gshall - Posted - 03/19/2011:  12:25:32

---

I'm really confused, now. I've learned how to look at the number of sharps and flats to pick out the key of a song, but it was in an acapelo (sp?) church, so I never related it to an instrument. I just don't get the circle of fifths. I can make a C chord anywhere on the banjo it can be made, but I can't sharp one note to get a G chord. Would somebody straighten out my thinking?

If the circle of fifths is just a list of all keys, I guess that's okay, but people seem to indicate it does more for you than just list keys. I don't know what.

DantheBanjoMan - Posted - 03/19/2011:  12:47:49

---

I know, it can be pretty confusing. However, this si a really good question and it sounds like off to good start.

The circle of fifths is a list of keys, not a list of chords. Adding a sharp chagnes it from the KEY of C to th Key of G. However, in terms of chords the notes in a C chord are C, E, G, and the notes in G chord are G, B, D. As you can see, there is no F# in either of these chords.

The easiest way to figure things out is to sit a piano keybord with somone who has a basic understanding and you'll be able to visualize it more easily.

gshall - Posted - 03/19/2011:  12:54:10

---

Thanks, Dan. You're right about the piano. I have a chromatic harmonica, and that helps (although I can't play chords on it). Plus, I've been studying TexasBanjo's post, and that helps.

I really didn't want to know this much; I just wanted to pick a few songs on my banjo.

John Steele - Posted - 03/19/2011:  13:31:29

---

The circle of fifths refers to the tendency of a chord to resolve to the next chord in the "circle". The word "fifth" refers to the interval between the starting chord and the next.

If you think of the 12 keys like spokes in a bicycle wheel. This wheel has 12 spokes. If you spin it all the way around one revolution, you end up back where you started.
But musical spokes really like to resolve a certain distance - or interval. It's most commonly referred to as a fifth, so if you're in C, the next chord in the circle is F.
How far is that ? Well, if you start on C and count down the C scale, it's a fifth, or five steps - C, B, A, G, F
Of course, it depends on which way you spin the bicycle wheel, and for that reason it's also sometimes called the circle of fourths, if you count up instead of down - C, D, E, F
That's spinning the wheel the opposite direction.

Regardless of what you call it, the fact remains that chords like to resolve this way. That's not to say that they don't resolve other ways too, but the movement from base to the chord a fifth down (or a fourth up) is one of the most common and defining movements in Western harmony.

How does this apply to what we do as banjo players ? Well, the circle of fifths is certainly alive and well in traditional music.
Once you start to play with other people and pay attention to chord progressions of song, you'll notice patterns, as well as little things that chord instruments do to foreshadow the next chord. This is most common when chords move around the circle as we've described above.
I need a simple familiar example everyone knows, in a simple key, so I'm gonna pick "Your Cheatin' Heart" in C:
So, you're jamming with someone, and they're playing guitar and giving you their best Hank imitation. The song starts on a C chord, and you're following along carefully - They sing the opening lines, accompanied by the chords shown above the lyrics:

C
Your cheatin' heart

C7
Will make you

F
weep....... you'll cry and

G
cry, and try to

C
sleep

So, you ask yourself - why did the guitarist change the opening C chord from a simple pure C chord to C7 while he sang "will make you.." ?
Because the next chord in the progression is F. F is the next chord in the circle. C7 was a musical hint - telling you that C chord is about to resolve
through the circle to the next chord (either down a fifth or up a fourth, depending on how you look at it, or which way you spin the bicycle wheel)

For the same reason, perhaps the guitarist will also choose to use G7 instead of a pure G chord, because likewise the song is about to resolve from that G chord
through the circle of fifths and land back on C, our home base.

I could say alot more about this, but I don't want to muddy the water. The seventh chord is one of many choices you might choose to accentuate the fact that the chord progression is following the circle. Suffice to say, jazz students can study an entire semester on the use of II-V-I changes (two, five, one) and their variations. It's the most common change in 20th century music, and contains two revolutions through the circle of fifths before landing back on "home base". (There aren't an abundance of bluegrass examples, but "Sled Ride", the instrumental, comes to mind). It can be as complicated or as simple as you wish to make it.

- John

p.s. The number of sharps and flats used to indicate a key is unrelated to this topic. This is all about intervals.

---

Edited by - John Steele on 03/19/2011 13:34:30

gshall - Posted - 03/19/2011:  14:07:03

---

John, thanks. That makes a lot of sense and fills in a lot of holes in my knowledge!

JoeDownes - Posted - 03/19/2011:  14:25:26

---

Some thoughts about the circle of fifth and the sharps:

The new sharp notes are always one half step below the root of the key. So for G you add F#, for D you add C# etc. Those are called the leading notes, as they lead back to the root note of the key at the end of a progression.

They are the third of the V chord that resolves to the I chord, like John described. So when you move through the circle of fifth from C to G, the F changes to F#. F# is the 3rd of the V chord D (DF#A) that leads backs to G at the end of the song.

Also notice that the sharps are all a fifth apart: F#, C#, G#, D#, etc.

RedDragon - Posted - 03/19/2011:  14:32:42

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gshall

I'm really confused, now. I've learned how to look at the number of sharps and flats to pick out the key of a song, but it was in an acapelo (sp?) church, so I never related it to an instrument. I just don't get the circle of fifths. I can make a C chord anywhere on the banjo it can be made, but I can't sharp one note to get a G chord. Would somebody straighten out my thinking?

If the circle of fifths is just a list of all keys, I guess that's okay, but people seem to indicate it does more for you than just list keys. I don't know what.

---

The circle itself is merely a cute representation of the mathematical relationship between key signatures, and provides some mnemonics for remembering them.

The keys are:

Cb / Abm : 7 flats - Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, Gb, Cb, Fb
Gb / Ebm : 6 flats - Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, Gb, Cb
Db / Bbm : 5 flats - Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, Gb
Ab / Fm : 4 flats - Bb, Eb, Ab, Db
Eb / Cm : 3 flats - Bb, Eb, Ab
Bb / Gm : 2 flats - Bb, Eb
F / Dm : 1 flat - Bb
C / Am : No sharps or flats
G / Em : 1 sharp - F#
D / Bm : 2 sharps - F#, C#
A / F#m : 3 sharps - F#, C#, G#
E / C#m : 4 sharps - F#, C#, G#, D#
B / G#m : 5 sharps - F#, C#, G#, D#, A#
F# / D#m : 6 sharps - F#, C#, G#, D#, A#, E#
C# / A#m : 7 sharps - F#, C#, G#, D#, A#, E#, B#

Whatever key you start with in this list, moving one up or down moves you a perfect fifth in either direction, e.g. F# is a perfect fifth above B, and E is a perfect fifth below B.

The order of sharps - F, C, G, D, A, E, B - is also an upward chain of perfect fifths (and also the only chain of perfect fifths you can make which does not have sharps or flats in it). The order of flats - B, E, A, D, G, C, F - is a downward chain of perfect fifths, and is merely the reverse of the order of sharps.

So, if you want to find the key signature of E major, for instance, count upwards or downwards from C in fifths until you find it the least distance away, in this case counting up four perfect fifths from C - C, to G (1), to D (2), to A (3), to E (4). Since you're counting up from C, you know the key signature has sharps in it, and because its four perfect fifths above C, you know it has four sharps in it. To find out which four sharps, just take the first four of the order of sharps, which is F#, C#, G#, and D#, and there's your key signature. As Joe notes, as you progress upwards through the sharp keys, the new sharp each time is the leading note of the major scale build on the key centre if and only if you are looking at major rather than minor keys, which can sometimes also be a memory aid.

Beyond this, the actual circle doesn't have much of any real practical use. Obviously intervals of fifths are very important and common in music, and progressions of chords in fifths - e.g. ii, V, I - are very important, but the actual diagram of the circle of fifths isn't really very helpful here - the vast majority of the time you'll be counting in fifths within the notes of the scale that goes along with the key you're using, or the key you're modulating to (and, in a major key, one of those intervals will be a diminished rather than perfect fifth, and so won't match up with the circle anyway - there are more variations in a minor key), rather than pulling out some diagram and looking at that. You'll sometimes see people drawing lots of pretty coloured lines over the top of it, but these are much more cute than they are actually useful. It's not really useful at all for chord construction, as you've found yourself.

---

Edited by - RedDragon on 03/19/2011 14:35:21

spinley - Posted - 03/19/2011:  15:19:40

---

What John said

tom elder - Posted - 03/20/2011:  07:23:09

---

g c f bflat eflat a flat dflat gflat b e a d back to g the complete circle of fiths

gshall - Posted - 03/20/2011:  07:34:01

---

Thanks.

I'm humbled (and that hasn't happened often in my life).

Jazz Country - Posted - 03/20/2011:  07:58:50

---

Sweet Georgia Brown is a good one to use for circle of 5ths (4ths) practice.

---

Edited by - Jazz Country on 03/20/2011 07:59:13

minstrelmike - Posted - 03/20/2011:  10:10:34

---

Chords are different from chord progressions.

If you want to make a specific chord, you make it based on the underlying scale.
A C chord is based off the Cmajor scale
A Cm chord is either based off the Cminor scale or based off the Cmajor but uses a flatted third (I've seen it explained both ways and I tend toward the first explanation).

All G chords are built off of G scales. All F chords are built off of F scales.
----------------------------------------------------------
A chord progression is different. It is based off of a key. In the key of C, you will most often use the C,F, and G chords to express the song. Those chords fit the key well but each individual chord is still built off of its own underlying scale.

Chord construction from a root note is different than chord progressions for a given key.

And neither of them have any specific relationship to the circle of fifths.

---

Edited by - minstrelmike on 03/20/2011 10:11:39

John Steele - Posted - 03/20/2011:  11:02:54

---

>>All G chords are built off of G scales. All F chords are built off of F scales.

I hate to disagree, but, respectfully, that's simply not true.

G7 is not built off a G scale, because G7 contains an F note, not an F#. G7 is built off a C major scale.

Cm can come from the Cm scale, but it can also come from Eb major (relative minor), or Bb major (dorian minor).

But, none of this has to do with the circle of fifths.

- John
i knew i should never have come in here :)

gshall - Posted - 03/20/2011:  11:03:30

---

You guys have given me a lot to study.

minstrelmike - Posted - 03/20/2011:  11:21:54

---

G7 in my domain is built off the dominant seventh scale starting on G.

Scales and keys are not the same thing.
The C major scale and the C minor scale and the C diminished scale and the C harmonic minor scale and the C augmented scale and the C mixolydian scale are all in the key of C.
So is the C pentatonic and the C blues pentatonic and the C blues which is called the minor seventh and uses the flatted third: C D Eb F G A Bb C

There are two ways to think of making a G7 chord based off G scales.
One is the regular major scale with the seventh flatted.
The other is to use the standard dominant seventh scale: g a b c d e f g
which can -also- be considered a mode of C but using an alternate key besides the Root is not the standard way to build a chord.

John Steele - Posted - 03/20/2011:  12:22:41

---

I give up. If anyone needs me, I'll be at Moe's.

- John

EggerRidgeBoy - Posted - 03/22/2011:  18:08:49

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by minstrelmike


Scales and keys are not the same thing.

The C major scale and the C minor scale and the C diminished scale and the C harmonic minor scale and the C augmented scale and the C mixolydian scale are all in the key of C.

---

As a relatively new banjo player I have been trying to pick up as much music theory as I can while learning my drops thumbs and bum ditties. Unless I am misreading them, most of the "Music Theory 101" books I have read seem to state that scales and keys are indeed the same thing. Or, in other words, that saying "I am playing in the key of A" is simply a way of saying "I am using the A Major scale".

For instance, here is a quote from Chapter 4 of "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Music Theory":

"When a piece of music is based on a particular musical scale, we say the music is in the "key" of that scale. For instance, a song based around the C Major scale is in the key of C Major. A song based around the B-flat Major scale is in the key of B-flat Major."

Additionally, I have not heard Mixolydian (or Dorian or Lydian, etc.) referred to as scales - I have always heard them referred to as modes. Again, from the same book:

"If a scale is a combination of eight successive notes, do any eight notes make a scale? Not necessarily. Once you get past the major and minor scales, all other eight note combinations aren't technically scales; they're called modes."

Am I missing something?

(I realize this question is getting away from the OP's Circle of Fifths topic - perhaps it should be its own thread.)

---

Edited by - EggerRidgeBoy on 03/22/2011 18:22:03

Rick McKeon - Posted - 03/22/2011:  20:29:55

---

Here is a nice chart summarizing the circle of fifths:
rickmckeon.com/guitarlessons/circle5.pdf

Keep in mind we are simply talking about keys with an increasing number of sharps (or flats if you go the other direction - circle of 4ths). The only reason for sharps (or flats) in the key signature is to preserve the pattern of the major scale (WWHWWWH) but it turns out that jumping on to the circle sounds good too.

So, if you are playing a circle of fifth's tune you start with the I chord, jump on the circle, and work your way back to the I (one) again. Most of the early jazz tunes are based on the progression ii V I. Ragtime progressions are typically based on vi ii V I (jumping on the circle one step further).

Just strum the chords and listen. You will hear all of the familiar stuff you are used to. By this I mean for a ii V I progression in the key of G strum one measure each of Am D G. To hear the sound of a vi ii V I progression strum Em Am D G. You'll hear some familiar stuff. Also, for up tempo stuff all the chords can be major (very typical in ragtime music).

Rick

---

Edited by - Rick McKeon on 03/22/2011 20:30:28

RedDragon - Posted - 03/22/2011:  21:21:26

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EggerRidgeBoy

As a relatively new banjo player I have been trying to pick up as much music theory as I can while learning my drops thumbs and bum ditties. Unless I am misreading them, most of the "Music Theory 101" books I have read seem to state that scales and keys are indeed the same thing.

---

Yes, many overly simplistic music theory works make this kind of assertion, but scales and keys are absolutely not the same thing. As two trivial examples, firstly you can have a piece of music in, say, D major, which in parts takes excursions into A major, or other keys, yet the piece as a whole remains in the key of D. Secondly, a piece in a particular key can use chords containing non-diatonic notes or "borrow" chords from other keys. In both of these cases, you'll be playing notes which you simply will not find in the scale associated with the key. Many people seem to be under the impression that if you're playing in, say, the key of D, you can only play notes which are in the D major scale, and that you're somehow "breaking the rules" if you play other notes. Not only is this not true, but it's not even normal - outside of simple folk songs, most non-trivial pieces of music in a key will contain non-diatonic notes.

In addition, the whole concept of keys is much larger than the simple collection of notes which comprises a scale. It relates to the movement of chord progressions centred around the tonic, and also often to the modulation between keys centred around the "home" key. The concept of a scale just isn't big enough to contain these additional elements. For instance, the "Ionian" mode contains the same notes as the major scale starting on the same note, but it would be easy to write a piece of music in, say, the "B Ionian mode" which would definitely not be in the key of B major, despite the fact that those two scales contain the same notes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EggerRidgeBoy

Or, in other words, that saying "I am playing in the key of A" is simply a way of saying "I am using the A Major scale".

---

As per the above, this just isn't true. Your books are telling you fibs to make things easier.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EggerRidgeBoy

Additionally, I have not heard Mixolydian (or Dorian or Lydian, etc.) referred to as scales - I have always heard them referred to as modes. Again, from the same book:

"If a scale is a combination of eight successive notes, do any eight notes make a scale? Not necessarily. Once you get past the major and minor scales, all other eight note combinations aren't technically scales; they're called modes."

---

Again, just not true. Firstly, a mode, in this context, is a type of scale. Not all scales are modes, but all modes are scales. Secondly, there are many, many "eight note combinations" you could invent which aren't modes, and legitimately call them "scales". You can take any ordered collection of notes that you like and call it a "scale", there's no law that stops you doing this.

The difference between "scales" and "modes" really isn't all that important, and just comes down to terminology. The difference between scales and keys is far more significant, and the two should not be confused - scales and keys are more different than scales and chords are.

---

Edited by - RedDragon on 03/22/2011 21:23:33

banjola1 - Posted - 03/23/2011:  00:42:44

---

Hi,

I have one motto concerning theory:

"Chords come from scales."

Music theory can be a house of mirrors. It seems to me that a person's ideas about tonal organization have to eventually be pragmatic and somehow serve real playing situations. (Otherwise, it amounts to endless discussions on theory forums.)

A scale generates a series of ancillary modal chords and scales. Well over 90% of the chords you will ever use can be painted by major or minor scales that generate them. I think of a major/minor scale as a key or temporary tonal center. It has a family of chord modes and a family of corresponding scales. When I size up a piece of music, I find a common scale that paints many chord(s) in succession or if I need to, or find an altered scale that fits the improvisation I want to hear.

When I hear a G7 chord, I know that I can use the modes and scalar inventions of a C major scale. If that G7 chord is an altered jazz chord, I know that a few well chosen hybrid scales will serve my purpose of providing me with the sensitive tones I need to resolve the dominant b9+9 and b5+5. (jazz minor, diminished, augmented)

A harmonic minor scale to my thinking is a minor key as in classical music. Minor scales can also be thought of as altered major scales. I can easily conceptualize a C harmonic minor scale as an Eb major scale with the fifth note sharped (Bb to B). In a dominant C minor progression, G7+5b9 is more minor sounding as a resolve to Cm than a pure G7 mixolydian scale mode of C major. I will therefore use a C harmonic minor scale to resolve an altered G7b9+5 to Cm. When you play a C harmonic scale from G to G, you get the b9 (Ab) and the +5 (Eb) alterations and it resolves nicely into C minor/major seventh.

If I am reading a jazz chart, I will work with the progression by boiling down the arrangement's chords into three basic functions: Tonic, sub-dominant and dominant.

For example, in a G major scale, the modes and scales of the Imaj., IIIm and VIm degrees are tonic in function. The modes IIm and IVmaj. are subdominant and the V7 and VIIø are functionally dominant. The same concept goes for the modes/scales of a harmonic minor scale. I look for tonal centers (temporary keys) that pivot or modulate into or out of these various modes and focus my attention on how they function within the progression. I can group chords together (like II-V-I) and easily improvise over the changes using one primary scale. (Ultimately the whole chromatic scale.)

I know this may not suit a lot of the theoretical opinions here, but it has gotten me through decades of satisfying jazz improvisation. It's quick, and once you get it down, very simple.

All the best -

P. Cloud

---

Edited by - banjola1 on 03/23/2011 00:55:53

banjoak - Posted - 03/23/2011:  02:23:30

---

quote:

---

If the circle of fifths is just a list of all keys, I guess that's okay, but people seem to indicate it does more for you than just list keys. I don't know what.

---

People do seem to indicate it is some magical key for unlocking great secrets of music. I myself find it way overrated. Part it's apparent magical quality is that it forms a closed circle. But nobody uses it that way, the circle aspect isn't really important. Especially when you consider part of the magic is the magic of number 12, some things that will occur with the number 12.

As RedDragon stated - it's just a chart to help visualize. It's not the only way. You certainly don't need to study it much, or really memorize the entire thing.

banjoak - Posted - 03/23/2011:  03:04:03

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RedDragon
a piece in a particular key can use chords containing non-diatonic notes or "borrow" chords from other keys. In both of these cases, you'll be playing notes which you simply will not find in the scale associated with the key.

---

A great example of this is simply going to a II7 chord - E7 in the key of D, which would contain a g#. The key doesn't change, you're still in D, that g# as part of the E7 is still as it's related to D.

quote:

---

the "Ionian" mode contains the same notes as the major scale starting on the same note, but it would be easy to write a piece of music in, say, the "B Ionian mode" which would definitely not be in the key of B major, despite the fact that those two scales contain the same notes.

---

That "Ionian and the major scale are the same thing" is one of the most misunderstood myths. Simple logic - the concept of Ionian (and aeolian) goes back to the Greeks (also present in many old civilizations). The concept of major/minor was something rather new in the 17th century. If it already existed, why the big deal about now calling it major/minor. It's precisely that it was a whole different way of thinking about music, a way that now allows for expansion of harmonic concepts. It's not just the notes used, but how you can use them. I think if you really want to understand the major/minor it might be worth understanding why it is not Ionian/Aeolian. More than I could post here, that's why they write books.

IMO, Ionian and diatonic are also different concepts. I've been really getting into understanding the older modal systems, beyond the notes. There is a beauty there that fits well with many fiddle tunes and even some songs, that major/minor tends to alter. Major/minor was a great invention, but it did come at a cost of losing something else.

quote:

---

Your books are telling you fibs to make things easier.

---

the absolute best book I would recommend for Music Theory is Gerald Elskin "Lies My Music Teacher Told Me"
It is not a big book, not hard to understand. It's mostly basic music theory, just a better explanation of it, without little fibs. The premise of the book is just as you describe, little lies or half-truths, to make it easier to understand for a beginner. He generally goes through dispelling them "myths" we thought were true. The big problem with the simplified myths, is because they are not quite right, they prevent us from expanding our understanding until we get rid of the myth and form a better foundation. Covers both harmonic and rhythmic.

---

Edited by - banjoak on 03/23/2011 03:07:55

banjola1 - Posted - 03/23/2011:  09:13:08

---

The cycle has a great practical use. It is a great way to practice scales. Any two adjacent scales on the cycle only differ by one note so when you learn one major scale through the range of the instrument, you only have to change one note and you have a new major scale. Over a period of time, you can work your way around it and thoroughly learn the banjo neck. I also use it to practice motifs and phrases.

The cycle shows a relationship of how music actually works.

---

Edited by - banjola1 on 03/23/2011 09:15:16

Jody Hughes - Posted - 03/23/2011:  14:18:21

---

I prefer to write it out as the circle of fourths, reading clockwise.

I have used it with a number of students and they seem to like it as a visual aid.
It's a quick reference that allows one to find the common ragtime/going around the horn changes in any key. It can tell you the ii-V's in any key and many other common harmonic progressions.

However, you have to get to the point you aren't depending on it to know these things, it needs to be in your head and eventually in your ears.

---

Edited by - Jody Hughes on 03/23/2011 14:19:18

banjoak - Posted - 03/23/2011:  15:12:27

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jody Hughes

I prefer to write it out as the circle of fourths, reading clockwise.

I have used it with a number of students and they seem to like it as a visual aid.
It's a quick reference that allows one to find the common ragtime/going around the horn changes in any key. It can tell you the ii-V's in any key and many other common harmonic progressions.

However, you have to get to the point you aren't depending on it to know these things, it needs to be in your head and eventually in your ears.

---

While myself and many of my friends are aware of the visual chart, we generally use something easier as a visual reference, the instrument. For bass and guitar using lower 4 strings, it's pretty easy. The next fifth is both on the same fret one string lower and the fret plus two one string up. A fifth of a fifth of the root is always just plus two, and the series forms a little box; fifth of a fifth of fifth of root just continues the same plus two series. When you ask them what a V of G flat is, rather than thinking how many flats/sharps, or remembering the circle, they just look at or visualize the frets and say C#. Ask them a II and they usually just go up two frets, A flat. Ask them a fifth of a fifth and they might look or visualize C# then Ab, or might know the rule of just go up two. For bass, don't even need to think the name of the notes. My piano friends do something similar, based on visual space and perhaps tactile feel of distance and shapes. They can play any number I, VI... and while they know the name of the I chord, if you ask them the name of the other chords, they sometimes have to pause and think what the name is, and they determine the name not by going around the circle a fifth at a time, but just what notes they are playing. Guitar players often do something similar, they navigate chord shapes and distances, just based on the shape and position of the I chord, (kind of like using a capo) again ask them what the name of any chord is (other than the memorized ones) and they look at what notes they are playing.

RedDragon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:01:31

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jody Hughes

I have used it with a number of students and they seem to like it as a visual aid.
It's a quick reference that allows one to find the common ragtime/going around the horn changes in any key. It can tell you the ii-V's in any key and many other common harmonic progressions.

However, you have to get to the point you aren't depending on it to know these things, it needs to be in your head and eventually in your ears.

---

Agree with your last part. It's a "quick reference" for some things, sure, but let's face it, counting up five notes really isn't all that difficult. Anyone working within a key really ought to get pretty quickly to the level where they can rattle off the diatonic chords off the top of their head without much difficulty.

On the first part, while it's true that you can find some common harmonic progressions in there, to dispel some of this enthusiasm around the circle of fifths it's worth pointing out that the reason this is possible is something more along the lines of a coincidence than some deep musical "truth" inherent in the circle.

The circle really doesn't define any harmonic progressions, and the reason it doesn't is that I think technically it should be called the circle of perfect fifths, and while many common harmonic progressions move in perfect fifths, not all of them do.

For instance, the full progression of fifths - which is the proper name for the actual chord progression - goes:

I - IV - vii(dim) - iii - vi - ii - V - I

It's pretty easy to see that the circle of fifths isn't linked to this progression at all. For instance, to take it in the key of C, I is obviously C itself, and IV is F. If you start at C on the circle, and back up to the left then you will indeed go straight to F, and they'll match. If you go one step further and try to hit vii(dim), this is Bdim in the key of C, but if you back up another place on the circle you'll hit Bb, and not B at all. This is because the descending interval from the subdominant to the leading note is a diminished fifth, not a perfect fifth, and the circle deals only with perfect fifths. So if we're using it to look at the actual full progression of fifths, we can see that the circle fails us before we even get to the third chord. Once you start dealing with minor keys, the circle will lead you even further astray if you try to do this.

Naturally, there's only one interval of a diminished fifth in a major scale, so from there all the way back to the tonic the circle is going to match the scale, so you can indeed find your vi - ii - V - I progressions on it and all the rest. But this exercise shows that while some people seem to think that the circle embodies some deep musical "truth" to it, that it "shows a relationship of how music actually works" as someone has just said, it actually doesn't, at least if we're talking about tonal music, which we are if we're talking about key signatures which is what the circle is all about. Harmonic progressions throughout a key just isn't done via endless chains of perfect fifths, and that's what the circle shows.

Ultimately the circle is concerned solely with the relationship between key signatures, and pretty much nothing else. Because of the fact these relationships are understandable through chains of perfect fifths, and because some common chord progressions are chains of perfect fifths, you can see some of them on there, and if you really struggle with counting to five then I guess there's nothing wrong with using the circle as a visual aid in some cases, but I think it's still worth pointing out that the fact you can do this with some common progressions is not "intentional", as it were, because when diatonic chord progressions move through fifths they do so through fifths in the scale, and these aren't always perfect fifths as they are in the circle.

banjola1 - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:20:59

---

The cycle of fifths/fourths has great musical truth in it. If ones studies the music of Chopin, Bach as well as modern jazz, it embodies the natural tendencies of progressions, not just a representation of keys. The piano jazz of Art Tatum as well as later modern players make use of it as an improvisational harmonic device.

P. Cloud

RedDragon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:21:13

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by banjola1

I have one motto concerning theory:

"Chords come from scales."

Music theory can be a house of mirrors. It seems to me that a person's ideas about tonal organization have to eventually be pragmatic and somehow serve real playing situations. (Otherwise, it amounts to endless discussions on theory forums.)

---

Well, I've had this kind of discussion here before, and I think this is a pretty myopic view of "theory".

To start with, any suggestion that "traditional" music theory is somehow not "pragmatic" is obviously false. This stuff didn't spring out of the air from some dusty professor in an ivory tower looking to confound people - the theoretical principles we have come from centuries of analysing and creating real music. They're about as "pragmatic" as you can get. The "ideas about tonal organization" are the way they are because when you listen to those centuries of real music, that's how you actually do hear the movements towards and away from the tonal centre and the home key, and this is true independently of whether or not someone is personally able to apply those ideas to their jazz improvisations.

As for the idea that theory must "somehow serve real playing situations", this firstly completely ignores the entire subject of composition, which is not a "real playing situation", but which benefits from a thorough understanding of theory like no other. Secondly, it completely ignores the concept of learning about the subject of music for its own sake, which apart from being enjoyable in its own right, often has plenty of indirect "playing" benefits. "Theory" is basically the study of music, and it's hard for me to see how anyone who deliberately limits their study of music purely to those things which they might personally play in the next five minutes can be the richer for it. Enhancing one's understanding of music, even if one can see no immediate tangible practical benefit, can only be a good thing, and the realizations and insights one gets from doing that can often improve your playing and your general musicality in indirect ways.

The idea that studying theory only has value if it has direct tangible playing benefits is no different from the idea that universities have no value other than producing obedient, well-trained corporate employees, or that scientific research has no value if it doesn't result in new types of household appliance in the short term. Studying music for the sake of studying it is a perfectly worthwhile and beneficial endeavour. Nobody has to do this, of course, if they don't want to, and plenty of people don't do it and are still able to make perfectly good music, but the idea that they have to avoid doing this is nonsense.

As for "endless discussions on theory forums", you can have endless discussions on banjo forums just as easily.

Slick Salmon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:32:26

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gshall

If the circle of fifths is just a list of all keys, I guess that's okay, but people seem to indicate it does more for you than just list keys. I don't know what.

---

As far as I'm concerned, the high priest of the Circle of Fifths must be Bill Keith. My brother-in-law once arranged for me to take a lesson with him, but before he'd meet with me in person, he wanted to make sure I knew enough about music. So, he gave me about a 2hr lesson over the phone, all based on the Circle of Fifths. My jaw about hit the floor as he described all of the various relationships he saw. I swear, he sees everything in that circle. Much of what he talked about is in the book he wrote with Jim D'Ville entitled, The Natural Way to Music".

banjola1 - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:50:06

---

Myopic as you seem to think it is, that's my opinion and I'll stick by it. No one is assailing "traditional" music theory. You do not know what I hear and you do not know my history nor do you know me. I try to stay away from forums because I disdain arguments. I will leave now and you can once again dominate this forum with your wonderful comments and opinions.

You win... enjoy your victory.

Good luck to you and Goodbye!

quote:

---

Well, I've had this kind of discussion here before, and I think this is a pretty myopic view of "theory".

To start with, any suggestion that "traditional" music theory is somehow not "pragmatic" is obviously false. This stuff didn't spring out of the air from some dusty professor in an ivory tower looking to confound people - the theoretical principles we have come from centuries of analysing and creating real music. They're about as "pragmatic" as you can get. The "ideas about tonal organization" are the way they are because when you listen to those centuries of real music, that's how you actually do hear the movements towards and away from the tonal centre and the home key, and this is true independently of whether or not someone is personally able to apply those ideas to their jazz improvisations.

As for the idea that theory must "somehow serve real playing situations", this firstly completely ignores the entire subject of composition, which is not a "real playing situation", but which benefits from a thorough understanding of theory like no other. Secondly, it completely ignores the concept of learning about the subject of music for its own sake, which apart from being enjoyable in its own right, often has plenty of indirect "playing" benefits. "Theory" is basically the study of music, and it's hard for me to see how anyone who deliberately limits their study of music purely to those things which they might personally play in the next five minutes can be the richer for it. Enhancing one's understanding of music, even if one can see no immediate tangible practical benefit, can only be a good thing, and the realizations and insights one gets from doing that can often improve your playing and your general musicality in indirect ways.

The idea that studying theory only has value if it has direct tangible playing benefits is no different from the idea that universities have no value other than producing obedient, well-trained corporate employees, or that scientific research has no value if it doesn't result in new types of household appliance in the short term. Studying music for the sake of studying it is a perfectly worthwhile and beneficial endeavour. Nobody has to do this, of course, if they don't want to, and plenty of people don't do it and are still able to make perfectly good music, but the idea that they have to avoid doing this is nonsense.

As for "endless discussions on theory forums", you can have endless discussions on banjo forums just as easily.

---

Banjophobic - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:51:31

---

I've always thought of the circle of fifths as a useful,practical visual for what happens in most popular music. Does it cover every conceivable musical genre and situation, well, no. But it serves a very useful purpose and I see nothing wrong with using it. If this is 'myopic' thinking , then count me as myopic (I am actually nearsighted,haha). While the circle is 'key' related its also great for harmony thinking, more than melodic. Chord progressions revolve around 4ths and 5ths and melodic lines not so much. All in all I think its useful to the kinds of music most folks play. Even jazz guys can appreciate it's usefulness. Pat Cloud seemed to give it a thumbs up and his comments tend to favor its more important aspect, which is use it for 'playing'. He seems to do alright with it and if his understanding and use is 'myopic', then Im ready for some thicker glasses myself,haha.

pearcemusic - Posted - 03/23/2011:  17:57:36

---

Pat Cloud is an amazing resource here on the BHO ....

His creds are deep and wide, I've learned a ton from him, and I'm proud to call him a friend.

Besides his amazing talents, he is one of the kindest people I know.

Banjophobic - Posted - 03/23/2011:  18:00:08

---

[quote]Originally posted by banjola1

Myopic as you seem to think it is, that's my opinion and I'll stick by it. No one is assailing "traditional" music theory. You do not know what I hear and you do not know my history nor do you know me. I try to stay away from forums because I disdain arguments. I will leave now and you can once again dominate this forum with your wonderful comments and opinions.

You win... enjoy your victory.

Good luck to you and Goodbye!



Pat, I for one really appreciate your input and I agree 100% about theory and its practical application,i.e 'playing it'. Unfortunately there will be those who attempt to brow beat you into submission with endless, line by line debates. Its about being right, or superior, not about helping anyone understand the topci at hand. Ive experienced it first hand myself. I hope you dont let it scare you off this forum because it greatly benefits from great players, who can convey meaningful advice and experience.

Banjophobic - Posted - 03/23/2011:  18:05:21

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pearcemusic

Pat Cloud is an amazing resource here on the BHO ....

His creds are deep and wide, I've learned a ton from him, and I'm proud to call him a friend.

Besides his amazing talents, he is one of the kindest people I know.

---

You can say that again Doub-

RedDragon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  18:30:53

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by banjola1

Myopic as you seem to think it is, that's my opinion and I'll stick by it. No one is assailing "traditional" music theory. You do not know what I hear and you do not know my history nor do you know me. I try to stay away from forums because I disdain arguments. I will leave now and you can once again dominate this forum with your wonderful comments and opinions.

You win... enjoy your victory.

Good luck to you and Goodbye!

---

What a peculiar response.

tom elder - Posted - 03/23/2011:  18:51:33

---

I am sure you all really have gshall straightened out now with all this info about music.The circle of 5ths is a simple 12note circle gshall that i showed on page 1'It has not a thing to do with naming the correct key.99% of the time the chord the song ends in is the key, also you have to learn to look at the sharps or flats at the clef that also is 99% correct unless it is a case of being written in a mode,highly unlikely unless you are into some ethnic music,celtic music or jazz,These guys will wear you out with their abundance of knowledge.
If you do it backwards yes its 4ths but still does not give the key.
Learn your 3 chord positions and learn to switch them without raising your fingers with a right hand pattern,from a5435 g at 5 to a bar c at 5 on up to a7567 f to a8768 b flatt ,that is climbing in5ths and can be continued to the end of the neck,Just do the bar on the bflatt for a d flatt etc.

---

Edited by - tom elder on 03/23/2011 19:08:04

tom elder - Posted - 03/23/2011:  19:39:19

---

my bad when you bar the b flatt it gives you an e flatt

From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/23/2011:  19:51:12

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RedDragon

quote:

---

Originally posted by banjola1

Myopic as you seem to think it is, that's my opinion and I'll stick by it. No one is assailing "traditional" music theory. You do not know what I hear and you do not know my history nor do you know me. I try to stay away from forums because I disdain arguments. I will leave now and you can once again dominate this forum with your wonderful comments and opinions.

You win... enjoy your victory.

Good luck to you and Goodbye!

---

What a peculiar response.

---

Let me give you a clue. The response was not peculiar. It was tactful.

MYOPIC....!? If you had any self awareness you would not have responded to Pat Cloud that way. The man is a creative legend. Sometimes even if you disagree (don't understand is more accurate) you have to work like mad to see it their way and do some real soul searching on your way. We just had another great player spend his time to help us all (with expressed reservations) and he left. Doubt we will hear from him again soon.

Wow. You have "had this conversation before." Maybe if you had enlightened Pat Cloud he could have had a career in music. If I could translate in a non 4 letter worded way his Peculiar response" , you were told to kiss the sky and I don't need to put up with this. This is what I was speaking about: treating the big time players with respect in the thread (banjohangout.org/topic/201783/5).

R Dragon said: "The idea that studying theory only has value if it has direct tangible playing benefits is no different from the idea that universities have no value other than producing obedient, well-trained corporate employees, or that scientific research has no value if it doesn't result in new types of household appliance in the short term."

Comparing banjo to a university would make Joel Sweeney turn over in his grave. University comes from the word universe which is "the whole body of things and phenomena." The difference between a university and a college is that a university takes in the "whole" while a college may be limited a certain studies. Banjo is banjo and is (unfortunately) not the whole universe. There are always a few in academia that take this professed mantra of disdaining "tangible benefits" in order to absolve themselves from accountability in doing anything measurable or productive. Tenure can be sweet.

I thought the purpose of this thread was to relate the circle of fifths to playing. Why don't we all just get in a circle around a fire, no instruments and just think banjo and talk banjo. It is so much easier that way and our ideas are never wrong!
Ken

Ps R. Dragon don't bother coming back with 25 quotes in lines unless debate points are you goal in life. If you can brush Pat Cloud aside so quickly on a banjo topic, I have no chance of a meaning dialogue with you.

---

Edited by - From Greylock to Bean Blossom on 03/23/2011 20:03:18

tom elder - Posted - 03/23/2011:  19:58:33

---

Climbing up as i show is actually 4ths doing the same thing in reverse is 5ths.

stormoveroklahoma - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:19:00

---

I'm always amazed by the circle of fifths practicabilities.....referring to the "Western Ear". Based on the frequency studies of Pythagoras our ears want to hear certain things and are curious about other things and don't like some things. Music can do all of these things; fleeting for a moment in the air before they are gone.

When I'm noodling around and discover wow that sounds way cool together or if I did this.... how would this sound next to that?

Every new discovery I find was already found by the circle.

Some how our concepts of movement based on our bipedalism and our ears our all tied in together.

Notice in the circle the tri-tones are always the furthest apart. And one time I heard my friend Winton Marsalis talking about how open the "C" part s of the circle are and how "Dense" the Db Gb side is....interesting way to look at it.

Anyway here are some tips that have helped me enjoy the mystery of our ears and "the Circle of Fifths".

Some of the circles uses:

As Bill Keith would say...check it out....... cover the left half of the circle with another piece of paper leaving the C at the top and the F# at the bottom exposed and what you have on the right is the G (Em) scale.
C G D A B E F#

Now acting like a clock turn the clock one notch counter clock wise and you"re left with C scale F C G D A B E

Turn the clock back two notches to the right and you have the D scale
G D A B E F# C#.

One more notch to the right you have the A scale D A B E F# C# G#

etc. etc. etc.

Now here's another trick. Put the paper back to its original position covering the left (or flat) half of the circle with the C and F# exposed creating the G scale again C G D A B E F#.....now slide the paper straight across to the right now covering the C and F# and you are left with the G Pentatonic Scale.

etc. etc. etc.

and as you keep looking at the circle it has other perfect math relationships built in.... the tri-tones are included............. for G that would be C and F# and notice how they are at the farthest apart of all the notes of the G scale when displayed in the circle and how they also are the notes that drop out to create the pentatonic (blues) scale for the key of G.

And it goes on and on and on......
Interesting isn't it?
Thanks Bill

Circle can also be used for assigning (flats and) sharps to the scales as you go around the circle. For instance the scale of C Major has nor sharps or flats. As you tick the clock to the right the G gets one sharp (or (flat) the F#. One more tick to the right - the D scale gets two sharps (or flats) the F# and C#. One more tick and the A scale gets 3 sharps (or flats) the F#, C# and G#. The sharps or flats always get added to the previous scale in the circle in the order they appear in the circle. It helps remind people.....if they see 3 sharps near the G Clef in the sheet music or tab it means they are playing in the scale of A which has the sharps (or flats in it).
The order of the letters going clock wise around the circle starting at the top at C is the number of flats or sharps each successive scale would get. If you go counterclockwise it works the same way.


if you familiarize yourself with the circle you can "go off" (musically) and always find your way home.


hope this helps you new players

Tracy
thanks to others for sharing their insights ...I'm always learning something

"is it a coincidence that there are seven musical notes in a scale and we have seven days in the week?"


PS -- still snowing here

---

Edited by - stormoveroklahoma on 03/23/2011 20:26:50

Jody Hughes - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:23:31

---

I don't think anyone is saying ALL chord progressions move in perfect fifths. There are chromatic approaches, diminished chords, giant steps changes, and a whole ton of stuff the circle of fifths isn't good for.

It is a tool, that DOES help some folks with some material.

The circle CAN be used as a tool as follows:
If you are playing Rhythm Changes in the key of Bb, the bridge goes
D7, G7, C7, F7
Let's say you now want to do the same in the key of F, well then you know you just start over one, aka A7 and go until you get back to F on the circle.

Some people are visual learners and this allows them to see it quicker than counting to five. I realize counting is an easier way for some people, but some people like diagrams. Personally, I just learned it all in the context of songs, I never busted out the circle of fifths or counted. When you learn a bunch of songs in a bunch of keys that do those kind of changes, then you know them.

I think people should be allowed to use whatever tool they find helps them. If they want to draw hexagons on their living floor and line up note names on it, I could care less.

No one has time to think about this, or count when they are playing anyways. You should have it down so well you don't have to consciously think about it. The same goes for composing, you aren't going to want to bust out a chart or even count every time you want to move in parallel fifths, you are just going to want to know it dead cold.

gdoc - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:23:55

---

I'll stick with Pat's words. He's been there, and done it. He knows what he is talking about. If a person has other views, there are better ways of discussing them than to attack another person. I have had the privilage of questioning Pat extensively for hours, and what he has to say isn't always simple, but follow it through, and you begin to understand.

RedDragon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:36:04

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom

MYOPIC....!? If you had any self awareness you would not have responded to Pat Cloud that way. The man is a creative legend.

---

I couldn't care less if he's the Queen of Sheba. I call things how I see them. I disagreed with something he said, explained why, and backed it up. If he can't tolerate people disagreeing with him or not sharing his opinion on an open forum, that's his problem, there's no point complaining to me.

From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:52:33

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RedDragon

quote:

---

Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom

MYOPIC....!? If you had any self awareness you would not have responded to Pat Cloud that way. The man is a creative legend.

---

I couldn't care less if he's the Queen of Sheba. I call things how I see them. I disagreed with something he said, explained why, and backed it up. If he can't tolerate people disagreeing with him or not sharing his opinion on an open forum, that's his problem, there's no point complaining to me.

---

It is obvious there is no point complaining to you. However you have made this banjo community worse for all of us.

"Call them as I see them." A man made mountain rising majestically high above the normal plains.

You should care who he is. He has EARNED respect.

Ken

pearcemusic - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:55:08

---

red dragon ... learning from a legend is a privilege ...

I couldn't care less how you see things ... you are only one opinion.

try to show some respect to someone who has devoted himself to the study and furthering of music on the 5 string banjo.

you make yourself look and sound foolish.

pearcemusic - Posted - 03/23/2011:  20:58:51

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Banjophobic

quote:

---

Originally posted by pearcemusic

Pat Cloud is an amazing resource here on the BHO ....

His creds are deep and wide, I've learned a ton from him, and I'm proud to call him a friend.

Besides his amazing talents, he is one of the kindest people I know.

---

You can say that again Doub-

---

yeah John ... I'm sick of mean spirited people chasing the real players off of this forum.

I can live without red dragon ...

Pat is a "real deal" guy ... I appreciate all he has to say.

stringbreaker - Posted - 03/23/2011:  21:05:39

---

red dragon is the real deal

---

Edited by - stringbreaker on 03/23/2011 21:05:55

RedDragon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  21:06:26

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jody Hughes


I don't think anyone is saying ALL chord progressions move in perfect fifths. There are chromatic approaches, diminished chords, giant steps changes, and a whole ton of stuff the circle of fifths isn't good for.

It is a tool, that DOES help some folks with some material.

---

Agreed - I'm not saying that it can't be used for all manner of things, just that those things aren't in it "by design", so to speak, to counter this idea that there's some enormous mystical musical truth in that circle, which there isn't. Perfect fifths obviously come up all the time in music, so there are all manner of things someone can read into or overlay onto the circle of fifths if they are so inclined.

The original question was:

"If the circle of fifths is just a list of all keys, I guess that's okay, but people seem to indicate it does more for you than just list keys. I don't know what."

All these other things, sure, someone can read them into the circle if they want, but they can just as easily count, or memorise them, or whatever. For these things, the circle doesn't "do anything for you" other than what you read into it in this way, because you can do those things just as easily without it. What it does do - by itself - is simply show the relationship between key signatures, and I think everything else that can be read into it is essentially coincidental, so making this clear seems to me to be the most appropriate response to the original question, i.e. getting to the point of what the circle actually does, as opposed to what other random stuff you can hang on it. Apparently some people object to that. That's OK.

RedDragon - Posted - 03/23/2011:  21:10:23

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom

You should care who he is. He has EARNED respect.

---

Not from me, he hasn't. He's lost any respect he might have earned from me with that bizarre response. I'm sure he'll lose about as much sleep over it as I will.

I won't be entertaining any more off-topic meta-discussion in this thread.