Naming the Inversions

[cnsky54]

I am missing something in my attempts to understand the naming of the first and second inversions. Could someone provide a simple to understand explanation for the 6/4, 6/3 designations? I know how the inversions are built, but for some reason the numbering escapes me. Thanks!

[matt.guitarteacher]

Has to do with an older chord-naming convention called figured bass. It's still used by classical cats and geezers like me who studied it in college. Most players talk about chords in different ways now, esp. with four note chords.

Check this out:Inversion (music) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's late. I'm off to bed.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Actually this is my favorite description of it: ‪Capt. Broccoli explains triad positions‬‏ - YouTube

Really funny for us old music school guys.

[cnsky54]

That makes a bit of sense. One thing from the Wikipedia - if a 1st inversion can be notated as 6/3 I can recognize what they are asking for. If it is abbreviated to just '6' after the chord, what's to stop me from mistaking a chord, say C6, from being a C-E-G-A C6th? Is it the size of the numbers and their position directly after the chord designation, without being elevated a bit? And then I need to listen to Captain Broccoli explain the secondary dominants...whew.

[matt.guitarteacher]

These figured bass terms for inversions aren't that important to learn if you're not enrolled in university theory or music history classes. Modern players don't use figured bass to describe what they're playing very often. There are more practical ways to talk about modern harmony.

[cnsky54]

True, don't see 'em much, but I was trying to make sense of a master class where the instructor was covering the white board with all these designations and leaving me in the dust...

[TruthHertz]

Originally Posted by cnsky54

True, don't see 'em much, but I was trying to make sense of a master class where the instructor was covering the white board with all these designations and leaving me in the dust...

If you use it a lot, do some composing with that kind of analysis and take a look at some Bach Chorales... IF you do that, you get transported into another world where voice leading is king.
It's another world, and fluency in figured bass is a kind of "insiders' secret handshake" that shows you've got some chops. I didn't really see any use in it but I got thrown into the deep end of the pool and dang! it really gave me an awareness of voice leading that, when I choose to use it, really informs my improvisation and comping now.
David

[cnsky54]

Excellent advice, I'll keep working it through. Since I am kinda OCD about theory and study, it's no hardship for me. I like to write things that have voice leading and interesting chord mixes, so I appreciate the inside look!

john

[TruthHertz]

Originally Posted by cnsky54

Excellent advice, I'll keep working it through. Since I am kinda OCD about theory and study, it's no hardship for me. I like to write things that have voice leading and interesting chord mixes, so I appreciate the inside look!

john

Well then! You're in for a treat! Compose stuff, an 8-16 bar piece a day was what I did, and keep an awareness of bass line movement. Make sure you play everything you write to get the aural chops that must be integrated with the notation. At some point, you may want to check out the thread on Mick Goodrick's Voice Leading in this group. It's been quiet for a while but I'm about to revive it with some good exercises. That's a uniquely horizontal approach to jazz voice leading that's closer akin to Bach than block chord progression.
Good incentive for me to get that started again.
David

[cnsky54]

I will look into it, and since I play my own bass on my home recordings it gives me some impetus to work that into the whole scenario. I really do need to dig into the theory, though, so I get it all. Some of the threads here more resemble Greek or Klingon to me. It will come, I'm sure...