Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence I have












1















I only have a little knowledge of music theory and was unable to work out how to use roman numerals to denote a chord sequence of one of my old tunes which starts in Fm. I have listed the chord sequence a follows:



Fm Ebm F#m Bbm played twice, then, Fm Ebm Em Dm Bdim A



I know this has a modulation at the end but I don't know how to set Roman Numerals to the chords.










share|improve this question




















  • 3





    Can I ask what "pluutin" is?

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 14:49






  • 2





    @Richard "Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence [he has]."

    – user54487
    Nov 22 '18 at 18:59


















1















I only have a little knowledge of music theory and was unable to work out how to use roman numerals to denote a chord sequence of one of my old tunes which starts in Fm. I have listed the chord sequence a follows:



Fm Ebm F#m Bbm played twice, then, Fm Ebm Em Dm Bdim A



I know this has a modulation at the end but I don't know how to set Roman Numerals to the chords.










share|improve this question




















  • 3





    Can I ask what "pluutin" is?

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 14:49






  • 2





    @Richard "Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence [he has]."

    – user54487
    Nov 22 '18 at 18:59
















1












1








1








I only have a little knowledge of music theory and was unable to work out how to use roman numerals to denote a chord sequence of one of my old tunes which starts in Fm. I have listed the chord sequence a follows:



Fm Ebm F#m Bbm played twice, then, Fm Ebm Em Dm Bdim A



I know this has a modulation at the end but I don't know how to set Roman Numerals to the chords.










share|improve this question
















I only have a little knowledge of music theory and was unable to work out how to use roman numerals to denote a chord sequence of one of my old tunes which starts in Fm. I have listed the chord sequence a follows:



Fm Ebm F#m Bbm played twice, then, Fm Ebm Em Dm Bdim A



I know this has a modulation at the end but I don't know how to set Roman Numerals to the chords.







theory chord-progressions roman-numerals






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 22 '18 at 19:32









Richard

43.4k7100186




43.4k7100186










asked Nov 22 '18 at 13:39









Matt BrownMatt Brown

61




61








  • 3





    Can I ask what "pluutin" is?

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 14:49






  • 2





    @Richard "Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence [he has]."

    – user54487
    Nov 22 '18 at 18:59
















  • 3





    Can I ask what "pluutin" is?

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 14:49






  • 2





    @Richard "Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence [he has]."

    – user54487
    Nov 22 '18 at 18:59










3




3





Can I ask what "pluutin" is?

– Richard
Nov 22 '18 at 14:49





Can I ask what "pluutin" is?

– Richard
Nov 22 '18 at 14:49




2




2





@Richard "Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence [he has]."

– user54487
Nov 22 '18 at 18:59







@Richard "Question of putting Roman Numerals on a chord sequence [he has]."

– user54487
Nov 22 '18 at 18:59












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4














Roman numerals can be really helpful for music the follows traditional harmonic syntax. But if music is really chromatic, sometimes Roman numerals really aren't helpful at all. Unfortunately, I think your progression is one such case: we can stick Roman numerals to the chords, but it won't tell us much (if anything) that's helpful.




Fm E♭m F♯m Bbm Fm E♭m Em Dm B° A
i vii ♭ii iv i vii v iv ii° I
*** ###


Two caveats of the above progression:




  • The chord marked *** I have interpreted enharmonically as G♭ minor so as to understand it as ♭II (a modified Neapolitan chord).

  • The chords beginning at ### are no longer understood in F minor, but in A.


Since Roman numerals aren't all that helpful, we can perhaps better understand this progression as an example of planing. Planing is when we take a particular chord type and just move it up and down in musical space. In this case, you plane a root-position minor chord and move it up and down through the chromatic universe, and then you use it to reach a pretty clear iv–ii°–I cadence in A major.






share|improve this answer


























  • Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:03



















1














Roman Numeral Analysis wouldn't do much good for chord progressions like these because it's not clear what key these progressions belong to, especially the second progression. Something important to note about music theory, compared to other lofty kinds of theory (physics, mathematics, etc) is that music theory does not dictate how one should or shouldn't write. It simply allows us to communicate what's happening in the music in a succinct, formal, and analytic format. What I see in your progression is, instead, a root-movement relationship built on intervals. However just because that's what I see in there does not magically mean that's why you wrote it that way.



The first progression could be said to be "constant structure" minor chords (i.e., entirely minor chords) built upon an increasingly large root movement: Major second/diminished third between Fm/Ebm, minor third between Ebm/F#m, and major third between F#m/Bbm. The second progression looks to me like a chain of seconds of varying sizes: Fm->Ebm = M2, Ebm->Em = m2, Em->Dm = M2, Dm->Bdim = A2(m3), Bdim->A = M2. The diminished and major chords in this progression provide significant color differentiation to break up the monotony of the minor chords.



This is simply how I would explain the construction of these progressions, and I'm sure several other people would have different analyses as well.






share|improve this answer



















  • 3





    Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 15:22











  • Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:13











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "240"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f76805%2fquestion-of-putting-roman-numerals-on-a-chord-sequence-i-have%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4














Roman numerals can be really helpful for music the follows traditional harmonic syntax. But if music is really chromatic, sometimes Roman numerals really aren't helpful at all. Unfortunately, I think your progression is one such case: we can stick Roman numerals to the chords, but it won't tell us much (if anything) that's helpful.




Fm E♭m F♯m Bbm Fm E♭m Em Dm B° A
i vii ♭ii iv i vii v iv ii° I
*** ###


Two caveats of the above progression:




  • The chord marked *** I have interpreted enharmonically as G♭ minor so as to understand it as ♭II (a modified Neapolitan chord).

  • The chords beginning at ### are no longer understood in F minor, but in A.


Since Roman numerals aren't all that helpful, we can perhaps better understand this progression as an example of planing. Planing is when we take a particular chord type and just move it up and down in musical space. In this case, you plane a root-position minor chord and move it up and down through the chromatic universe, and then you use it to reach a pretty clear iv–ii°–I cadence in A major.






share|improve this answer


























  • Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:03
















4














Roman numerals can be really helpful for music the follows traditional harmonic syntax. But if music is really chromatic, sometimes Roman numerals really aren't helpful at all. Unfortunately, I think your progression is one such case: we can stick Roman numerals to the chords, but it won't tell us much (if anything) that's helpful.




Fm E♭m F♯m Bbm Fm E♭m Em Dm B° A
i vii ♭ii iv i vii v iv ii° I
*** ###


Two caveats of the above progression:




  • The chord marked *** I have interpreted enharmonically as G♭ minor so as to understand it as ♭II (a modified Neapolitan chord).

  • The chords beginning at ### are no longer understood in F minor, but in A.


Since Roman numerals aren't all that helpful, we can perhaps better understand this progression as an example of planing. Planing is when we take a particular chord type and just move it up and down in musical space. In this case, you plane a root-position minor chord and move it up and down through the chromatic universe, and then you use it to reach a pretty clear iv–ii°–I cadence in A major.






share|improve this answer


























  • Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:03














4












4








4







Roman numerals can be really helpful for music the follows traditional harmonic syntax. But if music is really chromatic, sometimes Roman numerals really aren't helpful at all. Unfortunately, I think your progression is one such case: we can stick Roman numerals to the chords, but it won't tell us much (if anything) that's helpful.




Fm E♭m F♯m Bbm Fm E♭m Em Dm B° A
i vii ♭ii iv i vii v iv ii° I
*** ###


Two caveats of the above progression:




  • The chord marked *** I have interpreted enharmonically as G♭ minor so as to understand it as ♭II (a modified Neapolitan chord).

  • The chords beginning at ### are no longer understood in F minor, but in A.


Since Roman numerals aren't all that helpful, we can perhaps better understand this progression as an example of planing. Planing is when we take a particular chord type and just move it up and down in musical space. In this case, you plane a root-position minor chord and move it up and down through the chromatic universe, and then you use it to reach a pretty clear iv–ii°–I cadence in A major.






share|improve this answer















Roman numerals can be really helpful for music the follows traditional harmonic syntax. But if music is really chromatic, sometimes Roman numerals really aren't helpful at all. Unfortunately, I think your progression is one such case: we can stick Roman numerals to the chords, but it won't tell us much (if anything) that's helpful.




Fm E♭m F♯m Bbm Fm E♭m Em Dm B° A
i vii ♭ii iv i vii v iv ii° I
*** ###


Two caveats of the above progression:




  • The chord marked *** I have interpreted enharmonically as G♭ minor so as to understand it as ♭II (a modified Neapolitan chord).

  • The chords beginning at ### are no longer understood in F minor, but in A.


Since Roman numerals aren't all that helpful, we can perhaps better understand this progression as an example of planing. Planing is when we take a particular chord type and just move it up and down in musical space. In this case, you plane a root-position minor chord and move it up and down through the chromatic universe, and then you use it to reach a pretty clear iv–ii°–I cadence in A major.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Nov 22 '18 at 14:50

























answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:39









RichardRichard

43.4k7100186




43.4k7100186













  • Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:03



















  • Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:03

















Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

– Matt Brown
Nov 23 '18 at 11:03





Thank you for explaining this Richard, I shall go on learning music theory as best I can.

– Matt Brown
Nov 23 '18 at 11:03











1














Roman Numeral Analysis wouldn't do much good for chord progressions like these because it's not clear what key these progressions belong to, especially the second progression. Something important to note about music theory, compared to other lofty kinds of theory (physics, mathematics, etc) is that music theory does not dictate how one should or shouldn't write. It simply allows us to communicate what's happening in the music in a succinct, formal, and analytic format. What I see in your progression is, instead, a root-movement relationship built on intervals. However just because that's what I see in there does not magically mean that's why you wrote it that way.



The first progression could be said to be "constant structure" minor chords (i.e., entirely minor chords) built upon an increasingly large root movement: Major second/diminished third between Fm/Ebm, minor third between Ebm/F#m, and major third between F#m/Bbm. The second progression looks to me like a chain of seconds of varying sizes: Fm->Ebm = M2, Ebm->Em = m2, Em->Dm = M2, Dm->Bdim = A2(m3), Bdim->A = M2. The diminished and major chords in this progression provide significant color differentiation to break up the monotony of the minor chords.



This is simply how I would explain the construction of these progressions, and I'm sure several other people would have different analyses as well.






share|improve this answer



















  • 3





    Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 15:22











  • Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:13
















1














Roman Numeral Analysis wouldn't do much good for chord progressions like these because it's not clear what key these progressions belong to, especially the second progression. Something important to note about music theory, compared to other lofty kinds of theory (physics, mathematics, etc) is that music theory does not dictate how one should or shouldn't write. It simply allows us to communicate what's happening in the music in a succinct, formal, and analytic format. What I see in your progression is, instead, a root-movement relationship built on intervals. However just because that's what I see in there does not magically mean that's why you wrote it that way.



The first progression could be said to be "constant structure" minor chords (i.e., entirely minor chords) built upon an increasingly large root movement: Major second/diminished third between Fm/Ebm, minor third between Ebm/F#m, and major third between F#m/Bbm. The second progression looks to me like a chain of seconds of varying sizes: Fm->Ebm = M2, Ebm->Em = m2, Em->Dm = M2, Dm->Bdim = A2(m3), Bdim->A = M2. The diminished and major chords in this progression provide significant color differentiation to break up the monotony of the minor chords.



This is simply how I would explain the construction of these progressions, and I'm sure several other people would have different analyses as well.






share|improve this answer



















  • 3





    Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 15:22











  • Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:13














1












1








1







Roman Numeral Analysis wouldn't do much good for chord progressions like these because it's not clear what key these progressions belong to, especially the second progression. Something important to note about music theory, compared to other lofty kinds of theory (physics, mathematics, etc) is that music theory does not dictate how one should or shouldn't write. It simply allows us to communicate what's happening in the music in a succinct, formal, and analytic format. What I see in your progression is, instead, a root-movement relationship built on intervals. However just because that's what I see in there does not magically mean that's why you wrote it that way.



The first progression could be said to be "constant structure" minor chords (i.e., entirely minor chords) built upon an increasingly large root movement: Major second/diminished third between Fm/Ebm, minor third between Ebm/F#m, and major third between F#m/Bbm. The second progression looks to me like a chain of seconds of varying sizes: Fm->Ebm = M2, Ebm->Em = m2, Em->Dm = M2, Dm->Bdim = A2(m3), Bdim->A = M2. The diminished and major chords in this progression provide significant color differentiation to break up the monotony of the minor chords.



This is simply how I would explain the construction of these progressions, and I'm sure several other people would have different analyses as well.






share|improve this answer













Roman Numeral Analysis wouldn't do much good for chord progressions like these because it's not clear what key these progressions belong to, especially the second progression. Something important to note about music theory, compared to other lofty kinds of theory (physics, mathematics, etc) is that music theory does not dictate how one should or shouldn't write. It simply allows us to communicate what's happening in the music in a succinct, formal, and analytic format. What I see in your progression is, instead, a root-movement relationship built on intervals. However just because that's what I see in there does not magically mean that's why you wrote it that way.



The first progression could be said to be "constant structure" minor chords (i.e., entirely minor chords) built upon an increasingly large root movement: Major second/diminished third between Fm/Ebm, minor third between Ebm/F#m, and major third between F#m/Bbm. The second progression looks to me like a chain of seconds of varying sizes: Fm->Ebm = M2, Ebm->Em = m2, Em->Dm = M2, Dm->Bdim = A2(m3), Bdim->A = M2. The diminished and major chords in this progression provide significant color differentiation to break up the monotony of the minor chords.



This is simply how I would explain the construction of these progressions, and I'm sure several other people would have different analyses as well.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:36









LSM07LSM07

750413




750413








  • 3





    Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 15:22











  • Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:13














  • 3





    Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

    – Richard
    Nov 22 '18 at 15:22











  • Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

    – Matt Brown
    Nov 23 '18 at 11:13








3




3





Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

– Richard
Nov 22 '18 at 15:22





Your second and third sentences should be carved into stone!

– Richard
Nov 22 '18 at 15:22













Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

– Matt Brown
Nov 23 '18 at 11:13





Your explanation is of great interest to me as I knew that most of the chords were not in the key, but borrowed from other keys and therefore it is not helpful to apply roman numerals to them, I don't think the piece really modulates till the Em but feels like it modulates only at the end Bdim to A when set with the tune (top notes).

– Matt Brown
Nov 23 '18 at 11:13


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f76805%2fquestion-of-putting-roman-numerals-on-a-chord-sequence-i-have%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







這個網誌中的熱門文章

Xamarin.form Move up view when keyboard appear

Post-Redirect-Get with Spring WebFlux and Thymeleaf

Anylogic : not able to use stopDelay()