The Order of Chord Inversions?

[timscarey]

Modern music has every conceivable chord change. There is no new relationship between any two given seventh chords. Try to come up with something outlandish, such as Amaj7B5 to Ebmin7b5. Unfortunately, good voiceleading quickly "ruined" my bizarro example, making it sound almost pretty.

I agree completely, I would also like to point out that the chord progression you have just given is IV-vii in the key of E major, not particularly outlandish.

However, trying to guess up weird voicings that will sound bad together is missing the point.

I would agree here too, of course, no one said that was the point.

A better use of time is recognizing the voicings that don't get practiced often enough and work on those so that they can be recalled quickly, out of harmonic context.

and with this statement as well.

Cycle b3 of any chord quality does not pass through other inversions of the chord it was begun on. This has to do with the simple math of it. It's not my rule. Complain to god if you don't like it!

Assuming you use the closest possible voiceleading and move the voices in specific directions. But of course, the same exercise could be devised for any group of four chords. You are the one deciding how the voices move, not god. And not actual music either, which is where my only gripe comes in.

I don't think there is really any disagreement here as to the value of this practice technique. But I think it's important to understand that this is just a practice method, of which there are many without specific names.

Like for example, playing all of the changes to a given piece of music within the range of one octave. If, the music happens to have four chords of the same quality sitting minor 3rds apart, you might arrive at your "cycle of inversions" or you might not. Another example might be playing all of the changes to a tune with only Bb-B-C-or-C# as the lowest voice in each chord. Again, just a practice technique, only difference being that in these two cases, you are prcticing inversions in the context of actual music.

[Reg]

Just a thought....You might want to spend more time on being able to play in a jazz style ... maybe like,

Any note on top of ...Any chord... Anywhere on your fretboard.

I can guarantee you will use this skill all the time. As compared to... cycles, sequences, inversions, classical voice leading practice, chord tones etc... those skills are usually a process to be able learn your fretboard...

Compositional and arranging skills... and being aware of harmonic and contrapuntal aspects of performing those skills, in my opinion, are a different learning process. (and a different Forum) Voicings and voice leading are not harmonic concepts, they're performance or compositional mechanical devices. Generally of the vanilla genre, as I think Tim mentioned above... pretty useless... except to help get your fretboard skills together.

OK...there great, very useful skills... for at least... hummm 10%.. no 5%, I'm sure some % of performance.

Why do we as guitarist always dig solo guitar chordal melody playing? Because they use these cool sequences of inversions... and have chord tones on top. I personally don't... I hate vanilla mechanical anything.

Why do some players always have a great feel and it sounds as though they're quoting melodies. Well we're getting closer.

Anyway... usually doesn't come from sequencing stagnant harmonic chordal structures with basic chord tones. But I'm getting away from the OP... sorry.

Reg

[Garrett Smith]

OK...there great, very useful skills... for at least... hummm 10%.. no 5%, I'm sure some % of performance.

What's great where?

Why do we as guitarist always dig solo guitar chordal melody playing?

I actually have no idea what you dig.

But I'm getting away from the OP... sorry.

With no apology, I agree.

[wolflen]

for a more expanded look at chord inversions and voice leading using basic chords as a starting point..visit the Ted Greene site and explore the "V System"...a very in depth look at the possibilities of chord mechanics...and the results of Ted's dedication to share his knowledge of chords in harmonic structures..

TedGreene.com - Teachings - V-System

wolf

[fumblefingers]

seems to me that a lot of things are being mixed up here.

playing the guitar
inversion terminology
drop voicing "theory"
jazz music

here's my take:
1. you can fiddle with inversions all you want. William Leavitt for one, has some useful exercises for this, starting in volume 2 and continuing through volume 3 of his method.

2. inversion terminology was described accurately by Guitarzen and another person above. (just a note - if you really want to understand harmony & theory, do yourself a favor and buy the best textbooks in the industry - used ones if you must. forget the damned internet).

3. drop voicing lingo was coined by Berklee pedagogues (not the voicings, just the terminology.). i am pretty certain of this, but not 100% certain.

4. jazz is a style of music. while it has some characteristic and distinguishable practices that are more narrow than the whole history of European art music (i.e. "classical"), it is still very broad. the notion that inversions don't apply to jazz is grossly inaccurate. in order for that to be true every time simultaneous pitches were being played (i.e. harmony was occurring), either on the beat or off the beat, and across however many instruments and voices - the root would always have to be in the bass. lol. if you think that will work please put down your guitar and go take 4 courses of arranging, and a few more in composition, and a few more in orchestration from UNT, Berklee, USC, etc and get back to us.

[fumblefingers]

one more question - the word contrapuntal was used. are we really referring to counterpoint here, or simply homophonic voice leading, or even just "chords"?

[Garrett Smith]

Hi fumblefingers -

one more question - the word contrapuntal was used. are we really referring to counterpoint here, or simply homophonic voice leading, or even just "chords"?

I used contrapuntal to describe non-parallel motion where the voices (or "voicing") is consistent. I'm sticking with drop 3 for this example of the exercise. Is homophonic voice leading a better term for that?

Here is another video that explains some of the terms I've coined:

Aside: When playing a piece of music, I don't stick to just once voicing throughout.

Thanks for clearing up the discussion.

[Garrett Smith]

Why are you spelling dim7 chords using augmented 2nds?:

"What is Cycle b3?
Cycle b3 describes the distance between the root of each chord. Incidentally, these notes form a diminished 7 arpeggio. The three cycles of b3":
A, C, Eb, F#
Bb, C#, E, G
B, D, F, G#

Good question!

In even temperament, going round the Circle of minor thirds starting with one pitch, the same pitch is reached 4 pitches later: A, C, Eb, Gb (F#) A.

Can you suggest any Pythagorean tuned electric guitar or modern music?

Thanks.

[JohnRoss]

In even temperament, going round the Circle of minor thirds starting with one pitch, the same pitch is reached 4 pitches later: A, C, Eb, Gb (F#) A.

You don't mean pitch, you mean note.

[Garrett Smith]

You don't mean pitch, you mean note.

No, I distinctly meant pitch, not note. A minor third away from Gb is Bbb -- not the same note as A. However, in even temperament, Bbb and A sound at the same pitch. From C, Bbb is a diminished seventh away, and A is a major sixth away. As W. Hat's Wisdom pointed out, I'd misspelt a minor third as an aug'd second.

A dim7: A C Eb Gb
C dim7: C Eb Gb Bbb
Eb dim7: Eb Gb Bbb Dbb
Gb dim7: Gb Bbb Dbb Fbb
Bbb dim7: Bbb Dbb Fbb Abbb

[JohnRoss]

No, you mean note. Pitch means higher or lower. Going round your circle of minor thirds involves stepping up or down every time, so if you begin at A 440, after 4 steps you aren't at the beginning but at A 880 or 220, same note different pitch. It is irrelevant that you want to spell it as Bbb or anything else.

Distinctly.

[Garrett Smith]

No, you mean note. Pitch means higher or lower. Going round your circle of minor thirds involves stepping up or down every time, so if you begin at A 440, after 4 steps you aren't at the beginning but at A 880 or 220, same note different pitch. It is irrelevant that you want to spell it as Bbb or anything else.

Distinctly.

I meant pitch, as in sound frequency, also including its doubles and halves as octaves.

My discussion of Bbb that you're commenting on answers this:

Why are you spelling dim7 chords using augmented 2nds?:

Perhaps I didn't explain well enough.

In harmony, a seventh degree away from C is B.

 Interval: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
 Note:     C D E F G A B C

A diminished 7th away from C is Bbb -- not A; A is a sixth away from C. And an augmented sixth away from C is A##.

But there[s more. In equal temperament, Bbb and A sound as the same note. In other tuning systems, notably pythagorean, they are not the same pitch; and I believe the Bbb will sound lower. There is a field of study for tuning systems and it is not something I've studied.

[Vladan]

Half the pitch and double pitch can not be "the same pitch". It's not even the same note, because notes are named in regard to octave they are in, and octaves are named in regard to middle C, so you have .... c-1, c0, c1 ...., at least that was my impression. But, ok, I understand what you wanted to say.

Something I find pretty odd. In preface on that link, it seams after years and years of advanced playing, you discovered you could play chords in one direction, while melody goes in another, in regard to pitch of melody notes, contained in hat chord. In my experience, that's something an average Punk band discover on their second rehearsal, you know, "hey, this is dull, we all play all the same, you play there and I'll move arround ...".

[JohnRoss]

I meant pitch, as in sound frequency, also including its doubles and halves as octaves.

So you're inventing your own language again, because that isn't what 'pitch' means.

In equal temperament, Bbb and A sound as the same note. In other tuning systems, notably pythagorean, they are not the same pitch; and I believe the Bbb will sound lower.

This is a misconception. The two notes might be calculated differently in the different tuning systems, and I suppose if you're playing a violin or an oud or some such instrument where you have to make the note it might be possible to play both (though it would be damn difficult, you'd have to shift mentally from one tuning to another), but that is not how most instruments work. Most instruments have keyboards or frets or sound holes which produce fixed notes, and Bbb sounds the same as A because they have to be produced in the same way. The disadvantage of just temperament as opposed to equal temperament is not that you have multiple notes but that transposition is difficult, because instruments such as recorders or early organs are tuned to their natural key, and the further you get away from that key the less in tune the instrument sounds. But B is always sounded in exactly the same way as Cb.

[Garrett Smith]

So you're inventing your own language again, because that isn't what 'pitch' means.

I meant pitch and including octaves (doubles and halves of pitch), as differentiated from the named note. You're getting hung up on semantics.

This is a misconception. The two notes might be calculated differently in the different tuning systems, .

Not only might they be, they are! Also, 3409.4835136920174 (Bbb) and 3456 (A) are off by more than a few cents.

The subject of interval calculation is getting off topic.

Intervals are determined by ratio. An octave above is a double, a perfect fourth is the ration of 4:3 and a perfect fifth is the ratio 3:2.

[Vladan]

That A can't be played on guitar, though. A on e1 17th fret is 880Hz. 2 octaves above it would be 3520Hz,

[JohnRoss]

Garrett isn't talking Hz, Vladan, he's talking cents of a semitone. Let's not go deeper, this isn't going anywhere.

[Vladan]

Thats new for me. Cents 100 per semitone, counted from where? Awkward way to compare tunings, because ther's always 100cents to a semitone, no matter how many hertz thy're apart. But ok, whatever.

[JohnRoss]

Cents 100 per semitone, counted from where? Awkward way to compare tunings

It's a pretty standard way way to do it (but it isn't likely to be of all that much interest to most people here, who tune to a tuner or a piano or something else equal-tempered and don't really think about it much, why should they?). See Cent (music) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Vladan]

Thank you John, I must have said something wrong. I know what cents are, but in such calculations, just vs. equal, and so on, I don't find them particularly usefull. If it's so common, could you please point me to some place other than this thread, where I could see written and disscussed3048cents, and then to 10th decimal place. 3048cents means nothing, except ther's almost 30.5 halfsteps in question. It says nothing about notes and their pitches. Pitches are in Hz, absolute. Cents are arbitrary.

[jckoto3]

Cents are not arbitrary as there are always exactly 100 cents between each semitone. We use the term "cents" most often when referring to how sharp or flat a note sounds since measuring the same audible degree of sharpness or flatness in Hz would require cumbersome logarithmic calculations for each and every particular note.

E.g. "20 cents sharp" is going to sound like the same degree of "sharpness" for any note whereas the actual difference in Hz would be entirely different for each and every note.

[Vladan]

Cents are not arbitrary as there are always exactly 100 cents between each semitone..

I think that's exactly why they are "aritrary", but for the sake of peace, let's call it "relative", instead.

We use the term "cents" most often when referring to how sharp or flat a note sounds since measuring the same audible degree of sharpness or flatness in Hz would require cumbersome logarithmic calculations for each and every particular note.

Well, almost. Because, if like in exaple by OP, you calculate one same 9enharmonic) note to couple of diferent frequencies, you have to be aware 50 cents to each side of that note will cover different number of Hz. So, when you say one is so many cents sharper or flatter than another, which cents you are talking about? That's why it's arbitrary. even more serious question: Is one sharper, or is another one flatter?

E.g. "20 cents sharp" is going to sound like the same degree of "sharpness" for any note whereas the actual difference in Hz would be entirely different for each and every note.

As per default, when you introdue subjective approach, "it'll sound like ...", it becomes arbitrary. BVut, I knoqw what you mean, and you are correct. In low octawes couple of Hz make a big difference, because they cover lots of cents, and so on. However, it's not propper way to address difference in pitch due various tunings and enharmonic recalculations, because you have to chose in advance which one is correct and to compare another one to it.

[fumblefingers]

Hi fumblefingers -



I used contrapuntal to describe non-parallel motion where the voices (or "voicing") is consistent. I'm sticking with drop 3 for this example of the exercise. Is homophonic voice leading a better term for that?

Here is another video that explains some of the terms I've coined:

Aside: When playing a piece of music, I don't stick to just once voicing throughout.

Thanks for clearing up the discussion.

i understand. its just that almost all pop and jazz music is homophonic. i suspect that you are engaged in the study of harmony in a homophonic setting. contrapuntal may not be improper but it might confuse things. in other words, are you studying polyphonic counterpoint when studying these inversions? or are you studying how harmony might be structured - harmony that functions as accompaniment - while a written or improvised melody is being played? if its the latter it is probably best just to call it voice leading, or voice leading for jazz guitar. IMHO.