The Chords in this progression sound great but don't belong together - so why do they work?

Question

I am a songwriter and compose my own music to go with my lyrics. Most of my chord progressions follow common patterns like using a I V IV or I IV V with an occasional ii or iii or vi chord thrown in for good measure. But I am always looking for new ways to make my chord progressions more interesting and unusual. But I want them to be effective and satisfying. So when I see something outside the norm that sounds good, I like to try to figure out what makes it work. The sound file below is an example of a popular song (some may recognize it but the title isn't important) that uses a very strange chord progression. My arrangement is transposed from the original composition but these chords absolutely work in this song. Yet the chords don't seem to fit properly into any key. I'll take a wild guess and say it's in the key of G. So the intro is **G to E** (G = G major and E = E major). Then the verses chords are **G B7 C A G B7 C A** then the chorus is **G Em G Em G A G E** (major this time). Then there is a bridge that goes **G D C - G D C - G D C** then **F D7** then back to the verse. Song ends on E (major) after repeating the intro. My question is how can these chords go together? There is an Em **and** E major? I know the G C D & Em fit in the key of G major. But why does an A major and E major work if this song is in the key of G? What about the B7 (a B major will work in the song also). I realize the bridge might modulate to a different key? But in the verse there is a G and B7 and A and C If I can understand what functions these seemingly out of place chords have and what makes them work in this progression, perhaps I can use the same logic to compose some fresh new melodies for my own original songs. The sound file is me playing the chord progression on acoustic guitar while calling out the chord names in case my sloppy playing does not make them clear. https://soundcloud.com/al-webster-4/strange-chord-progression-but-it-works

Answer 1

There are a couple of different things going on here, mostly the use of secondary dominants and mode mixture.

Here's the chord progression:

Intro: I - VI

Verse: I - V/vi - VI/vi - IV/vi (or II)

Bridge: I - V - IV - I - V - IV - bVII - V

Some clever things are happening here, where the composer is actually using G major's parallel minor, E minor, to introduce some fun and colorful chords, while still keeping the overall feel of the song in G major.

Mode mixture is when you borrow a chord from another mode of the same key. For example, the bVII chord in the bridge is borrowed from G Mixolydian (same as G major but with F natural instead of F sharp), which still allows it to have a (albeit weak) dominant function. Also the A major chord in the verse is present in G Lydian (same as G major but with C sharp instead of natural).

Mode mixture also allows you to change a chord from major to minor and vice versa in the progression to add flavor. This is where the E major comes in. Though E major isn't a chord in any of the modes that start on G, it is closely related as the parallel major of E minor, which of course is present in G.

In the simplest terms, you can experiment with changing chords from major to minor and back if they "shouldn't" be that quality in the key that you're working in.

One other thing going on here is the use of secondary functions. The chord analysis above shows that B7 or B serves as the V to vi (E minor) - that's called a secondary dominant. The chord progression briefly goes into E minor before throwing in that A major, which is a nice chord to pivot back to G major on because it's both the mode-mixed(!) IV of E minor AND the mode-mixed II of G major, both of which are subdominant chords in their respective keys.

It's kind of complicated, but I hope that makes sense!

Answer 2

Tonality and common practice harmony does not attempt explain what sounds good. It is only an observation of the way composers used harmonies in a kind statistical way. What makes chord progressions interesting is when one creates something that works but is, in some way, unusual...and as you said "sounds good" even though it doesn't fit a common practice explanation. In other words, there really are no rules other than "does it sound good or not?"...it works because it works or vice versa. I hope this frees you up to look for progressions that appeal to your ear and trust that rather than looking for why. This is what composers have done for centuries to create original sounding music.

Having said that, here is one suggestion: you can make any two chords sound good if the "voice leading" between them is smooth. In other words, if the individual components of the two chords connect in a way that the ear can follow comfortably, then the progression sounds like iti works...and this doesn't necessarily mean that that two are in the same key - it just means a smooth connection has been made. In your audio example, all the chords connect smoothly as played on the guitar. If you were to write out in notes on music paper those chords you played, you would see that all of the notes between each of the chords, connect reasonably smoothly.

Your question is a good one and could be the beginning of creating some fresh sounding progressions. Feel free to ask me a follow up question.

Stephen