What is a (i.e. C/D) chord?

[jancivil]

the 3rd should not be played on 11th chords

but not as D13 because "13" normally implies that you still have the 3rd, but not the 11th because it would be too dissonant against the third).

a major third is hardly ever done because the 11th is pretty much the same idea as per major triad as the 'sus 4', and the presence of both is a clutter, less flexible and kind of ugly. However a minor chord might be extended out to 11 for its sonority and is its own thing.

If I see 'D13', I assume a seventh but not more per se; I would indicate more if I totally required those notes. An 11th and a 13th on a dominant type seventh? the 11th is #11 in the idiom.

[tapper mike]

That's really just your lack of education. .

No it's really your lack of education and your unwillingness to accept it. I provided a link. It seems every time I provide a meaningful response I have to give a real life example. Something you always fail to do. Instead you rely on conjecture. No links to musical treaties that would support your claim no real life usages of the concept at hand nothing but your over zealous desire to prove your right in a field you have no practical real life knowledge or experience or education in.


I mean my god slash chord names are expressed over guitar chord diagrams which follow the exact tennants I've laid out.

http://www.guitarlessonworld.com/lesson ... chords.htm

Here look at all the pretty images of slash chord names, chord diagrams for guitar and notation. All there in freaking black and white.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Slash+c ... 24&bih=632

[jancivil]

Look, you actually stated here that to be a 'ninth chord', the D has to be a ninth above the C. So, it isn't conjecture to go into inversions. Understand a word! "Conjecture" is only meaningful in the absence of fact. Inversions of chords deals in things we know. A seventh chord is a seventh chord because a seventh, vis a vis the root is in it. You've never encountered a 7th chord that wasn't root position? Any of a chord's components are still that part of the chord in inversion. Is 'inversion' just brand new to you? If you have a C/Bb this can never be a C7? Are these things you never once encountered?? Worse than this you have 'ninth' as absolutely literal, so if the spacing exceeds it, logically you want that 17th chord, don't you. Think it through.

I am not LYING to you. Google "9th chord, fourth inversion", since you simply cannot manage the basic logic you need to get it.

I'll do it for you: https://www.google.com/search?q=9th+cho ... hannel=rcs

If E in the bass of a C major chord, at a sixth from the root, does not make it the sixth of the chord, a ninth in the bass of a C9, a seventh interval from the root, does not make it the seventh of the chord. It's still the ninth in the harmony, just like that E is still the third of the harmony. I can't do more for you on it. This is REALLY SIMPLE LOGIC, man.

I don't 'need to be right'. I have not only copped to someone noticing a term that was off, I elaborated on what is the real, accepted meaning of the term (2-3 suspension [or 'bass suspension' as it was pointed out] means eg., F in the bass next to a G resolves down to E/G). I am of course not infallible and if you show me an error I don't have to stick to a story.
YOU on the other hand have yet to cop to your {clueless} 'voice leading' definition after being shown by numerous people. Get real.

[jancivil]

http://www.hearandplay.com/main/how-to- ... ons-part-2

[jancivil]

We got into this at Central Piedmont Community College in 'Chromatic Harmony'.

On the "Ninth-Chord in Fourth Inversion" from "Verklärte Nacht"

http://www.schoenberg.at/library/index. ... /show/7094

"No links to musical treaties that would support your claim no real life usages of the concept at hand nothing but"
alrighty then: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/187 ... ne1987.pdf

[jancivil]

I already showed this, those are so clearly ninths of the harmony in the bass in something that's workable and not hard to understand. But no, you have to have authority and documentation, since you can't really follow my example somehow. Because I wrote it it isn't a 'real world example'. Gee.
There ya go.

Bar 2, first harmony. The critics called it Ab9. Schoenberg said, ok then...

In the actual score, ms 42



Read 'em and weep.

[IncarnateX]

Read 'em and weep.

Make war, not music!

[JumpingJackFlash]

I think the problem here is that people are talking about different things.

A "ninth chord" (e.g. C9) is short for "dominant ninth", an extension of the dominant seventh, and as such must contain the seventh. 11th and 13th chords also must contain the seventh (though not necessarily the ninth).

When the seventh is not present, the correct writing is "add9".

With ninth chords, just like seventh chords, there is no inherent restriction on where that ninth must occur. As jancivil says, it could be in any part, even the bass, and still be a "ninth chord" (though in classical music, the ninth is most often at the top).

However, "add9" may imply that the ninth should be in the top octave. This is in contrast to "add2" which would imply the opposite. This is by no means a hard and fast rule though, and is often violated in practice.

So to summarise with an example:

C9 means the notes C-E-G-Bb-D, in any order. The fifth (G) is often omitted.

Cadd9 might imply C-E-G-D.

Cadd2 would imply C-D-E-G.

As I said, in practice the latter two are often synonymous, but some people like to preserve the distinction.

In the OP; you wouldn't write Cadd9/D, that's unnecessary (and looks silly). C/D is fine, meaning a C major triad over a D in the bass (D-C-E-G). This is not a "ninth chord".

[jancivil]

Read 'em and weep.

giantass degraded image

Make war, not music!

'Read 'em and weep' is a card game thing. 'Show your hand'. 'Read 'em and weep'.

[jancivil]

Conventionally, chord charts give 'C9' and practically everybody familiar with the convention takes it as a major triad, minor seventh, major ninth. Shorthand M/m7, 9.

"Dominant" however has a contextual meaning. While most music, pop music, jazz practice with pop music, lead sheets, fake books etc are going to have a V7, 9 type of deal there, 'ninth chord' as given, containing that seventh, is not per se a dominant function. For examples of it outside of being a dominant V, look to Debussy.

Do we say you cannot call M/M7, 9 a 'ninth chord'. Nossir, I don't like it. Yes, we're going to see 'Major ninth chord' with that additional modifier in it. What do we call m/m7, 9? Minor ninth chord? Typically, unless we're calling a flat nine what it is, a minor ninth. So there are two things can be meant by the term.

Dealing with C minor triad and an F in addition, what do we call this? I call it Cm11 and if I do intend Bb in that chord I put Cm7 11 in the chart. Others may disagree; but what do you do with that, 'Cm add4'? I don't like it much, particularly if it's really more the 11th. But you can't call it 'sus 4' as it contains the third of the chord. This is not so unusual.

This 'add9' is a convention and it pretty much comes out of jazz and jazz reharmos of pop tunes and show tunes. What did people call that chord with a ninth with no seventh in the old days? I don't know. My little example shows the 'ninth in the bass', the ninth is what it is to the harmony. Go looking for definitions on the 'net, for instance, some will agree with that 'must have the 7th', some (wiki, 'Ninth chord') will state it as 'Chord containing the ninth' and the qualifiers there are 'close voiced' and 'root position', nothing about any seventh [cites Grove]. And the article messes with that lower down with a minor 6/9 example in first inversion. There's a chord with a sixth rather than a seventh. I first came across that as a kid. It's no "ninth chord", though? But w. 'add9' we have pretty much indicated 'no seventh needed' and this is useful.

Expecting a little chord symbol to mean exactly the same result by all people, IDK.
If I want the ninth next to the third I'll indicate 'add2'. It's a different sound than the ninth a seventh above the third, and I care about that.
In school, we said 'major/minor 7, minor 9th' and were perfectly clear. Lead sheets etc use something else less absolute.

[fmr]

After reading all the replies, I can't stop thinking what I have been thinking for so long: "Why editors insist in publish melodies with figures, instead of writing what's supposed to be played? Is it so difficult? Does it serve any purpose?"

Because, clearly, the figures were never an established norm, and are becoming more and more confusing when harmonies become more sophisticated. And, after all, notation was created to avoid precisely that confusion.

Still, I'd like the OP to publish a picture of the piece, to allow more informed opinions.

[D.Josef]

After reading all the replies, I can't stop thinking what I have been thinking for so long: "Why editors insist in publish melodies with figures, instead of writing what's supposed to be played? Is it so difficult? Does it serve any purpose?"

Because, clearly, the figures were never an established norm, and are becoming more and more confusing when harmonies become more sophisticated. And, after all, notation was created to avoid precisely that confusion.

Still, I'd like the OP to publish a picture of the piece, to allow more informed opinions.

Actually, as far as I know, it all started with figures. Originally, classical music scores were little different from modern pop notation, where you have the melody on a staff, and the chords written above with letters. Instead, they had the melody, and figured bass, giving the performer freedom to play the chords according to personal taste and feel.

So it's to communicate intent versus execution, and give the performer freedom. At least that's what I'd think. Maybe you're right and they are just lazy, but...

[fmr]

After reading all the replies, I can't stop thinking what I have been thinking for so long: "Why editors insist in publish melodies with figures, instead of writing what's supposed to be played? Is it so difficult? Does it serve any purpose?"

Because, clearly, the figures were never an established norm, and are becoming more and more confusing when harmonies become more sophisticated. And, after all, notation was created to avoid precisely that confusion.

Still, I'd like the OP to publish a picture of the piece, to allow more informed opinions.

Actually, as far as I know, it all started with figures. Originally, classical music scores were little different from modern pop notation, where you have the melody on a staff, and the chords written above with letters. Instead, they had the melody, and figured bass, giving the performer freedom to play the chords according to personal taste and feel.

So it's to communicate intent versus execution, and give the performer freedom. At least that's what I'd think. Maybe you're right and they are just lazy, but...

If you are talking about figured bass, that was not the beginning, but a convention of the baroque music, and was just for the "continuum" part - usually played by a keyboard instrument (organ/harpsichord), or a lute/theorbe. All other parts were written (and there were problems, that's why Bach many times wrote the continuum parts (much to displeasure of his contemporaries).

But that wasn't the beginning - the beginning was with neumes, little signs written above the texts in the middle-ages, to indicate the melodic contours, which evolved later to the four-line scores.

So, no, it didn't start with figures.

[jancivil]

[A figure] instead of writing what's supposed to be played? Is it so difficult? Does it serve any purpose?"

Well, 'fake books' give the basic function a lot of the time and that might be received down through time in a way where some of it isn't really it anyway. You might see 'Em' when the composer did CM7. Somebody guessed at things. And for a jazz usage, what was 'supposed to be' in a pop ditty of days of yore, who even remembers. And you want to do something happening creatively and this is a sketchy indication you take with the melody and not more.

Because, clearly, the figures were never an established norm, and are becoming more and more confusing when harmonies become more sophisticated. And, after all, notation was created to avoid precisely that confusion.

It's been too many years, but I'm sure in my part-writing classes the figured bass was absolute. In chromatic harmony you have to define what certain modifiers do to the intervals, ie., the plus and minus signs.

That fourth inversion was definitely something we were given in part-writing tests. I would have to think to give you the figure, that much isn't automatic for me anymore.

[IncarnateX]

Read 'em and weep.

giantass degraded image

Make war, not music!

'Read 'em and weep' is a card game thing. 'Show your hand'. 'Read 'em and weep'.

Yes so says the idiom wiki and he is weeping isn't he?