By definition, secondary dominants usually resolve to the dominant. But sometimes they go to a major or minor subdominant, then the tonic, with a sort of descending rather than ascending voice leading:
6->(6 or ♭6)->5
#4->4->3
2->1->1
(This is occasionally referred to as a cross-relation or false relation.)
It happens in “Eight Days a Week” in a major key with IV:
Or in “You’re All I Need to Get By”, still major but with iv:
And a transcription I’ve nearly finished uses it in a minor passage:
(Is it just a coincidence that all three examples keep the same lowest note throughout? The first two examples repeat the progression in their verse but switch to uninverted chords, so maybe.)
The big question: which numeral do you prefer to use for these secondary dominants? I see V/V used in some places, but II is more common in tabs here. Is it situational, and if so, what should it depend on?
Using the applied spelling for a chord like that violates the contributor guide and doesn’t make any sense. After all the only point of an applied chord is that it tonicizes the target chord, which obviously isn’t possible when the target chord isn’t even present in the progression. The only instance where it would be justifiable to label a chord that isn’t preceded or followed by V as V/V would be when it resolves deceptively to bIII or iii.
II7 - iv - I is an example of a progression where 2 voices move chromatically in parallel while 1 voice remains static. Putting the static voice in the bass makes the smoothness of the voice leading much more apparent. If you make it a II7 - iv(add6) - I(add9), you even have 2 static voices.
It’s a somewhat common thing to have 2 chromatically moving voices over a tonic pedal in the bass and you can continue the chromatic movement for quite a bit longer than just 3 chords. Some examples of this type of progression would be measures 7-12 of the Verse to Explorers by Muse, the Intro to Fighting With The Melody by Jimmy Urine and the Bridge to Care Of Cell 44 by The Zombies.
1 Like
