What you're saying about the importance of interval relationships in the definition of chords is accurate in traditional "school" functional harmony, but the chord theory that applies to contempory music is quite different. Intervallic relationships cease to be as important as modal functions and "color". Take an extended minor chord, for example Dmin11. There are a number of ways to voice this chord function using different types of intervallic relationships and therefore bringing out different colors of the function. We could voice it with all fourths: D,G,C,F. We can voice it with a combination of fourths and thirds: D,G,C,F,A. We can voice it with all thirds: D,F,A,C. We can voice it with seconds and fourths: C,D,F,G. All of these voicings sound very different, yet could be interpreted as Dmin11.
The important thing to remember about the harmonic structures that appear in much electronic dance music (and Rock and Roll,RnB, modal-jazz, etc.) is that they are most related to the harmonic concepts of modalism (Debussy and Ravel started these theoretical ideas in the Concert Music tradition and players like Miles Davis, Billy Strayhorn, and John Coltrane in the Jazz tradition). Without a ridiculous digression, suffice it to say that your typical college theory textbook (which is teaching "Functional Harmony") is leaving out the picture of the harmonic basis of most contemporary music. In Mozart's time (which is what these basic theory texts explain) every chord had a very clear function and existed in a very obvious harmonic scheme. Such is often not the case today, where chords/modes are much more likened to the concept in the visual arts of complementary and uncomplementary colors.
I don't mean to digress with lengthy explanations, but I often feel with my students and with my own studies than an understanding of modal harmony as an aspect of the Ambient ethos often goes hand in hand with creating high quality electronic music.
|