-
Originally Posted by bako
Originally Posted by bako
Maybe I'm quibbling, but it's what I do best.
Originally Posted by bako
Peace,
Kevin
-
02-09-2011 03:40 AM
-
Originally Posted by bako
I can't think of examples of standards with the 3rd and 4th used in the same chord. Stuff like you mentioned: F-Bb-E-A comes across to me as quartal, not sus (thus more "modal" than "tonal" as some say).
The basics that cover 90% or so -
-The 7sus or 11th is usually played as a triad built on the 7th degree: eg A-G-D-B
-On a II chord, the sus note is the root of the V. So, these don't seem to resolve.
-On a V chord, the sus note is the root of the I. When it doesn't doesn't resolve, people describe the effect as "floating." (I guess what was suspended didn't fall). You can hear this at the end of the intro of Just -The Way You Are: A-G-B-D becomes D-F#-A-D.
-When V7sus resolves it can takes the 9th with it: A-G-B-D to A-G-Bb-C#.
-You can futz around "chromatically" with these moving the roots in minor thirds etc., and find "cool" sounds.
FWIW, a Dm9-G13 with the E on top, comes across as an unresolved sus if you want to hear it that way.
I am just not seeing this - putting a third back into a sus chord - as a fertile field. I notice in one of the other current Levine threads, his E7susb9 doesn't have a third.
-
Originally Posted by bako
I'll take a shot at this tonight. Looks interesting.
The names of the Quartal chords. Now there's a good question.
I learned the the 3 note variety by type. Perfect -Perfect for C F Bb. Perfect-augmented for C F B. and Augmented -Perfect for C F# B
The inversions were called 2-4 and 4-2. Usually the lowest note was doubled an octave higher ( C F G G ex.) [Tons of stuff to do with these but I'll save that for a different post]
Once you got past the 3 note version what next? I'll have to check out the Pesichetti book and see if he has anything on it. Maybe the Walter Piston book has something on it
Anybody?
-
Originally Posted by JohnW400
You could number the SoWhat chords.Last edited by Aristotle; 02-09-2011 at 11:16 AM.
-
Yes
But they're not the only quartal variety. They get more complex as you add notes and then as you change the parent scale.
The So What chord is DGCFA or p4 p4 p4 m3.
The Dorian version of a six note D4 would be D G C F B E. Which is different from the 6 note aeolian version D G C F Bb E.
Here is the 6 note version from the 7th mode Melodic Minor G# C (B#) F# B E A
You get a diminished 4th this chord is a G#7#5 +/-9
I don't think functional harmony when moving to compound intervals. (4,5,7 and 9ths) but 4ths present a challenge as they have become so prevalent in music.
All these compound intervals may resemble tertian harmony but they are an exact way of voicing the notes and may or may not have a third.
This is what I think they mean when they talk about getting away from functional harmony . (I may be wrong here)
-
I have no problem with what you said, John. We all have to come up with coping mechanisms if are going to try improvising or composing with these sounds.
-
Originally Posted by bako
I begin to see why KS insists on separating chord definition from chord voicing. It never occurred to me that they were associated in the first place. A chord definition is like, a set of ratios, no more. Since it has to have a name, it should be a name that doesn't cover anything else. That way, if you add things, it's easy to see what is the added part.
What other chord definitions imply the voicing?
-
Originally Posted by Aristotle
I didn't think you did
Ron,
I think slash chords 'might' but not in all cases. Bbma7/C for a C13 sus4 voiced C Bb D F A. But this might not mean the same thing to all players. SO , I agree whole heartedly with your staff commentLast edited by JohnW400; 02-09-2011 at 12:18 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Aristotle
Peace,
Kevin
-
Originally Posted by Ron Stern
At the same time I am interested in learning and or developing an understandable language of symbols that can indicate varying degrees of generalities to specificity.
I know a symbol is unsuccessful when a skilled musician is steered toward a musically incorrect realization.
Suspended chords that incorporate a major 3rd is a sound that I like and is one of those gray areas regarding naming convention,
at least to me.
-
Originally Posted by bako
Originally Posted by bako
Peace,
Kevin
-
Let's come at this another way. If you write X7, doesn't that mean that the triad can be in any inversion? So just writing X7 you haven't specified a voicing. That's not a problem, that I'm aware of.
Seems to me all you want in a chord definition is the root and the rest of the notes in relation to the root, counting from the root up, regardless oh how you end up playing it. It is the very fact that those specifications don't change is what allows you to be more specific with additional symbols, because of the simplicity and invariability of the basic definition.
-
I played a Big Band gig last night... a few of the latin charts had... Gbmaj#11/F, one had F11b9, another one used F7susb9.... they were all implying basic phrygian note collection, with or without the nat.3rd... Reg
-
I think I got it. That's Phrygian from the lowest note of the chord, F. But probably not as part of a cadence in the key of Db. Whew!
-
Originally Posted by Aristotle
The phrygian thing is a bit confusing since it has nothing to do with a minor 7th b9. There is a real interesting thread about this here:
What is Sus and Phyrigan Chord? - Jazz Bulletin Board
I Always thought the notation E Phrygian in the RB always meant play quartal chords from the Phrygian mode. It appears to mean 7sus4b9 or or as Vic Juris mentions an Fma7b5/E which gives a E7sus4b9 (sans D)
Here's a voicing that works with open strings and isn't too difficult on the higher frets
-----0---------7-------------------------------R
-----0---------7-------------------------------5
-----2----------9-----------------------------sus4
-----3---------10------------------------------b9
-----5---------12------------------------------7
-----0---------7-------------------------------R
-
Originally Posted by Ron Stern
I have studied Mark's books and I now see some problems in it, like everyone else...
He thinks the b9th is the last dissonant interval. He "avoids" it whenever possible.
The b9th is between the 3rd and 4th in a basic chord, etc.
By putting it up an octave above the 4th in a sus4 inverts into a maj7 interval, not an "avoid" interval. Therefore I think Mark felt like he could not suggest not using it since it contradicts his last dissonant interval idea.
I still think it sounds like dookie if sustained.
-
What you say is true for all I know, but doesn't address the question.
The definition of sus4 has been stable for some time now. Mr. Levine finds some notes that he doesn't like to play over it. That calls for the definition to be changed?
He finds some notes that aren't commonly played over it, but are interesting. That calls for the definition to be changed?
If so, what will we name what used to be called sus4? Or do we have to do away with it? Why? If there's something wrong with it, it hasn't been a problem in a shipload of music so far. Were all those people wrong?
-
Originally Posted by Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D
-
Originally Posted by JohnW400
-
Originally Posted by Aristotle
Moffa Mithra
Today, 08:31 AM in For Sale