-
A simple question for a theory forum like this, but I really like a certain chord and use it a lot and am in doubt about its name. Notes are C D G B low to high (frets D10, G7, B8, E7). Checked using a chord finder and it says Cmaj7sus2. If C were the root then I follow that. But my ears tell me this is an inversion of some G chord with an added 4. The G note within the chord is enough to tell me that it’s the root but becomes really obvious (to my ears at least) when adding a low G (A10). So if G were the root then it’d be a chord with scale notes 1, 3, 4, 5 and I’d try to name it from that. Since it’s a major chord with an added note (smaller than 7) I’d be inclined to call it G4.
Two questions basically:
When naming chords, to what extent can/should the root be determined by ear?
If this were a G chord, what would its name be? An inversion of G4?
-
10-28-2023 04:26 AM
-
Thanks!
Originally Posted by djg
Originally Posted by djg
-
If your chord is C D G B there are two possible names.
G/C (G triad with a C bass)
CM7sus2
Which one you use would depend on the context.
(You said you prefer the G/C so I expect you're absolutely right)
-
Originally Posted by djg
-
Originally Posted by Oscar67
Now move your pinky up to the 6th string 4th fret: 4 3 2 0 1 0. The sound changes the chord into a colourful transition chord if you want. For example it might be Ab7 or something at this point, so let's follow that with a Db maj. 4 x 3 5 2 x and now that chord isn't a C cowboy chord, is it? Just for kicks, play the C cowboy preceeded by an Eb minor/Ab
4 x 4 3 4 x
Cowboy C
Single bass note pedal 4 x x x x x
Db maj 4 x 3 5 2 x
Does that Cowboy chord seem like an absolute C anymore?
I can do this with any key, figure out a way to re-contextualize what was once familiar into a part of a different tonality... but I don't have all day here, so I'll go take my walk now and you tell me if cowboy C might not be everything and every way you know it.
Have funLast edited by Jimmy blue note; 10-28-2023 at 12:28 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Oscar67
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
What he said.
What I said.
What is possible.
-
When I studied some of Ben Monders work .. he says inversions and voice leading produce many new ways to utilize familiar chord
shapes in a new harmonic setting giving the chord function a new tonal name..
so as said in above posts ,, context rules in harmonic analysis
sometime a C chord is not a C chord
-
Originally Posted by wolflen
I was feeling limited and frustrated with my chord vocabulary, especially when I'd hear players using chords that just didn't exist on my guitar. One afternoon Mick Goodrick had a span of time reserved tor office hours, walk in and ask a question time. I knocked. I asked: I know there are chords that I don't know that do things I haven't imagined. Where do I begin?
He said "Let's begin with a triad. Any triad can exist not only in the root 3rd and 5th we are taught, but have you considered the each note can be thought of as the root?" and he proceeded to play a passage wherein the C triad was played where the E was root, and then the G played as the root. Now you know that there are 12 possible roots you can work with, so eliminating doubled notes C, E and G, we have 9 notes that can be played, and for simplicity sake, let's put them under the triad. 9 slash chords that redefine a "simple" C triad into absolutely stunning chords each of which has a distinctive sound and texture and can be voice led into a harmonic passage. He played 9 passages of music and within each was a chord using a C/x where x=chromatic non chord tone.
My mind was blown. I said "Can you write that down for me?" and he said "You just saw what I did. You figure it out. Come back with any questions."
Big Bang. Infinite expansion. In one conversation my world had changed. Still feeling it to this day.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy blue note
-
Oscar -
Thanks. Okay, so that's a brief sequence of chords connected, as you say, by a bass line.
It's obviously in C and the first chord is G13 and that resolves up an octave to a CM7sus2 (bang goes the G/C theory).
Anyway:
G13 CM7sus2 C69 Am7 Dm7 CM7
I take it this is something you've written yourself. I have to say I find the leap from the 3rd to the 7th fret a bit surprising. I think if it were me I'd knock out the bottom G and just play the F B E higher up:
xx899x - xx10787
so the B resolves to the C more easily. And then descend like that.
Of course, I don't know what the time values are or what else is going on. But the mystery chord is a variation on CM7 - xx10987 - only with a D in it.
Hope that satisfies. Best I can do :-)Last edited by ragman1; 10-28-2023 at 09:48 PM.
-
to Rag
as a point of order
note the second chord has a B in it
-
Thanks, corrected.
-
C D G B. If you want a guitarist to play that, you'd call it G/C.
If you didn't care about the C being in the bass, you might call it Gadd4, but it risks creating a problem since you never see that.
The problem with G4 is that it's non-standard and some musicians will interpret it as something other than C D G B. I have used G4 before, to specify a short stack of 4ths. G C F. I put an explanation of the symbol in the chart. I got complaints but I didn't know a better way to do it. Yes, I could have written it out on a stem, but then it gets played where it was written, rather than leaving the rhythm up to the musician.
In one chart I used an ossia staff with a note "rhythm ad-lib". The next time I played it I had to stare at that for long enough to miss the next note. And it was my own chart!
So, the moral is that G/C is the least likely name to cause problems while at least getting close to the right sound.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by Oscar67
As a matter of fact what I've done isn't complete. There's the bass line to consider. If the sounds of the bass notes are carried into the next chord then that changes the analysis.
The G under C69 is all right but the F# under the Am7 makes it an F#m7b5 and the F under Dm7 makes it an FM7. But it depends how you play it. If it's actually playable on a guitar, that is!
-
I’m not convinced about this whole root note idea
Take the second chord from days of wine and roses which is of course Am7b5/Eb (NOT Eb7#11 yuck)
you put it in context and it obivously functions as the ii in a ii V I to Gm, but it sounds so utterly different from a root position Am7b5 I question whether it can be regarded as the same chord.
I suppose the concept of root movement may have some value in that it allows unification of a number of musical objects, but its inherent simplification means that the musician must look deeper. But I’ve heard that from many jazz musicians.
But then that’s an issue inherent in music theory.
Functional simplification may help with soloing (oh it’s a ii V I) I suppose. It has been useful as a teaching tool. But sometimes it ends up doing a violence to the music. The masters seem to be able to modulate between the extremely general and highly specific in their thinking and hearing.
It’s interesting to me that Bach felt the whole idea of root movement (from Jp Rameau) was fundamentally a theoretical idea and in his opinion practical music making was fundamentally concerned with specifics and the details of musical language. He and his son CPE Bach remained hostile to Rameau’s ideas. This is certainly true of jazz.Last edited by Christian Miller; 10-29-2023 at 05:18 AM.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by Oscar67
-
I think what Christian said is very interesting. Will respond later, must run.
-
The thing is jazzers talk in the language of functional harmony and Roman numerals but when it comes down to it mostly they are used as convenient labels for common chord progressions - ii V I’s, I VI II V’s and relate other progressions to those templates.
Anything that falls out of these bounds is termed ‘non functional.’
So really jazz musicians aren’t thinking too theoretically (ie trying to ‘understand’ what’s going on as Rameau was) but recognising and internalising common patterns (which seems more like what Bach and his students did). Which is one of the main things any student needs to do early on.
Or in other words what other commenters were saying when they stressed context.
tl;dr the identification of root may not be that important, and may not always be easy to deduce.Last edited by Christian Miller; 10-29-2023 at 06:10 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
there is no non functional harmony because there is no such thing as functional harmony.
1993 MINT Gibson L-5 Wes Montgomery James...
Today, 06:21 PM in For Sale