Ibanez JEM Forum banner

what does in mean when someone says " this lick is in the key of C"

Tags
key
9K views 62 replies 18 participants last post by  Alepheleven 
#1 ·
what does it mean when a song or lick is in a key of a note? how do we transpose that to the guitar?
 
#3 ·
What he said, and as the transposing, so the song originally was in the key of G, and the chord progression was something like: G-C-D, then transposing it to the key of C would be C-F-G.

Easiest way to look at it, is the look at the original key of the song G, and its chord progression G-C-D, and understand that as the intervals of the song. I-IV-V, which is G being the root is I, and C and D are the 4th and 5th intervals in the G major scale so they are the IV and the V. So when going to another key, if you use the intervals to understand the chord structure, then its easy to what the transposed chords are. C-F-G, are the I (root), IV and V of the key of C.

I hope that helps. Working with a group that use the Nashville numbering system and understanding that has gone along way to help me. Especially since we transpose alot of the songs to different keys to make them more singable.

Muf
 
#4 ·
What he said, and as the transposing, so the song originally was in the key of G, and the chord progression was something like: G-C-D, then transposing it to the key of C would be C-F-G.

Easiest way to look at it, is the look at the original key of the song G, and its chord progression G-C-D, and understand that as the intervals of the song. I-IV-V, which is G being the root is I, and C and D are the 4th and 5th intervals in the G major scale so they are the IV and the V. So when going to another key, if you use the intervals to understand the chord structure, then its easy to what the transposed chords are. C-F-G, are the I (root), IV and V of the key of C.

I hope that helps. Working with a group that use the Nashville numbering system and understanding that has gone along way to help me. Especially since we transpose alot of the songs to different keys to make them more singable.

Muf
I see why i suck at guitar now.
 
#8 ·
that sounds great. something wierd happened today... i was playing for the love of god when i realized i could play further than the intro, i never looked at anything farther than the intro. icould play a couple measures more just from listening to the song more. i think im starting to get a deeper understanding of the guitar. just from my measley lessons. it was pretty cool.
 
#10 ·
I think there are a couple of things you need to take into account:

1 lick implies a chord (arpeggio/broken, rolled chord)

2 lick has it's own natural tonal center:
a. tonal center is traditional major or minor,
b. but could also be modal, blues/jazz, exotic, augmented etc.
c. leading notes or chromaticism is used to establish the tonic.

3 lick has multiple tonal centers:
a. lick contains a traditional movement/mimics a progression,
b. turnaround or smilar, ex.: tonal center starts at ii moves via V in natural progression to I
c. subsequent arpreggios

4. lick works over a chord
a. change the underlying chord, keep the pitches of the lick the same: completely different feel (tonal center changes)
b. diatonic shift allows you to play it over another chord in the same scale, pitches change but more importantly relative intervals within the lick change,
c. parallel shift over the same chord means it takes on a completely different feel (pitches change but relative intervals within the lick remain the same)
d. pedal point, lick moves diatonic (b) or parallel (c).

There must be more ways to look at it (I'm sure someone with more background in music theory could expand), but one thing is for sure: it's not as simple as "this lick is in C".

1. Emphasises the feel, atmosphere or colour of the chord.
2. Mostly melody,
-could imply feel (especially with modal or exotic licks)
-could imply a circular progression.
3. Emphasises melody.
4. Emphasis on harmonies.
 
#15 ·
Ouch! My head hurts. I think 'theory' is too loaded of a term. It can mean as many things as there are people trying to explain it. Try to keep it simple and take it a step at a time. Every one has levels, some people grasp it fast, some take a lifetime. Most types of music have repetative formulas that seem complex, but only until you realize everybody uses them. Put the books down and crank up your favorite stuff and play along.
 
#17 ·
the truth is most of was posted is useless jargon
by the rules....
a set of tones is said to be in the key of X if the phrase begins on that note.
unless notated other wise on the sheet music..
theroy is the relationship of the succeeding note to the root or beginning note.
called the key


musicians use lots of jargon to make up for the fact that the song they just wrote sounds like crap
cp
 
#22 ·
the truth is most of was posted is useless jargon
by the rules....
a set of tones is said to be in the key of X if the phrase begins on that note.
unless notated other wise on the sheet music..
theroy is the relationship of the succeeding note to the root or beginning note.
called the key

musicians use lots of jargon to make up for the fact that the song they just wrote sounds like crap
cp
Actually, most of the useless jargon is contained in your post.

a set of tones is said to be in the key of X if the phrase begins on that note.
This is not true - you could start a 'set of tones' on any note you like.

theroy is the relationship of the succeeding note to the root or beginning note.
called the key
I'm not even sure what you mean by this so you need to be clearer when making your point, if you are going to call other peoples' responses 'jargon'.
 
#26 ·
notice all conflicting jargon?

as i said before

a riff or set of tones can be the whole song or
the riff can stand alone

the truth is most of was posted is useless jargon
by the rules....
a set of tones is said to be in the key of X if the phrase begins on that note.
unless notated other wise on the sheet music..
theory is the relationship of the succeeding note to the root or beginning note.
called the key

the rule is very simple

the perfessors on here can't understand this because they paid 50.00 an hr for the jargon
 
#29 · (Edited)
It only means C is the tonal centre with a major tonality guys - any borrowed chords maybe there (ie borrowed from it's parallel minor - Cminor) or use of modes. The scale choice in the lick would reflect these chords and style wanted...which could mean changing scales as you go.

For blues in a major key, the 7th chords are used as "style" chords and the blues scale suits these to give that style but the major scale does not work. You are actually using Cm pentatonic with the added blue-note (b5) but it's still in the key of C.

Even if you borrow chords and even happen to modulate with secondary 7ths e.g. C - D7 - G7 (where D7 is a secondary 7th) - you would still say C (the tonal centre) is it's key. This is good to know so you can transpose it if needed to fit a singer etc.
 
#31 ·
Ok, people need to take a HUGE step back here.

Assuming it is a major key and you are not using lydian/mixolydian/other outside notes etc etc (Maybe 1% or less of the time), if someone says "This lick is in the key of C", it would mean C is the root note(assuming you know what a root is. If you don't, google it), and the other notes are within the C major scale (CDEFGABC). To play it on guitar you would simply find the notes that are being played(Assuming you know your notes. If you don't, google it). That's it, no apocalyptic forces of nature are being utilized. It is that simple.


END OF THREAD.
 
#47 ·
Chill Muffin, he was right in labelling it the tonal centre because the term root refers to a chords bass note that labels it that chord. Yes knowing theory still does not make a great song writer but its terminology to communicate and improve as a musician. Which is why you still want to learn.
 
#52 · (Edited)
It should be noted that many of the respondents in this thread have differing opinions of what "this lick is in the key of C" means. A lot of guitarists are self-taught. And a lot of guitar teachers are, too. That said, we're all going to have different ways of explaining music. The guy who only reads tab and doesn't know any notes on his guitar other than the lowest note of the lowest string is probably not going to be the guy you want to ask what "this lick is in the key of C" means. And knowing the name of every single note on every single fret of your guitar is no guarantee that your answer will be right, either.

The relationship of notes and chords within a key is part of the language of Western harmonic theory. My belief is that so long as people insist on using the vocabulary of keys, that they at least learn how to use it properly. Technically speaking, the key of C major contains the following chords: C Dm Em F G Am B°

That said, saying "this lick is in the key of C" doesn't tell us any information other than the key. Something more specific, like "the progression is I iii IV ii V vi in C" tells me a hell of a lot more than "this lick is in the key of C", but still doesn't say anything about the lick. A more complete response might be "this lick is played over the I (or whatever) chord in the key of C". Typically, a lick is played over a single chord, so I think this to be the most satisfactory answer for that situation. Think of a blues shuffle: the riff is played on the I chord, transposed to IV, and is transposed again to V before turning around. If somebody says "blues shuffle in A", we know that there is a shuffle-y riff played on A, the same riff on D, and the same riff on E. The chord progression and the riff are both established in those four words.

"In the key of C" could mean anything at all. You could be playing over a G7 chord (which strongly implies C tonality, far more than a C major chord does), never touch a C note, and be in C like you've never been in C before in your life. Is this what most guitarists mean when they say "this is in C"? Probably not. Consider who's telling you this, and the volume of information about the music that is at your disposal.

As far as modal mixture and chromaticism goes, sure, it happens a lot in rock and metal. In some instances more than others. However, keep in mind that rock is a partially modal style, and to analyze it in terms of classical harmony might not adequately express the music. What if the only chord shapes you know are major bar chords? Chances are that you're not going to be diatonic all the time. What if you use strictly minor chords because it sounds ****ing awesome? You bet your ass your harmony is going to be somewhat ambiguous. What if you never learned a single scale in the twenty years you've been playing the guitar and play everything by ear? Yeah, it might not conform strictly to a major scale. Am I going to use diatonic theory when I try to figure out what's going on in your music? Heck no! On the other hand, if some guy says he's substituting an arpeggiated augmented triad for the V chord to facilitate a modulation to a key a major third away, he's already done the work for us. :mrgreen:

My point is this: consider your source. It's obvious that "this lick is in the key of C" means very different things to different people.

As for jazz, I have yet to find two jazz players who speak the same harmonic language, beyond what the definition of ii V I is. And even then...

Our discussion seems to be centered around diatonic harmony, though, so I would avoid veering off into jazz territory, which requires some fairly heady explanation of harmonic substitutions and melodic extensions, rendering the statement, "this lick is in the key of C," rather pointless.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top