Which statement would be least consistent with a simple triadic progression described?

Which statement would be least consistent with a simple triadic progression described?

• A. A chain of triads, each pulling to the next
• B. Each chord moves toward related chords
• C. Smooth voice leading may use inversions
• D. A progression built from unrelated chords

Answer: (D)

A simple triadic progression relies on staying within related harmonies so the chord choices feel connected and the voices move smoothly. In such progressions, chords often share tones or sit near each other in the key, and composers use inversions to keep voices close and avoid big leaps. So a chain of triads that pulls from one to the next, or movement toward related chords, fit this idea because they maintain tonal cohesion and smooth voice leading. Even using inversions helps preserve common tones and keep the line moving nicely. A progression built from unrelated chords breaks that pattern: it would sound abrupt and out of place in a straightforward triadic framework, because the chords don’t share common tones or fit neatly within the same tonal space.

A simple triadic progression relies on staying within related harmonies so the chord choices feel connected and the voices move smoothly. In such progressions, chords often share tones or sit near each other in the key, and composers use inversions to keep voices close and avoid big leaps. So a chain of triads that pulls from one to the next, or movement toward related chords, fit this idea because they maintain tonal cohesion and smooth voice leading. Even using inversions helps preserve common tones and keep the line moving nicely. A progression built from unrelated chords breaks that pattern: it would sound abrupt and out of place in a straightforward triadic framework, because the chords don’t share common tones or fit neatly within the same tonal space.