About the "9th issue": In most common more or less modern contexts, when you see a C9 or so, it is *required* to play a 7th as well. In case the composer doesn't want you to play a 7th, the chord will be called "add 9".
Fwiw, the same is true for 13ths and 11ths. As soon as you see a C13, the minimum requirement that you're asked for is the 7th and the 13th (the rest might be added to taste).
"Add 2" is something you will rarely find, the usual term is "add 9" - and well, even if jancivil already tried to explain it the way that in case you want a "2" straight next to your root, you'd be using "add 2"... valid approach but unfortunately not common at all. Similar things go for "sus2" (or even only "2") chords, which is a shame. "Sus2" would make a lot of sense as in all those chords when you'd replace the 3rd with the second/ninth, but even in newer Realbook versions (which, generally, are pretty good at using standardized chord symbols) you can still find chord symbols like "Cadd9 (omit 3rd)" - ridiculous, especially under less than ideal lightning conditions. It'd be great if the music notation world could just agree on a few things, such as "C2" being a C chord with the second/ninth replacing the 3rd. It already happened with "C5", which is pretty much commonly known as a "power chord" (root and fifth).
Anyway, as a rule of thumb: All chord extensions above the octave require a 7th to be present, unless they're "add"ed. Chord extensions within the octave most often replace something, sus4 for the 3rd, 6th for the 7th, sus2 for the 3rd (okok, the 6th is arguable, in a classic context it might be added, but in a jazz theory context it's usually replacing the 7th).
- Sascha
Another Chord Progression Thread
-
- KVRAF
- 13444 posts since 14 Nov, 2000 from Hannover / Germany
There are 3 kinds of people:
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
-
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
When I see 'C2' I assume the third is replaced.
I would agree that your rule of thumb is a good one. As far as that obligatory seventh, it's true-er more for a major quality chord, for instance dominant seventh than it is for a minor triad.
In cases where there is not much space for a chord symbol, to write "C- ADD 9" might not be the best thing.
It depends how much the arranger feels it's needed to dictate the whole chart versus giving the keyboardist or guitarist some leeway.
When I see C min add 2, I'm going to play D next to Eb for sure. I'm a guitarist, I would grab: D Eb G and be done. If I see C min 9, I'm not first concerned with a Bb, I'm going for C Eb and D a maj 7 above that Eb. However if I see C13, I go for E Bb D A.
If you're talking about a piano player with no bassist, doing kind of cornball or trad show tunes, that's going to be a different kind of chart.
I would agree that your rule of thumb is a good one. As far as that obligatory seventh, it's true-er more for a major quality chord, for instance dominant seventh than it is for a minor triad.
In cases where there is not much space for a chord symbol, to write "C- ADD 9" might not be the best thing.
It depends how much the arranger feels it's needed to dictate the whole chart versus giving the keyboardist or guitarist some leeway.
When I see C min add 2, I'm going to play D next to Eb for sure. I'm a guitarist, I would grab: D Eb G and be done. If I see C min 9, I'm not first concerned with a Bb, I'm going for C Eb and D a maj 7 above that Eb. However if I see C13, I go for E Bb D A.
If you're talking about a piano player with no bassist, doing kind of cornball or trad show tunes, that's going to be a different kind of chart.
-
- KVRAF
- 13444 posts since 14 Nov, 2000 from Hannover / Germany
Well, really, in all sort of "jazzy" charts (or anything else based on whatever chord/scale theories), when you see a C9, it's most often a requirement to play a 7th, too.
I do however agree that the 7th is less of an issue on minor or major chords. Especially when being limited to 4 voices only (usually the case with guitar players or standard one hand piano comping), you often have to make decisions about certain things to be left out. Sometimes it's physical limitations, sometimes it's voice leading - and of course, it always depends on the style. In a "true" jazzy context, it's usually a good idea to always concentrate on the 3rd and the 7th first, then add anything else either as required (9ths and colleagues) or by personal taste.
Fwiw, as a guitar players side note: A very nice approach to play just the last mentioned kind of chords (3rds and 7ths, add the rest at will), is to always put the 3rd and 7th on your D and G strings. You'll end up with 2 possible versions for each chord that way. As an example: C maj7 could either be E (2nd fret D string) and B (4th fret G string) or B (9th fret D string) and E (9th fret G string). In case you have a bass player, these are fine to "describe" almost any chord context. You can then use the upper 2 strings (B and E) to add color or required extensions. In case you have to play the roots on your own, you can use the lower two strings (E and A). This method is pretty easy to understand and it's giving you quite some fingering freedom.
As said, to be used best in a more or less traditional jazz context, but also quite useful to "explore" the instrument.
- Sascha
I do however agree that the 7th is less of an issue on minor or major chords. Especially when being limited to 4 voices only (usually the case with guitar players or standard one hand piano comping), you often have to make decisions about certain things to be left out. Sometimes it's physical limitations, sometimes it's voice leading - and of course, it always depends on the style. In a "true" jazzy context, it's usually a good idea to always concentrate on the 3rd and the 7th first, then add anything else either as required (9ths and colleagues) or by personal taste.
Fwiw, as a guitar players side note: A very nice approach to play just the last mentioned kind of chords (3rds and 7ths, add the rest at will), is to always put the 3rd and 7th on your D and G strings. You'll end up with 2 possible versions for each chord that way. As an example: C maj7 could either be E (2nd fret D string) and B (4th fret G string) or B (9th fret D string) and E (9th fret G string). In case you have a bass player, these are fine to "describe" almost any chord context. You can then use the upper 2 strings (B and E) to add color or required extensions. In case you have to play the roots on your own, you can use the lower two strings (E and A). This method is pretty easy to understand and it's giving you quite some fingering freedom.
As said, to be used best in a more or less traditional jazz context, but also quite useful to "explore" the instrument.
- Sascha
There are 3 kinds of people:
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
-
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
that's smart. I never boiled it down to that formula, but yes, I would do that more often than not.
when I see C9, it's E Bb D, fourth thru second string. (I only ever would do bass function as a solo, sort of Brazilian voicings out of Mickey Baker book, largely sixth string/Fourth; third/second, melody on top.)
you're boiled it down to fourths or fifths on those two strings, which is a good way to get hipper voicings, more quartal/quintal voicings, beyond just the utility of covering 3rd 7th, (which if the harmony is functioning you HAVE to do).
eg., Ab D G covers E #9 as well as Bb 13, and you can go in either direction, and you can go outside from there.
movable line: Ab D G E F Bb D Ab (G C# F# D# E A C# G> F#...) or explode the fourth stack into fifths Eb Ab D G/G D Ab Eb...
when I see C9, it's E Bb D, fourth thru second string. (I only ever would do bass function as a solo, sort of Brazilian voicings out of Mickey Baker book, largely sixth string/Fourth; third/second, melody on top.)
you're boiled it down to fourths or fifths on those two strings, which is a good way to get hipper voicings, more quartal/quintal voicings, beyond just the utility of covering 3rd 7th, (which if the harmony is functioning you HAVE to do).
eg., Ab D G covers E #9 as well as Bb 13, and you can go in either direction, and you can go outside from there.
movable line: Ab D G E F Bb D Ab (G C# F# D# E A C# G> F#...) or explode the fourth stack into fifths Eb Ab D G/G D Ab Eb...
-
- KVRist
- 252 posts since 17 Jul, 2008 from glasgow
iv just woke up with a massive hangover..this thread scares me its too indepth to learn with sore head ! 
-
- KVRist
- 252 posts since 17 Jul, 2008 from glasgow
lolOptomadic wrote:Mee tooo arrrrgg! Just downed 2 of those asprin powder packs..
Chord progs are painful right now, ouch.
i expected better from you,, lol i have no idea bout chord progressions in first place but even with a head full of asprin im sure 1 or 2 of those progressions click with you,,, think i have 1 or 2 of your progressions that i downloaded to experiment with,, v usefull ,, send more melodies and chords as midi please folks,, helps with hangovers
-
- KVRian
- 1000 posts since 25 Feb, 2008 from Sydney, Australia
Totally agree with Sascha and jancivils posts above.
However, although it has become firmly entrenched in todays lexicon, one of my old uni teachers would absolutely have a fit whenever we used the term "Sus2".
And we used it alot.
He reasoned that Sus4 was labeled thus because, obviously, the 3rd was suspended (and held over from the dominant) to a 4th.
He reasoned that a 2nd could never be "sus" because it requires a lowering of the 3rd, instead of raising it, and the term "sus" specifically described a raising of the 3rd.
We tried to tell him that hundreds of thousands of musicians use the term "sus2" on a daily basis to describe a 1 2 5 triad ..... but being the old fashioned codger he was, he would have none of it
However, although it has become firmly entrenched in todays lexicon, one of my old uni teachers would absolutely have a fit whenever we used the term "Sus2".
And we used it alot.
He reasoned that Sus4 was labeled thus because, obviously, the 3rd was suspended (and held over from the dominant) to a 4th.
He reasoned that a 2nd could never be "sus" because it requires a lowering of the 3rd, instead of raising it, and the term "sus" specifically described a raising of the 3rd.
We tried to tell him that hundreds of thousands of musicians use the term "sus2" on a daily basis to describe a 1 2 5 triad ..... but being the old fashioned codger he was, he would have none of it
Prestissimo in Moto Perpetuo
-
- KVRist
- 236 posts since 24 Jan, 2008
On academical contexts, I think sus2 chords are usually seen as the first inversion of a sus4 built over the 4th. That is, a Csus2 is actually a an inversion of Fsus4, and that's its usual function.Melkor wrote: However, although it has become firmly entrenched in todays lexicon, one of my old uni teachers would absolutely have a fit whenever we used the term "Sus2".
And we used it alot.
He reasoned that Sus4 was labeled thus because, obviously, the 3rd was suspended (and held over from the dominant) to a 4th.
He reasoned that a 2nd could never be "sus" because it requires a lowering of the 3rd, instead of raising it, and the term "sus" specifically described a raising of the 3rd.
EDIT: I meant the 5th, of course. Csus2 = Gsus4.
-
- KVRAF
- 13444 posts since 14 Nov, 2000 from Hannover / Germany
From a classical POV, he's completely spot on - but well, that POV doesn't met "modern" requirements very often, especially not in case of practical use.Melkor wrote: He reasoned that Sus4 was labeled thus because, obviously, the 3rd was suspended (and held over from the dominant) to a 4th.
As a player, the "sus2" term is perfectly accurate IMO. Csus4? Replace the 3rd with a 4th. Csus2? Replace the 3rd with a 2nd. As easy as that. I really don't want to bother with "Cadd9 (omit 3rd)" chord symbols on sheets only offering limited space, especially as the "sus2" term doesn't offer much room for confusion anyway. Theoretically incorrect? Well, perhaps - but then, there's so many things in classical theory that don't match modern requirements at all, so why bother? Just ask a classically trained harmony analyst to explain a simple "hit transpose" - not only will you end up with at least 83628 possible solutions, but after that you will probably also believe that this very hit transpose of your precious composition is just wrong...
- Sascha
There are 3 kinds of people:
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
-
- KVRAF
- 13444 posts since 14 Nov, 2000 from Hannover / Germany
It depends. As much as the sus4 chord, the sus2 chord brings us into quartal harmony. I'm not saying your explanation is wrong at all, but once we're dealing with quartal harmony, it's just one of many interpretations. Obviously, in classical theory, some of them aren't covered.pedrorf wrote: On academical contexts, I think sus2 chords are usually seen as the first inversion of a sus4 built over the 4th. That is, a Csus2 is actually a an inversion of Fsus4, and that's its usual function.
EDIT: I meant the 5th, of course. Csus2 = Gsus4.
- Sascha
There are 3 kinds of people:
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
-
- KVRAF
- 2118 posts since 1 Apr, 2004 from Athens, Greece
I think the term "sus" comes from SUSpension, meaning when voice leading, a note from the previous chord is suspended for a while in the next chord until it resolves where it "should". For example when voice leading the chords Dm7-G-C, you could have the seventh of Dm7 (note C) suspend for a while after hitting the G chord, and then resolve on the third (note B), thus giving the chord progression Dm7-Gsus4-G-C.
So, I can't see why you can't have sus2 in classical theory too. Everyone from Bach to Wagner used it. After the latter they didn't even have to justify it of course.
So, I can't see why you can't have sus2 in classical theory too. Everyone from Bach to Wagner used it. After the latter they didn't even have to justify it of course.
-
- KVRian
- 1000 posts since 25 Feb, 2008 from Sydney, Australia
Oh yeah ...... EVERYBODY uses it, because its quite an awesome chord 
Sometimes i have to resist the urge to the old Sus4-Maj-Sus2-Maj, or variations thereof, on any chord that is even remotely "let ring" ..... Its like any chord can go tense, and then resolve, within itself, at any time.
Spooky
Sometimes i have to resist the urge to the old Sus4-Maj-Sus2-Maj, or variations thereof, on any chord that is even remotely "let ring" ..... Its like any chord can go tense, and then resolve, within itself, at any time.
Spooky
Prestissimo in Moto Perpetuo