Trouble reading roman numeral notation with flats

Multi tool use
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:
Thank you!
roman-numerals functional-harmony
add a comment |
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:
Thank you!
roman-numerals functional-harmony
add a comment |
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:
Thank you!
roman-numerals functional-harmony
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:
Thank you!
roman-numerals functional-harmony
roman-numerals functional-harmony
asked yesterday
286642286642
1538
1538
add a comment |
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
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.
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 inE7#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
|
show 1 more comment
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.)
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
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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)
'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
|
show 2 more comments
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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.
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 inE7#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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
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 inE7#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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
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.
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 inE7#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
|
show 1 more comment
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 inE7#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
|
show 1 more comment
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.)
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
add a comment |
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.)
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
add a comment |
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.)
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.)
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
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.
answered yesterday


Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
36.5k1670
36.5k1670
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
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.
answered yesterday
TimTim
103k10107259
103k10107259
add a comment |
add a comment |
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)
'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
|
show 2 more comments
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)
'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
|
show 2 more comments
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)
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)
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
|
show 2 more comments
'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
|
show 2 more comments
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
nNZCA6HJcF88kxUM2czG5tErcn0 yHw6AK6K33geIAvLGRcEER