Chord Symbol Chaos

[VersatileJazzGuitarist]

Okay, maybe I have never seen a mi7sus4 either. I'm not sure. My real point was that you need to know what to play if you see Cmi11 or even the incorrect symbol, Cmi7sus4.

I think we'd all agree that this means add an 11 (and optionally 9) to a Cmi7, right?

(Back to rummaging through fake books.)

[czardas]

For me, there's little point in arguing over what's theoretically correct. The bottom line is, you're on the bandstand and someone hands you a chart. Are you going to quibble over whether the chord symbols are correct, or make your best effort to figure out what they want you to play?

I think it's important to be prepared for the great variety of notation you'll encounter, so you can adapt in real time.

This is a good point, and I think from this perspective the system demonstrates flexibility. Indeed it is necessary to be able to interpret all kinds of symbols written in different ways. However I think the downside is that all these different names muddy the water somewhat when it comes to understanding harmony.

[mstevenson]

I hope this question doesn't seem off topic:

Do you have a criteria for determination in calling/naming a chord a SUS chord as opposed to an 11th chord?

It's good to see that this question has to everyone along the lines that it has; however I was just interested in the preference of naming. I'm aware of the notes that make up the chord but, for example, if you are working with a keyboardist and depending on their voicing, some keyboardist will call it an 11th chord and some would call it a suspended chord (and I have seen both major and minor; it seems to depend on how it is used; as a 'substitution' in place of what would be a major or minor chord.) I have run across min11 chords.

[JohnW400]

It's good to see that this question has to everyone along the lines that it has; however I was just interested in the preference of naming. I'm aware of the notes that make up the chord but, for example, if you are working with a keyboardist and depending on their voicing, some keyboardist will call it an 11th chord and some would call it a suspended chord (and I have seen both major and minor; it seems to depend on how it is used; as a 'substitution' in place of what would be a major or minor chord.) I have run across min11 chords.

There's a thread at All About Jazz where they discuss this very thing. It's somewhere in the musician 2 musician or theory sub forum. It's intersersting to read some of the comments about this very topic from non-guitarists

[VersatileJazzGuitarist]

Is this it:

C11? - Jazz Bulletin Board

[Billnc]

Personally, since modal harmony is static, I would use something like A dorian, quartal harmony as a note. I don't know how wrong that is.

[RonD]

Is this it:

C11? - Jazz Bulletin Board

Thanks for posting this.
I only managed to get through 8 pages, , before my head started to spin... but, I was pleased to see that musicians could debate a subject without it turning in to a "flame war". (maybe that came later.)

Cheers, Ron

[mstevenson]

Great link to another interesting post.

To me, a C11 implies playing the 11th interval at the top of the voicing as opposed to lower which I would consider it a sus. So I view it as a clue to the intended voicing.

Now that I've had to express it verbally, I realize that this is how I approach 11ths.

I'm heading back to that link you sent!

[czardas]

To me, a C11 implies playing the 11th interval at the top of the voicing as opposed to lower which I would consider it a sus. So I view it as a clue to the intended voicing.

Hmm, I would be careful with this. There is a distinction between an 11th and a suspended 4th. The voicing isn't really so significant.

I haven't read the link, so I'm not sure what's been said there.

[mstevenson]

Hmm, I would be careful with this. There is a distinction between an 11th and a suspended 4th. The voicing isn't really so significant.

I haven't read the link, so I'm not sure what's been said there.

Isn't the distinction that fact that one is an octave higher than the other?

[czardas]

Isn't the distinction that fact that one is an octave higher than the other?

Not for me. A suspension is a note suspended over from a previous chord, although the term is used more freely today. An eleventh is a note that actually belongs to the chord. The octave in which the notes appear doesn't alter the chords construction. How you arrange them depends on what sounds good.

[mstevenson]

I feel that it also depends on how the chord is being resolved (if at all). Where do I want the focus to be; the sus resolving to the third or the 11th resolving to the 7th. For me, that basically determines what sounds good and how I will look at it.

Here is a quote from another post at another forum that I found interesting:

<quote>: You are quite right that chord symbols are not notations for voicings. Therefore, writing 11 instead of 4, meaning I presume that one wants the 4 to be above the rest of the chord, is meaningless.

Referring to the oxford school harmony book (1961) which I studied when I was a child I find the following in the chapter on dominant 11ths ... "the 11th is sometimes prepared as if it were an ordinary 4th but not infrequently it is unprepared and has the character of an appoggiatura."

Now I am not really interested a difference in the functional analysis of a C7sus as opposed to a dominant 11th, but I think there maybe a stronger case for saying that we don't need a symbol for C9sus as the dominant 11th chord already has a fairly long history. But really any symbol will do as long as it is clear, won't it?

I will continue to use 11 in my charts as I have yet to either hear a compliant or hear a problem with it being played. And I have been writing charts and transcribing charts since the 70's; both for small groups and big bands.

Everyone will have their own opinion on what is "correct" but it has worked for me. Love this discussion!!

One more closing quote I saw on that same forum:

From your beloved 'Harvard Dictionary of Music":
Quote:
The principle of superimposed thirds that leads from the triad to the seventh chord and to the ninth chord can be carried on still further, resulting in the eleventh chord (g-b-d'-f'-a'-c')

Go figure... Here is that other forum: C11? - Jazz Bulletin Board

[czardas]

I feel that it also depends on how the chord is being resolved (if at all). Where do I want the focus to be; the sus resolving to the third or the 11th resolving to the 7th. For me, that basically determines what sounds good and how I will look at it.

Here is a quote from another post at another forum that I found interesting:

< quote: You are quite right that chord symbols are not notations for voicings. Therefore, writing 11 instead of 4, meaning I presume that one wants the 4 to be above the rest of the chord, is meaningless.

Referring to the oxford school harmony book (1961) which I studied when I was a child I find the following in the chapter on dominant 11ths ... "the 11th is sometimes prepared as if it were an ordinary 4th but not infrequently it is unprepared and has the character of an appoggiatura."

Now I am not really interested a difference in the functional analysis of a C7sus as opposed to a dominant 11th, but I think there maybe a stronger case for saying that we don't need a symbol for C9sus as the dominant 11th chord already has a fairly long history. But really any symbol will do as long as it is clear, won't it? <unquote

I will continue to use 11 in my charts as I have yet to either hear a compliant or hear a problem with it being played. And I have been writing charts and transcribing charts since the 70's; both for small groups and big bands.

Everyone will have their own opinion on what is "correct" but it has worked for me. Love this discussion!!

You make some interesting points. I think C9sus is a bit of a conundrum too, although I would shy away from arguing that it shouldn't exist. I would be more inclined to make a clear distinction between the two. My impression is that C9sus ought to exist because it has a clearly defined formula. I see it as forming part of another chord C11 (the main or parent chord). I don't make the distinction between the 4th or 11th as regards voicing (at least not in this case), but rather as regards formula.

C11 => 1, 3, 5, b7, 9, 11
C9sus => 1, 4, 5, b7, 9

Between the two formulas there is a difference of just one note. It is true that alternative symbols could be used, and may in some situations be more practical. The question in my mind is this: Does a chord symbol represent a clear set of notes as defined by it's construction, or does it represent a number of note combinations from a select group? I think both are applicable depending on the intended purpose.

[JohnW400]

Is this it:

C11? - Jazz Bulletin Board

Yep. 11 pages

[JonR]

11th chords can have a third, "sus" for the most part means leave it out.

So that leaves us with function mostly, but as anything, that can be debated.

"Sus" chords had to resolve until May of 1965. (Maiden Voyage)

Or July 1964, with the Beatles' "Hard Days' Night".
(Mind you, there's infinite debate about exactly what that chord is... and they didn't exactly exploit its implications.)

[JonR]

And for the truly obsessed, I just discovered a long Wikipedia article on the subject. Looks like it does a fantastic job of exploring the ambiguities and varieties.

I don't know if anyone else has pointed this out, but there is a serious error in that page. The triangle symbol doesn't refer to a major triad - it refers to a major 7th extension.
The maj7 may not always be included in the chord when played, but the implication is that the chord's 7th would be major and not minor, if it had one.
IOW, it would (at least should!) never be used to indicate a dom7 chord, or even a major triad on V.
A major triad is indicated by the root letter only - always. "maj" or "M" is superfluous, and risks confusion.
That leaves "m", "min" or "-" to refer to the lowered (minor) 3rd, and "maj" (or the triangle, or more confusingly a capital "M") to refer to the raised (major) 7th. That's the neat economy of chord symbol language: the shortest possible names are reserved for the commonest chords and extensions.
"C7" - major triad and minor 7th - common.
"Cm(maj7)" (or variations) - minor triad and major 7th - rare.

In "Cmaj9", "maj" refers to the 7th, not the triad or the 9th. (Both the latter are assumed to be major; other symbols would be used if they weren't.)

Apart from that, I agree, it's a good job.

[mr. beaumont]

Or July 1964, with the Beatles' "Hard Days' Night".
(Mind you, there's infinite debate about exactly what that chord is... and they didn't exactly exploit its implications.)

Fadd9 with a G is the bass.

3 0 3 2 1 3 (fret the low G with the thumb)

Played on a 12 string...I have sources (and by sources, I mean other folks' hearsay) that that's how George pulled it off live.

On the record...well, you know...

[JohnW400]

Or July 1964, with the Beatles' "Hard Days' Night".
(Mind you, there's infinite debate about exactly what that chord is... and they didn't exactly exploit its implications.)

Years ago Guitar player magazine had an article about this using mathematics or somthing and decided that there was a Piano note in there as well. I think it was a low G. They wound up deciphering what the chord was or so they say

I forget all the detail and I tossed the issue ages ago.

[JonR]

Fadd9 with a G is the bass.

3 0 3 2 1 3 (fret the low G with the thumb)

Played on a 12 string...I have sources (and by sources, I mean other folks' hearsay) that that's how George pulled it off live.

On the record...well, you know...

I think I read the same source. The author (forget his name) reported GH as saying he played it as Fadd9 on a 12-string. But I think there's a bass D, and apparently George Martin played something else on the piano.

On 6-string, I've always played it as G7sus4:

3 5 3 5 3 3

- gets close enough.

You can also hear it as the first two chords of the song's sequence played simultaneously.

Whatever the exact nature of it, the effect (IMO) is of an unresolved sus chord.

[mstevenson]

Back again! I've got another one:

It's a C chord that is voiced from the fifth string.

Notes are C G Bb D G

X 3 5 3 3 3

Root, no third, fifth, seventh and ninth; how should it be named? On charts that only I would be using, I refer to it as a C9(no third).

[JohnW400]

Gm/C

[mstevenson]

I like your answer.

[Gitarguy]

Chord notation can be quite a challenge for the guiarist. Especially if you sight-read a lot of arrangements like the band I'm in. Just about the time I think I've seen all the possible variations, something else will come up.

Almost as aggravating is the many different engraving styles. Usually, every chart will look totally different in style from the last, (unless you're playing from a compiled book), none of the publishers seem to be able to agree what jazz charts should look like.

[Reg]

There are many methods to imply what harmonic area the composer/arranger wants... when one wants a specific voicing... you notate it out, when one wants a specific lead line you notate it out. If your writing for a specialized group, you use their notation. It's part of the job to be aware of stylized notation... Piano as compared to guitar slash chords as compared to standard inversions. There is no standardizes system in use. The closest we have is "Standard Chord Symbol Notation" by Carl Brandt and Clinton Roemer from the mid 70's, which is used by many. It has problems with calling b13 a #5, but still is the best published system in use. I think I'll put one together with explanation of why and how labeling works, with sections of stylizes examples... that sound fun

[max chill]

G7+9 = ? I've seen it used for G9aug5 (G9#5) and for G7#9, depending on the engraver.