How do you call such chord?

[jancivil]

To me it's just weird how readily we fall into being conditioned. "Music is based on chords" - except when it isn't, and there are whole realms where it isn't. Seen that one too often here recently.

Fortunately I came up hearing mostly more sonority than three note chords, even if the chords were from thirds. And they aren't always. Cue that one guy to insist it must be tertial to even be a chord.

[NERF_PROTOSS]

"what are chord symbols for?" is an important thing to think about.

they're good at telling someone else (or yourself) "hey fill in some accompaniment here" and if they know what they're doing they'll play voicings and use voice leading that's idiomatic, can choose to elaborate static chords with all sorts of movement, etc. but they aren't particularly good at asking for specific sorts of voice leading.

they can be helpful to give an improviser some framework as a jumping off point. but truly great improvisers are going to develop a relationship with the structure of a tune in a way that makes sense to them individually. in analysis the same thing has to happen, eventually - you make a personal value judgement about what's significant and how it helps you interpret the structure of the music. which can only really be done in context and in consideration of all sorts of other elements of the music besides the notes.

but yeah 'where might you go next' is the more interesting question. the fourth and second intervals are what stick out to me, so 99% of the time I expect to either hear them wanting to resolve more straightforwardly to some sort of combination of thirds/fifths/sixths, or absorb them into a floaty quartal chord or cluster.

[Hink]

'this is not a chord'.

Agree, it is just a brief movement of voices. Everyone should be able to see where it ends: D is on its way to E, and we got a complete Am triad. Piece O cake. What do people need all these cryptic chord symbols for?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NPBIwQyPWE

I can see Peter's baffled face compared to just handing him the note sheet.

well in my case I use Chordwizard Gold software for alternate tunings, I use so many it helps give me quick guidelines as to wear chords as well as scales/modes....been using it since actually around the time I joined KvR and it has been awesome to me.

I decided to input that to see what it says to compare to the results here...not to check you but to check it...reading between basically ot says what you guys are saying...if you enter what is missing you would get those chords no?

Again this was just to see how it lined up, I will go on record in saying that I dont use this for theory really, again this software just helps me switch through different tunings quickly...this was just a test because in the "design" page I see this a lot...that's my fancy symbols

F6/A 1=F
Bm7b9/A 1=B 5=F#
Bbmaj9/A 1=Bb 5=F

[jancivil]

[..] C-D, the sonority of Am is pretty dead easy to establish.

so is a chord of the seventh on D, the assertion of an A "root" notwithstanding; pop chart reads "Dm7/A". CPP say iv4/3.
this is my entire objection to certainty on A minor. E is missing or F is missing. 3/4ths of Dm7 is present; 3/4ths of Am (add11) is present. even odds.

[Passante]

I'll try to give some contest, but keep in mind I don't know much music theory.
I reiterate, the chord is as follows: A being the root note, D in middle and C on the top.
The progression starts as: |AAC| - |AFC| - |AEC-BEC| - |ADC-BAC| and that concludes the first 4 bars, from there it continues into |GAB-GGB|

I started this thread because I couldn't really find a definition of this chord in google. I've ignored for a long time labeling the chords I use but recently I got more interested in music theory. Learning is fun.

[fmr]

I'll try to give some contest, but keep in mind I don't know much music theory.
I reiterate, the chord is as follows: A being the root note, D in middle and C on the top.
The progression starts as: |AAC| - |AFC| - |AEC-BEC| - |ADC-BAC| and that concludes the first 4 bars, from there it continues into |GAB-GGB|

I started this thread because I couldn't really find a definition of this chord in google. I've ignored for a long time labeling the chords I use but recently I got more interested in music theory. Learning is fun.

The order you write these "chords" is the voicing you are using? If it is, I'd say that you are using a pedal in C, which means the C may or may not belong to each of the "chords" you use. I write chords between "" because, if the C is a pedal, then you are left with two notes, and you can't have chords with just two notes.

I'd say you are making a sequence in A resolving in G with some passing notes (the A-D are the resolving notes of B-E, and then you proceed to B-A, a melofic jumpt of the D to B, then another jump from B to G, and the pedal finally moves from CV to B, preparing the final G chord.

IMO, that isn't a chord, as many of the others also aren't. My 2 cents.

[Functional]

[..] C-D, the sonority of Am is pretty dead easy to establish.

so is a chord of the seventh on D, the assertion of an A "root" notwithstanding; pop chart reads "Dm7/A". CPP say iv4/3.
this is my entire objection to certainty on A minor. E is missing or F is missing. 3/4ths of Dm7 is present; 3/4ths of Am (add11) is present. even odds.

Well, now OP has finally replied. And based on the reply, I'm going to keep my answer - and I don't quite see it the same way that odds were quite even. Think of a thought experiment where a person asks "What key is my song in?" and provides no context nor information otherwise. Now, answering that is rather silly without any context. But probability of it being in certain keys like C major, F major, G major and the respective relative minor counterparts, is much higher than the probability of it being in other keys like F#/Gb major, Db major and so on. You get the point.

And then of course they may say "On my guitar", which also makes some keys more likely than others, despite the chance being 1/24 for every minor/major key on some abstract level.

Anyway, I'm going to hold my answer: it's an Am chord. That whole bar probably is, but the implied voiceleading makes my head hurt and think that this is something going on in the upper strings of guitar :p

[jancivil]

it's the simplest guess, as I said in the beginning. Now we see it's voices moving, it won't be called a chord at that moment in any kind of analysis and it's obv. no surprise it's in A natch minor as they said in the OP.
I found the conjecture as to what's possible more interesting, although what actually happened is more interesting than it might have been.

With no context Dm7 vs Am (add11) is mathematically even odds as an abstraction. 3 out of 4 = 3 out of 4.

[jancivil]

Yez don't have to call it a chord. I'm staying with my bulletproof original answer.

[Passante]

simple as that really.

Not simple really, we already have a few choices to consider.
Without context it doesn't really matter anyway. A collection of notes can be interpreted in many different ways. As jancivil has said - you can't call it.
Personally I see the A and C as appogiaturas descending to a major triad on G.
Clearly, and any true musician would agree with me, this is a G major chord.

hm, interesting

as to assuming the naivety has produced definitely an A root from the words A Aeolian, I don't

What I mean is that they probably limited themselves to using that particular scale. Why that might be relevant, I'll get back to it later.

You're smart.

Try https://www.music-chords.com/exercises/chords-analyzer

The free online tools says there are 15 possible meanings of this chord.

This wouldn't help me in my quest to start labeling the notes/chords I use.

Anyway, I'm going to hold my answer: it's an Am chord. That whole bar probably is, but the implied voiceleading makes my head hurt and think that this is something going on in the upper strings of guitar :p

Damn! You're scaring me.

[shawshawraw]

Interesting sounding turnaround. Don't worry about naming. It's not a chordal movement in block and you probably aren't adding more voice(s) :p

[jancivil]

<|AAC| - |AFC| - |AEC-BEC| - |ADC-BAC|>
two of these objects are considered chords in the sense of tertial (by thirds) constructs: A F C is F major; A E C is A minor. The others are in flux, containing *non-harmonic tones*. The F major is in first inversion, meaning the second part of the triad is in the bass.
The non-harmonic tones tend to have jargon applied to them, such as 'passing tones' and so forth which I don't want to get into (I don't think it's all that useful personally).

Turnaround is typically meant to describe a move back to home or a I harmony (A minor chord here). This, moving to a G major harmony I would not call turnaround; there is no around, it goes elsewhere, here a new place.
"A turnaround progression is a series of chords whose most important characteristic is to circle back to the starting point," for an example definition.

Your next step is to get some technique happening in part-writing. For instance the A D C to B A C has a leap of a fifth there, D to A which is a bit awkward, particularly in that it moves a fifth up for a 4-1 move (not smooth, and as it arrives at two dissonances at once is going to come across as awkward, angular... then the change of harmony (all of the stuff in the first 4 ms is basically A minor harmony with some dissonances) to G major gives a minor 7th to a major 9th, which is right avant-garde (generally more like 'wrong', tbh) and probably not to be encouraged at this stage. If your intent is to be avant-garde and dissonant/angular as this is, you want to have the technique to exert real control, and a vocabulary that's expansive (while this is purely pandiatonic white key stuff, and static, and sounding more like mistakes in all probability).

"probably aren't adding more voice(s)" - I don't know why there'd be any particular 'probably' going on here.
It's time to (begin to) learn 4-part harmony and principles of voice-leading to get you progressing to a next step in your development, actually.

[jancivil]

Anyway, I'm going to hold my answer: it's an Am chord. That whole bar probably is, but the implied voiceleading makes my head hurt and think that this is something going on in the upper strings of guitar :p

Damn! You're scaring me.

It's time to get down to work. Don't be scared!
I can see the voice-leading without too much trouble. It's not highly idiomatic to guitar particularly but it could have happened on one without undue difficulty or strain, but it's pretty abstract to be guitar writing, ie. fall under the fingers easily or obviously/intuitively.

Do you read music?

[shawshawraw]

"probably aren't adding more voice(s)" - I don't know why there'd be any particular 'probably' going on here.
It's time to (begin to) learn 4-part harmony and principles of voice-leading to get you progressing to a next step in your development, actually.

Thanks Jan for clarifying "turnaround".

I was feeling those 3 voices complete as they all acquire distinctive movements - soprano stays on C, bass alternates between A and B, and mid voice has a more interesting melody (I quite liked that fifth upwards). Slightly concerned with that <BAC>, which sounds to me like a reluctant/undecided sus4. "Good enough for the peculiar sound," was what I was thinking! I understand your suggestion, a 4th voice will always serve as a great exercise!

Appreciate your analysis

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

To me it's just weird how readily we fall into being conditioned. "Music is based on chords"

Just imagine you took one great classical symphony of choice. Now instead us using a note sheet, you are to name every vertical line, every little step, may it be trills, triplets or beyond, as chords.

However, nice to see ya all taking movements into account. Feels a little more like home to me.