keychanges in pop songs

[nadir]

I usually understand the chord movement in Jazz standards. Most of the time it is a 251 in major or minor or a variation of it.
With very basic songs, i called them pop songs in the subject, i usually fail to understand why a chord is used, or in what ways the chords move to each other.
To give an easy example:
In "Hey Joe" the score seems to indicate it is G major.
The chords are:
E dominant
C major
G major
D major
A major

I can't understand the "function" of the chords. Say an E dominant would make me think the following chord is an A-major.
The assumed key (G major) makes me think the A would be a minor chord.
I can assume the C major is a rootless A chord, but then get lost, as it would be a dominant chord again. And i can't see why the G is the following chord.

I don't even know what "term" to search for. Hey Joe is just an example.
Thanks in advance.

[BobUnderwood]

Search on "functional harmony".

In pop, jazz and blues, a dominant 7th chord (1, 3, 5, b7) is not typically functioning as the dominant (V) chord in the key. It's a substitute for any major chord (let's make the E7 in "Hey Joe" an E7#9).

If we analyze it in G we get:
VImaj - IV - I - V - IV of VI
E7#9 - C - G - D - A

That's kind of clunky - maybe better to think of it in E.

[nadir]

Thanks.
I still don't understand why they are all major chords.
If i think of the E as a major chord too, it only seems to make it worse.
Willl try to get my head into it again when less tired (might be the IV of VI is the hint, but right now i am too tired).

[bsg75]

Perhaps Adam Neely can help
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVvmALPu5TU

[merlyn]

@nadir If you're familiar with jazz standards do you know the bridge from rhythm changes? How would you analyse that?

[BobUnderwood]

nadir,
you should also research "chromatic harmony" - not everything is diatonic.

[nadir]

@nadir If you're familiar with jazz standards do you know the bridge from rhythm changes? How would you analyse that?

Just wrote the answer, got logged out from ISP, and all was removed. Will try again

As far i know, as far i was told:
The chord progession called "rythm changes" comes from the song with the same name.
I was told it is a chord progression III-VI-II-V (3-6-2-5) in a diatonic way of the scale, so it is minor, minor, minor, dominant.
As the relation between III-VI-II (and VI-II-V) to me it is the usual II-V-I, as each chord is the fivth of the chord to follow
(III being the fivth of the VI, VI the fivth of the II, II being the fivth of the V).
I don't really see it as a different thing, just as another, though slightly different II-V-I (mainly as the dominant chord is not there, hence the movement is not as strong).

I am not sure, as said. So i did a quick search if the song "rythm changes" really has that chord progression. The sheet music i found (wikipedia) doesn't have it. I don't really know that song, nor ever looked at it. (It might be what i tried to describe is to be found in the bridge, section B, should have looked at it before i wrote all that, it pretty much looks like it .... )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhythm_ch ... pitzer.png

To sum it up: I told you how i think about it. Don't take my word for it. It might well be wrong. I lack a lot of knowledge, and usually do very basic jazz standards (say satin doll, autumn leaves, such).

[nadir]

nadir,
you should also research "chromatic harmony" - not everything is diatonic.

Yes, thanks. I looked the video provided by bsg57, i thought quite a bit about what you said. I turn it around my head, and as soon i think i might have gotten it, it all gets confusing again and i am lost as i was before.
As soon it is not diatonic i am all lost. Even key changes confuse me very much.
I will keep looking. Let me start with "chromatic harmony". So thanks for giving that hint.

[BobUnderwood]

In both "Hey Joe" and "I've Got Rhythm" you're looking at tonicizations.

[merlyn]

Yes, the A section in rhythm changes is based around I VI ii V. The bridge is

| D7 / / / | D7 / / / | G7 / / / | G7 / / / |
| C7 / / / / | C7 / / / | F7 / / / | F7 / / / |

The F7 is diatonic in Bb, and the preceding chords are only to get there. The progression moves exclusively in 4ths, and starts on D7, which means it ends up on F7. C7 is V7/V7 which means it's the dominant 7th of the V7 in this key. So extending that we have G7, which is the V7/V7/V7 and D7 which is V7/V7/V7/V7. I hope you see what I mean. We have gone away from F7 by 4ths to end up back there.

It's a similar idea in Hey Joe, where A is diatonic, and the other chords get to A, this time by 5ths.

[nadir]

| D7 / / / | D7 / / / | G7 / / / | G7 / / / |
| C7 / / / / | C7 / / / | F7 / / / | F7 / / / |

I completely missed it's all dominant chords. Probably as i didn't expect it.
It that case i'd look at is as secondary dominants.
Which i am also kind of used to. But i can't apply it in (easy considered) songs ( i called it pop) Hey Joe being the example. At least not yet.

[merlyn]

Hey Jimi, where you going the wrong way round the cycle of fourths?
I'm heading for E, man, that's where I can get in touch with the source.

Some of my more hardcore colleagues would consider moving in fifths the wrong way. I'm more tolerant and think on fifths as the other way. If we take the bridge of rhythm changes (which is in a lot of songs e.g. Caravan) in F as triads:

|A / / / |A / / / |D / / / |D / / / |
|G / / / |G / / / |C / / / |C / / / |

Read that backwards, and it's the chords for Hey Joe.

[nadir]

lol for the lyrics change.

Yeah, i did understand that it is the other way around ( C fourth of G, G fourth of D, D fourth of A, A fourth of E).
That is not the problem.
The problem is why they are all major chords

[Loki Harfagr]

The problem is why they are all major chords

Not a big problem, that's just all the minors were busy on chores since they came back late intoxicated by diatonics' abuse

[RyanH]

I'm not at all saying this to derail the conversation or criticize anyone, but to your statement that you usually fail to understand why a chord is used, I would suggest that, often (and probably the case with Hendrix), rock and pop songwriters are not thinking in terms of music theory - if they even understand theory to begin with. There is often no logic behind the decision.

I've known or read interviews with some pretty fantastic and/or popular musicians who don't know any theory or even how to read music. I'm not at all fantastic or popular, but I've been writing songs for decades, spanning rock, funk/soul, and ambient instrumentals - and I do have a very basic background in theory and can (slowly) read music - and I can honestly say I've never looked to established theory to help me write songs (except, I think, in one case where I was sorely vexed about how to complete a passage).

As I said, no criticism intended. My hat is off to those like yourselves who are more capable and knowledgeable than I. I just wanted to give another perspective. A lot of musicians are going purely by feel (although, of course, what feels right to them might be influenced by songs written by other people who do have knowledge of theory).

Cheers.