What is this chord called?

[Sascha Franck]

Not really, sounds much more like a D resolving to an E with practically NO TRACE of an F.

Wtf? I mean, really, you should have your ears or listening skills checked.
The F to E movement is sooo blatantly obvious I could use this file for some "ear training 101" class.
Admittedly, the velocities of the Fs and Ds vary, but when you listen to the very first movement, it's already absolutely obvious what's happening.
Besides, the D is always in the chord, so it's CDFG to CDEG all throughout, which is making the movement even more obvious.

Sus4? Please. If anything you are MODELING the resolution of a sus2.

Errm... really.
What you *seem* to hear is the D to E movement because our ears sort of don't want those 2 second intervals following each other on the resolved chord (C-D-E), so the brain kinda tries to get the D out of the way. But when you listen to the overall scenario, Csus to C is just obvious, regardless whether there's an additional D or not.

[BERFAB]

Can't we all just get along?

[Sascha Franck]

Can't we all just get along?

I can get along just fine, as long as there's no BS spread.
(Un?)fortunately I'm quite advanced in common/modern theory and whatever, so I just had to get those things straight.

[BERFAB]

Sascha -
I speak for many here when I say that your expertise is much appreciated. Don't sweat the small stuff.

-B

[frequency_algorithm]

hey sascha maybe this video will make you feel better.

[jens]

Not really, sounds much more like a D resolving to an E with practically NO TRACE of an F.

Wtf? I mean, really, you should have your ears or listening skills checked.
The F to E movement is sooo blatantly obvious I could use this file for some "ear training 101" class.

er - no, it think it isn't - it could be and it is to you, obviously - but you could interpret it in various ways - it's just not definite enough to say for sure...

[Sascha Franck]

er - no, it think it isn't - it could be and it is to you, obviously - but you could interpret it in various ways - it's just not definite enough to say for sure...

I was talking about my sound example. If you were in an ear skill exam and say anything else but this basically being a sus4->maj3 movement, you'd fail the exam. No way around it.

Nice link, frequency_algorithm. Doesn't exactly make me feel better, but then...

[jens]

er - no, it think it isn't - it could be and it is to you, obviously - but you could interpret it in various ways - it's just not definite enough to say for sure...

I was talking about my sound example.

Yeah, me too - but your suggestion still doesn't seem the most obvious to me...

and if that means I'm deaf I'm glad I am.

[Sascha Franck]

Yeah, me too - but your suggestion still doesn't seem the most obvious to me...

I wasn't talking about most obvious or anything. I was talking about how the chord would relate to a C root. And in that case, *the* most obvious solution would be Csus4 (with an additional 9).
Heck, I even mentioned that G7sus4 would be a more obvious solution. And I also mentioned two more solutions.
Hell, there's a shitload of further options. Play CDFG over an Eb in the bass - great "open" sound (Ebj7/9/13). Or use a Bb in the bass (Bb6add9). Or even an Ab (Abmaj7/13/#11).

But, no matter how you try to look at it, in my example it's Csus4(add9) to Cadd9. There's no further way to look at it with the root being played in the three lowest octaves at once. Anything else would get you disqualified in any ear skill test. And while I don't believe in such tests religously, in this case, I do.

[jens]

ah, o.k. - got you now.

[jcivil]

C major, playing C D F G at the same time

Using my head I find that "Csus4add9" or ah-ehm Csus2sus4 and Csus2add11 would say the same?

An online chord finder http://www.ocmusic.com/vpc.htm says it's called C9sus4 .. does the sus4 at the end mean that E -> F instead?

If so, would C7sus2 be C,D,G,B then? or is sus2 never used like that?

Any of the above, I'd only worry about it if I gave someone a chart and they used different symbols for stuff like minor (versus a - sign) and what terms like augmented mean in some chords, eg: augmented 9 means to me a #9 more than an augmented triad with a 9th

a lotta jazzers'd prefer "sus4 add2" I think, in a chart

in general spelling terms, if the d is just next to the c and not a ninth above it's an add 2, as a piano player might conceptualize it under her hands
.

[jcivil]

Yeah, me too - but your suggestion still doesn't seem the most obvious to me...

I wasn't talking about most obvious or anything. I was talking about how the chord would relate to a C root. And in that case, *the* most obvious solution would be Csus4 (with an additional 9).
Heck, I even mentioned that G7sus4 would be a more obvious solution. And I also mentioned two more solutions.
Hell, there's a shitload of further options. Play CDFG over an Eb in the bass - great "open" sound (Ebj7/9/13). Or use a Bb in the bass (Bb6add9). Or even an Ab (Abmaj7/13/#11).

But, no matter how you try to look at it, in my example it's Csus4(add9) to Cadd9. There's no further way to look at it with the root being played in the three lowest octaves at once.

the bass note, when strong or reinforced, affects our expectation of the rest of the components. if our tonic is C, and the c d f g sonority has a real bass G, it's not really a C sus or C anything is it?

arguments about using the convention 'sus4' outside of classic functional expectations, as 'not a sus chord at all' are meaningless semantics.

in practice, dealing with symbols and getting results, clarity in specification is important, however.

someone improvising by a chart of chords might benefit by a designation like 'min/sus 4'
because of an IMPLIED CONTEXT, whether in absolute terms it's 'right' or no.

[Sascha Franck]

if our tonic is C, and the c d f g sonority has a real bass G, it's not really a C sus or C anything is it?

I never said so at all. That's why I listed a bunch of context choices for the chord to to be used in.

[jcivil]

Yes and I simply agreed with you, before making my other point.