Which chord?

[Oscar67]

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?

[Oscar67]

Thanks!

a chord in isolation? never.

Isn’t that a bit absolute? A first position cowboy chord has a root note which (to me) can clearly be identified by ear and which is also the chord’s namesake. In the chord that I used as the example for my question, apparently what I hear to be the chord’s root note in fact isn’t its root. I’m not disputing it, just finding it interesting and trying to get a handle on it.

just to clarify: take gce. you should be able to indentify this as a major triad, 2nd inversion. so you are determining a root. but this does not translate into a chord symbol. any chromatic note could be the actual root, depending on context.

Agreed. And with GCE my ears tell me C is the root. So the theory and my ears are in agreement. Yet in my example chord, apparently the theory and my ears are not in agreement. I’m hearing G as a very strong root note within this chord and would have called it a G4. Chord finder says it’s not. Again, I’m not necessarily disputing it, just intrigued.

[ragman1]

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)

[pamosmusic]

no. your ears tell you C could be the root. because the major triad and it's inversions are a super familiar sound. so it says more about you and which sounds are familiar to you. but what if by accident a plane flies by and the sound is exactly an A. or somebody plays an A in the next room. are you still gonna hear a C major triad?

you can make experiments to confirm this:

play an Am tune for 10 minutes. summertime, minor blues, whatever. then listen to gce and your ears will probably indentify this as a rootless Am7 chord. or sing an A for a few minutes and the play the chord. or sing a Db for a while.and then play gce. still sounds like a C triad?

Yeah it’s usually just a function of register and doubling with those cowboy chords. So a bass player in the room playing a D would change things quick.

[Jimmy blue note]

Isn’t that a bit absolute? A first position cowboy chord has a root note which (to me) can clearly be identified by ear and which is also the chord’s namesake. In the chord that I used as the example for my question, apparently what I hear to be the chord’s root note in fact isn’t its root. I’m not disputing it, just finding it interesting and trying to get a handle on it.
.

Cowboy x 3 2 0 1 0. has a certain sound right?
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 fun

[ragman1]

I’m hearing G as a very strong root note within this chord and would have called it a G4. .

Never mind all the rest of it. What's the context? What is happening before and after this chord? What's the tune? What key is it in? In fact, let's see the whole thing.

[pamosmusic]

Never mind all the rest of it. What's the context? What is happening before and after this chord? What's the tune? What key is it in? In fact, let's see the whole thing.

+1

[Jimmy blue note]

Never mind all the rest of it. What's the context? What is happening before and after this chord? What's the tune? What key is it in? In fact, let's see the whole thing.

+1
What he said.
What I said.
What is possible.

[wolflen]

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

[Jimmy blue note]

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

Every once in a while we can pinpoint a time or incident that changes the perception of what is possible to one incident.
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.

[Oscar67]

Never mind all the rest of it. What's the context? What is happening before and after this chord? What's the tune? What key is it in? In fact, let's see the whole thing.

I like the flavour of this shape and use it often in a variety of contexts. For the sake of argument, let it be this simple progression of basic chords separated by some chromatic descending bass notes. The chord in question is of course the second chord.

[Oscar67]

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.

Thanks for sharing that! Going to try that tomorrow!

[ragman1]

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 :-)

[pingu]

to Rag
as a point of order
note the second chord has a B in it

[ragman1]

Thanks, corrected.

[rpjazzguitar]

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.

[Oscar67]

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

From a theoretical point of view it’s clear now. When writing a chord chart I’d have labelled it a G4 or G/C without hesitation, so this has been enlightening.

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. Hope that satisfies. Best I can do :-)

Thank you for indulging me and taking the time to answer this! “Written” is a big word, I literally slapped it together in 2 minutes for the sake of this discussion. But I kind of like it and it might find a place somewhere. The change from the G13 to the CM7sus2 appeals to me, it grabs attention and sets a certain mood without being atonal. But that’s just me.

[ragman1]

Thank you for indulging me and taking the time to answer this! “Written” is a big word, I literally slapped it together in 2 minutes for the sake of this discussion. But I kind of like it and it might find a place somewhere. The change from the G13 to the CM7sus2 appeals to me, it grabs attention and sets a certain mood without being atonal. But that’s just me.

Yes, I know you slapped it together but you might be quite young and inexperienced so I didn't say anything.

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!

[Christian Miller]

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.

[Oscar67]

Yes, I know you slapped it together but you might be quite young and inexperienced so I didn't say anything.

I’m young enough that I might be 30 years your junior, in theory. But I’m old enough that I might be 30 years your senior. I will forever be inexperienced and a student, especially when it comes to jazz. My love for the guitar is as deep as it is personal. After 40 years of playing rock, metal, pop and blues, I’ve found that jazz and especially swing are gifts that keep on giving. I intend to find a good teacher and take lessons for a year.

[ragman1]

I’m young enough that I might be 30 years your junior, in theory. But I’m old enough that I might be 30 years your senior. I will forever be inexperienced and a student, especially when it comes to jazz. My love for the guitar is as deep as it is personal. After 40 years of playing rock, metal, pop and blues, I’ve found that jazz and especially swing are gifts that keep on giving. I intend to find a good teacher and take lessons for a year.

Well, let me tell you something simple. Keep your 2-5's and 2-5-1's tidy. Dm - G7 or Dm - G7 - C. That includes extensions, alterations, substitutions, and modal interchange. Can't go wrong... unless you're Wayne Shorter. But he knew what he was doing. Most of the time :-)

[Oscar67]

I think what Christian said is very interesting. Will respond later, must run.

[Christian Miller]

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.

[ragman1]

Anything that falls out of these bounds is termed ‘non functional.’

Yes, but there's sensible non-functional and nonsense non-functional.

[Christian Miller]

Yes, but there's sensible non-functional and nonsense non-functional.

Here’s a position I’m playing around with -

there is no non functional harmony because there is no such thing as functional harmony.