Suspended Chords = Preffered Dissonance?

[TFHT2013]

I was just screwing around on my keyboard and I came up with a simple little melody I am going to expand on, but I'm a little confused as to what I am doing. I think the melody sounds fine, but it is totally dissonant.

I first play E-G-D, then C-G-D, then I raise that top D a step to an E.

If my calculations are correct, the melody goes from a D add9 Sus 4 chord, to C Sus 2, to a basic C.

Admittedly I used the Internet for help finding out those chord names...My question about these chords is basically should I be playing these if they are dissonant? They have names so they obviously exist, and they sound fine to me, but I'm no Yo Yo Ma. Are my ears off, or do these chords actually "make sense" musically, despite the fact that they are dissonant? I understand that dissonance is often preferred, for adding tension and what not, but I don't know if I'm doing this right.

[tanabarbier]

Hi,
to me when you play E G D you are playing an Em7 (E G B D), and then C G D=>E is a C, add9 if you want, but nothing fancy. And if you feel that those two parts belong to the same chord, the first part fits perfectly on a C, or even Cadd9 iff you want to spell it all out.
On the dissonance part, well it is a part (a really important one) of harmony, don't be affraid of using it!

You could also go for G6 , C...Asus4 , Am... Even Bm7b5 , C... It also depends greatly on the rythm of the notes, wich ones are on "strong times" and wich are on week ones, etc etc.

[jancivil]

should I be playing these if they are dissonant? They have names so they obviously exist, and they sound fine to me, but I'm no Yo Yo Ma. Are my ears off, or do these chords actually "make sense" musically.

if they sound good to you, why do you need to worry?

that's a completely normal move, and a perfectly good execution of it as you describe it. You want a term for it?: a 2-3 suspension. Technically a 'suspension' because the D was in the prev. harmony.

[JumpingJackFlash]

You want a term for it?: a 2-3 suspension. Technically a 'suspension' because the D was in the prev. harmony.

To be completely accurate - and I admit this is nitpicking, so novices need not worry about it - but when a "suspension" resolves upwards, it is technically called a Retardation (although some people do tend to lump the two together).

I'll leave someone else to make the obvious joke.

[stringtapper]

Also a 2-3 suspension is generally understood as a bass suspension where the lowest voice is the one that moves downward causing the interval between it and the other voice to widen from a 2nd to a 3rd.

[jancivil]

That term 'bass suspension' brings up a problem with what I said: traditionally, this 2-3, 'bass suspension' is quite different than what I have there.

I have the 2 of the harmony to the 3 of the harmony and there is the danger of a misnomer there.

in a first inversion the 2-3 has the fourth of the harmony resolving down to the third; F in the bass vis a vis G in the top voice moving to E/G is that 2-3 suspension, per se.

So what I had, without being picky should probably be called something else; 'retardation' I don't remember but I could confirm it easily I'm sure.

[stringtapper]

That term 'bass suspension' brings up a problem with what I said: traditionally, this 2-3, 'bass suspension' is quite different than what I have there.

I have the 2 of the harmony to the 3 of the harmony and there is the danger of a misnomer there.

in a first inversion the 2-3 has the fourth of the harmony resolving down to the third; F in the bass vis a vis G in the top voice moving to E/G is that 2-3 suspension, per se.

So what I had, without being picky should probably be called something else; 'retardation' I don't remember but I could confirm it easily I'm sure.

The OP's example is called a 9-10 upward-resolving suspension (or retardation).