The Cadential 6/4 chord: is it I 6/4 or V6/4-5/3?

This is the dichotomy - it might structurally be a tonic chord, albeit inverted, but its function is undoubtedly dominant. It occurs in the passing form the IV chord, through the I 6/4, on its way to the dominant - and is so powerful in doing so, that it becomes the launch pad for the cadenza. Can we hear what the player is thinking? Maybe if we extrapolate ideas from their cadenza construction, if it is fact their own. Does the I 6/4 ever occur on a WEAK beat? Can't think of one that is successful. That movement to the V in the bass voice tells all. Powerful it is - and not cadential - so yup, it's a dominant chord alright - even though it contains the pitches it does.

Added - I am re-reading you question - a V 6/4 chord would not have the dominant tone in the bass, would it? - it would have the supertonic - really weak, compared to gravity. Even the use of a II chord as a substitution for IV, usually has the 4th step in the bass - it's just the most powerful way to get home. *Could* you do it the other way? Sure - why??? Double-gravity? Might as well use the double-dominant - and even then, cooler with the sharp 4 in the bass - your call on what you want to hear - the additional leading tone, or MORE gravity. It's liek when you use the Neapolitan - as a sub for the IV chord - geez, stick the 4th step of the scale in the bass - coll when you then go to the last inversion of the dominant 7 chord - got all the serious classic factors of prediction in motion.

It is actually both of those, because the cadential 6/4 is a I chord, but it has a dominant function. I think the later is a better definition for it personally, because it shows both the function and resolution of the cadential 6/4. Not to mention that the cadential isn't the 1 chord (I6/4), it is the relationship between the 2 chords (I6/4, V) as dominants leading the the tonic. By the way V6/4-5/3 means, V as in dominant function, 6/4 as in the 2nd inversion of the I chord, and 5/3 as in the root position of the V chord that follows. The reason why the V is in front of the resolution is to state that both the chords act as a big dominant leading to the tonic. I first learned it as a tonic chord and then my next teacher told me it was a dominant, and honestly I never felt like it sounded any different either way. I feel like the ultimate goal is to get back to the tonic, and no matter what function you thought the Cadential 6/4 had I think It would be played the same way. It has its own tonal pull, and will always have that tonal pull. It speaks for itself.

This Site Might Help You.

RE:

The Cadential 6/4 chord: is it I 6/4 or V6/4-5/3?

Another question re-sparked my interest in this most inane of music theory questions.

If you thought of the cadential 6/4 chord as I or V would you actually play it differently? do you think you could hear the difference in how a performer was thinking about the chord? Or how the composer...

A I 6/4 sounds like dominant harmony with suspensions on the 3rd and 5th, hence the logic of of the I 6/4 > V > I progression, in full or partial cadences. Calling a chord passing implies harmonic unimportance, both 2nd inversions imply the harmony of the note in the bass, and can be used as weak substitutions for same. They are freely used when the bass moves by scale line. Major - major sevenths are rare in classical music proper becoming more common at the end of the 1800s into the 20th century. They are almost always the result of contrapuntal movement in classical music proper, and in more modern, say impressionist works they have the sound of an added tone chord, the chord being stable and the added tone being the note requiring resolution, though that seeming free. Classical uses the dominant, the minor, (a,c,e, g), the half diminished (a,c,Eb, g), and the diminished (a,c,Eb,F#). These were used in traditional forward moving, "circle of fifths" harmony on the classical period proper. As the Romantic era progressed, a trend towards chromatic resolution of the same chords, either to triads or other sevenths went with it until with Wagner this chromatic movement became the major harmonic force. At this time a third seventh was added with the augmented 5th. This is mostly done to the dominant type 7th, as the presence of the augmented third is heard as an enharmonically notated 4th in the other sevenths. It is useful to note that all progessions become possible when the voiceleading is correct.

Cadential 6 4

I don't really see what you mean, the stereotypical cadential formula is ii7b*-Ic-V(7)-I. If you mean in Baroque figuration, wouldn't it just be 6/4 on the bass note given?

Also, I didn't know the was a dominant 6/4 chord used in cadences, is it not usually passing V6/4 chords?. Lastly V6/4-5/3 if in the key of C would chord (in ascending note order), D-G-B to D-F-A, which isn't a cadential formula at all. unless it was to F-A-C-D (ii7b).

* b = second inversion c= third

Edit: Just read the answer by Jeff, I see what you mean by V6/4 and I6/4 now, though personally I'd still call it I6/4, ignoring its function as a dominant, since other chords with multiple functions (every single one) aren't given new names to fit with their function that I'm aware of.

Sadly, the answer is what your textbook says. Some textbooks will label it as a I64, others as a V64. Those who label it as a I64 are being dogmatic about the application of roman numerals ("It is a triad in first inversion whose root is the tonic). If your textbook uses I64, say that. If it uses V64, then that is the answer.

However, that's not always a good idea, because while roman numerals will show you the pitches of the triad and what inversion it is in, they may not accurately describe the function (which is far more important - I'd rather have my students say "This is a neighboring chord prolonging a tonic triad" than "This is a IV64 between two tonic chords." because the roman numeral in this instance does not reflect its function: a IV64 doesn't really act as a predominant; it acts as a prolongation of tonic.)

So, while the debate goes on, the majority, I feel, label this chord as a V64, because it functions as a dominant chord. While the root is not the dominant, this roman numeral says that the 6th and 4th above the dominant are acting as non-chord tones (often suspended over from a previous predominant chord) which resolve to the 5th and 3rd above the dominant.

When I M 64 Chords

It's I 6/4, because it then moves to V, before resolving back to I.