Trouble reading roman numeral notation with flats












5















I am working my way through an article on transformations in rock harmony, but I am getting stuck trying to read the author's roman numeral analysis. I would really appreciate some help understanding how to read flattened roman numerals. Here is an example of what I mean:



enter image description here



Thank you!










share|improve this question



























    5















    I am working my way through an article on transformations in rock harmony, but I am getting stuck trying to read the author's roman numeral analysis. I would really appreciate some help understanding how to read flattened roman numerals. Here is an example of what I mean:



    enter image description here



    Thank you!










    share|improve this question

























      5












      5








      5








      I am working my way through an article on transformations in rock harmony, but I am getting stuck trying to read the author's roman numeral analysis. I would really appreciate some help understanding how to read flattened roman numerals. Here is an example of what I mean:



      enter image description here



      Thank you!










      share|improve this question














      I am working my way through an article on transformations in rock harmony, but I am getting stuck trying to read the author's roman numeral analysis. I would really appreciate some help understanding how to read flattened roman numerals. Here is an example of what I mean:



      enter image description here



      Thank you!







      roman-numerals functional-harmony






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked yesterday









      286642286642

      1538




      1538






















          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5














          TLDR;



          a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling





          In the usual Roman numeral analysis we have these conventions:



          First we have to give a label for a key like E: for E major or Em: for E minor. Then we have these points...




          • capital numeral means major triad

          • lower case numeral means minor triad

          • 'o' after numeral means diminished triad

          • '7' means a diatonic seventh above root

          • a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling


          That last rule is the crux of your question.



          In E major the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C# minor and gets labelled vi.



          In E minor the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C major and gets labelled VI.



          If the VI from E minor is used in E major the chord root is altered from C# to C natural. (This is called chord borrowing.) When in E major that change in the chord root is made explicit in the Roman numeral figure by using the flat to show the change of chord root: bVI.



          The reason your book's example is confusing is because the key signature on the staff is E minor, but the analysis key shows E which is read as E major (it should be Em: to mean minor) and then the Roman numeral figures are labeled with flats which makes things seem like the assumed key is E major. Basically the labeling is a mess and it makes confusing the use of sharps and flats on Roman numeral figures.



          As others point out, the book doesn't even label the chords as 7th chords!



          The book seems sloppy.



          @Tim makes a good point that Roman numeral analysis can be tricky with rock music. The real conundrum to me is the final chord. It's an E dominant 7th with a G natural on top. That is a very bluesy sound. It's a very familiar sound, but Roman numerals are a poor way to label it. There is no way to indicate the simultaneous G# and G natural... and the minor 7th. About the only thing the I label gets right is a root on E and a perfect fifth of B. Tread carefully with harmonic analysis of rock music. You might find a lot of inappropriate labels.






          share|improve this answer
























          • Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

            – 286642
            yesterday











          • That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

            – Tim
            yesterday






          • 1





            Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

            – trlkly
            yesterday













          • @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

            – Michael Curtis
            yesterday











          • Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

            – Laurence Payne
            15 hours ago



















          3














          The notation seems a bit confusing. The first chord is a D7 in the key of either E-Major or e-minor; the author isn't quite so clear. The key signature indicates e-minor in which case the chord is VII (no flat needed.) If the author shows keys in ALL CAPS (which has been outdated since 1834), the chord VII7 but that disagrees with the single sharp signature. The author also leaves off the seventh indicator.



          Perhaps we can assume the author uses E irrespective of Major or minor mode and that he leaves off the seventh. This still leaved the bVII vs VII so it's still still. The (V) must mean the seventh of G.



          The author shows a descending scale (the caratted numerals above some of the chords) so perhaps that may help. I think he's using the Roman numerals associated with E-Major but the score is written as e-minor; he's assuming that all chords have sevenths (OK, but limiting). Then we have (if the score were in e-minor): VII7, VII7, VII7, VI7, III, VII7, VI7, V7, IM7 (at least as I would notate it.)






          share|improve this answer
























          • Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

            – Tim
            20 hours ago











          • You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

            – ttw
            16 hours ago





















          3














          Are you confused because the song's in E minor, but the Roman numeral chord names are relative to E MAJOR? Yes, that's how it works. The numbers only care that E is the tonic. E minor triad is i, E major triad is I. The uppercase Roman number doesn't mean 'diatonic', 'in key' or 'correct', it just means 'major'.



          Similarly for modified numerals. G is the 'correct' third note of E minor, but G B D is called ♭III. That's ♭ because G is the flattened 3rd of E major, III because it;s a major triad.



          G B♭ D would be ♭iii. That's ♭ because it's built on the flat 3rd of E major, iii because it's a minor triad.



          I repeat, these names would be the same whether we were in E major, E minor or E anything-else.






          share|improve this answer































            2














            RNA isn't designed for analysing 'rock' music. It sort of works when non-diatonic chords need naming, as we use 'b' in certain circumstances. As in key E. There is no D and no C, only D# and C#. So, we have to call the D chord bVII and C chord bVI. It gets as close as we can.



            The bIII represents G, again because there's no G in key E: G# is iii (III) but we need the flattened G#, making G. Thus bIII.






            share|improve this answer































              2














              The trouble is:



              The key sign is G-major/e-minor:
              (in e-minor the flat should be a natural sign to explain the VI and VII degree are not of the harmonic scale!)



              Indeed this progression is notated in respect of E-major!



              D - D - D - C - G - C - D - E



              If you transpose this figure to C you will understand that the flats are concerning



              Bb - Bb - Bb - Ab - Eb - Ab - Bb - G - C (with the blue note b10)






              share|improve this answer
























              • 'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                – Tim
                21 hours ago











              • As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                – Albrecht Hügli
                21 hours ago













              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                – Tim
                20 hours ago











              • RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                – Albrecht Hügli
                20 hours ago











              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                – Albrecht Hügli
                20 hours ago













              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%2f81665%2ftrouble-reading-roman-numeral-notation-with-flats%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              5 Answers
              5






              active

              oldest

              votes








              5 Answers
              5






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              5














              TLDR;



              a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling





              In the usual Roman numeral analysis we have these conventions:



              First we have to give a label for a key like E: for E major or Em: for E minor. Then we have these points...




              • capital numeral means major triad

              • lower case numeral means minor triad

              • 'o' after numeral means diminished triad

              • '7' means a diatonic seventh above root

              • a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling


              That last rule is the crux of your question.



              In E major the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C# minor and gets labelled vi.



              In E minor the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C major and gets labelled VI.



              If the VI from E minor is used in E major the chord root is altered from C# to C natural. (This is called chord borrowing.) When in E major that change in the chord root is made explicit in the Roman numeral figure by using the flat to show the change of chord root: bVI.



              The reason your book's example is confusing is because the key signature on the staff is E minor, but the analysis key shows E which is read as E major (it should be Em: to mean minor) and then the Roman numeral figures are labeled with flats which makes things seem like the assumed key is E major. Basically the labeling is a mess and it makes confusing the use of sharps and flats on Roman numeral figures.



              As others point out, the book doesn't even label the chords as 7th chords!



              The book seems sloppy.



              @Tim makes a good point that Roman numeral analysis can be tricky with rock music. The real conundrum to me is the final chord. It's an E dominant 7th with a G natural on top. That is a very bluesy sound. It's a very familiar sound, but Roman numerals are a poor way to label it. There is no way to indicate the simultaneous G# and G natural... and the minor 7th. About the only thing the I label gets right is a root on E and a perfect fifth of B. Tread carefully with harmonic analysis of rock music. You might find a lot of inappropriate labels.






              share|improve this answer
























              • Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

                – 286642
                yesterday











              • That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

                – Tim
                yesterday






              • 1





                Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

                – trlkly
                yesterday













              • @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

                – Michael Curtis
                yesterday











              • Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

                – Laurence Payne
                15 hours ago
















              5














              TLDR;



              a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling





              In the usual Roman numeral analysis we have these conventions:



              First we have to give a label for a key like E: for E major or Em: for E minor. Then we have these points...




              • capital numeral means major triad

              • lower case numeral means minor triad

              • 'o' after numeral means diminished triad

              • '7' means a diatonic seventh above root

              • a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling


              That last rule is the crux of your question.



              In E major the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C# minor and gets labelled vi.



              In E minor the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C major and gets labelled VI.



              If the VI from E minor is used in E major the chord root is altered from C# to C natural. (This is called chord borrowing.) When in E major that change in the chord root is made explicit in the Roman numeral figure by using the flat to show the change of chord root: bVI.



              The reason your book's example is confusing is because the key signature on the staff is E minor, but the analysis key shows E which is read as E major (it should be Em: to mean minor) and then the Roman numeral figures are labeled with flats which makes things seem like the assumed key is E major. Basically the labeling is a mess and it makes confusing the use of sharps and flats on Roman numeral figures.



              As others point out, the book doesn't even label the chords as 7th chords!



              The book seems sloppy.



              @Tim makes a good point that Roman numeral analysis can be tricky with rock music. The real conundrum to me is the final chord. It's an E dominant 7th with a G natural on top. That is a very bluesy sound. It's a very familiar sound, but Roman numerals are a poor way to label it. There is no way to indicate the simultaneous G# and G natural... and the minor 7th. About the only thing the I label gets right is a root on E and a perfect fifth of B. Tread carefully with harmonic analysis of rock music. You might find a lot of inappropriate labels.






              share|improve this answer
























              • Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

                – 286642
                yesterday











              • That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

                – Tim
                yesterday






              • 1





                Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

                – trlkly
                yesterday













              • @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

                – Michael Curtis
                yesterday











              • Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

                – Laurence Payne
                15 hours ago














              5












              5








              5







              TLDR;



              a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling





              In the usual Roman numeral analysis we have these conventions:



              First we have to give a label for a key like E: for E major or Em: for E minor. Then we have these points...




              • capital numeral means major triad

              • lower case numeral means minor triad

              • 'o' after numeral means diminished triad

              • '7' means a diatonic seventh above root

              • a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling


              That last rule is the crux of your question.



              In E major the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C# minor and gets labelled vi.



              In E minor the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C major and gets labelled VI.



              If the VI from E minor is used in E major the chord root is altered from C# to C natural. (This is called chord borrowing.) When in E major that change in the chord root is made explicit in the Roman numeral figure by using the flat to show the change of chord root: bVI.



              The reason your book's example is confusing is because the key signature on the staff is E minor, but the analysis key shows E which is read as E major (it should be Em: to mean minor) and then the Roman numeral figures are labeled with flats which makes things seem like the assumed key is E major. Basically the labeling is a mess and it makes confusing the use of sharps and flats on Roman numeral figures.



              As others point out, the book doesn't even label the chords as 7th chords!



              The book seems sloppy.



              @Tim makes a good point that Roman numeral analysis can be tricky with rock music. The real conundrum to me is the final chord. It's an E dominant 7th with a G natural on top. That is a very bluesy sound. It's a very familiar sound, but Roman numerals are a poor way to label it. There is no way to indicate the simultaneous G# and G natural... and the minor 7th. About the only thing the I label gets right is a root on E and a perfect fifth of B. Tread carefully with harmonic analysis of rock music. You might find a lot of inappropriate labels.






              share|improve this answer













              TLDR;



              a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling





              In the usual Roman numeral analysis we have these conventions:



              First we have to give a label for a key like E: for E major or Em: for E minor. Then we have these points...




              • capital numeral means major triad

              • lower case numeral means minor triad

              • 'o' after numeral means diminished triad

              • '7' means a diatonic seventh above root

              • a sharp or flat before numeral mean raise or lower the chord root from its normal diatonic spelling


              That last rule is the crux of your question.



              In E major the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C# minor and gets labelled vi.



              In E minor the diatonic chord of the sixth degree is C major and gets labelled VI.



              If the VI from E minor is used in E major the chord root is altered from C# to C natural. (This is called chord borrowing.) When in E major that change in the chord root is made explicit in the Roman numeral figure by using the flat to show the change of chord root: bVI.



              The reason your book's example is confusing is because the key signature on the staff is E minor, but the analysis key shows E which is read as E major (it should be Em: to mean minor) and then the Roman numeral figures are labeled with flats which makes things seem like the assumed key is E major. Basically the labeling is a mess and it makes confusing the use of sharps and flats on Roman numeral figures.



              As others point out, the book doesn't even label the chords as 7th chords!



              The book seems sloppy.



              @Tim makes a good point that Roman numeral analysis can be tricky with rock music. The real conundrum to me is the final chord. It's an E dominant 7th with a G natural on top. That is a very bluesy sound. It's a very familiar sound, but Roman numerals are a poor way to label it. There is no way to indicate the simultaneous G# and G natural... and the minor 7th. About the only thing the I label gets right is a root on E and a perfect fifth of B. Tread carefully with harmonic analysis of rock music. You might find a lot of inappropriate labels.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered yesterday









              Michael CurtisMichael Curtis

              9,664534




              9,664534













              • Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

                – 286642
                yesterday











              • That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

                – Tim
                yesterday






              • 1





                Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

                – trlkly
                yesterday













              • @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

                – Michael Curtis
                yesterday











              • Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

                – Laurence Payne
                15 hours ago



















              • Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

                – 286642
                yesterday











              • That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

                – Tim
                yesterday






              • 1





                Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

                – trlkly
                yesterday













              • @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

                – Michael Curtis
                yesterday











              • Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

                – Laurence Payne
                15 hours ago

















              Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

              – 286642
              yesterday





              Thank you for the great response! Your answer was very clear--I appreciate it!

              – 286642
              yesterday













              That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

              – Tim
              yesterday





              That's the Hendrix chord. E7#9 So there's a 7th - D, and a #9 - Fx, which isn't exactly G, more F##. Can't think of any RN that describes it!

              – Tim
              yesterday




              1




              1





              Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

              – trlkly
              yesterday







              Using the 7#9 is a common way to fit the blues major-minor chord into roman numeral analysis. In equal temperament, the distinction between a double sharp 2 and a flat 3 become less important. The notes are the same, so they are named either for function or even convenience.

              – trlkly
              yesterday















              @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

              – Michael Curtis
              yesterday





              @trlkly, 7#9 as in E7#9 would be a jazz symbol rather than a Roman numeral symbol. But it is interesting the #9 in a dominant chord versus a flat (minor) third over a major triad. I think when I have seen the latter it has been for a tonic chord. I've not seen a rule stated, but #9 to me says 'dominant' and flat third over major triad sort of 'tonic'

              – Michael Curtis
              yesterday













              Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

              – Laurence Payne
              15 hours ago





              Trouble is, in relation to this music example at least, the answer's wrong. The example uses the 'mode-blind' convention of chord numbering. Everything is named relative to E major, even if the tune's in E minor.

              – Laurence Payne
              15 hours ago











              3














              The notation seems a bit confusing. The first chord is a D7 in the key of either E-Major or e-minor; the author isn't quite so clear. The key signature indicates e-minor in which case the chord is VII (no flat needed.) If the author shows keys in ALL CAPS (which has been outdated since 1834), the chord VII7 but that disagrees with the single sharp signature. The author also leaves off the seventh indicator.



              Perhaps we can assume the author uses E irrespective of Major or minor mode and that he leaves off the seventh. This still leaved the bVII vs VII so it's still still. The (V) must mean the seventh of G.



              The author shows a descending scale (the caratted numerals above some of the chords) so perhaps that may help. I think he's using the Roman numerals associated with E-Major but the score is written as e-minor; he's assuming that all chords have sevenths (OK, but limiting). Then we have (if the score were in e-minor): VII7, VII7, VII7, VI7, III, VII7, VI7, V7, IM7 (at least as I would notate it.)






              share|improve this answer
























              • Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

                – Tim
                20 hours ago











              • You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

                – ttw
                16 hours ago


















              3














              The notation seems a bit confusing. The first chord is a D7 in the key of either E-Major or e-minor; the author isn't quite so clear. The key signature indicates e-minor in which case the chord is VII (no flat needed.) If the author shows keys in ALL CAPS (which has been outdated since 1834), the chord VII7 but that disagrees with the single sharp signature. The author also leaves off the seventh indicator.



              Perhaps we can assume the author uses E irrespective of Major or minor mode and that he leaves off the seventh. This still leaved the bVII vs VII so it's still still. The (V) must mean the seventh of G.



              The author shows a descending scale (the caratted numerals above some of the chords) so perhaps that may help. I think he's using the Roman numerals associated with E-Major but the score is written as e-minor; he's assuming that all chords have sevenths (OK, but limiting). Then we have (if the score were in e-minor): VII7, VII7, VII7, VI7, III, VII7, VI7, V7, IM7 (at least as I would notate it.)






              share|improve this answer
























              • Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

                – Tim
                20 hours ago











              • You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

                – ttw
                16 hours ago
















              3












              3








              3







              The notation seems a bit confusing. The first chord is a D7 in the key of either E-Major or e-minor; the author isn't quite so clear. The key signature indicates e-minor in which case the chord is VII (no flat needed.) If the author shows keys in ALL CAPS (which has been outdated since 1834), the chord VII7 but that disagrees with the single sharp signature. The author also leaves off the seventh indicator.



              Perhaps we can assume the author uses E irrespective of Major or minor mode and that he leaves off the seventh. This still leaved the bVII vs VII so it's still still. The (V) must mean the seventh of G.



              The author shows a descending scale (the caratted numerals above some of the chords) so perhaps that may help. I think he's using the Roman numerals associated with E-Major but the score is written as e-minor; he's assuming that all chords have sevenths (OK, but limiting). Then we have (if the score were in e-minor): VII7, VII7, VII7, VI7, III, VII7, VI7, V7, IM7 (at least as I would notate it.)






              share|improve this answer













              The notation seems a bit confusing. The first chord is a D7 in the key of either E-Major or e-minor; the author isn't quite so clear. The key signature indicates e-minor in which case the chord is VII (no flat needed.) If the author shows keys in ALL CAPS (which has been outdated since 1834), the chord VII7 but that disagrees with the single sharp signature. The author also leaves off the seventh indicator.



              Perhaps we can assume the author uses E irrespective of Major or minor mode and that he leaves off the seventh. This still leaved the bVII vs VII so it's still still. The (V) must mean the seventh of G.



              The author shows a descending scale (the caratted numerals above some of the chords) so perhaps that may help. I think he's using the Roman numerals associated with E-Major but the score is written as e-minor; he's assuming that all chords have sevenths (OK, but limiting). Then we have (if the score were in e-minor): VII7, VII7, VII7, VI7, III, VII7, VI7, V7, IM7 (at least as I would notate it.)







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered yesterday









              ttwttw

              8,928932




              8,928932













              • Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

                – Tim
                20 hours ago











              • You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

                – ttw
                16 hours ago





















              • Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

                – Tim
                20 hours ago











              • You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

                – ttw
                16 hours ago



















              Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

              – Tim
              20 hours ago





              Your 3rd line - did you mean 'chords' not 'keys' in ALL CAPS?

              – Tim
              20 hours ago













              You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

              – ttw
              16 hours ago







              You'e right; I meant chords, not keys. It's harder to read Roman numeral analysis with all cap chords. Older versions of Piston's Harmony do this. Marx's 1830s book does use more modern notation and is easier to read.

              – ttw
              16 hours ago













              3














              Are you confused because the song's in E minor, but the Roman numeral chord names are relative to E MAJOR? Yes, that's how it works. The numbers only care that E is the tonic. E minor triad is i, E major triad is I. The uppercase Roman number doesn't mean 'diatonic', 'in key' or 'correct', it just means 'major'.



              Similarly for modified numerals. G is the 'correct' third note of E minor, but G B D is called ♭III. That's ♭ because G is the flattened 3rd of E major, III because it;s a major triad.



              G B♭ D would be ♭iii. That's ♭ because it's built on the flat 3rd of E major, iii because it's a minor triad.



              I repeat, these names would be the same whether we were in E major, E minor or E anything-else.






              share|improve this answer




























                3














                Are you confused because the song's in E minor, but the Roman numeral chord names are relative to E MAJOR? Yes, that's how it works. The numbers only care that E is the tonic. E minor triad is i, E major triad is I. The uppercase Roman number doesn't mean 'diatonic', 'in key' or 'correct', it just means 'major'.



                Similarly for modified numerals. G is the 'correct' third note of E minor, but G B D is called ♭III. That's ♭ because G is the flattened 3rd of E major, III because it;s a major triad.



                G B♭ D would be ♭iii. That's ♭ because it's built on the flat 3rd of E major, iii because it's a minor triad.



                I repeat, these names would be the same whether we were in E major, E minor or E anything-else.






                share|improve this answer


























                  3












                  3








                  3







                  Are you confused because the song's in E minor, but the Roman numeral chord names are relative to E MAJOR? Yes, that's how it works. The numbers only care that E is the tonic. E minor triad is i, E major triad is I. The uppercase Roman number doesn't mean 'diatonic', 'in key' or 'correct', it just means 'major'.



                  Similarly for modified numerals. G is the 'correct' third note of E minor, but G B D is called ♭III. That's ♭ because G is the flattened 3rd of E major, III because it;s a major triad.



                  G B♭ D would be ♭iii. That's ♭ because it's built on the flat 3rd of E major, iii because it's a minor triad.



                  I repeat, these names would be the same whether we were in E major, E minor or E anything-else.






                  share|improve this answer













                  Are you confused because the song's in E minor, but the Roman numeral chord names are relative to E MAJOR? Yes, that's how it works. The numbers only care that E is the tonic. E minor triad is i, E major triad is I. The uppercase Roman number doesn't mean 'diatonic', 'in key' or 'correct', it just means 'major'.



                  Similarly for modified numerals. G is the 'correct' third note of E minor, but G B D is called ♭III. That's ♭ because G is the flattened 3rd of E major, III because it;s a major triad.



                  G B♭ D would be ♭iii. That's ♭ because it's built on the flat 3rd of E major, iii because it's a minor triad.



                  I repeat, these names would be the same whether we were in E major, E minor or E anything-else.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered yesterday









                  Laurence PayneLaurence Payne

                  36.5k1670




                  36.5k1670























                      2














                      RNA isn't designed for analysing 'rock' music. It sort of works when non-diatonic chords need naming, as we use 'b' in certain circumstances. As in key E. There is no D and no C, only D# and C#. So, we have to call the D chord bVII and C chord bVI. It gets as close as we can.



                      The bIII represents G, again because there's no G in key E: G# is iii (III) but we need the flattened G#, making G. Thus bIII.






                      share|improve this answer




























                        2














                        RNA isn't designed for analysing 'rock' music. It sort of works when non-diatonic chords need naming, as we use 'b' in certain circumstances. As in key E. There is no D and no C, only D# and C#. So, we have to call the D chord bVII and C chord bVI. It gets as close as we can.



                        The bIII represents G, again because there's no G in key E: G# is iii (III) but we need the flattened G#, making G. Thus bIII.






                        share|improve this answer


























                          2












                          2








                          2







                          RNA isn't designed for analysing 'rock' music. It sort of works when non-diatonic chords need naming, as we use 'b' in certain circumstances. As in key E. There is no D and no C, only D# and C#. So, we have to call the D chord bVII and C chord bVI. It gets as close as we can.



                          The bIII represents G, again because there's no G in key E: G# is iii (III) but we need the flattened G#, making G. Thus bIII.






                          share|improve this answer













                          RNA isn't designed for analysing 'rock' music. It sort of works when non-diatonic chords need naming, as we use 'b' in certain circumstances. As in key E. There is no D and no C, only D# and C#. So, we have to call the D chord bVII and C chord bVI. It gets as close as we can.



                          The bIII represents G, again because there's no G in key E: G# is iii (III) but we need the flattened G#, making G. Thus bIII.







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered yesterday









                          TimTim

                          103k10107259




                          103k10107259























                              2














                              The trouble is:



                              The key sign is G-major/e-minor:
                              (in e-minor the flat should be a natural sign to explain the VI and VII degree are not of the harmonic scale!)



                              Indeed this progression is notated in respect of E-major!



                              D - D - D - C - G - C - D - E



                              If you transpose this figure to C you will understand that the flats are concerning



                              Bb - Bb - Bb - Ab - Eb - Ab - Bb - G - C (with the blue note b10)






                              share|improve this answer
























                              • 'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                                – Tim
                                21 hours ago











                              • As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                21 hours ago













                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                                – Tim
                                20 hours ago











                              • RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago











                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago


















                              2














                              The trouble is:



                              The key sign is G-major/e-minor:
                              (in e-minor the flat should be a natural sign to explain the VI and VII degree are not of the harmonic scale!)



                              Indeed this progression is notated in respect of E-major!



                              D - D - D - C - G - C - D - E



                              If you transpose this figure to C you will understand that the flats are concerning



                              Bb - Bb - Bb - Ab - Eb - Ab - Bb - G - C (with the blue note b10)






                              share|improve this answer
























                              • 'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                                – Tim
                                21 hours ago











                              • As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                21 hours ago













                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                                – Tim
                                20 hours ago











                              • RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago











                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago
















                              2












                              2








                              2







                              The trouble is:



                              The key sign is G-major/e-minor:
                              (in e-minor the flat should be a natural sign to explain the VI and VII degree are not of the harmonic scale!)



                              Indeed this progression is notated in respect of E-major!



                              D - D - D - C - G - C - D - E



                              If you transpose this figure to C you will understand that the flats are concerning



                              Bb - Bb - Bb - Ab - Eb - Ab - Bb - G - C (with the blue note b10)






                              share|improve this answer













                              The trouble is:



                              The key sign is G-major/e-minor:
                              (in e-minor the flat should be a natural sign to explain the VI and VII degree are not of the harmonic scale!)



                              Indeed this progression is notated in respect of E-major!



                              D - D - D - C - G - C - D - E



                              If you transpose this figure to C you will understand that the flats are concerning



                              Bb - Bb - Bb - Ab - Eb - Ab - Bb - G - C (with the blue note b10)







                              share|improve this answer












                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer










                              answered yesterday









                              Albrecht HügliAlbrecht Hügli

                              3,450220




                              3,450220













                              • 'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                                – Tim
                                21 hours ago











                              • As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                21 hours ago













                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                                – Tim
                                20 hours ago











                              • RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago











                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago





















                              • 'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                                – Tim
                                21 hours ago











                              • As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                21 hours ago













                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                                – Tim
                                20 hours ago











                              • RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago











                              • Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                                – Albrecht Hügli
                                20 hours ago



















                              'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                              – Tim
                              21 hours ago





                              'In Em, the flat should be a natural sign...' I don't understand!

                              – Tim
                              21 hours ago













                              As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                              – Albrecht Hügli
                              21 hours ago







                              As in e-minor (harmonic and melodic key) the VII is D# a flat wouldn't be quite the chorrect sign, in my opinion there should be the sign the accidental corresponding to D natural).

                              – Albrecht Hügli
                              21 hours ago















                              Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                              – Tim
                              20 hours ago





                              Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D# - it could well be D nat. Although using the major as a datum point, D# would be the diatonic. But diatonic doesn't feature well in rock music, so RNA is never going to be a good idea.

                              – Tim
                              20 hours ago













                              RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                              – Albrecht Hügli
                              20 hours ago





                              RNA is roman numbers? Yes, I agree. To me it's only useful for historical interests. The Chord signs will fit here better.

                              – Albrecht Hügli
                              20 hours ago













                              Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                              – Albrecht Hügli
                              20 hours ago







                              Except we don't necessarily expect E minor to have D. Have you seen the remark below the time 4/4? it says E: (if this means E-major the VII and VI would be D# and C#.

                              – Albrecht Hügli
                              20 hours ago




















                              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%2f81665%2ftrouble-reading-roman-numeral-notation-with-flats%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







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              How did Captain America manage to do this?

                              迪纳利

                              南乌拉尔铁路局