Do these chords exists? Any different name for them?

[pamosmusic]

And for that I would share a score written by me that displays exactly how do I want that the acompaniament IS played. Etc

Alrighty. Well, I guess I’m not sure why we’re asking about how chords are named then.

[JimmyDunlop]

Alrighty. Well, I guess I’m not sure why we’re asking about how chords are named then.

Ask to the nomenclature philosophers, that dont understand the essence of music

[pamosmusic]

Ask to the nomenclature philosophers, that doesnt understand the essence of music

Oh I thought I’d ask the guy who apparently does understand the essence of music, who asked the question (and another about how to name chords) in the first place.

I guess that’s my bad

[JimmyDunlop]

Oh I thought I’d ask the guy who apparently does understand the essence of music, who asked the question (and another about how to name chords) in the first place.

I guess that’s my bad

I wanted to know alternative names for 2 chords. One sounded very strange. But now I realised that I can use online tools for that.
Did I reply your question? Any other question?

[pamosmusic]

I’m sure I have a few about the essence of music, but it might take me a moment to formulate those in an intelligent way.

As you were.

[JimmyDunlop]

It actually would be subjective concept, It will depend on each creator, and whats his aim

[pamosmusic]

It actually would be subjective concept, It will depend on each creator, and whats his aim

Ah right.

So all those people who don’t understand the essence of music really just don’t understand the essence of your music.

Its possible—and I’m just spitballing here, so bear with me—that you might be missing something about theirs.

[rpjazzguitar]

When you play with people who can read, you will likely encounter people who can get very finicky about how a chart is written. If you can adjust the chart to make them happy, you probably end up with a chart that a newbie can read more easily, which is a real benefit when you have a sub in the band.

[JimmyDunlop]

Ah right.

So all those people who don’t understand the essence of music really just don’t understand the essence of your music.

Its possible—and I’m just spitballing here, so bear with me—that you might be missing something about theirs.

Not mine. In general. We can divide the essence in aim of the creator and process of making It.

Do I have to put examples?

[Boss Man Zwiebelsohn]

In the case of functions we enter another level of abstraction. What precisely does it mean that Gb6 (or for that matter Gbmaj7#11) retains the function of Gb7?

I suppose one could argue that the removal of the leading tone C# renders the function of the chord to be no longer dominant. subdominant. Em in the key of C is a dominant function according to Reimann and so on (it has the B.)

If I understood, in your example it’s standing in for a dominant so its function is normative. I think most jazz musicians mean function in this sense. It a practical definition, not a closed theoretic one. More like the way grammar of a language evolves rather than some immutable fact of nature the way Rameau and his followers imagined it.

(There’s a lot of this grammatical evolution in jazz that I’d love to track more. How exactly did the maj7 go from being a chord that needed to be prepared and resolved in earlier jazz to being considered a consonant tonic chord for example?)

So it’s not a cut and dried concept. You are distilling some aspect of it being different and another of it being the same. So it’s subjective, not objective. And that’s kind of interesting. I think subjectivity is underrated.

It's Hugo Riemann.

[JimmyDunlop]

When you play with people who can read, you will likely encounter people who can get very finicky about how a chart is written. If you can adjust the chart to make them happy, you probably end up with a chart that a newbie can read more easily, which is a real benefit when you have a sub in the band.

Here IS the problem. I was initially asking about 2 chords from a classical exercptthat IS performed using score and not chart. Maybe I didnt mention It although I think I did

[JimmyDunlop]

Anyways. End of the week. Out of the forum for sometime.

[Mick-7]

Of course, it’s the verse of All by Myself, which is a lift from Rachmaninoff but even Rach didn’t put the IVm there because he thought ‘maybe it’s too much, I’ll hold it back just this side …’

Speaking of Rachmaninoff, Jerry Hahn played a lovely solo guitar rendition of Full Moon and Empty Arms on his album Moses,
I used to have transcription of it.

Jerry Hahn - 05 - Full Moon And Empty Arms - 18:24-20:08

[pauln]

I suspect my way of viewing these things is quite a bit different than most people I encounter in these discussions. You said "It (is) a practical definition, not a closed theoretic one" and truthfully, practical definitions are all I really care about ... and even that is limited further by the additional condition of being practical to my own vision of playing music. Over time I have come to accept that my vision may not (does not?) coincide with a lot of others. There are certain ideas that are central to me that would probably be rejected outright by most musicians and yet they seem to work for me so I am happy to live by them. The deeper I get, the more I find those ideas are both expanding and becoming more entrenched ... simply because they work for the way that I make music. The byproduct of this way of thinking is that I get further out on my own little isolated evolutionary branch. For the most part I'm very comfortable with that, especially when I just keep to myself and accept that my way is not the accepted way of many others.

...that is some extraordinary insight

[dconeill]

The OP's signature says:
"Self taught. Never studied harmony. ... and theory sounds chinese to me."

Maybe it would be a good idea to study harmony. It's not impossible to learn, but if you believe it's impossible to learn then you won't learn it.

What's the phrase? "If you think you can, you might. If you think you can't, you're right."

Writing is, in part, a way to communicate ideas. If your terminology is so idiosyncratic that no one understands it or misunderstands it, what have you communicated?

[dconeill]

hey Jimmy get yourself a copy of Standardized Chord Symbol Notation. It's cheap and is standard starting point for notation concepts. ...

"Standardized Chord Symbol Notation" (SCSN) is a fine book (copyright 1976) but is out of print. There have been changes in standard practices in the intervening 48 years since it was published. One of the authors of SCSN, Clinton Roemer, also wrote "The Art of Copying Music" that includes a section on chord symbols. SCSN is available from scribd for a monthly subscription fee of about $12. (Amazon misspelled Roemer's name, btw, as "Rolmer".)

There are many newer books that discuss the topic, often in combination with other elements of music notation. They're also much easier to obtain.

One reasonable book is "Berklee Contemporary Music Notation" (2017), which includes a section on chord symbols.

[Boss Man Zwiebelsohn]

"Standardized Chord Symbol Notation" (SCSN) is a fine book (copyright 1976) but is out of print. There have been changes in standard practices in the intervening 48 years since it was published. One of the authors of SCSN, Clinton Roemer, also wrote "The Art of Copying Music" that includes a section on chord symbols. SCSN is available from scribd for a monthly subscription fee of about $12. (Amazon misspelled Roemer's name, btw, as "Rolmer".)

There are many newer books that discuss the topic, often in combination with other elements of music notation. They're also much easier to obtain.

One reasonable book is "Berklee Contemporary Music Notation" (2017), which includes a section on chord symbols.

https://www.popschoolmaastricht.nl/p...olNotation.pdf