Hi folks,
here's a standard system of chord notation taken from Sammy Nestico's book 'The Complete Arranger'. Having a standardised version of chord shorthand means less chance of confusion on sessions and gigs. I beleive that this version is the standard form used by all the top arrangers (Mr. Nestico is currently one of the major guys), so it's useful to know this. He got it from 'Standardised Chord Symbol Notation' by Cark Brandt and Clinton Roemer (pub. Roerick Music co, USA)

Here we go:
Major chords will be indicated thus: C (and not Cmaj or ma).
Sixth chords: C6 (not C (A) (addA) or similar).
Seventh chords with the flattened seventh: C7 (not C add Bb).
Minor chords: Cm (rather than Cmin, C- or similar).
Minor 7ths: Cm7 (not C-7, min7th or similar)
Major 7ths: Cmaj7 or Cma7 (not CM7, or C with a triangle, although some people use the latter).
9ths work in the same way as 7ths (not Cmaj7+9, add D or other confusing stuff).
Aug 7ths with a #5: C+7 (not C7+, C7 (#5) or C7+5).
Aug 9ths : C+9 as for aug 7ths.
Thirteenths: C13 (and not C7 (13), C7+6, C9 add A, etc).
Diminished chords: Co; the o is a superscript placed next to the top half of the C but I can't do that on this computer! (not C-, Cdim, C7o, etc).
Six nine chords: C6/9 (not C2/6, C13 (no7) or C6 add D).
Seventh with a flat 5 chord: C7(b5) (not C7-5, C7#4, C7(5b)).
Half diminished chords-a minor 7ths with a flat 5: Cmi7(b5), although you'll find some folks use a o with a line through it, like the phase reverse sign on your mixing desk (but avoid things like Cmi7-5 and Cmi7 5b).
Seventh with a flat ninth: C7(b9). (Avoid C9b, Cb9, C9-, C(add Db)).
Minor with a major 7th: Cmi(ma7). (Not Cmi add B, Cmi+B, C-7.
Raised ninths: C7(#9) (rather than C7(+9), C+9, C7(b3) or C9+).
Sus chords: C7sus (not C7(sus4), C7 (add F), C7 (alt 4th), C7 (+4) or C7 #3)).
Augmented 11th chords can be C9(#11), (not C+11, C11+, C11#, C9+11, or C9 (b12)).
Note that the + sign is used to indicate augmented, rather than a substitute for a #. Some musos use the dash (-) to mean minor, dim, or even a flat. No wonder you can get confused
Try not to use lower case letters on your parts for other players: a badly written 'mi' could be read as 'mj': is it major or minor? Is it real or is it Memorex (hands up all those who remember that advert )
MA is never used by itself, only in Ma7 or Ma9. Just write the chord name alone for the major chord (eg: Cm/ C). I once had a fine time on a gig with a rhythm guitarist who couldn't work out major and minor chords, to chaotic effect on some tunes!

So that's it for the present. Even with this shorthand, sometimes you've got no option than to write C13 #11 b9 b5!


Best wishes,
Dave

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Thats very helpful!

Simple Roman Numerals (all examples are in C major)

I - Tonic. (C Major)
II - Supertonic (D Minor)
III - Mediant (E Minor)
IV - Sub Dominant (F Major)
V - Dominant (G Major)
VI - Sub-mediant (A Minor)
VII - Sub-tonic (B-Diminished)

The triad is made up of a root, third and fifth. The Root always stays the same. The fifth and third move accordingly

Triads come in different versions, according to which note is in the base

a - root - CEG
b - 1st inversion - EGC
c - 2nd inversion - GEC
d - 3rd inversion (in a dominant 7th where the 7th is flattened,) Bb-C-E-G

a flat or sharp sign before the chord indicates that the root of the chord is sharpened/flattened accordingly
i.e
bIIb - first inversion of the flattened supertonic
F - Ab - Db (the root is Db) known as the now-infamous n6th!

Alternatively, type music theory into Wikipedia

--------------------
David

Edited by DavidW (03/11/05 09:28 PM)

I've been looking at Dave Stewart's (the keyboard player, not the Eurhtyhmics axeman) mighty tome 'The Musician's Guide to Reading and Writing Music' and he has a more simplified version which seems to be easier to grasp.
Here's the gist:

C : major chord.
Cm: minor chord.
C7: seventh chord.
Cm7: minor 7th chord.
C6: sixth chord.
Cm6: minor sixth.
Cdim: diminished.
Caug: augmented.
C7/9: ninth.
Cm7/9. Minor ninth.
Cmaj7: Major seventh.

And he also adds a system of inversion notation:
C1: C/E, 1st inversion.
C2: C/G, 2nd inversion,
C3: C/Bb, 3rd or last inversion.

Which should keep you going for a while!

Best wishes,
Dave.

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

David E.: Is there any chance that you can add examples for each of the chord symbols you list, listing the notes in the chord and indicating which is in the bass. I know this might seem a little like overkill, but it's probably worth it all being completely cut and dried for those who might not know what a given bunch of notes is even called in the first place.

--------------------
Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio
A complete mixing method based around the techniques of the world's most famous producers.

Quote David Etheridge:

---

I've been looking at Dave Stewart's (the keyboard player, not the Eurhtyhmics axeman) mighty tome 'The Musician's Guide to Reading and Writing Music' and he has a more simplified version which seems to be easier to grasp.
Here's the gist:

---

C : major chord. (C-E-G-C)
Cm: minor chord. (C-Eb-G-C)
C7: seventh chord.(C-E-G-Bb-C)
Cm7: minor 7th chord. (C-Eb-G-Bb-C)
C6: sixth chord. (C-E-(G)-A-C)
Cm6: minor sixth (C-Eb-(G)-A-C)
Cdim: diminished.(C-Eb-F#-A-C)
Caug: augmented. (C-E-G#-C)
C7/9: ninth.(C-E-G-Bb-(C)-D)
Cm7/9. Minor ninth. (C-Eb-G-Bb-(C)-D)
Cmaj7: Major seventh.(C-E-G-B-C)

I've copied Dave's chart and added notation. Hope it helps and is right!

--------------------
David

Edited by DavidW (04/11/05 01:44 PM)

I know you're gonna hate me for being pedantic, but...

I think that's a Gb, not an F# in the C dim chord.



EmGee

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Quote EmGee:

---

I think that's a Gb, not an F# in the C dim chord.

---

On a slightly less humorous note, is there a way in this simpler system of distinguishing between the diminished triad on C (C, Eb, Gb) and the diminished-seventh chord on C (C, Eb, Gb, Bbb [or A, or whatever the hell you want to call it!])?

--------------------
Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio
A complete mixing method based around the techniques of the world's most famous producers.

Although, F# is more closely related to the key of C than Gb, that was my justification, and that more people would probably know what F# was than Gb. (Yes, I know its not strictly a minor 3rd)

Yours enharmonically,
David

Quote Mike Senior:

---

Quote EmGee:

---

I think that's a Gb, not an F# in the C dim chord.

---

On a slightly less humorous note, is there a way in this simpler system of distinguishing between the diminished triad on C (C, Eb, Gb) and the diminished-seventh chord on C (C, Eb, Gb, Bbb [or A, or whatever the hell you want to call it!])?

---

Hi MG,
actually when notating dim chords, I've found it common practice in printed charts for Eb and F# to be in there together. A thought has just struck me that this form of notation may be related to key signatures, as the #F is the first sharp in a key signature, while Gb occurs a few flats in, if you get my drift!
Of course may be wrong but it's as good an excuse as any!

Mike, as far as I know, the only way to distinguish between the triad and the chord is in the number of notes written down? I'm guessing that the triad will have an inherent quality that's subtly different from a full blown four note chord. At least that's the way it seems to me.

In fact I find that all chords even up to 13 and #11s have their own 'flavour' (if that's the word). When composing my '800 chords in a piece' music I find I get a physical 'churn' in the solar plexus whwn I've found the right one, however arcane a chord irt might be!

Dave

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Quote DavidW:

---

I've copied Dave's chart and added notation. Hope it helps and is right!

---

Hi Dave W,
yes, it is right, but in Dave Stewart's book he omitted the top C in each case, presumbaly to show how each extra degree of the chord relates to the previous ones.
Thus C9 is C-E-G-Bb-D, etc.
I hope that's clear.

Dave.

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Hi Dave,

I thought that was probably the case, so I parenthesised the octave C.

Thanks for your help,
David

Quote Mike Senior:

---

Quote EmGee:

---

I think that's a Gb, not an F# in the C dim chord.

---

On a slightly less humorous note, is there a way in this simpler system of distinguishing between the diminished triad on C (C, Eb, Gb) and the diminished-seventh chord on C (C, Eb, Gb, Bbb [or A, or whatever the hell you want to call it!])?

---

I generally use:
C Eb Gb = Cdim
C Eb Gb A = Cdim7
(and C Eb Gb Bb = Cm7b5 to distinguish between diminished and half-diminished 7ths)

--------------------
Myspace | All Things Considered - album out now!

Quote DavidW:

---

Simple Roman Numerals (all examples are in C major)

I - Tonic. (C Major)
II - Supertonic (D Minor)
III - Mediant (E Minor)
IV - Sub Dominant (F Major)
V - Dominant (G Major)
VI - Sub-mediant (A Minor)
VII - Sub-tonic (B-Diminished)

---

I think it is good practice to notate the minors with small case numerals eg,

ii - Supertonic
iii - Mediant
vi - Sub mediant

And also call the seventh interval the leading note and notate it vii with a small circle on the top right.

At least that seems to be the way the ABRSM prefer it currently.

Thanks for that Kayvon. I'd forgotten about the practice of notating minors. Its been a while since I did A'level, Grade 5 and all the rest of it. I'll think I'll look at the ABRSM stuff when I next go home. Didn't know about the 7th/leading note though.

Cheers,

--------------------
David

Quote David Etheridge:

---

Quote Mike Senior:

---

Quote EmGee:

---

I think that's a Gb, not an F# in the C dim chord.

---

On a slightly less humorous note, is there a way in this simpler system of distinguishing between the diminished triad on C (C, Eb, Gb) and the diminished-seventh chord on C (C, Eb, Gb, Bbb [or A, or whatever the hell you want to call it!])?

---

Hi MG,
actually when notating dim chords, I've found it common practice in printed charts for Eb and F# to be in there together. A thought has just struck me that this form of notation may be related to key signatures, as the #F is the first sharp in a key signature, while Gb occurs a few flats in, if you get my drift!
Of course may be wrong but it's as good an excuse as any!

---

I believe that as the diminished chord is a dischordant flattening of a triad, (that is a minor triad with a flattened fifth) it should be referred to as such - hence the Gb rather than F#. The other poster is incorrect, that the A is not technically a Bbb, even though it appears to be a 7th it is not.

As a rule it's considered poor form (by those Bach fans among us) to mix and match sharps and flats within a chord.
The consistancy of this approach alows for all dim 7 chords to be correctly recorded without ever mixing #s and bs, so, for instance, F#dim is F# A C (and i'd always write c natural), D#. Gbdim is, rather horribly Gb Bbb Dbb Fbb. Yuk!

Yours, pretensiously,


EmGee

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Quote EmGee:

---

The other poster is incorrect, that the A is not technically a Bbb, even though it appears to be a 7th it is not.

---

Ouch! That's me put in my place...

And Walter Piston in his book 'Harmony'. And Schoenberg in his Harmonielehre. And R.O. Morris in 'The Oxford Harmony Volume One'.

Or, to put it another way: what's the seventh chord on the leading note in G minor? It has both sharps and flats in it, by my count.

Perhaps you were referring to a diminished seventh chord on Fsharp? It would be A in that one...

--------------------
Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio
A complete mixing method based around the techniques of the world's most famous producers.

Far be it for little ol' me to argue with Mr. Schoenberg!!

I'm yet to see J.C. Bach mix and match his bs and #s, although quite how he would contend with a diminished 7th augmented 9 chord is anyone's guess! I suppose there must be situations where it is necessary, however undesirable.

The question is, though, and I don't profess to have an answer to this one, is the diminished seventh chord simply a dischordant version of the 7b5, in which case a Cdim would indeed contain a Bbb, or should it be viewed as a chord in it's own right, in which case the A is not a double-diminished seventh, but a minor sixth above the root.

Hmm, wish I'd just shut up now. I'll get my coat.


EmGee

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Quote Mike Senior:

---

Or, to put it another way: what's the seventh chord on the leading note in G minor? It has both sharps and flats in it, by my count.

Perhaps you were referring to a diminished seventh chord on Fsharp? It would be A in that one...

---

Sorry, I've just re-read my message and I was unclear as to what I meant. In Gminor, the leading not diminised chord is indeed F#, which contains F# A C and Eb. What I MEANT to say is that if notating on a score, as you're in Gminor (two flats) there's only need to write a sharp by the F, hence it would read F# A C E.

How did I get involved in this? Mike - you're the man, I'll go away...

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Quote EmGee:

---

I believe that as the diminished chord is a dischordant flattening of a triad, (that is a minor triad with a flattened fifth) it should be referred to as such - hence the Gb rather than F#. The other poster is incorrect, that the A is not technically a Bbb, even though it appears to be a 7th it is not.

Yours, pretensiously,


EmGee

---

Hi MG,
not quite. If you count up in a dimished scale you get a 7th from C to A.
Remember the minor 3rd interval between each note of the chord, so:
C=1
d=2
Eb=3.
F=4
Gb/F#=5.
Ab/G#=6.
A=7 (Bbb?)
So even though C to A is a 6th, when you use a dimished scale it becomes a 7th!


I know, don't ask me, that's what I was told at Music College!

Best wishes,
Dave.


--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Haha!

I stand (ahem, sit) corrected.

Back to writing songs...

G Em C D
(repeat)



EmGee

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Quote EmGee:

---

What I MEANT to say is that if notating on a score, as you're in Gminor (two flats) there's only need to write a sharp by the F, hence it would read F# A C E.

---

I see what you mean -- it is a bit unusual to see opposite accidentals in the score.

Quote EmGee:

---

I'll go away...

---

Not at all! Sorry, got carried away in front of my bookshelf there -- some kind of allergic reaction to the word 'incorrect'... As far as I'm concerned, the more Bach nuts on this forum the better!

--------------------
Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio
A complete mixing method based around the techniques of the world's most famous producers.

No Mr. Senior sir!!
Not more Bach!! Please!!

Let's have a few more Delius nuts on this forum; now there was a dude who really knew his norwegians

Olivier Messaien too!!!


Dave.

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

So, my 'Penguin's first book of music theory' probably shouldn't be viewed as an authoritative resource then?


Bach, definately. Delius perhaps. Olivier Messaien, who are you kidding?


EmGee

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Quote EmGee:

---

Olivier Messaien, who are you kidding?

EmGee

---

"Apparition de L'eglise Eternelle" (my first intro to Messaien): fabbo!

Some bits of the Turangalila symphony are brill, plus you get the Ondes Martenot as well (but other bits are a bit wearing )

Okay then: Arnold Bax, Vaughan Williams, Ravel, Richard Strauss (cont.p.94.........)

Dave


--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Richard Strauss..... wahey! My favourite piece of music is his Four Last Songs. Absolutely sublime.

I wish I hadn't chosen C major for dim chords. G-Bb-Db would have been easier!

Vaughan Williams never did it for me, although I heard one of his at the Proms this year and realised my prejudice was unfounded.

Ravel, oh yeah, and Strauss? what can I say - genius. But then he was influenced by the master, Wagner.

On a side note - went to hear LSO and Wynton Marsalis the other day. Incredible.


EmGee

--------------------
EmGee
MBP, Focusrite Pro24DSP, Logic9, Yamaha Motif, Kontakt

Unfortunately some note combinations are difficult to notate in chord symbols such as C-D-G which comes out as C omit 3 add 2

Auch you know most of this thread is pointless pedantic luncacy, you know

This is because all this stuff is getting played in equal temperament, so all those "enharmonic equivalents" are the same note (eg F# and Gb)

I'd dry your eyes until you're actually using an instrument which lets you escape equal temperament, in which case you can try both F# and Gb in your chord, they'll sound different, and you can choose which one SOUNDS BETTER.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Hi Feline1,
now that's naughty; do you know of an instrument that can change tunings as you go? Actually, if memory serves, someone made a revved up piano many years ago with seperate half black keys for differing sharps and flats. Needless to say, it didn't catch on, so references to it now reside in the hallowed portals of Grove's dictionary.
So I'm guessing that if you dial up an alternate tuning on your synth (my Kurzweil modules have a few) you'll only be presented with F#s and not Gbs at the same time.
For the biz on alternate tunings, listen to Wendy Carlos, who's probably taken things as far as possible. Switched on Bach 2000 is the definitive classical version of this, and there's another album who's title currently escapes me where she took things even further.
http://www.wendycarlos.com gives all the info.
Alternate tunings are fab, but for chord notation we're trying here to get a mostly coherent method of labelling for yer everyday muso, rather than your alternate tuning geek.

Dave (pointless pedantic lunatic and proud of it)


--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Well, if you are conducting or scoring for (say) a string section, they of course could be ordered not to play in equal temperament (although probably most of them would start crying).

Historically, a few nut-bags out there did build instruments with loads of extra keys on their keyboards (wasn't the Motorala Scalotron one such more recent attempt, back in the 70s?)

But in more practical terms, yeah, I was thinking about digitally controlled synths where you can set up alternate temparaments, then switch them at the press of a button to hear the difference.

But let's be clear: if you are using an instrument that's stuck in equal temperament, it really is meaningless to worry about which enharmonic equivalent note-name to use. In reality, you cannot have either of them!

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Quote feline1:

---

But let's be clear: if you are using an instrument that's stuck in equal temperament, it really is meaningless to worry about which enharmonic equivalent note-name to use. In reality, you cannot have either of them!

---

I disagree.

The point about using the correct note-names for a chord rather than their enharmonic equivalents is not just that they sound different (in which respect you're right - on equal tempered instruments they don't). It's that they make more sense, making the tonal and harmonic structure of the music clear to the person reading it.

This operates firstly in respect of individual chords. In most kinds of harmony in western music these are built up in 3rds. If you're using that kind of harmony, and you keep returning to say a dominant 7th chord G-B-D-F, then on one occasion you want to alter it by flattening the fifth, it makes sense to write it G-B-Db-F. The eye immediately sees that it is the same chord, but with a flat in front of it - the immediate visual impression matches the aural impression. If on the other hand you were to write G-B-C#-F, then the eye would be immediately thrown by the second from B-C# and the fourth from C#-F, and think it's some kind of inversion of something else.

Secondly, the correct spelling of accidentals gives a clearer impression of the sense of voice leading and progession from one chord to the next. Say in the example above, one wanted to resolve the chromatic note onto the diatonic one, rather than sustaining it for the full duration of the chord, then it WOULD make sense to use the C#, thus:

F.........
C#...D....
B.........
G.........

A musician's eye tend to read in "chunks", so would still see the overall sense of a G7 chord, and the visual upward movement from the C# to the D would, again, reflect what the ear hears. It's also important that in this case the D belongs to the chord whereas the C# is foreign to it - so it makes sense that the "look" of the chord is made to add up only at the resolution.

You may think this is pedantry, but I can tell you that these things make a difference for example to a pianist or keyboard player sight reading a piece in a session or trying to learn and understand a piece in depth (or even to players of purely melodic instruments, in some cases). For an orchestral score, they are absolutely essential to allow the conductor to follow and internally hear the harmony easily.

One can always say that technically it doesn't make any difference, but music is not an abstract technical science. It's something that interacts with human psychology, in real time. In this respect it certainly does make a difference.

Finally, if someone is composing music in the classical way, actually writing it down and giving it to musicians to play, then I'd say there's a real problem from the composer's OWN pont of view if they don't see any difference in writing a C# or a Db. It means they don't have sufficient awareness of what that note is doing in relation to the other notes of the composition - what function it serves within its chord, and where it is going in the voice leading. Answering those questions and answering how to spell the note go hand in hand.

Sure, there are rules, but as in music engraving, the 'rules' can profitably be considered 'guidelines' on occasion. The acid test is making it clear to the musician so you get the result you want. For example, in music notation, extremely chromatic passages are often better notated in sharps going up and flats going down. Nothing to do with enharmonics, simply it's quicker to read, say, G, G sharp, A rather than G, A flat, A natural. But a 'genuine' scale should be notated so that you get seven different note names, even if it means double flats or sharps. By my reckoning, G harmonic minor would be G, A, Bb, C, D, Eb, F#, G. Liekwise, some chords look much clearer one way than another, which may or may not be theoretically correct. There are times when Eb and F# look right, others when Eb and Gb look better. Usually it turns out that the theory is 'better', but not invariably. Judgment is needed.

Just to clarify - inversions are decided by the lowest sounding note - and any other repositioning of notes are referred to as voicings.
If you play in a group with say a guitar and a bass guitar then any "inversion" the guitarist plays is just a voicing. the real inversion is decided by the bass player.
Equally the guitarist can play simpler(or just other) chords where required. e.g if the guitarist plays Em and the bass plays a C# it is a C#m7. Assuming there are other part to cover the gaps you can often get away (or even improve) your voicings by leaving out notes. The power chord is just one example of this.

--------------------
Daniel Davis
Edinburgh Recording Studio Windmill Sound

Quote David Etheridge:

---

Hi folks,
here's a standard system of chord notation taken from Sammy Nestico's book 'The Complete Arranger'. Having a standardised version of chord shorthand means less chance of confusion on sessions and gigs. I beleive that this version is the standard form used by all the top arrangers (Mr. Nestico is currently one of the major guys), so it's useful to know this. He got it from 'Standardised Chord Symbol Notation' by Cark Brandt and Clinton Roemer (pub. Roerick Music co, USA)

Here we go:
Major chords will be indicated thus: C (and not Cmaj or ma).
Sixth chords: C6 (not C (A) (addA) or similar).
Seventh chords with the flattened seventh: C7 (not C add Bb).
Minor chords: Cm (rather than Cmin, C- or similar).
Minor 7ths: Cm7 (not C-7, min7th or similar)
Major 7ths: Cmaj7 or Cma7 (not CM7, or C with a triangle, although some people use the latter).
9ths work in the same way as 7ths (not Cmaj7+9, add D or other confusing stuff).
Aug 7ths with a #5: C+7 (not C7+, C7 (#5) or C7+5).
Aug 9ths : C+9 as for aug 7ths.
Thirteenths: C13 (and not C7 (13), C7+6, C9 add A, etc).
Diminished chords: Co; the o is a superscript placed next to the top half of the C but I can't do that on this computer! (not C-, Cdim, C7o, etc).
Six nine chords: C6/9 (not C2/6, C13 (no7) or C6 add D).
Seventh with a flat 5 chord: C7(b5) (not C7-5, C7#4, C7(5b)).
Half diminished chords-a minor 7ths with a flat 5: Cmi7(b5), although you'll find some folks use a o with a line through it, like the phase reverse sign on your mixing desk (but avoid things like Cmi7-5 and Cmi7 5b).
Seventh with a flat ninth: C7(b9). (Avoid C9b, Cb9, C9-, C(add Db)).
Minor with a major 7th: Cmi(ma7). (Not Cmi add B, Cmi+B, C-7.
Raised ninths: C7(#9) (rather than C7(+9), C+9, C7(b3) or C9+).
Sus chords: C7sus (not C7(sus4), C7 (add F), C7 (alt 4th), C7 (+4) or C7 #3)).
Augmented 11th chords can be C9(#11), (not C+11, C11+, C11#, C9+11, or C9 (b12)).
Note that the + sign is used to indicate augmented, rather than a substitute for a #. Some musos use the dash (-) to mean minor, dim, or even a flat. No wonder you can get confused
Try not to use lower case letters on your parts for other players: a badly written 'mi' could be read as 'mj': is it major or minor? Is it real or is it Memorex (hands up all those who remember that advert )
MA is never used by itself, only in Ma7 or Ma9. Just write the chord name alone for the major chord (eg: Cm/ C). I once had a fine time on a gig with a rhythm guitarist who couldn't work out major and minor chords, to chaotic effect on some tunes!

So that's it for the present. Even with this shorthand, sometimes you've got no option than to write C13 #11 b9 b5!


Best wishes,
Dave

---

Well a funny thing happens when you move beyond triads - the same set of notes can be interpreted in more ways. e.g. take the notes CEGA you have either a C6 or an Am7 chord.
From an ensemble player's point of view this means you can choose other possibilities to play (often simplifying your parts or adding variety).
As you add more notes the possibilities increase, until with 7 note chords they can be anything - so-called pan diatonic harmony. Holst uses this in the Planets suite - but never wrote another decent piece. perhaps because...
From a harmonic point of view the strength of chords with more than 3 notes is that they gain flexibility and can perform more than one harmonic role. This is particulary good when you repeat a section using the same chord to take you in a different harmonic direction. On the down side as you add roles each is weakened , predictability dissappears, and functional harmony distroyed.

--------------------
Daniel Davis
Edinburgh Recording Studio Windmill Sound

Quote Daniel Davis:

---

Just to clarify - inversions are decided by the lowest sounding note - and any other repositioning of notes are referred to as voicings.
If you play in a group with say a guitar and a bass guitar then any "inversion" the guitarist plays is just a voicing. the real inversion is decided by the bass player.
Equally the guitarist can play simpler(or just other) chords where required. e.g if the guitarist plays Em and the bass plays a C# it is a C#m7. Assuming there are other part to cover the gaps you can often get away (or even improve) your voicings by leaving out notes. The power chord is just one example of this.

---

An Em with C# bass would be a C#m7(b5), wouldn't it?

Anyway, does anyone here know what's the standard notation for open voicings (no 3rd) such as C-D-G, C-G, C-G-Bb, C-D-F-G etc? What about quarter chords (4th, but no 3rd or 5th) such as C-F-Bb?

BTW, it's a great pleasure to meet all of you!

--------------------
All the best,
Knut Skaarberg

wouldn't C-D-G be Csus2? and similarly C-D-F-G Csus2/4? i'm sure i've seen these written this way in guitar scores.

--------------------
hourglass | random thoughts | doubledotdash!? collective

Quote Knut Skaarberg:

---

An Em with C# bass would be a C#m7(b5), wouldn't it?

---

Well spotted!

Quote:

---

Anyway, does anyone here know what's the standard notation for open voicings (no 3rd) such as C-D-G, C-G, C-G-Bb, C-D-F-G etc? What about quarter chords (4th, but no 3rd or 5th) such as C-F-Bb?

---

One can't really say "standard" here, because the chords themselves are not standard. The open fifth I've sometimes seen notated as "5". Thus C-G alone = "C5"

C-G-Bb I'm not sure. I'd probably just write "C7(no 3rd)". Alternatively you could write Gm/C, if you felt relaxed about the player adding a D if he wants.

The others you describe are various combinations of 4ths/5ths and 2nds/7ths. As such, if you juggle the notes a bit you can usually reduce them to some kind of sus4, or 7sus4 chord, and then just use a slash to indicate the bass note. Thus:

C-D-G = Gsus4/C

C-D-F-G = G7sus4/C

C-F-Bb = Fsus4/C

But if you're really thinking in 4ths, as opposed to writing within a conventional framework of 3rds but in a "4thy" way - then you might be better off notating the part at least in guide tones. Write a chord voicing upwards in 4ths, in semibreves, and then just tell the player to use whatever rhythm feels right to it.

In modal jazz, it's quite common for pianists to gravitate towards 4ths and 2nds because they capture the harmonically "floating" sound better and don't push things in as clear a direction as 3rds. So you might write "Cm11", and depending on the feel and style, the player might voice it upwards: C-F-Bb-Eb, omitting the G and making 4ths out of everything else. Some of Bill Evans's playing on "Kind Of Blue", and similar music of the period, is a case in point.

But this is a very inexact science and it relies on people sharing a common set of unspoken understandings, or being able to walk over to the piano, stab a few 4ths and say "a bit more like that!" or whatever...

Thanks for the thorough reply!

I agree in principle on could write C-F-Bb as Fsus4/C, but that indicate it resolves to F/C, wouldn't it? As a piano player I would tend to play with diffent positions of the "double quarter" chords over a C bass, such as

G-C-F
A-D-G
C-F-Bb
D-G-C

and so on. Maybe that's a bit on the edge of what standard chord notation is useful for.

--------------------
All the best,
Knut Skaarberg

Quote Wurlitzer:

---

... if you juggle the notes a bit you can usually reduce them to some kind of sus4, or 7sus4 chord, and then just use a slash to indicate the bass note. Thus:

C-D-G = Gsus4/C

---

hi Wurlitzer, just out of interest, C-D-G can sound (in some contexts) more "C" to me than "G", hence i would say (as above) that that is Csus2 and not an inversion of Gsus4. is there a reason it should be Gsus4/C or is this just another way of seeing the "same" chord? just for my future reference... (i.e. is calling it "sus2" bad form, as technically you can only have sus4? or something?)

--------------------
hourglass | random thoughts | doubledotdash!? collective

Edited by onesecondglance (22/08/08 04:14 PM)

Quote Knut Skaarberg:

---

I agree in principle on could write C-F-Bb as Fsus4/C, but that indicate it resolves to F/C, wouldn't it?

---

Not really. Sus4 chords in jazz aren't presumed to "resolve" the way suspended 4ths are in classical harmony. The 4th is just a static entity that can go wherever it likes, usually.

That's kind of what I meant about unspoken assumptions.

Quote:

---

As a piano player I would tend to play with diffent positions of the "double quarter" chords over a C bass, such as

G-C-F
A-D-G
C-F-Bb
D-G-C

and so on. Maybe that's a bit on the edge of what standard chord notation is useful for.

---

Indeed, and that's exactly the kind of thing I meant where it might make more sense just to write out the voicings.

Chord symbols were originally derived from tonal harmony, and were not purely a technical description of the chords in isolation. eg Dm7 - G7 - Cmaj7 doesn't ONLY tell you what notes to use above each root, it also tells you that it's a II - V - I in C.

As harmony becomes less and less functional in modern jazz, you can start to approach a point where the chord symbols might accurately describe each chord, but what they appear to be saying about the chord function is completely misleading. eg your progression above is basically a set of parallel 4ths within the mixolydian mode on C. The bass is C all the way through, and that bass is harmonically independent from the chords (apart from the fact that it generates the mode they belong to). As such, calling those chords F this or G that might be technically correct, but doesn't actually give one a very clear idea into what is going on.

But then in this kind of style the harmony is usually pretty freely improvised anyway (although sometimes within strict constraints of mode). Often the chord symbol only changes when the mode does, which might only be once every 8 bars or so. But within that period, you'll hear the piano and bass exploring the kinds of things you describe here.

Unfortunately there is not yet a settled and agreed language in which to describe things any more precisely than that!

Quote onesecondglance:

---

hi Wurlitzer, just out of interest, C-D-G can sound (in some contexts) more "C" to me than "G", hence i would say (as above) that that is Csus2 and not an inversion of Gsus4. is there a reason it should be Gsus4/C or is this just another way of seeing the "same" chord? just for my future reference... (i.e. is calling it "sus2" bad form, as technically you can only have sus4? or something?)

---

No, it can just as rightly be described as Csus2, that's a perfectly accepted notation. And if you're thinking of it with a C root, that probably makes more sense.

Quote Knut Skaarberg:

---

Thanks for the thorough reply!

I agree in principle on could write C-F-Bb as Fsus4/C, but that indicate it resolves to F/C, wouldn't it? As a piano player I would tend to play with different positions of the "double quarter" chords over a C bass, such as

G-C-F
A-D-G
C-F-Bb
D-G-C

and so on. Maybe that's a bit on the edge of what standard chord notation is useful for.

---

Hi Knut,
if you did this with C in the bass, the chords could be annotated as:
(C) G C F : Csus4
(C) A D G: C6/9 (no 3rd)
(C) C F Bb: C7sus
(C) D G C : C2.
and to my ears C D G sounds simply like a C2.

Hope this helps,

Dave.


--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Quote Wurlitzer:

---

Quote onesecondglance:

---

hi Wurlitzer, just out of interest, C-D-G can sound (in some contexts) more "C" to me than "G", hence i would say (as above) that that is Csus2 and not an inversion of Gsus4. is there a reason it should be Gsus4/C or is this just another way of seeing the "same" chord? just for my future reference... (i.e. is calling it "sus2" bad form, as technically you can only have sus4? or something?)

---

No, it can just as rightly be described as Csus2, that's a perfectly accepted notation. And if you're thinking of it with a C root, that probably makes more sense.

---

excellent. always nice to know you've not made an idiotic remark in public

--------------------
hourglass | random thoughts | doubledotdash!? collective

Hello David.
I read your review a while ago of the BASSIX Electric Bass.
I currently play an ARIA SB1 Electric Upright. It is OK ish at low volume but when I take it up a bit it goes into the fretless bass guitar sounding.
Your review of the BASSIX made it sound that maybe it would be worth investing in. Would you recommend the BASSIX.??

Regards
Tony Dunmore

Quote Tony D:

---

Hello David.
I read your review a while ago of the BASSIX Electric Bass.
I currently play an ARIA SB1 Electric Upright. It is OK ish at low volume but when I take it up a bit it goes into the fretless bass guitar sounding.
Your review of the BASSIX made it sound that maybe it would be worth investing in. Would you recommend the BASSIX.??

Regards
Tony Dunmore

---

Not sure why you are in Music Theory with this but a few words from me on MY experience with EUB`s.

PLayed a Clevinger in the USA back in er 83 or 84.
The full size one was excellent, the Baby sounded like a fretless bass guitar.

Fast forward to last year.

Picked up a pretty crappy ol dupright and have been slowly making headway on it.

In the meantime I have played two or three more EUB`s, all of them short scale, as this BASSIX appears to be.

They don`tplay like an upright and they don`t sound like one either.

If BASSIX do a full (40-42") scale EUB, that might be a horse of a different color, but for the time being I am looking into a pickup for my doghouse.

Eager posters please note: An AFFORDABLE pickup for my upright.

--------------------
Me? But I`m such a loveable old bugger!

Hi Tony and Ivan,
yes, the Bassix range are essentially 3/4 scale basses, which means they're still longer in scale than yer average electric cricket bat.
The pickups on the Bassix range combine Piezos on the bridge PLUS extra pickups at the top (bridge) end of the fingerboard. The resulting combination provides to my ears the most faithful sound of a genuine double bass I've ever heard, and way better than Y**(-you know who)
Also at £1100 for the top end one, Bassix is much cheaper!
So they sound right, and they do play like a double bass, once you get over the culture shock of not have a large body to wrap yourself around/support your beer gut (delete applicable).
For me the only drawback is that Bassix don't do a 5 string!

Dave.



........and now, back to chord notation!

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Quote David Etheridge:

---

Diminished chords: Co; the o is a superscript placed next to the top half of the C but I can't do that on this computer!

---

As in C°

Alt+248 (on the keypad)

Hi Folks
Read the thread on the notation of chords. Well - has any one else come across the use of Tonic Sol-fa used for writing chords? Some while ago, 1960’s I was working the American Bases in France and one Saturday night the floor show was an Italian speciality act. They had their own MD with them and when he handed out the dots the bass and guitar parts were written out with chord symbols I didn’t recognise. An example of which appeared thus.
Written on standard manuscript paper, the first to appear was the appropriate clef symbol, bass for me, followed by the key signature – then Doh 6/// Lah m7/// Ray m7b5/// Soh 9/// Doh 6/ Doh 9/ Fah 7/// Fah m7/// Doh 6 /// Soh 7 /// Doh M7 /// etc etc. After a number of choruses a key change, indicated by an appropriate key signature and then Doh 6 /// Lah m7 /// etc. I eventually sussed it out half way through the second act. I’ve never come across parts like this again and I don’t think I want to.

Quote Musomech:

---

Hi Folks
Read the thread on the notation of chords. Well - has any one else come across the use of Tonic Sol-fa used for writing chords? Some while ago, 1960’s I was working the American Bases in France and one Saturday night the floor show was an Italian speciality act. They had their own MD with them and when he handed out the dots the bass and guitar parts were written out with chord symbols I didn’t recognise. An example of which appeared thus.
Written on standard manuscript paper, the first to appear was the appropriate clef symbol, bass for me, followed by the key signature – then Doh 6/// Lah m7/// Ray m7b5/// Soh 9/// Doh 6/ Doh 9/ Fah 7/// Fah m7/// Doh 6 /// Soh 7 /// Doh M7 /// etc etc. After a number of choruses a key change, indicated by an appropriate key signature and then Doh 6 /// Lah m7 /// etc. I eventually sussed it out half way through the second act. I’ve never come across parts like this again and I don’t think I want to.

---

I have come across this a lot as I often used to read off Italian popular songs' sheet music. You get used to it very quickly, assuming the music is not too complicated (i.e. Giant Steps).

--------------------
No longer a forum member.

Hi,

As a keyboard player, I hate the way chords and bass notes are expressed as the chord first slash the bass note. For example a Gm7 with a C bass is Gm7/C.

I prefer my own system whereby the bass note for my left hand is on the left and the chord in my right hand is on the right. So I would write the above example as c-Gm7. Visually and logically my brain takes these in naturally without having to cross them over. This has always worked for me but I am sure those guitarist out there would disagree, especially as most of them leave out the other notes. They will probably want the Gm7 to be their first thought and then as an after thought think about the possibility of playing the C bass - only kidding. Seriously from a keyboard point of view I have found this is far easier.

Tony Long
tonylongmusic.co.uk

Hi Tony,
I actually disagree with you on this. Mind you, I can understand C7+9+11 13 quite happily, but the slash chord system is very useful for those folks who can't get their head around upper structure tones of a more complex chord.
take your example, which might ordinarily be written C11.
Now to the beginner, that works out as C-E-G-Bb-D-F -in theory at least.
In practice you won't use the 3rd E because it will clash with the 11th F -unless you like 'orrible clashes! When dealing with 13th and 11th chords you can leave out the lower tones to get the full smooth voicing. So you have in your left hand C and in the right G-Bb-D-F = Gm7.
Likewise if you used C11 13 you could write that as Gm9/C or (if you leave out both the E and G) Bbmaj7/C
Which seems a lot simpler and quite logical to me.
With C13 you can leave out tones and get an effective voicing as C-Bb-E-A (you can add G if you like) although as far as I know there's no slash equivalent!

Hope this helps,
Best wishes,
Dave


--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

I've got some sheet music (While My Guitar Gently Weeps) which has a chord notated as a D with a superscript 9 and a subscript 7 next to it. What's this called?

---

As a rule it's considered poor form (by those Bach fans among us) to mix and match sharps and flats within a chord.
The consistancy of this approach alows for all dim 7 chords to be correctly recorded without ever mixing #s and bs, so, for instance, F#dim is F# A C (and i'd always write c natural), D#. Gbdim is, rather horribly Gb Bbb Dbb Fbb. Yuk!

Yours, pretensiously,


EmGee

---

Dear EmGee,
You may wish to re-examine your spelling of F#dim7. A "dim7 is built on stacked minor 3rds, as you stated with Gb. So your "D#" really should be "Eb" for two reasons:
1. C to D# is a "#2" not a "b3"
2. The seventh scale degree of an F# is some sort of "E"; in this case "Eb"
I understand some people's aversion for mixing sharps and flats, but a "dim7" chord is not a diatonic chord, so it will necessarily contain an accidental not common to the key.

Respectfully,

Lance "koolbass" Martin

--------------------
Lance "koolbass" Martin
BoogieHouseMusic.com

Actually Emgee,
Bach never had to play jazz or show material. You'll find that sharps and flats are mixed in chords with gay abandon -particularly diminished 7ths and extensions. In fact this last weekend I was on a band call for a presentation of 'Crazy for you' which features lots of tap dancing and jazz standards and we were trying to work out the chords for the guitarist from the piano part. Many of them made no sense at all until you start thinking enharmonically (F#s to Gbs etc) and at one point in the score the piano parts were flat chords, but the vocal parts above were printed in sharp keys
I suppose it all helps in the rehearsing.......

Best wishes,
Dave.

--------------------
Lots of Ataris which keep on going, 12 Kurzweil 1000 modules, a bunch of hardware synths. Still recording to tape -the old ways are best.....

Sorry, raking over old ground here, but I'd like to pick up on the C2 notation mentioned earlier... I find this notation ambiguous, as it could mean 'replace the third with the second', as in the example above: CDG, or it could mean 'add the second to the complete triad', which would be: CDEG - cf: C6 which adds the 6th to the complete triad.

Is it better to write CDG as Csus2, because you are suspending the third and replacing it with the 2nd, and CDEG as Cadd2 (or maybe C2 if you ask really nicely)?

Quote Knut Skaarberg:

---

Quote Daniel Davis:

---

Just to clarify - inversions are decided by the lowest sounding note - and any other repositioning of notes are referred to as voicings.
If you play in a group with say a guitar and a bass guitar then any "inversion" the guitarist plays is just a voicing. the real inversion is decided by the bass player.
Equally the guitarist can play simpler(or just other) chords where required. e.g if the guitarist plays Em and the bass plays a C# it is a C#m7. Assuming there are other part to cover the gaps you can often get away (or even improve) your voicings by leaving out notes. The power chord is just one example of this.

---

An Em with C# bass would be a C#m7(b5), wouldn't it?

Anyway, does anyone here know what's the standard notation for open voicings (no 3rd) such as C-D-G, C-G, C-G-Bb, C-D-F-G etc? What about quarter chords (4th, but no 3rd or 5th) such as C-F-Bb?

BTW, it's a great pleasure to meet all of you!

---

bugger, I meant E with C# bass! thanks for the correction.

--------------------
Daniel Davis
Edinburgh Recording Studio Windmill Sound

I find the conversation on grammar of sharps and flats quite interesting. As a composer and engraver of choral music I get to make that sort of decision all the time, and the two "grammars" of harmony and voice leading are often at odds.

The only way to really know how a singer will read (or misread) the part is to mentally sing it yourself, and I find that most of my engravings contain enharmonic chromatic lines that are simple to sing but more difficult to interpret vertically.

The point about having flats in the keyboard part and sharps in the chorus parts is well made. Also, consider the needs of transposing instruments. Sometimes it's best to notate for these poor players in a different key entirely!

Another anecdotal fact: complex harmony may lead you to notate chords that don't actually exist. F flat minor, for instance.

--------------------
Composer;
www.ogonline.org

Chord structure 101 boys... Years ago, when I first starting playing guitar and piano, it was seriously confusing, but if you use a midi/digital piano in your production, then sitting down with a chord chart get can you a long way in short time. Take your [ ****** ] to the next level

--------------------
make dubstep music

I'm finding Progression for the ipad very useful for notation. In the past I've only used tabs and chord charts but now I'm learning to read notation for the first time! I soon will be able to jam with my daughter the violinist. I also recommend Notion for the ipad...a powerful composing app for the whole orchestra. amazing!

In tonal music the idea is you write harmony with correct "grammer" no matter how out of the way things end up

i.e., bviidim7 in Cmajor is Bb, Db, Fb, Abb and so fourth, with all you're weird notes you'd never 'spell' in everyday playing.
Or a chord containing C, Gb (a Diminished 5th) theoretically wants to resolve inward; the Gb wants to fall to F. (with perhaps the C, going up to D)
where as C, F# (an Augmented 4th) wants to resolve outward: the F# wants to rise to G (with perhaps the C falling to B)


Anyway once you're not dealing with "traditional" harmony, for example in the instance of serialist music, atonal writing or other things, the preferred grammar changes. You no longer bend over backward to name intervals according to their function but instead you just designate a name to each semitone from the offset be it "whites and sharps only" or "whites and flats only" and either don't flop from one to the other at all, or if you must and have a very good reason to, not willy-nil-lily or illogically.

The other complication is microtonality, (notes in-between semi tones) in which case the same rules apply only on a finer scale. Unless you're indicating special fingering on particular instruments, you ought to select four terms in a row from the following array of seven and stick to them for the whole piece: [3/4 flat], [flat], ([1/4] [flat], [natural], [1/4 sharp], [sharp]), [3/4 sharp]. The four in the red bracket would be what I'd use. You'd also need to sort out the definite names given to the micro tones between semi tone whites i.e. if you call the microtone between B&C "C1/4b" don't then call it "B1/4#" elsewhere in the same piece (again, unless you have a good logical reason too).

--------------------
I'm hope I'm alive to see the 70's

I have only dipped into bits of this thread, so forgive me if what I'm about to type is besides the point!

It is NOT at all true that mixing sharps and flats within the same chord should be avoided. The relevant rule here is that you should use the notes within the harmonic chromatic scale of the key you are in. So, for example, if the piece is in C major (or its relative minor, A minor) you would use the C harmonic chromatic scale. ie. C Db D Eb E F F# G Ab A Bb B.

This rule is actually extremely cool as it ensures that intervals retain the same VISUAL relationship in different keys. So a piece looks how it sounds. Simples! I should add that rules are made to be broken and there are definitely times when this one needs to be...

I can explain how to work out the harmonic chromatic scale easily for any key... but dinner's ready so will have to return later to do this!!

So here's how to find the harmonic chromatic notes for any key:

We need to start with just the note letters only. Lets say we want to know the correct chromatic notes for Db major: Our tonic letter is D, we then need 2 notes of the next letter (E), 2 of the next letter (F), 2 of the next (G), then just 1 of the next note letter (A) as it is the 5th note of the major scale, then 2 of the next letter (B) and finally 2 of the the next letter (C). So putting all those together with whatever sharps or flats give us a chromatic scale we get: Db, Ebb, Eb, Fb, F, Gb, Gnat, Ab, Bbb, Bb, Cb, C.

You just need to use the tonic note letter once, the letter of the fifth of the major scale once, then all the others, twice. That's it!

One beautiful thing when in Db is that you don't use E natural, you use Fb. This means that (for example) a jump between the tonic and the minor third has the same relationship on paper as if we were in D major, which it wouldn't if we used E natural.

In some keys there are both flats and sharps used at the same time. eg. the chromatic notes for G major are: G, Ab, A, Bb, B, C, C#, D, Eb, E, F, F#.

Hope that makes clear why it can be fine to use flats and sharps together.

I can at times veer away from keeping to the harmonic chromatic note names when in the world of diminished chords or when loitering in an other key that has not been reflected in the key signature.

On a more pragmatic level - if you're writing something that will be heard as a major or minor triad - something you might write a chord symbol above - make it LOOK like one too! A Db chord in the treble clef will have a note in the space under the stave, then notes in the next two spaces. It will LOOK like a triad. So no question - the middle note will be some sort of F, not some sort of E. F natural for Db major, Fb for Db minor.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

On a more pragmatic level - if you're writing something that will be heard as a major or minor triad - something you might write a chord symbol above - make it LOOK like one too! A Db chord in the treble clef will have a note in the space under the stave, then notes in the next two spaces. It will LOOK like a triad. So no question - the middle note will be some sort of F, not some sort of E. F natural for Db major, Fb for Db minor.

---

Db minor is 8 flats. Fb is the 7th flat. So the Fb could not occur earlier than in the key of Ab minor. In Eb minor, for example, the bVII chord is Db major - with a natural F.

So I guess that chord can occur - in Ab minor - I was thinking that you would not choose to notate in Db minor, you would use C# minor instead, but notating in G# minor would be weird. In Ab minor, as Db is the iv, you can also use the (major) IV chord, so the distinction really is F versus Fb rather than F versus E natural.

As a practical matter, if your charts are copied by your average copyist (I should talk), and if the note ends up a little high, and somewhat dubious as to whether it is an E or an F, with the natural in front of it, I think most musicians would read it as an F. So you really don't want to write it as an E natural.

Edited by damoore (05/11/12 07:29 PM)

Quote windbag:

---

Sure, there are rules, but as in music engraving, the 'rules' can profitably be considered 'guidelines' on occasion. The acid test is making it clear to the musician so you get the result you want. For example, in music notation, extremely chromatic passages are often better notated in sharps going up and flats going down. Nothing to do with enharmonics, simply it's quicker to read, say, G, G sharp, A rather than G, A flat, A natural. But a 'genuine' scale should be notated so that you get seven different note names, even if it means double flats or sharps. By my reckoning, G harmonic minor would be G, A, Bb, C, D, Eb, F#, G. Liekwise, some chords look much clearer one way than another, which may or may not be theoretically correct. There are times when Eb and F# look right, others when Eb and Gb look better. Usually it turns out that the theory is 'better', but not invariably. Judgment is needed.

---

I don't think convention should be changed to help people sight read.

In fact good performers should be playing from memory anyway if you want to have
a chance at decent phrasing, especially in difficult keys.

One musician I respect the most is a young jazz cat. While his peers are off playing hip hop,
he has built a list of hundreds of standards and other tunes he can play in every key and all tempos.

Thats how jazz education used to take place....you'd get on the bandstand and they would call donna lee in a crazy key and BPM.

We've gotten so lazy these days!

I don't mean to criticize your post, it seemed the quickest to reply to on this page, I know you've all made many of the same points, just thought I'd add another musician's perspective.

Edited by The Pablo Augustus (12/04/13 12:45 PM)

Quote:

---

In fact good performers should be playing from memory anyway if you want to have
a chance at decent phrasing, especially in difficult keys.

---

That's not at all how it often works. Playing in a pit, you get a large book and very small number of rehearsals and often short runs, so everyone is sight reading most of the time. Added to the fact that the books have all been copied by foot, and you need all the help you can get.