I just replied to your other theory!

Originally Posted by: dlwalkeYes Chris, that makes sense.[/quote]

Good deal!

Originally Posted by: dlwalkeI thought I probably had a more-or-less complete list of the chords that would typically sound good together with diatonic chords, "borrowed" cords from all the different modes, secondary dominants and even what I have referred to as "God" chords (major chords that are 3rds or 6ths aparts, like C-Eb or E or F# or Ab or A) that have nothing in common but can sound good under the right circumstances (like movie soundtracks in circumstances where the director is trying to create a sese of awe).[/quote]

There is always a reason why certain chords created certain specific sounds. It's always related to the interval distances involved. In the case of the above chords I find it is usually the voice motion of each note of a chord as it moves to the next chord.

Often when there is contrary motion combined with common tones a great deal of tension is implied creating a dramatic effect.

C major to E for example:

C > down to > B

E > stays on > E

G > up to > G#

Originally Posted by: dlwalkeI'm starting to get the feeling that music theory doesn't tell you which chords might sound good together, in a particular order, but instead just gives you a vocabulary for talking about the chords that do end up sounding good.[/quote]

Good observation. But it tells even more! It gives you a vocabulary to tell you everything. Not just the chords that sound good, but why they sound good to you, why others might sound bad, or just common, interesting, unusual, bland, etc.

Originally Posted by: dlwalkeOn another site (a reddit music theory sub-forum), someone wrote that music theory is descriptive rather than prescriptive.[/quote]

I just posted that in the other thread! :) It's true that you can use it prescriptively in a certain sense. But that is not its function. Music theory describes musical sounds that exist.

[quote=dlwalke]I have to think that it's going too far to say that music theory doesn't tell you at all which chords might sound good.

But "sounding good" is a matter of personal estimation. Music theory can help you mentally classify chord progressions. But it doesn't tell you which ones are good or bad. After all, you can use Roman numerals to label any & every chord progression that is possible. But you still have to decide if you like the sound of it.

[quote=dlwalke]As you get further and further away from I, IV, V progressions (where it's hard not to have a decent sounding progression), the options for successfully using out-of-key chords becomes more limited.

2 things here.

1. Chord progressions have virtually infinite possible ways of being voiced & played (different rhythms & instrumental timbres). I-IV-V has been used in classical pieces & in basic rock & roll songs with drastically different sonic results.

2. The fact that there are only 12 notes to recombine hasn't stopped anyone yet that wants to write a new song. :)

[quote=dlwalke]I guess the question is do you think I'm thinking about this stuff in the right way or am I way off base, out in left field, not even in the right ballpark...to use a series of baseball metaphors?

I think it's great that you are thinking about it at all. But it's good to get clear on what it is & how it can be used.

Music Theory is the set of concepts that describes the nature of musical events. It is the process of mentally indentifying, categorizing & labeling the sounds that occur in music. We do this in order to build a consistent set of ideas to describe what happens in music. Music theory only exists to identify, mentally organize, classify and categorize the sounds that happen in actual music. The sounds are primary. The theory describes the sounds.

It is called theory because it is the conceptual organization of all the musical sounds we can hear. All those sounds are the concrete applications, the practice.

Some music does not conform to the standard of voice leading that classical composers used (no perfect fifth or octave motions, not too many consecutive thirds, etc.). But, of course, there is no reason that music has to do so. Unless you are taking a test on Bach's voice leading in a music theory class. :)

Music theory can tell you the relationship between the notes or chords. But which notes you use or you think sound good or bad depends on the player or composers intention.

For example, playing a C major scale over a C# major chord might "fit" if that creates the very dissonant sound you are trying to achieve. Music theory can tell you what those objects are, and even show you (if you understand enough) why it will be dissonant as hell. Theory only tells you what it is, how you can understand it and relate it to the other musical concepts you know. Theory is only "wrong" when someone attempts to misidentify or mis-conceptualize something. For example, if you want to call the notes "c, e, g" a D major chord, then you are wrong. That is "bad theory".

[quote=dlwalke]While noodling around the other day I came up with the following progression: D-F#-G-A ...

Is there a music theory reason why this sounds good?

[p]Sure. You can & have described the chord progression in theory terms (key of D major: I - bIII - IV - V). But keep in mind that "sounds good" is a personal evaluation. So, you can use theory to identify the chords & their relationship. And you can use that knowledge to realize that you like the sounds of that specific progression. You can even dive deeper into the voice motion of the chords to think in terms of chromatic approach tones fo major chords.

Make sense?