Why the Dominant chord is called dominant?

[balabolka]

Why the Dominant chord is called dominant?

(let's eliminate the irrelevant flood of text, so stick to the words)

What could it possibly  d o m i n a t e ?

[andrew_s]

The chord on the fifth scale degree has a strong pull toward the tonic (our musical “home”) because the third and seventh of the dominant chord set up tension, direction, and expectation. So it effectively "dominates" the harmonic motion. The name follows the function, not the other way around.

[balabolka]

It has a strong pull toward the tonic (our musical “home”) because the third and seventh of the dominant chord set up tension, direction, and expectation... effectively "dominates" the harmonic motion.

Strong, but what makes it strong? (then I will agree strong is synonym to dominant, in this case)
Set up tension? Can you explain the "tension", "pull" using only (am giving you a big hint here) musical elements as sound? Then I will agree tension pull is caused by something 'strong'. Although, dominant is a bit different than strong. Dominant is being strong without having to show it. A king might not be as strong as any of his soldiers, but he dominates them.

I would consider the "pull to a musical home" a stylistic preference though. Unless we are speaking of generalized tonality. For example in modulation, it does not have to be directed to the new tonic at all but the overall tonality.
But I understand, what you wrote is what the textbooks say. But never explain, instead using subjective adjectives such as "strong", "feeling home", "tension".

[dizzyfingers]

Why the Dominant chord is called dominant?
(let's eliminate the irrelevant flood of text, so stick to the words)
What could it possibly  d o m i n a t e ?

Not sure why you would ask that here instead of doing a little online research - - -

"The term comes from early music theory, referring to the important "reciting tone" (often the fifth degree) in chants that was frequently used and "dominated" the melody."

[balabolka]

"The "reciting tone" (often the fifth degree) in chants that was frequently used and "dominated" the melody."

How often? And you are talking about a tone. Not sure what "dominated the melody" means. Ah, frequently!
Examples maybe? But you speak about a tone.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

MMMMMMMMMMMMMM I like this one!

I don’t think all major chords with a flat 7 should be called dominant chords.  I think a TRUE dominant chord is something that totally stands out from the rest.  It dominates attention I guess???

Cause you could resolve on a C7 but it doesn’t FEEL very tensiony.  You could have a straight up minor 7 chord and that can feel more tensiony than anything else.  So dominant is more about context IMO 

Idk I’m just speaking from the dome here so if it doesn’t make sense then whatever. 

[dizzyfingers]

How often? And you are talking about a tone. Not sure what "dominated the melody" means. Ah, frequently!
Examples maybe? But you speak about a tone.

English is not your first language?
Or are you completely unfamiliar with music theory, terminology?

[balabolka]

MMMMMMMMMMMMMM I like this one!
So, dominant is more about context IMO.

Contextually, indeed we can "shape" a chord so it expresses dominant role.
And it doesn't have to express subjective features such as "tension" although some people would associate "tension" with dissonance. It strongly depends on culture or style broadly speaking.

The question is much more simple, so it concerns the chord, not its function in some voice leading of some melody or stylistic movement maybe in reharmonization or such subjective decisions for composition.

English is not your first language?
Or are you completely unfamiliar with music theory, terminology?

English is my third language or second (currently). I think you maybe referring to a stylistic approach at melody where the melody would reach that tone as highest, mostly related to tetrachordal cadences. That was mostly folk music movement. But I surely do not know how it was with church chants. Probably they borrowed such movement but I doubt it lasted longer as influence. Could be either probably.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

When I’m explaining a chart to someone I and other people use dominant and Bb7 (or any other key) interchangeably

  Terminology is just used to explain what you hear or what’s going on in the music, but the actual vocabulary doesn’t have anything to do with theory

[balabolka]

AI spoke its nonsense:

The dominant chord “dominates” the tonic.
What really earns the name is the chord’s function:
• It is built on the 5th scale degree called dominant
• The dominant chord contains tones that actively want to resolve to the tonic

In a dominant seventh chord (V7), two critical tendencies appear:
• The leading tone (7th scale degree) resolves upward to the tonic
• The chordal seventh resolves downward
• These opposing tendencies create strong tension, which is released only by returning to the tonic.
• This makes the dominant feel like it commands the harmonic direction.

So, the Tonic is actually dominating the movement. What a joke this AI "logic" is.
It just says the 5th scale degree called dominant and that's it.

N o !

[balabolka]

But in a minor tonality don't we also have a "5th" (diatonic). Isn't it a dominant note too in this context? So its chord is what then?!

And they teach this nonsense in schools and academies.
It is indeed pathetic how ignorant and indoctrinated such environments are.

[newbie2]

And they teach this nonsense in schools and academies.
It is indeed pathetic how ignorant and indoctrinated such environments are.

Who is the determiner of the truth?  You?

[balabolka]

Who is the determiner of the truth?  You?

Isn't it obvious? It is AI of course. Who else could it be?
Now the question is how AI knows all this. I wonder, how it can immediately give us the correct answers.

[newbie2]

AI spoke its nonsense:

The dominant chord “dominates” the tonic.
What really earns the name is the chord’s function:
• It is built on the 5th scale degree called dominant
• The dominant chord contains tones that actively want to resolve to the tonic

In a dominant seventh chord (V7), two critical tendencies appear:
• The leading tone (7th scale degree) resolves upward to the tonic
• The chordal seventh resolves downward
• These opposing tendencies create strong tension, which is released only by returning to the tonic.
• This makes the dominant feel like it commands the harmonic direction.

So, the Tonic is actually dominating the movement. What a joke this AI "logic" is.
It just says the 5th scale degree called dominant and that's it.

N o !

Isn't it obvious? It is AI of course. Who else could it be?
Now the question is how AI knows all this. I wonder, how it can immediately give us the connect answers.

You appear to be contradicting yourself.  In the first post above, YOU appear to be the determiner of the truth.  Perhaps you can clarify.

Also:

And they teach this nonsense in schools and academies.
It is indeed pathetic how ignorant and indoctrinated such environments are.

So AI is not the determiner of the truth.  Schools and academies are not the determiners of the truth.  So who is the determiner of the truth?  You?

[balabolka]

You appear to be contradicting yourself.  In the first post above, YOU appear to be the determiner of the truth.  Perhaps you can clarify.

Let's be more inclusive. Earlier, I also suggested a question towards some minor tonality. I think what is A minor, I mean also on the 'white' piano keys (apologies to the non‑piano players though).

But in a minor tonality don't we also have a "5th" (diatonic). Isn't it a dominant note too in this context? So its chord is what then?!

So, no! Saying a note ("5th" or whatever) is dominant therefore its own chord (built from it) is the Dominant is a bit of a circular argumentation.

[newbie2]

Let's be more inclusive. Earlier, I also suggested a question towards some minor tonality. I think what is A minor, I mean also on the 'white' piano keys (apologies to the non‑piano players though).
So, no! Saying a note ("5th" or whatever) is dominant therefore its own chord (built from it) is the Dominant is a bit of a circular argumentation.

But I do not want to step over the specialty of @lostinidlewonder and his magic copy\paste dialogues with AI.

Please answer the following: 
Who is the determiner of the truth?

AI spoke its nonsense:

The dominant chord “dominates” the tonic.
What really earns the name is the chord’s function:
• It is built on the 5th scale degree called dominant
• The dominant chord contains tones that actively want to resolve to the tonic

In a dominant seventh chord (V7), two critical tendencies appear:
• The leading tone (7th scale degree) resolves upward to the tonic
• The chordal seventh resolves downward
• These opposing tendencies create strong tension, which is released only by returning to the tonic.
• This makes the dominant feel like it commands the harmonic direction.

So, the Tonic is actually dominating the movement. What a joke this AI "logic" is.
It just says the 5th scale degree called dominant and that's it.

N o !

Also:

And they teach this nonsense in schools and academies.
It is indeed pathetic how ignorant and indoctrinated such environments are.

So AI is not the determiner of the truth.  Schools and academies are not the determiners of the truth.  So who is the determiner of the truth?  You?

[newbie2]

And while your at it:
Who determines what is important?  Who gets to pick the curriculum taught in schools?  Who gets to determine what is relevant?

Why is the Dominant chord called dominant?
Why does Mr. "A" appear where it does on the piano keyboard?

Is this really important?  Should these question be addressed in schools?

Let's think about a course on nutrition and health.  Let's start with: Why is an apple called an apple?  And then spend the first 3 weeks of a 12 week course discussing this question.

So again the question is WHO gets to determine these things?  You?

[balabolka]

Who is the determiner of the truth?
Why is the Dominant chord called dominant?

Well I am glad that you asked. The second question is open for discussion here.
Regarding what is the Truth, such thing can only be accepted upon analysis, discussion and counterarguments. I give mine in form of questions.

Asking for opinions, to get to in informed choice, hence – knowledge. That is all.
A chord comes from the word (greek?) for string. Dominant is Latin and is adjective.

[newbie2]

A chord comes from the word (greek?) for string. Dominant is Latin and is adjective.

Okay.  You've explained all that I need to know.  Thanks for answering! Good luck in finding the audience that you seem to crave.

[keypeg]

You referred to this question.

But in what you call A minor, isn't the chord from E the Dominant one? After all if A is the Tonic here. I mean, to be consistent somehow. Or?

Yes, E is the Dominant chord in the key of A minor.  Is that what you're asking?

[balabolka]

Yes, E is the Dominant chord in the key of A minor.  Is that what you're asking?

What do you mean by E, because if not strictly written min or maj just a letter E usually means major? So, do you mean E Major or E minor? Because AI says:

For Natural minor (Aeolian):
V = E minor (E–G–B)

For Harmonic minor (most common in tonal music):
V = E major (E–G♯–B)
→ The raised 7th (G♯) creates a strong pull back to A.

With a 7th (very common):
E7 = E–G♯–B–D
This is the true dominant chord in A minor and strongly resolves to A minor.

Is the Dominant a major or a minor? Both maybe?

[newbie2]

What do you mean by E, because if not strictly written min or maj just a letter E usually means major? So, do you mean E Major or E minor? Because AI says:

For Natural minor (Aeolian):
V = E minor (E–G–B)

For Harmonic minor (most common in tonal music):
V = E major (E–G♯–B)
→ The raised 7th (G♯) creates a strong pull back to A.

With a 7th (very common):
E7 = E–G♯–B–D

This is the true dominant chord in A minor and strongly resolves to A minor.

Is the Dominant a major or a minor? Both maybe?

There a here many here that are excellent in music theory and can help you if needed. 

You should study about "modal cadences".  If you say the key is A-minor without further description, the implication is the piece is in A-minor.  In this case the dominant chord is the E-major chord. If you are referring the Aeolian mode on A, then the dominant chord is the E-minor chord.

So to answer your question: "Is the Dominant a major or a minor? Both maybe?"
No, the dominant chord is never both. 
For A-minor, the dominant chord is E-major.
For the Aeolian mode on A, the dominant chord is E-minor.

[balabolka]

For A-minor, the dominant chord is E-major.
For the Aeolian mode on A, the dominant chord is E-minor.

Ok, but the Aeolian is usually referred to as the "natural" (true?) minor.
So, is A aeolian ("natural" minor) somehow implying that the Dominant changes its characteristics type here? But AI says "true dominant" is E7 or (E–G♯–B) + D.
What is true then? Someone (you) asked similar thing about truth also, who determines the truth?

Does it mean that no matter what the chord is, if its root is from V ("5th") or whatever the correct mark for it is, then it can be called Dominant, just because the note – that same "5th" (perfect, allegedly) note is called dominant as AI says, but does not explain why.

I have to admit, I've heard only about Dominant chord. Here, I see 'dominant note' but have no idea what makes it dominant. If it is a note that is predominantly used (more frequently, or as a pedal note, or simply repeated or held longer as a duration) then that is a personal choice of the composer or as a phrasing style. It certainly can not be used as a rule for all to stick to it.

[newbie2]

Ok, but the Aeolian is usually referred to as the "natural" (true?) minor.
So, is A aeolian ("natural" minor) somehow implying that the Dominant changes its characteristics type here? But AI says "true dominant" is E7 or (E–G♯–B) + D.
What is true then? Someone (you) asked similar thing about truth also, who determines the truth?

Does it mean that no matter what the chord is, if its root is from V ("5th") or whatever the correct mark for it is, then it can be called Dominant, just because the note – that same "5th" (perfect, allegedly) note is called dominant as AI says, but does not explain why.

I have to admit, I've heard only about Dominant chord. Here, I see 'dominant note' but have no idea what makes it dominant. If it is a note that is predominantly used (more frequently, or as a pedal note, or simply repeated or held longer as a duration) then that is a personal choice of the composer or as a phrasing style. It certainly can not be used as a rule for all to stick to it.

I would love to answer.  But I know there are many here that are great at music theory.  Let's see what they say.   I'll chime in on February 1st if needed.   

[newbie2]

Following is just something to consider:

Over 40 years ago, I studied all summer on music theory and music history and scored in top 1% on GRE in music history and theory.  This is something that anyone could do if they put in the time.  I learned all through just 2 books.  This was over 40 years ago.

1) Grout - A History of Western Music - I have 3rd edition.  It is out of date concerning Alkan.  First 34 pages are on the state of music at the end of the ancient world.  The next 45 pages are on the Gregorian chant and the secular song of the middle ages.  Book is 800+ pages.

2) A music theory book that I don't remember what it was.  I have "Tonal Harmony" by Kostka, Payne and Almen that looks decent.

I mention this because if you are doing all your learning on line, you will always be lacking in basic knowledge.  Take time, read and learn. 

[balabolka]

Following is just something to consider:

Over 40 years ago, I studied all summer on music theory and music history.

I also come from the era of libraries and thick books. Turning 17, I had already gone through some of those books, although I never went to a Music school (ever). All I got as impression was they were talking about styles. There is no theory really. It is just deep, nerdy dissections of styles, mostly classical period but also baroque (or pre‑classical Bach, Haydn, Scarlatti) and then a bit of general jazz (other books).

I mean, there is nothing wrong in willing to be style specific and call it "Theory of music" but that is not all Music. And it can not be.

[keypeg]

  What do you mean by E, because if not strictly written min or maj just a letter E usually means major? So, do you mean E Major or E minor? Because AI says: ...

I couldn't care less what "AI" "says".  You asked a question, and I answered the question.  When a question is asked, I'm assuming an answer is being sought - though you seem to only want to be argumentative and that seems insincere.  I also have the impression that actually do have enough understanding so that things don't have to be spelled out. (But in that case, the question doesn't make sense.)

The Dominant chord would be built on the 5th degree note.  That makes it E.  You can have Em or a major E chord in the key of E minor.  No particular scale is assumed.

Are you really asking any of this?  Please don't quote a "language model".

[newbie2]

The Dominant chord would be built on the 5th degree note.  That makes it E.  You can have Em or a major E chord in the key of E minor.  No particular scale is assumed.

I don't disagree with this, but I would like to add:

Common Practice/Classical Harmony: In traditional tonal harmony, a "true" dominant is expected to have a leading tone (a note a half-step below the tonic) to create a strong resolution. Because A natural minor lacks this G♯, composers traditionally raise the 7th scale degree, turning the minor v (E minor) into a major V (E major).

Great to have additional opinions and perspectives!

[newbie2]

So page 411 of "Tonal Harmony" talks about the dominant with a raised 5th that results in an augmented triad.  So here is a 3rd dominant for A-minor: E-G#-B#.  And we might as well throw in a 4th: E-diminished : E-G-B-flat making 4 dominant triads.  SEE * BELOW

balabolka -You should consider getting "Tonal Harmony".  I bought a used copy.  You seem like you would be able to understand this book well if you put in the time.  Relying on AI alone will not get you where you want to be.  Nothing beats studying from a good book to gain solid understanding of the basics IMO!  Others may have suggestions for other theory books.

* - Note: The below covers ALL the possible root position triads built on 3rds (the building block interval of our harmony).  Also note: E is the dominant note of A.  All dominant triads of A that are in root position start on the note E.

Intervals between the 3 notes of the root position dominant triads of A:
1) minor 3rd, minor 3rd = Diminished triad E-G-B-flat
2) minor 3rd, major 3rd = Minor triad E-G-B
3) major 3rd, minor 3rd = Major triad E-G#-B
4) major 3rd, major 3rd = Augmented triad E-G#-B#

No other combinations of minor and major 3rds are possible for root position triads.  So there are 4 dominant triads.  But let's see what others think!  This is how we get to the truth! 

Definition: In music, a triad is a set of three notes (or "pitch classes") that can be stacked vertically in thirds.

[balabolka]

So here is a 3rd dominant for A-minor: E-G#-B#.

Intervals between the 3 notes of the root position dominant triads of A:
1) minor 3rd, minor 3rd = Diminished triad E-G-B-flat
2) minor 3rd, major 3rd = Minor triad E-G-B
3) major 3rd, minor 3rd = Major triad E-G#-B
4) major 3rd, major 3rd = Augmented triad E-G#-B#

newbie2, all this is good I guess but it does not answer the question.
Technically, you've added one more chord and to be honest it is really dissonant, so again is that "tension" only because of that dissonance that makes a chord Dominant; and what does it dominate after all? We should have named it Disturbing or Tensing, something like that. The focus is on the word Dominant.

It has to make sense. That V degree (or "5th" diatonic note) is the root of the next tetrachord ↑wards, if we use the chain construction rule for a diatonic diapasone\renova ("octave"). No doubt about it.
But to my assumption the very specific chord got its Dominant role from that root (the root of the second tetrachord ↑wards) and then all other chords got same 'functional name' in min or maj form, not really sure about the so called augmented (which for me is just x4·8) because to me the 'dissonance' transformation can be applied from any note (in that tonality) and not be part of the overall tonality.

For example see the second chord playing just before the singing starts in the opening of "Nessun Dorma" by J. Puccinni (after the major chord, your G). If it is augmented then what is it Dominant about it, because it certainly is not where the Dominant chord should be expected? Technically, we can say it is from a root (D♯, ok we have to use E♭, gee… this medieval notation is atrocious) one chromatonic note above the "typical Dominant" (your D). But then augmented chords are symmetric (stacked 4ths or your "major thirds") so having a 'root' for it is only contextual. Or is it actually some modified "dominant" from your D root note but the base "5th" chord is not?
I mean, there could be no better example of absolutely brilliant use of this chord. Dissonant? Well, yes, by textbook definition, but to me it is creative use of harmony regardless of subjective "dissonance" factor.

just around 7 sec. (0:07 min) but it appears further as well.

[keypeg]

I don't disagree with this, but I would like to add:
Common Practice/Classical Harmony: In traditional tonal harmony....

and

So page 411 of "Tonal Harmony" talks about....

As I respond, I want to go outside of any purpose of the original post which seems to be trying for some particular attitude, and if the OP responds in a way to pull this back into that context, I may not respond.  I want to look at all this from a fresh angle.

These names are taught in traditional theory usually within a more limited musical context, to give students a general framework of how (some / a lot of) music works.  Fine print in one of my theory books addressed to teachers reminded them that this involved Common Practice period music, and my own teacher showed how some examples were taken out of context to fit the ideas.  When you get to names, things are given names in order to communicate just like we don't say "move the doohicky upward to get the other doohicky to make the room bright" - we say "flip the light switch on".  We end up with a framework that is narrower than how actual music works, and the danger as learners is if we think all music sits within that framework.  Staying aware, it can be useful.

I also learned the terms Tonic, Mediant, Dominant etc, and these were notes within the order of a major scale (minor gets messy) and then nothing was done with most of those names.  I learned to build chords on those named notes and in the raw those were the "Tonic chord", "Dominant chord" etc.  It was like learning the alphabet which you need for reading.  At this level, the "Dominant chord" is simply the chord built on the 5th degree note.  In that sense, if your chameleon minor scale is natural minor, you'll get a minor triad.

The names also refer to function: the role one of these placement-ranked chords get, which works in diatonic music (and anything we're given will be such music).  Tonic gives us the sense of "home", where home is.  Dominant is what brings us home again.  It is immediately useful because a large majority of music tends to go I ... V(7) ... I, with intermediaries like I .... IV V7 .. I, you can learn about cadences marking off sections of music.  It's useful.  And simplified.  That's why it's done.

The name given to C7, G7, Eb7 etc. i.e. a major triad with m7 (root position) is immediately problematic.  We call it "Dominant 7" and that implies that this chord always has the function of V7 I.  I'd prefer calling it the X7 chord as its generic name.  The X7 doesn't always go to the Tonic of the key it's in.  I've seen it slide to other X7's, a whole row of them.

Names like Dominant refer to roles.  Jack is the police officer and we can call anyone playing that role "police officer" but Jack, Jane, Jerry are also themselves individually and play other roles: parent, golf partner, soup kitchen volunteer.  In some other society there may be no police, and order is maintained in some other way, requiring different names.  C7 isn't always a "Dominant" chord function-wise.  It doesn't always go to F or Fm, or even "deceptively" to Dm.

A teacher I spent years with often referred to "Dominant role", and what was meant is bringing us to a "home key" (the Tonic) or even a temporary "home" where some key prevailed for a while.  The chord might have the instability that is present in our X7 with its tritone (G7 has BF), it might have an easy slide of neighbouring notes by a semitone.  We are no longer in a relationship of "5th degree going to 1st degree".  Probably that's what your book was trying to get at with, for example, the augmented chord.

The explanation you gave of these chords are based on an idea of chords being defined by stacked thirds when in "root position" which useful, a common way of seeing it (in itself useful for communication) but not the only way - and in some contexts not the best way.

I've tried to sketch out a broader view of the whole question.  I've studied with a teacher (for quite a few years) who has sought to look at these things always from a practical angle rather than an intellectual exercise.  Deviations from how things were 'usually' taught were also for practical reasons, and it's also not something that can be put down in a post or easily in a thread and how forum threads work.
         

[newbie2]

The explanation you gave of these chords are based on an idea of chords being defined by stacked thirds when in "root position" which useful, a common way of seeing it (in itself useful for communication) but not the only way - and in some contexts not the best way.

Absolutely agree! 

[keypeg]

Absolutely agree!

Did I waste my time with the rest, or do you need time to read it over?

Btw, I did study traditional music theory and used more than one resource.

[balabolka]

The names also refer to function: Tonic gives us the sense of "home", where home is. Dominant is what brings us home again.

keypeg, I do understand those textbook definitions although I think about them as a stylistic approach at composition. The word 'dominant' has a specific meaning. Why was it chosen instead of 'tensioner' chord or another. To me though the Tonic was sort of the actual one having 'dominant' role. The 'tensioner' was just that, it can not dominate over the tonic, put that way.
So… there must be something else! 

To your other questions:
Well, I love piano as an instrument and at the same time I sort of hate it as equally.
Same applies to that Music notation. I wouldn't say I love it but for those times without MIDI, audio recordings writing it down is (was) a necessity! Not so much necessary for the folk music though. It is another subject as with the piano.
And they are corelated, after all, the Music Notation and the essence of the piano layout.

[keypeg]

keypeg, I do understand those textbook definitions although I think about them as a stylistic approach at composition. The word 'dominant' has a specific meaning.

I also went beyond those textbook definitions in my other post.  I don't have much interest in why any of the names have those names, because my interest is practical.

[newbie2]

newbie2, all this is good I guess but it does not answer the question.
Technically, you've added one more chord and to be honest it is really dissonant, so again is that "tension" only because of that dissonance that makes a chord Dominant; and what does it dominate after all? We should have named it Disturbing or Tensing, something like that. The focus is on the word Dominant.

Dominant - most important, powerful, or influential – Okay maybe “dominant” is not the best name.  Perhaps a misnomer.  What if someone in math was unable to get past the name of “Pythagorean Theorem”, and therefore never learned the theorem? The relationship between the sides of a right triangle was known to Babylonian and Indian mathematicians centuries before Pythagoras.  So, can we just assume that “dominant” is a misnomer and move on from there?  It's really not important what it is called IMO.

For example see the second chord playing just before the singing starts in the opening of "Nessun Dorma" by J. Puccinni (after the major chord, your G). If it is augmented then what is it Dominant about it, because it certainly is not where the Dominant chord should be expected? Technically, we can say it is from a root (D♯, ok we have to use E♭, gee… this medieval notation is atrocious) one chromatonic note above the "typical Dominant" (your D). But then augmented chords are symmetric (stacked 4ths or your "major thirds") so having a 'root' for it is only contextual. Or is it actually some modified "dominant" from your D root note but the base "5th" chord is not?
I mean, there could be no better example of absolutely brilliant use of this chord. Dissonant? Well, yes, by textbook definition, but to me it is creative use of harmony regardless of subjective "dissonance" factor.

just around 7 sec. (0:07 min) but it appears further as well.

This is a beautiful passage and thanks for sharing! As you noted, the chord at time spot 7 seconds is NOT a dominant chord and so the word “dominant” should not appear in our discussion of this passage.  Remember, in G major the dominant chord has D (the 5th scale degree) as its root. 

At second marker 7 and in the key of G major, the E-flat minor chord (Eb–Gb–Bb) that appears here is most accurately described as a double chromatic mediant. A chromatic mediant is a chord whose root is a third (major or minor) away from the tonic and shares one common tone with the tonic triad. Eb minor is a third away from G, but because it shares no common tones with the G major triad (G–B–D), it is specifically called a double chromatic mediant. Note:  In the score you might see G-flat spelled as F#. 

In the top voice at second marker 7 seconds, you will see a D-natural (and later C-natural) that results in an E-flat Minor Major 7th chord and later an E-flat minor sixth chord resulting in what I might call a "mysterious" sound.  The E-flat Minor Major 7th chord contains the notes G-flat, B-flat and D-natural that is the augmented triad that you mentioned. 

Note: My chord analysis should be double checked by someone for accuracy.

[newbie2]

Did I waste my time with the rest, or do you need time to read it over?

Btw, I did study traditional music theory and used more than one resource.

No you did not waste your time!  I did not disagree with anything you said. 

[balabolka]

Well, I am quite surprised you both are answering to the question and related side‑questions here.

My purpose with Music is more than that.
Everything needs to change. To at least get updated, not as a facelift. A paradigm shift if necessary.

I am not an academic. Even today I went to the local music store where there are textbooks sold. Opened, same old thing. Piano. Note A, B, C are here this it tonic cord. This is Dominant, tension release. Same things.
No answers. Just, "it is like that". Learn it, rather memorize it and use it as stated.
Not enough for me.

[keypeg]

No you did not waste your time!  I did not disagree with anything you said. 

It would have helped to know what you understood.  For example, I went beyond the idea of triad-based, and I gave a more flexible idea to "dominant".  I don't know, at this juncture, if you are limited to the paradigm of the textbook you're using, for example.  When I wrote of "dominant function" that went outside what you wrote, where you stayed within chords having E in the root for the key of A.

[newbie2]

Well, I am quite surprised you both are answering to the question and related side‑questions here.

My purpose with Music is more than that.
Everything needs to change. To at least get updated, not as a facelift. A paradigm shift if necessary.

I am not an academic. Even today I went to the local music store where there are textbooks sold. Opened, same old thing. Piano. Note A, B, C are here this it tonic cord. This is Dominant, tension release. Same things.
No answers. Just, "it is like that". Learn it, rather memorize it and use it as stated.
Not enough for me.

Great!  Here is a roadmap for your journey:

1) Master the current system.  Yes - you will need to read and master my 2 recommended books (or similar books on theory and history) AND A LOT MORE.
2) AFTER #1, If you still agree that things need changed, talk to university professors at top schools and see if they agree.
3) Form a team - you and a large group of scholars that agree with you.  Advocate for the changes that you all feel are needed.

Good luck with your journey!

EDIT:
If you have these 2 books, have you mastered them?  I see strong evidence that you have not even come close to mastery of these BASIC items.  Example: In another thread, you asked what makes 3rds so important that the UGLY third of Pythagoras tuning system caused centuries delay in our music development?  Well, our entire harmonic system is built on stacked 3rds.  The triad - 2 stacked thirds, the 7th chord - 3 stacked 3rds, the 9th chord - 4 stacked 3rds, etc., etc.  See my EDIT in my final post below for more on this. And look at your question in this thread concerning the opening of "Nessun Dorma" by J. Puccinni.  Filled with inaccuracies - calling the double chromatic mediant a dominant chord or wondering if it is a dominant chord.  These are BASIC CONCEPTS - nothing advanced here.  I could go on and on.  Your questions are great, but then you present yourself as knowing way more than the experts and you will show the experts how they are ALL wrong.  But you have no mastery (not even close) of the basics.

And never forget my question to you:  WHO is the determiner of the truth?  You? 
You: The so-called experts are all wrong.
Me: So you are the determiner of the truth?
You:

[keypeg]

Well, I am quite surprised you both are answering to the question and related side‑questions here.

I answered newbie2 in a broader way and along that person's paradigms as I understood them.  It has nothing to do with your post and topic, and you might consider it a secondary thread.

My purpose with Music is more than that.
Everything needs to change. To at least get updated, not as a facelift. A paradigm shift if necessary.

Is there an "everything"?  Is there a single paradigm?

I am not an academic. Even today I went to the local music store where there are textbooks sold. 

Of course that's what you'll find in music stores, and the music stores are also going to be limited because they will also have on the shelves what sells, what the teachers want to have there, what the organizations such as RCM, ABRSM, AMEB, whatnot want. These things are very limited.

[keypeg]

Great!  Here is a roadmap for your journey:

1) Master the current system.  Yes - you will need to read and master my 2 recommended books . .....

and here I disagree.  That is, I don't know where you are in your own journey.  It is one reason why I asked for your take on the various things I wrote - and they cannot be taken in one quick glance.

[newbie2]

It would have helped to know what you understood.  For example, I went beyond the idea of triad-based, and I gave a more flexible idea to "dominant".  I don't know, at this juncture, if you are limited to the paradigm of the textbook you're using, for example.  When I wrote of "dominant function" that went outside what you wrote, where you stayed within chords having E in the root for the key of A.

Did you comment on each of my posts here?  For this particular thread, if you said something that I strongly disagreed with or strongly agreed with, I would have made my thoughts known. 

Keep up with your great participation on items of theory and learning!   

[newbie2]

and here I disagree.  That is, I don't know where you are in your own journey.  It is one reason why I asked for your take on the various things I wrote - and they cannot be taken in one quick glance.

That's fine Keypeg.  Good luck to you also on your journey.  See y'all later.

[newbie2]

This is my 24th post.

At Pianostreet, a user generally becomes a Junior Member after making 25 posts.

My next post will promote me to Junior Member and this will be inconsistent with who I am.  And so it looks like Newbie2 is out.  See y'all later!   
__________________________________________________________________________________

EDIT: I might as well toss this in here.  My post limit is forever up so I am reduced to edits.  Don't like AI? 
Well, he's pretty smart and I quote him occasionally IF I agree with him.  BTW, my edits are limited to this thread only and are clearly marked as "EDIT:", so don't waste your time looking elsewhere.

ME: How did the "ugly 3rd" in Pythagoras tuning system cause centuries delay in the development of western music? 

AI:  The "ugly 3rd" in the Pythagorean tuning system delayed the development of Western harmony—specifically the use of chords and polyphony—for centuries because it was mathematically and acoustically "out of tune".

In the Pythagorean system, which was dominant in Europe until the late Middle Ages, the major third was not considered a stable, pleasant sound (consonance) but rather a harsh tension (dissonance) that required resolution.

Why the Pythagorean Third was "Ugly"
The Ratio Problem: Pythagorean tuning is based on "stacking" perfect fifths (a 3:2 frequency ratio). A major third (e.g., C to E) is reached after four fifths (C-G-D-A-E). This results in a complex frequency ratio of 81:64.

Acoustic Harshness: A "pure" or "just" major third—which sounds sweet and blends well—has a much simpler ratio of 5:4 (or 80:64). The Pythagorean third is roughly 22 cents sharper than this pure version.

Audible Clashing: On instruments with rich overtones, like organs, this sharpness causes audible "beating" or clashing, making the interval sound unstable and unpleasant to the ear.

The Delay in Musical Development
Avoidance of Harmony: Because the major third sounded "grim" and "sour," medieval composers and theorists classified it as an "imperfect discord". For centuries, Western music focused almost exclusively on octaves, fourths, and fifths, which remained pure in the Pythagorean system.

Limitation to Monophony and Simple Polyphony: The lack of a stable third prevented the development of triads (the three-note chords that form the basis of modern music). This kept Western music largely melodic (single lines) or restricted to simple organum (parallel voices at fifths or fourths) for nearly a millennium.

Theoretical Stagnation: Scholars like Boethius promoted Pythagorean tuning as a divine mathematical truth. It wasn't until the Renaissance (around the 15th and 16th centuries) that musicians began adopting Just Intonation and Meantone Temperament, which lowered the third to a more pleasing frequency. This shift finally allowed for the "Golden Age" of polyphony and the eventual transition into the common-practice harmony we recognize today.

ME:  Great answer!  Thank you!

AI: You're very welcome! It is fascinating how a small mathematical discrepancy—just a tiny fraction of a semitone—could dictate the emotional range of music for over a thousand years.

[keypeg]

That's fine Keypeg.  Good luck to you also on your journey.  See y'all later.

I still would have liked to have seen responses to some of the details.

The reason that I wanted to see something beyond that recommendation is due to what I've been exposed to, and looking at more than one system would have to be key.

[balabolka]

1) "A History of Western Music" - I have 3rd edition.
2) I have "Tonal Harmony" by Kostka, Payne and Almen that looks decent.

• "A History of Western Music" I seem to have the 10th edition by Grout, Burkholder, Palisca
• "Tonal Harmony" by Kostka, Payne and Almén, I have the 8th edition

Neither explains or answers my questions. They simply say it is Dominant and that's it. Same as A, B, C… just is. Not my cup of tee.

I went last year to a very, very renown academy. The profs. and such there were too full of themselves for me. no wonder only two students were there. But I do not blame them, it is their job, career. Tried to speak with one of the Dr. a bit younger than me, he just left. He knew. He just did not want to see. Again, career, establishment.

It is pointless to get approval from such institutions and individuals. It is too shaking for their views.
And to be honest, in some of the speeches they were making fun (sarcastic type of examples) of PianoWorld and related forums online but it was about some music scores I could not remember. They were quoting some posts about certain elements in pieces… It was really not my thing.

I walk alone my way. If I follow steps, I will never leave a trace. I have chosen the hard way.

[balabolka]

Anyway, attached is the answer. It is here in the forum links in Miscellaneous.

In the minor ("natural" or Aeolian) there is no Dominant. They simply assign the E chord (minor) as 'dominant' to be consistent with the major tonality. But that is a mistake. If we also comply with the style of chord movements T, S, D, back to T, which has nothing to do with "how to compose" music. It is just a style of composition.
Let it sit here for posterity. Someone might want to know at some time.
They can lock this thread too. Apparently, it is what it is.

[keypeg]

Anyway, attached is the answer. It is here in the forum links in Miscellaneous.

So apparently you were not asking a genuine question as someone who didn't know.  You already had this in mind.  It is also within a narrow framework.  Your context had seemed to be that of seeking broader views.  If this world is only textbook type, I left that a long time ago.  What irks me is that you asked the question, knowing what answer you wanted.  It's close-ended.  Obviously within the narrow framework you're starting with, that would be the answer and most of us were probably already aware of that view.  There is no possibility of exploration, and I think I'm out.

[balabolka]

It also means that you were not asking a question - i.e. you were not seeking information.

It is a very simple question. It is Dominant because it holds more diatonic chords that can be formed from all diatonic notes. It can have the most.
It is also evident from modern point of view regarding overtones (series) but that is bound to timbre.
Also, this major is the true natural major. Not the Ionian. Ironically, it is that construction those ignorant monks did by accident.
And they should have named it A, so now we could have A where G is… provided we stick to the one sided (borderline arrogant) sequence of the Latin alphabet. And we should not do that at all.

Guido d'Arezzo did something in the right direction – giving names to the notes (six but let's acknowledge his effort). Again, he did it with yet another predilection – syllables of his favourite church chant or one that fit. It got changed, the first syllable got from Ut to Do many centuries later (by Doni).
He should have changed the letters too to D, R, M, F, S, L, T (not C, D, E, F, G, A, B respectively)

I suggest complete revamp of the system. 12 syllables with suitable to sing vowels and 12 distinctive consonants and map them to piano or any tuning on instrument of choice.
That's it. You can write any music you want with just a pencil and paper. No need for lines, no need for abstraction which only wastes your time to study it, comprehend, use it.