Written by Emily Sanders | Last updated: June 2026
Who Writes the Content on This Site
All content published on ChordProgressionMaker.com is written by Emily Sanders, music theory educator, harmony researcher, and founder of this site. There are no guest contributors, no outsourced writers, and no AI-generated articles published without full review, fact-checking, and rewriting by Emily personally.
Every page — whether a technical explanation of diatonic chord generation, a guide to understanding progression results, an FAQ answer, or a legal disclosure — is the direct product of Emily’s research into functional harmony, the Roman numeral system, chord substitution, and the practical application of music theory in songwriting and arrangement.
Editorial Standard
The single test every piece of content on this site must pass before publication:
Would a music theory professor, a conservatory-trained composer, or an experienced harmony educator reading this page find it theoretically accurate, pedagogically useful, and honest about where music theory rules give way to contextual judgment — or would they find something oversimplified, incorrect, or missing?
If the answer is anything other than “accurate, pedagogically useful, and honest,” the content is not ready to publish. Content that generates a chord progression without explaining the functional harmony logic behind it — or that implies there is a single “correct” progression for any given input — is not acceptable on any page of this site.
How Tool Pages Are Written
The tool page for the Chord Progression Maker is written to document three things with equal rigour:
1. What the tool calculates and how Every tool page names the specific music theory rules, diatonic chord lookup procedures, and functional harmony logic involved in generating a progression. The full calculation pipeline — root note and key input, diatonic scale construction, chord quality determination by scale degree, Roman numeral assignment, functional group classification (tonic/subdominant/dominant), and progression sequence output — is documented in full on the How It Works page. The tool page summarises this logic in user-facing language without sacrificing theoretical accuracy.
2. What the result means A chord progression output is only useful if the musician understands the function of each chord in the sequence, why chords in the same functional group can substitute for each other, and what contextual factors — genre conventions, voicing, tempo, and harmonic rhythm — determine whether a progression works in practice. Every result explanation on this site includes this contextual layer.
3. What the tool cannot determine The tool generates progressions based on documented diatonic harmony rules. It cannot determine whether a progression fits a specific genre, cannot assess voice leading quality, cannot account for harmonic rhythm, and cannot capture the emotional or stylistic context that shapes whether a progression is musically effective. These limitations are stated explicitly on every relevant page. The FAQ addresses the most commonly misunderstood aspects of chord progression generation.
How Technical Articles Are Researched
Functional Harmony and Chord Theory Content Articles covering tonic-subdominant-dominant function, diatonic chord quality, the Roman numeral system, secondary dominants, and modal interchange are researched against established music theory literature — including standard conservatory harmony texts and peer-reviewed music theory publications. Where specific chord formulas or scale degree relationships are cited, these are cross-referenced against documented music theory, not derived independently.
Chord Substitution and Reharmonisation Content Articles covering tritone substitution, secondary dominants, borrowed chords, and jazz reharmonisation techniques are researched against both classical and jazz harmony literature. Where a substitution technique is genre-specific or contested among theorists, this is noted.
Applied Harmony and Songwriting Content Articles covering the application of chord progressions in specific genres — pop, jazz, blues, classical, folk — are researched against genre-specific harmony conventions and verified against representative examples from the repertoire. Emily does not publish claims about specific harmonic conventions without verification against the genre’s established theoretical literature.
AI Content Policy
Emily uses AI writing tools as a research aid and first-draft accelerator. No AI-generated content is published on this site without the following process:
- Fact-check every theoretical claim — any chord formula, Roman numeral assignment, scale degree description, or harmony principle is verified against a primary source before it appears on the page
- Rewrite for accuracy and pedagogical precision — AI drafts are rewritten to reflect Emily’s research knowledge; generic music content is replaced with theory-specific content grounded in documented functional harmony
- Add site-specific context — general harmony explanations are replaced with examples and analyses specifically relevant to the chord progression tool and its output
- Final review before publication — every page is read in full by Emily before it goes live
Corrections Policy
If a theoretical or factual error is identified on any page — an incorrect chord formula, a misattributed Roman numeral, an inaccurate scale degree description, or an outdated harmony convention — it will be corrected as a priority. Corrections are made to the live page and the “Last updated” date is revised. Significant corrections are noted at the top of the relevant page.
To report a correction, use the Contact page with the subject line “Content Correction” and the specific page URL and error. Emily reviews all correction submissions personally. Response time: 48–72 hours.
What This Site Does Not Publish
- Chord progressions or harmony rules presented as universal without disclosure of genre context and theoretical conventions
- Content implying the tool produces “correct” progressions — harmony is contextual, and what works depends on genre, voicing, and intent
- Content that conflates chord naming conventions across classical, jazz, and pop theory without acknowledging the differences
- Medical, clinical, or hearing health advice of any kind
- Link exchange requests, sponsored content, or paid product placements of any kind
- Content written by contributors who have not verified their claims against primary music theory sources
Related Pages
- About ChordProgressionMaker.com — what this site is, who runs it, and who it is for
- How It Works — full technical documentation of the chord generation algorithm
- Data Security — why this tool involves no audio, no microphone, and no data transmission of any kind
- Contact — to report errors, ask theory questions, or submit data requests
These guidelines were written by Emily Sanders and apply to all content published on ChordProgressionMaker.com. Last updated: June 2026.