Talk:Ii–V–I progression

ii vs II: Technical restrictions on article titles

shouldn't the title be ii-V-I because the ii is minor?68.173.5.230 12:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions). Hyacinth (talk) 03:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bearing that in mind, suggest the article be re-named to avoid the current misrepresentation of its contents. How about "The ii-V-I Turnaround"...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.113.215 (talk) 19:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz - Clarity

The Jazz section offers examples in the key of F, whereas most of the pages that link to this page offer examples in the key of C. I will transpose these unless someone has a good reason not to. Persaonlly, I think the blues should be presented in E, it's traditional guitar key, but let's ignore bias and go for simplicity!

Also, I'm not sure that the first example's explanation is well worded, or indeed sensible. Could you please take another look?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.113.215 (talk) 19:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How long?

Article says the ii V I has been used "for a hundred years" - surely it's been around longer than that? Since Bach at least - probably before that too. Czgibson (talk) 11:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the function has been around since Aristotle, I'm sure. The idiom of using Roman numerals to indicate functional analysis or compositional shorthand probably really is barely 100 years old.--76.247.105.43 (talk) 10:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]