Is E7 in this piece analyzed as the dominant of the dominant of D? (A7)

[tomp86]

Hi guys. I know this is pretty obvious but Im having a blank here. I am trying to determine what the relationship E7 has in the following D piece in music theory. Is it the dominant of the dominant? E7 => A7 => D
Actually now the more I think about it im pretty sure it is. Can anyone possibly confirm?

[brogers70]

Yes, it is the dominant of the dominant.

[tomp86]

Yes, it is the dominant of the dominant.

Cool.Thanks brogers Im taking your advice analysing pieces

[lelle]

Yes it is the dominant of the dominant.

I think it would be interesting to hear your answer if you were to articulate the following:
* Why did you feel pretty sure that it was the dominant of the dominant?
* What made you feel unsure?

[tomp86]

Hi lelle.

I was feeling unsure as I did not recognize the A chord after the E7, it was too busy looking for a blocked chord type of pattern. But the A steps down one note at a time from E to A. After realising it was A makes perfect sense to be a V of the V    Is bar 29 a minor by the way? (he went from the Amaj to Amin?)  I notice now bar 30 is D7 and he resolves to G but doesn't change the key to G major (tonitization?)

[keypeg]

I'm thinking that m. 29 & 30 together form a D7 chord, which makes sense for the G in m. 31 (D7 is V of G, so V of IV).

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Bar 12 is an implied dominant, ie A major within the key of D major, with passing notes in the form of the D and B.

29 is A minor, following from the A major in the previous bar, and forming an II / V / I cadence within G major over the bars 29 to 31. The G major is of course also IV within the main key frame of the piece and the following VII in bar 33 may be thought of as a V which has lost its root.

[keypeg]

29 is A minor, following from the A major in the previous bar, and forming an II / V / I cadence within G major over the bars 29 to 31.

29 could be A minor, but only two notes are there so ambiguous.  If you combine it with 30, you have a gradually building D7 (C is the 7th of D7 = D F# A C ... The A, C of D7 are present in m. 29).  Thus I'm inclined to hear m. 29 + 27 as a V of IV.

Anyway, that's why I wrote what I did in the post above yours. What do you think?

[lelle]

29 could be A minor, but only two notes are there so ambiguous.  If you combine it with 30, you have a gradually building D7 (C is the 7th of D7 = D F# A C ... The A, C of D7 are present in m. 29).  Thus I'm inclined to hear m. 29 + 27 as a V of IV.

Anyway, that's why I wrote what I did in the post above yours. What do you think?

I think both interpretations are valid. I lean towards it being an a minor. In the previous bar you hear an A major chord ending on the root, and in bar 29 we start on the root of the same chord, followed by the minor third, which I strongly hear as the A major having been turned into an A minor. Usually the root and third have the strongest impact on the perceived harmony, while the fifth on the other hand can even be left out. With bar 29 being an implied a minor you get the common ii-V-I progression into the G major chord.

Both bar 29 and 30 being felt as one D7 being built feels weaker to me since it starts on the fifth and goes to the seventh and does so for a whole bar before your ear can understand what chord is being build. It's less common to have the fifth of the chord (A) as the bottom note/base unless it's a passing tone. But again, I think both interpretations are valid.

To answer tomp86 I don't think the G major is present long enough to be felt as a tonicization since he immediately proceeds back into raising the c into a c sharp again at the end of the bar. So in bar 31 you get an IV (G major) and an implied feeling of V on the last beat and then you're back to I in bar 32.

[keypeg]

Lelle, in a musical context, the Am doesn't make much sense, while a developing D7 does make sense.  If I'm playing this piece of music, trying to remember it, trying to have a feel for it, the developing D7 gives me everything - the Am, not much of anything.  A fantastic teacher taught me to move past analysis in a more intellectual way, and get music feel out of it. That is what I'm trying to do here.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

It make perfect 'musical' sense to me, as the third of the major is falling to the minor. Possibly, however, my analysis would make more sense if we look in depth. The piece is comprised of eight four bar units, and each of these units makes perfect sense even when viewed in four bar isolation. Observe that in every four bar unit, the first bar, with the arguable exception of bars 17 and 29, is completely harmonically unambiguous. In bar 17, the slur finishing on the first beat of bar 18 tells us unequivocally that we should view this descending figure as F# minor. In bar 29, we have no similar clue to tell us that the notes are anything other than the root and third of the A minor tonic, and indeed only in the first beat of bar 30 do we find an alternative harmony. As there is nothing in the score formally linking them, and as II V7 I makes more sense both in terms of movement and as a four bar unit cadence, I'd feel pretty confident in viewing it as such rather than a two bar buildup of a dominant followed by a tonic.

[tomp86]

Thanks everyone for your input on this, you answered all my questions and above! I only assumed it was a min as I know going from a major to its equivalent minor is a very classic and common way to modulate (even know this isn't really modulating! I feel both analysis could be correct and good to know both interpretations. Good work! 

[lelle]

Lelle, in a musical context, the Am doesn't make much sense, while a developing D7 does make sense.  If I'm playing this piece of music, trying to remember it, trying to have a feel for it, the developing D7 gives me everything - the Am, not much of anything.  A fantastic teacher taught me to move past analysis in a more intellectual way, and get music feel out of it. That is what I'm trying to do here.

I agree with ronde_des_sylphes explanation in this case. Changing from a major chord to a minor chord to spice things up is a quite common device. The a minor still does make total sense. We have a cadence E7 -> A and a phrase end. Then we throw in a minor surprise (no pun intended) in the form of lowering the third so we get into an a minor chord, which moves to D7 and then G which gives us a very common ii - V7 - I progression.