Circle of Fifths

Tomson · Post by **Tomson** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:51 am

In LCC, there is extensive talk about the "pull" a fifth downwards: D -> G -> C. Is it for the same reason that this is the strongest root progression, for example a II-V-I: Dm7 - G7 - Cmaj7?

guitarjazz · Post by **guitarjazz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:04 pm

What are the Lydian tonics for Dm7 - G7 - Cmaj7 and how do they relate to the circle?

chespernevins · Post by **chespernevins** » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:56 pm

Tomson, I think the both examples of perfect fifths you give are related.

But did you get guitarjazz's question? This is something that is not really in Vol. 1 (If I'm remembering correctly), but was in the older books.

MokshaIs · Post by **MokshaIs** » Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:14 pm

hello. Am I correct in thinking that the lydian tonics for Dm7 and G7 are F Lydian, and Cmaj7's lydian tonic is C lydian? Does this mean that any ii V I is in fact traversing between two centers of tonal gravity?

guitarjazz · Post by **guitarjazz** » Fri Apr 15, 2011 11:51 pm

[quote="MokshaIs"]hello. Am I correct in thinking that the lydian tonics for Dm7 and G7 are F Lydian, and Cmaj7's lydian tonic is C lydian? Does this mean that any ii V I is in fact traversing between two centers of tonal gravity?[/quote]
Yes, in relationship to Vertical Tonal Gravity. It could be three centers in the either the Dm7 or G7 is altered.

Tomson · Post by **Tomson** » Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:17 am

>This is something that is not really in Vol. 1 (If I'm remembering >correctly), but was in the older books.

Could someone please expand on this? I really feel like having seen only half the picture after reading the new Volume One...

MokshaIs · Post by **MokshaIs** » Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:28 am

guitarjazz wrote:
MokshaIs wrote:hello. Am I correct in thinking that the lydian tonics for Dm7 and G7 are F Lydian, and Cmaj7's lydian tonic is C lydian? Does this mean that any ii V I is in fact traversing between two centers of tonal gravity?
Yes, in relationship to Vertical Tonal Gravity. It could be three centers in the either the Dm7 or G7 is altered.

Hi guitar jazz, thanks for the reply. Now what about in relation to horizontal tonal gravity? If I was to interpret this horizontally, would it be to conceive as C ionian as the tonic?

guitarjazz · Post by **guitarjazz** » Sat Apr 16, 2011 9:02 am

Yes, C major.

MokshaIs · Post by **MokshaIs** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:40 am

and as for the third of the trinity,Supra Vertical... What is one to make of the Supra Vertical?

guitarjazz · Post by **guitarjazz** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:11 pm

[quote="MokshaIs"]and as for the third of the trinity,Supra Vertical... What is one to make of the Supra Vertical?[/quote]
Think Coltrane playing lines based on Giant Steps changes over Impressions. Or the stuff Liebman played on On the Corner.

chespernevins · Post by **chespernevins** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 9:16 am

MokshaIs wrote:hello. Am I correct in thinking that the lydian tonics for Dm7 and G7 are F Lydian, and Cmaj7's lydian tonic is C lydian? Does this mean that any ii V I is in fact traversing between two centers of tonal gravity?

Yes. And notice that F Lyd going to C Lyd is a progression in a *sharp* direction.

===
As another example,

| Dm7b5 | G7b9 | C |

would be Ab lyd -> C Lyd, which also resolves in a sharp direction.

===

Take a look at:

| Dm7b5 | G7b9 | C- |

This would be Ab Lyd -> Eb Lyd, also a resolution in a sharp direction.

===

But what about:

| D- G7 | C- |

This is F Lyd -> Eb Lyd.

This doesn't exactly fit the pattern!

What going on here?

The way I see it, this is a deceptive cadence. D- G7 (F Lyd) should go to C Lyd. But instead, we reharmonize the C Lyd with a flat lying key, Eb Lyd (C-) for a deceptive cadence.

Why does this work?

Perhaps because we maintain the same root movement.

Or perhaps, more importantly, because a flat lying key such as Eb Lyd supports melody notes from C Lyd such as the Lydian Tonic of C: 'C', as well as very strong notes from C Lyd such as : 'G, D, A'

===

Tomson · Post by **Tomson** » Thu Apr 21, 2011 5:24 am

Thanks, chespernevins, for a great post!

This is just what I needed. In my opinion the new edition of the book is rather hard to understand largely because it lacks simple examples/ explanations like these...