Is this in any key?

Could it be D, or rather Bm?  Technically it should be a C#dim in the progression, but a C#m might fit in just as well.  

Nope, that doesn't work.   I thought you had a Bm.  Let me think.

Maybe you should just call it C#m but you're playing an Em instead of E.  Could that be?  Truly, I don't know.  

If you thought of it in terms of E minor (harmonic or melodic, not natural), then you could look at it as

ii of V          V              i

Just an idea. The C#m does make it very interesting.

Peace

Ok, let me see if I have this.  Em is the relative minor or the key of G which has:

I - G
ii - Am
iii - Bm
IV - C
V - D
vi - Em
vii - F#dim

The if we start with Em and renumber we get:

i - Em
II - F#dim
III - G
iv - Am
v - Bm
VI - C
VII - D

The ii of Bm is C#dim.  So that explains that there is no key in which C#m, B, and Em absolutely, perfectly fit?

Nope, none where they perfectly fit.

I'm thinking along hodge's lines. You're playing in Em and the C#m is borrowed from the parallel major key (E major).

I think it's some guitar with originallity, if you theory guys cant figure it out! Maybe it's in no specific key. Just like the existance of a mode that only has one whole step... Unheard of, but alot of metal bands do stuff like that. This is why I dont do thigs with complex theory, because it puts your mind in a box filled with what everyone else has figured out. Be unique, and open to anything. I didnt know playing all the open strings on the guitar created a chord, and with that limitation in mind, I never used it in a song. Now I just might.

I think you're not characterizing theory correctly, Nik...

Music always comes first.  Theory comes later to categorize the music.

It's true that you can go to theory when you're 'stuck' in writing, but to rely on theory to create chord progressions or melodies will make your music sound rather wooden and mechanical.  When I write, I write the melodies I hear, and the harmonies come from the interaction between melody lines.

Where theory is of great value in creating a composition is in knowing in advance what WON'T work.  That saves you a lot of time running down avenues that won't go anywhere...

Tom

That's why with music, it's either know it all, or little enough to be experimental. Some of those complex things, like the key the chord progression is in, will lead you into a hole when it comes to writing progressins. I guess it takes time to know what wont work, without trial and error. I guess Im still not knowledgeable enough in the theory to understand what's all for, but thank you for pointing that out, and filling my head with that new veiwpoint, it really gave me a paradigm shift, when it comes to how I think of theory. I guess saying something uneducated always leads to education.

I remember someone saying something like this when we were talking about music theory.

You learn all the rules and systems of music theory and in the end when you understand the whole thing, it is then when you know which and when rules can be broken.

Well, good to know specifically that those 3 don't fit in any key formally.  I feel better that my hand wanted to keep popping out a Bm instead of that B.

On my way to work today I heard The Stones' Brown Sugar.  My buddy and I practiced that a bit two weekends ago.  I believe there is an instrumental part that goes D barre root 5, 5th fret) da na na  na na, C (barre root 5, 5th fret) da na na  na na, Bb (barre root 5, 5th fret) da na na  na na, and back to C (barre root 5, 5th fret) da na na  na na.  That's done twice then continues C chord.

Ok, so we have D, C, Bb.  From my experience moving around with barre chords my mind has made a rule you can't have 3 all major or all minor chords spaced a whole step apart on the same string (this time the 5th string).

For example, in the key of C you can play all these barres on the 6th string:  F to G to Am all a whole step apart.  You can't (according to key) play the Am as an A even though it's easier to keep the same finger shape.

So once again, I'm frustrated that they play D, C Bb and get away with it.  I guess big, huge, rich rock 'n roll bands can break the rules.

You might be even more frustrated because that D is actually an Eb! You can find the intro TABbed out in the "Easy Songs for Beginners" Lesson, Happy:

https://www.guitarnoise.com/article.php?id=80

If you relly feel like you have to explain this beyond the "sounds good" argument, this of it as fully harmonizing the blue notes of a Cm pentatonic scale. Or a C blues scale so that you can add in the Ab chord as well.

Just a thought.

Peace

C#m would be the II chord in the key of B Major, and I suspect that the Em has been thrown in (as IVm) to add "Chromatic Interest"

A :-)

So once again, I'm frustrated that they play D, C Bb and get away with it.  I guess big, huge, rich rock 'n roll bands can break the rules.

I heard an interesting story recently... the Stones were jamming in a recording studio with a guitarist.  After trying a few tunes, Jagger took the guitarist aside and told him 'it's just not happening'.

The guitarist was kinda stunned.  He thought he'd been fitting right in.

The guitarist, by the way, was Satriani.

I heard this through the grapevine by way of a bass player who was in the next studio at the time.  Thought you'd all enjoy it. :)

Tom

So once again, I'm frustrated that they play D, C Bb and get away with it.  I guess big, huge, rich rock 'n roll bands can break the rules.

Once again.  It is a rare chord progression except for the odd nursery rhyme and some ballady stuff that only uses diatonic chords from a single key.

Such a progression tends to sound a little bland.

It is far more common to substitute the odd chord from outside the key to add colour to the song.

In addition, it is extremely common for rock bands to use all major or all 5th chords for a progression.

Now, if you used Dm, C, Bb and then A - you've got Flamenco!

Pass me my castanets.

A :-)