How To Write Great Chord Progressions

[hardlock]

Thanks for that Hilary. When it's played on piano, depending on the inversions, I noticed that the Bm changes to D with only one note change of B>A. Almost an intro to: I, V, II (D, A, E). That's if the D is root? Here's a quick sample:

[Hilary]

The Bm is an inversion of the D with a 6 - Dmaj6?

I wish I could play like you do.

I got a book How to write songs on Guitar by Ricky Rooksby which is very good and analyses the structure of some popular songs when I first decided to have a go at writing songs - nowadays I do it all be ear.

I know nothing about guitars but 8va is usually up an octave and the sign you mention is usually marcato (I'm on my phone) which means to play it more forcefully than the rest!

[Hilary]

A D F# - 2nd inversion of D

The sign is reverse polarity so where it would typically be a minor chord it's a major and vice versa.

I'm fairly sure that if it was in D the E would be an Em but I'm rusty to say the least!

[Hilary]

Bm D A E - Bm tonic

i III VII IV^

Bm D A E - D tonic

vi I V II^

Bm D A E - A tonic

ii IV I V

Bm D A E - E tonic

v^ VII^ IV I

A is the only one that makes sense typically

[Hilary]

It does seem odd to start on a ii though if in A so maybe it's in Bm with a reverse polarity on the 4th 

[T.C. Elliott]

One version that keeps coming up but in different keys is: Bm, D, A, E. Which could be written: i, III, VII, IV ? 

Question is, what's the root chord? Or Key using these chords?

Or start on A for: ii, IV, I, V ?

The first thing I look at are the major chords to see if it fits the I IV V pattern of any major key. Your chord progression fits nicely into the key of A (I=A, IV=D, V-E)
If a progression is in minor then then a typical progression would have the minor chord sound more final or full even if it's not the final chord of the progression.
The relative minor of A is F#minor which doesn't appear. And after playing through on the guitar I'd agree with Hillary. Your key seems to be A.

All that being said, my little cheat method (identifying the major chords) works in a lot of rock music, but it isn't foolproof. People use Major III chords and other borrowed chords all the time. I think it makes more interesting music, but it also tests my limited theory skills.

[hardlock]

Thanks much for the theory lessons Hilory & TC! Guess I now need to do some serious homework. 

My takeaway is I need to understand "tonic" (thought it was something you add to a drink), "relative minor" (a young cousin?), and "reverse polarity" (putting my batteries in backward)...... 

[WarpCanada]

> I see what you're saying, but contrary to what you may think, knowing what you're doing and then some is an excellent way to, believe it or not, increase originality and takes things to entirely different levels.

I am with both fellers above, if you take my meaning, I'm quotin' a joke from one of my favorite Coen Brothers films, O Brother Where Art Thou.

Let me talk about both sides and how it feels inside my skull.

First, I'm a piano student at the young age of 50, I am about grade 1 level, but I am intent on mastering theory and composition from a classical point of view. Eventually.

Meanwhile, I am also a noodler and a free form song idea maker, and I do what I do with the level of theory knowledge I have, and I have a great time. 

Both those things are great.   But let's then, balance them.

What I find that I do when I don't know enough theory, is repeat myself, I get into loops.  Theory can be a way to BREAK OUT of loops.

Let's say I wrote a tonne of songs that use the I, IV, and V chord.  What you don't know what that is? Yes you do, if you've ever noticed all the songs that can be played with just G and C and D.  That's the I and IV and V chord of G major.  G is I,  C is IV, and D is V.   You might even (without knowing theory) know that if you do G, C, D7 G, it sounds more pleasant when returning to G.   That's also theory.  Not knowing theory is fine, but you're soaking in it anyways.

So then, suppose you asked yourself, could this song, which is very long become more interesting if I modulate into a different key for the bridge and fourth verse?  What if I could substitute different chords in my song and keep the same melody?    That's all theory.

Then suppose you ask yourself, is this boring, is this interesting, is this clever, is this a rip-off? The more theory you know, the more you'll be able to answer those questions, not with someone else's sets of judgements, but with your own judgement.  You'll be able to say, I think that there aren't enough interesting rhythmic ideas in here, and I know ways to spice these ones up because, hey, I know theory.  Playing salsa is awesome, but also, knowing how Salsa music is constructed and the musicalideas upon which it is based, and being about to talk about those ideas is part of perhaps learning something about salsa and applying it to something that isn't salsa. 

Should we stop making stuff until we learn more theory? Nope.  I'm a programmer in my day job.   I always have MORE fun programming the MORE I know about it.  But I also don't stop doing the part I love (making things) until I know things.  The knowing things is a gradual drip drip drip.

Should we learn more theory if it could make the stuff we make more fun for us to make, and make us happier with our own output, and possibly, even help other people to enjoy our music more?

I think sure.

What I don't get is the fear of knowing more, spending say 30 minutes, every year, or 30 minutes every week, learning more.  Music theory isn't rules. It's explanations of things.   Knowing how electricity works doesn't make you less creative or happy when working with electrical systems, so why would knowing about music theory make you a worse or less happy songwriter?

Only knowing four chords, or only knowing four ways to string together chords (less knowledge) is always going to mean more generic.  To take the argument that knowing more makes us less creative to its farthest end, let's say we should only know how to play one note on one string on our guitar.  Now for sure we will be original?

Maybe learning is hard and we don't want to do it. But I don't get the idea that it could make you less good at something or less of what YOU want to be.  You have the choices all open to you. You could know how to make Prog Rock or  Chamber Music and not make it.

[maxit]

Lol I wanted to say something but warren said it so well I just dont !
I only can add, being a long time fan of music theory, that really that stuff can be learned easily basing on what you need and what you like, and finding out someone that don't overcomplicate it. when I stopped calling it 'music theory' myself I made a biiig step forward, for example. Now I call it just magic tricks ;-)

[hardlock]

Hey max, I agree, it reminds me of the first time I heard about "circle of 5ths". Seemed just like magic!