Overused chord progressions

[ochrence]

Does anyone get really pissed off when they hear a certain chord progression? Whenever I hear the i-VI-III-VII (ex. Am-F-C-G) one that seems to be used in 50% of electronic music (and 90% of Basshunter songs) in a song, it's harder for me to like the song, just because it's used so often and so many harmonies with it have been done before. As an electronic musician, it's one of my major issues with electronic music.

So when I'm making music, I tend to dodge it, and in general try to not repeat chord progressions. Am I just weird and limiting myself, or is there anyone else who feels that way about it?

[Back-From-Purgatory]

While I don't think it's good to rely on a certain chord progression to make every song, I don't necessarily think you should avoid using it more than once in a lifetime.

Reason being, just because you're using a certain chord progression does not mean you are using the same melody, BPM, or rhythm. As a metalhead, I tend to use a handful of chord progressions across all my songs, and I've yet to get a complaint that they all sound the same. And that is likely because I don't utilize the progression the same way every song.

Same for my classical and electronic music, both of those end up using eerily similar progressions, but I still manage to make each song it's own (Save for people accusing me of stealing Moonlight Sonata in one of my songs... that kind of pisses me off).
Although the way Basshunter does it... that I'd consider pushing it... because most of his melodies across all his songs sound like they came from just 1 song. But there are just as many artists out there who don't succumb to "Basshunter Syndrome".

It's up to you to make each song it's own, just because you use a certain progression more than once doesn't mean your songs all have to sound the same.

That's my 2 cents anyways.

[Buoy]

I try to make a new chord progression for each song because hey if it's the same progression as before why not just add the new thing to the old thing? Still, making a new and interesting chord progression on command is difficult. But of course the Pachelbel's Canon progression (as I like to call it) is getting kinda silly after all these decades, however that's a problem of ALL music ever, not just electronic music (even if it sounds more obnoxious in happy hardcore).

[Sequenced]

I-IV-V. Be more creative people.

[jpbear]

XIV-VV-XP

Thats a good one.

[Kirbyfemur]

I-ii-I-ii-I-I
Is my favorite

[Buoy]

I

Classic ambient progression

[Sequenced]

At 12/3/11 05:25 PM, SBB wrote: I

Classic ambient progression

With little bits of Vii* here and there.

[Buoy]

i

another classic

[Kirbyfemur]

At 12/3/11 05:26 PM, Sequenced wrote:

At 12/3/11 05:25 PM, SBB wrote: I

Classic ambient progression

With little bits of Vii* here and there.

And a little bit of the iv*7/9/11/12/13 chords thrown into the mix

[SineRider]

Imaj7 - VI-7 - II-7 - V7

omg

[ochrence]

At 12/3/11 05:25 PM, SBB wrote: I

Classic ambient progression

I laughed.

But I wonder why we don't see more interesting progressions on the Portal - ones that defy the major and minor scales of the root, like Heaven Beside You by Alice in Chains (the chorus and the section after in particular) or Everything In Its Right Place by Radiohead. They don't sound bad, they're just different.

[Chris-V2]

Oh rock n roll, you've destoryed the following:

i/I- bVII - IVb-VI/ivb

i-VII-VI-VII

I-bIII-IV

I-bVII-bIII-bIII

[uint]

ii-V-I, you can't do anything interesting with this shit.

[Psil0]

Chord progressions, what are those?

[NickPerrin]

1.) i - VI

Strings & Brass only

You are now Hans Zimmer

2.) I - IV - V

Acoustic guitar, piano and slide guitar only

You are now the popular country charts

3.) i - V7 - #vi(dim) - V

Piano only

You are now Beethoven

4.) I - V - vi - IV

Muted powerchords on guitar only

You are now Simple Plan/Blink 182

----------------------------------------
-----

Not all music should be defined with the narrow scope of the "chord progression," but in music where that's the case, the fact remains that EVERY chord progression is overused. What matters is how you use it. Also... try not to pick the REALLY overused ones. They're painfully recognizable.

[camoshark]

At 12/3/11 07:09 PM, uint wrote: ii-V-I, you can't do anything interesting with this shit.

I seriously hope that was sarcastic.

[ochrence]

At 12/4/11 12:58 AM, NickPerrin wrote: Also... try not to pick the REALLY overused ones. They're painfully recognizable.

For me it's like hearing a song made on GarageBand. I sort of cringe.

[Knoxius]

At 12/4/11 12:58 AM, NickPerrin wrote: 2.) I - IV - V
Acoustic guitar, piano and slide guitar only

You are now the popular country charts

I love this progression. Throw out the slide guitar and you've got basically any blues song ever. A tad simple and overused, but I could jam in I-IV-V for hours and not get bored of it.

[Blackhole12]

Something like half my songs use i VI VII before I noticed what I was doing.

[Gario]

I say screw harmonies - harmonic progressions (at least the ones that work nicely) are all overused and boring nowadays. Let's stick to counterpoint, instead.

[Chris-V2]

At 12/4/11 04:33 AM, Gario wrote: I say screw harmonies - harmonic progressions (at least the ones that work nicely) are all overused and boring nowadays. Let's stick to counterpoint, instead.

> Implying that counterpoint generaly doesn't spell out some form of harmonic progression.

[Elsid]

At 12/3/11 04:10 PM, ochrence wrote: so many harmonies with it have been done before.

The chord progression is the harmony, you mean melodies.

And as for the progressions, as someone has said, it depends on how they are being used, songs with other elements different mostly wont sound samey if they use the same chord progression.

[samulis]

vi-V-IV-V

XD

gotta love that one...

I use iv-iii(2nd inv.)-V-iv a bit...

[ChimeraNoise]

I should really figure out what all of this I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII stuff means.

Music theory is rather difficult for me to understand.

[Gario]

At 12/4/11 07:37 AM, Chris-V2 wrote:

At 12/4/11 04:33 AM, Gario wrote: I say screw harmonies - harmonic progressions (at least the ones that work nicely) are all overused and boring nowadays. Let's stick to counterpoint, instead.

> Implying that counterpoint generaly doesn't spell out some form of harmonic progression.

It doesn't have to, actually.

[DJDela]

At 12/4/11 03:21 PM, ChimeraNoise wrote: I should really figure out what all of this I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII stuff means.

Music theory is rather difficult for me to understand.

I got to agree with you on this one .
I make it how I like it, and I don't care if it's I III VI VII or whatever might that be.

[samulis]

For those who don't know what it means but actually care enough to learn...

Roman Numeral Analysis (or so I was taught it as) is an alternate way of describing chords that uses the Roman Numerals 1-7 (I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII) to define each chord.

The Roman Numeral refers to the bottom note of each chord (when not inverted). For example, in the key of C, the I chord is C Major, whereas the V chord is G Major (as G is the fifth step of the C Major scale).

Lowercase Roman Numerals define minor chords (ii, iii, etc.)

In ANY key, the chords are, when played with no accidentals (sharps/flats) not listed, Perfect (another word for Major, really), Minor, Minor, Perfect, Perfect, Minor, Diminished... otherwise written as I, ii, iii, IV, V, vi, vii.

In other words, I can mean C Major, Bb Major, F Major, D Major, or any other chord that starts with the first step of the key... it's a great way to very simply write down something that can be in any key.

I believe you have to notate the minors of I, IV, and V not as i, iv, and v, but in some weird way with fifths of chords and crazy stuff (I just notate them as i, iv, v)... that's where my Music Theory education stopped. XD

[Buoy]

isn't the seventh degree like viiø or something

[samulis]

At 12/4/11 05:48 PM, SBB wrote: isn't the seventh degree like viiø or something

vii with a degree sign (or superscript o) because it is diminished, methinks... but I can use neither superscripts nor do I have a degree sign on my keyboard. XD