Coherence in sharps and flats in chord symbols

[Musicologo]

I'm having some difficulties in dealing with some incongruencies between the "legibility" and the "abstract theory".

Are the flats and sharps in chord symbols indexed to function or contextually to scale?...

1. the chord 3 semi-tones appart from the tonic for me it makes sense to call it bIII, because it's a minor third away. In Cm, this chord is Eb major, so it's a bIII. But in Am, this chord is C major, so it would be a III(!)...Then what it would be a C#?... shouldn't the C# be the "III" because it is the major third appart, like E should be the III in Cm, because it is the major third appart?... or let's say i'm in A#m, then the chord a minor third appart is C#. Is it bIII, III or #III?...

From a logical point of view I'd ALWAYS call bIII to the chord a minor-third appart from the tonic, regardless that chord has a flat, natural or sharp symbol in it. However in real life there seem to be lots of places that index the accidentals contextually to the scale and not to the function. So they call bIII to the Eb in Cm, they call III to the C major in A minor and they call #III to the C# in A#m, even though they are ALL the same function. For me seeing bIII, III and #III I see "3 different functions". I'm confused.



2. Let's say I have the following notes - F A B C. And I'm labelling it Fadd4. However, for me the Fadd4 (or Fsus) is indeed a F A Bb C - because a perfect fourth from F is Bb. Then my chord is really adding an augmented fourth from F. Then should I call it Fadd#4?... Because there is actualy not a # in the note or in the scale in question and that might look confusing for the player.

[jancivil]

Actually Eb major in C minor is symbolized III as with any key's "III". You may see it explicated on the internet with a flat sign but if we know that key has three flats, it's not essential to the understanding.

[jancivil]

my chord is really adding an augmented fourth from F. Then should I call it Fadd#4?... Because there is actualy not a # in the note or in the scale in question and that might look confusing for the player.

I don't find anything confusing about that. Objectively you've sharpened the default interval. CF: #9, #11, #5. Those are the terms I use id'ing a thing for myself. I was just looking at Ravel Scarbo fr. Gaspard and found these things, turned out to be major triads w. additionally '#9, #11'. Quick and to the point.

If you really hate it, do 'add aug4' I guess.

[Musicologo]

Then how is it called E major in Cminor? Also a "III"? or is it a "#III"?... because that chord would have "no function" in tonal theory...
For me a "V(7)" is a dominant as well as a "vii" and a "bII". a "IV is a subdominant, as well as a ii(7) and a vi and a #iv0".
For me a "iii" is a tonic substitution and a bIII a relative. a III I don't know what it is as I don't know what it is a #ii or a #V or a bI if I can make any sense... when I'm analyzing music if I "see" a III I usually think "Ok, I have modulated somewhere, this is indeed a I or a V of something else", like when I see a "II" (intead of a ii) I think, ok this is indeed a V7 of the V, or a I7 in a minor tonality I think "ok, this surely is instead a V7 of a iv", etc...

[jancivil]

Eb is III. So what's wrong with E being #III?
If one were to construct a harmony exercise and this bit of the test was how to handle E major vis a vis originally C minor, one would have to make a distinction. Believe me, III IS Eb major there, no ifs ands or buts.

[jancivil]

a III I don't know what it is as I don't know what it is...

If it's capitalized when lower case means minor it is the default third degree, major triad.
A minor? C.
D minor? F.
G minor? Bb.
etc. No es problemas.

If you're looking at major key and see III, it's the third degree made major if it's not a mistake. 'III' vis a vis C major? E major. 'III' vis a vis C minor? Eb major.

[jancivil]

For me a "iii" is a tonic substitution and a bIII a relative.

Then you're in essence saying 'major key is what I know'. No, III in minor is the default triad on the third degree of the scale, period.

[jancivil]

You have kind of begun to form dogmatic notions. "iii" *is* a substitute I? What if the idea isn't that? What if the idea is to prepare a modulation to that degree? It can just be iii in whatever the intent is.

"bII" *is* a dominant? We've been here before, if the harmony is F Ab Db and the tonic is C, it is a subdominant function known as the Neapolitan Sixth.
There isn't a dominant tension in itself, it's just a triad.

[Musicologo]

Oh, I extrapolated a bit as usual. But I got the idea. Basically what you're telling me is that the degree is indexed to the scale regardless of the accidentals, and further accidentals are relative to the original accidental in the scale.

In my famous artificial scale 1-#2-3-#4-5-#6-7, for instance, the "ii" would actually mean d#-f#-a# and still it would NOT be notated as #ii then. and IF I notated like #ii then I would mean that I would want dX-fX-aX I supose xD, right?

--------
P.S. about the bII I keep falling for that... I mean bII7 as tritonic substitution is a dominant, but only in that case. but, btw, what is traditionally the function of a "v" in a minor mode? In Cm, Gm is still a dominant? and Gm7 is what?...

[MadBrain]

1. I have to admit that when I do analysis for my personal usage, I analyze everything as if it were in major (so in A minor I use "bIII" for C instead of the standard "III", to avoid using different symbols in minor vs major). But this is not standard - the standard practice is that if you're in minor, your chord symbols become I bII II III #III IV #IV/bV V VI #VI VII #VII. Yes it looks weird.

2. For jazz notation (and the essentially equivalent Nashville notation), you are correct - F add4 is indeed F A Bb C, and F add#4 is F A B C. All chords are assumed to use notes from the "mixolydian mode" unless modified (so F13 - which has no modifications - has F G A Bb C D Eb, in theory). Minor chords simply flatten the 3rd, which gives "dorian mode" (so Fm13 can have up to F G Ab Bb C D Eb). For chords with a #4, some musicians use maj7#11 and 7#11 (depending on if E A B/F or Eb A B/F would work better). I've also seen 7b5 (which I think is usually theoretically wrong IMHO but has the advantage of being easy to read).

Classical music theory has a different way of writing chords, which I'm less familiar with so I'll let other people talk about it (I think the appropriate answer is that "F A B C" would almost never be used as a chord in classical music anyways).

[jancivil]

Oh, I extrapolated a bit as usual. But I got the idea. Basically what you're telling me is that the degree is indexed to the scale regardless of the accidentals, and further accidentals are relative to the original accidental in the scale

You have it.

In my famous artificial scale 1-#2-3-#4-5-#6-7, for instance, the "ii" would actually mean d#-f#-a# and still it would NOT be notated as #ii then. and IF I notated like #ii then I would mean that I would want dX-fX-aX I supose xD, right?

conceptually that is consistent, but in practice there is little possibility FOR a further sharpening of 2 because now it's 3, right?
I'm of the view that using classical means of locating or creating harmony for such a synthetic scale grants too much meaning to harmonic thinking for that job, I see problems right away with that one for instance.

btw, what is traditionally the function of a "v" in a minor mode? In Cm, Gm is still a dominant? and Gm7 is what?...

I don't really have a strong view about that as an axiom in itself. 'Classical' sort of ideation, the dominant V contains a leading tone, but the word 'dominant' could represent more things in other context.

[jancivil]

7#11/I've also seen 7b5 (which I think is usually theoretically wrong IMHO but has the advantage of being easy to read).

In jazz ideas there isn't necessarily a salient difference, 'b5' is such a structural idea in that harmony. I think arguing about that is too pedantic.
I remember a Zappa rehearsal {Baby Snakes} where he's conveying what he wants in the piano as 'flat five' into the fifth where I would definitely write eg., 'F#-G' and don't think of that as flat five at all, but the difference isn't much of anything, Mars knows what he means.

Some like to suggest the spacing with #11, I would tend to, depending.