be able to quickly translate it to a format that works better for me. All this discussion about "theoretically correct" is irrelevant. Every theory has a set of premises and a domain of application. When one moves out of that domain, the premises often change and to survive, one must be able to adapt with a more relevant theory.

All IMHO, YMMV, and I'm fine if you don't agree.

[David Doggett]

Well this one to me seems unambiguously rooted in Ab, since the progression in the intro and verse starts there and comes back to there before the start of the next phrase. So for any guitar player, including bass, you'd want to tell them it's in Ab, with a I bVII IV progression. However, for keyboards and horns, or even a guitarist who tries to work off of scales (and may know about modes), it will help them if you also give them the ionian key signature, and tell them it's the Db scale in the mode starting on 5, or myxolidian. In fact, if you're playing in a stable group, and they don't know about modes, it would be a good use of some practice time to explain it from a modal standpoint. I don't think that's being a slave to classical theory. It's a useful approach that opens some things up.

[Bo Borland]

What a great thread, one of the best ever on music!

I play this tune almost every night and while I know it's in G, I play all my solos in D and never gave it any thought at all.
To me, it's all about the feel and what sound right.

[Brint Hannay]

I have the misfortune (I'm being semi-facetious--it's really not that bad; there's a lot that could be worse) of still winding up playing Sweet Home Alabama many weekends. Since getting into this thread I have, a couple of times now, attempted to play one solo thinking V-IV-I in G. It's been a hoot! One time, I got a hand from the crowd for my solo, even though I was full time forcing the ideas, deliberately working against the grain and not feeling it at all myself, and then no response for the second solo, where I thought in D as per usual for me.