Chord confusion - quick question.

[guitar_face]

Ok, I'm going through the Berklee Modern Method for Guitar (Book 1 at the moment). For the most part it has been clear and concise but this confused the crap out of me. Here's the problematic chord diagram:

 

 

--------

-------O

-O------

----O---

-------O

--------

 

I hope this chord diagram makes sense as I can't draw a proper one. For example it could be that the chord tab-wise would be 3, 2, 1, 3 on the A, D, B, G strings respectively.

 

What the hell is this chord?? is it Augmented (add 9) (Root 5) or is Dominant 7(+5) (Root 4)? The book shows the same diagram for both chords!

 

So... which chord has the diagram above AND what is the chord diagram for the other chord?

 

Thanks

[sgt mukuzi]

C+9

 

 

whats all this (root 5) Root 4) stuff, now your confusing me

 

look at the intervals, look for a third and seventh. once you have them you have your chord name. plenty of chords share the same notes, its a great way to sell books to guitar players.

augmented chords are by nature symmetrical, so any name will do.

[guitar_face]

lol, root is just referring to which is string the root of the chord is located (6 is the low E, 5 is the A etc.).

 

Thanks! That clears up some of the confusion. The book is mainly aiding my sight reading and barely touching chord construction/theory at the moment so I suck at that currently.

 

Are you saying that Dominant 7 (+5) chords can look identical to C+9??

 

If not, what does Dominant 7(+5) look like with a root on the D string?? A diagram like the one I drew would be much appreciated.

[JonR]

 

If not, what does Dominant 7(+5) look like with a root on the D string?? A diagram like the one I drew would be much appreciated.

It's exactly the same as the diagram you drew. That shape just has a #5 on the A string, so technically it's a "2nd inversion" - but that's not too important.

Shapes for 7#5 chords with their root on 4th string, and the other 3 notes above, are tricky otherwise. Eg, this would do for E7#5:

 

|---|---|---|-O-|---| = G# (3)

|---|---|-O-|---|---| = D (b7)

|---|---|---|---|-O-| = C = B# (#5)

|---|-O-|---|---|---| = E (root)

|---|---|---|---|---|

|---|---|---|---|---|

 

As sgt muzuki says, augmented chords are symmetrical, so any note can be the root. That generally refers to triads -

E+ = E G# B#

C+ = C E G#

Ab+ = Ab C E

(All the same three pitches, they just get different enharmonic note names to fit the chord construction.)

 

But the same can apply to 7#5s and particularly 9#5s. That's because these chords can be seen as all harmonised from the same wholetone scale, a symmetrical scale with no root.

Here's the C wholetone scale:

 

C D E F#(Gb) G# (Ab) Bb

 

From that scale, you can ONLY form 7#5 or 9#5 chords: C9#5, D9#5, E9#5, F#9#5 (Gb9#5), G#9#5 (Ab9#5), Bb9#5. (And the remaining scale note would form a #11.)

 

That means, essentially, that there are only two wholetone scales, and only two wholetone chords - of which any of the 6 notes in the scale/chord can be the root.

So any shape for one of those chords will do for any of the others - and those for the other wholetone scale will be a fret above or below.

 

BTW, 9#5 chords are easier shapes that 7#5s, although to be complete you need a root on 6th or 5th string.

But, because of their symmetry, what will determine the name you give to a wholetone chord will probably depend on the bass note - which may not be your lowest note, but the note played by a bass player.

 

Here's a couple of 9#5 shapes. I've named the notes assuming the lowest note in the chord is the root.

 

C9#5 (C9+)

|---|---|---|-O-| G# = #5

|---|---|-O-|---| D = 9

|---|---|-O-|---| Bb = b7

|---|-O-|---|---| E = 3

|---|---|-O-|---| C = root

|---|---|---|---|

 

Gb9#5 (Gb9+)

|---|---|---|-O-| Ab = 9

|---|---|-O-|---| D = #5

|---|---|-O-|---| Bb = 3

|---|-O-|---|---| Fb = b7

|---|---|---|---|

|---|-O-|---|---| Gb = root

 

Obviously, the top 4 notes are the same. But they have different roles within each chord (assuming the given root). We could actually go the whole way and add the missing string:

 

|---|---|---|-O-|

|---|---|-O-|---|

|---|---|-O-|---|

|---|-O-|---|---|

|---|---|-O-|---|

|---|-O-|---|---|

(Barre 3rd and 2nd strings with ring)

 

Now what do we have? We've added a b5 (or #11) on the bottom of our C9#5. Or we've added a b5 (#11) above the root of our Gb9#5. Of course, we've done both - or either.

 

Moreover, that chord could also be named E9#5#11, Bb9#5#11, D9#5#11, or Ab9#5#11.

It could resolve in six directions: to F, G, A, B, Db or Eb, major or minor chords. (Try it.)

 

Wholetone chords and harmony are quite rare, but you can hear it in the intro to Stevie Wonder's "You are the Sunshine of my Life", which goes from a Cmaj7 to a G wholetone chord and back, with an ascending lick in 3rds on the wholetone scale. (IMO, he got the idea from McCoy Tyner's intro to Wayne Shorter's "Juju".)

 

Plain augmented and 7#5 chords are a little more common, as altered dominants. However, it's important to be aware that the classic "altered dominant" in jazz, although it has a #5 (and maybe a b5 or #11) also has an altered 9th, b9 or #9. IOW, it's not a wholetone chord.

[guitar_face]

wow; thanks JonR. Gotta try to digest all of that now heh.

[Jed]

I haven't read JonR's response. I'm sure it's accurate but it might be a bit more that you want to know right now so here's my take.

 

The chord you drew: x-3-2-1-3-x uses the notes C-E-G#-D

 

Those notes could be a:

 

C+ add9 = C - E - G# - D (Root on 5th) - most common name for that chord voicing

E+7 = E - G# - B#© - D (Root on 4th) - less common name for that voicing

Ab+ #11 = Ab(G#) - C - E - D (Root on 3rd) - least common name for that voicing

There are other potential chord names for these notes, but these are all I have time for this morning.

 

Any augmented triad can have three names. Since the intervals between each note is by definition a major third and since three major thirds divides an octave evenly, exactly and symmetrically . . . The choice of whether to call an augmented triad by a particular name depends on the context.

 

A similar problem happens with diminished 7th chords (which are made of minor thirds, four of which divide an octave evenly, exactly and symmetrically)

 

All of this will make much more sense once you get well into chord construction. For now don't worry about it and just keep with the book's program.

 

cheers,

[JonR]

Jed is absolutely right - as ever (esp when he says my post is accurate haha...).

 

When he says E7#5 would be a "less common" name for that voicing, he's correct if you're considering the chord in isolation. But a common use for an E7#5 would be as a V chord in key of Am, and that shape might well be one you would go for. Yes, it could still be called "C+add9", but it's function would be dominant - resolving to Am. As such, the presence of the 7th (D) is relevant.

Seeing it as a C+add9, it could act as dominant of F, but then the 7th (Eb) is missing.

 

Of course, this is all somewhat academic, as the whole point of augmented chords is their symmetry, which means functional ambiguity!

That chord (x-3-2-1-3-x) could resolve equally well to either Am or F, or A major.

Or indeed as follows:

to B major, as a partial F#9+11;

to Db major, as a partial Ab7+11;

to Eb major, as a partial Bb9b5.

 

The 6th theoretical option - to G major, as a partial D9#11 - is least convincing to my ears, probably because of the inversion, and the crucial (but missing) F#. But the others all work (try em!).

[TrickyBoy]

JonR, are you from this planet? :poke::poke:

 

For real, I've read that first post 4 times, and I can't ever imagine having enough theoretical knowledge crammed into my brain to be able to simple spout out a post like that without at least 14 footnotes.

 

That being said, there's a boatload of good stuff in there, so I ain't complaining

[JonR]

For real, I've read that first post 4 times, and I can't ever imagine having enough theoretical knowledge crammed into my brain to be able to simple spout out a post like that without at least 14 footnotes. That being said, there's a boatload of good stuff in there, so I ain't complaining

Thanks. If you can find a way to employ any of it, in more than - say - one tune (or even half of one), you're a better man than I.

 

(The wholetone scale is one of those cool scales that you can spend your entire musical life never having to use. Until you play "sunshine of my life" than is... and then it's only a lick in major 3rds.)

[sgt mukuzi]

 

Almost. A "C+9" chord - better written as C9+, or C9#5 - has root, M3, #5, b7, 9.

 

 

hey JonR C+9 is C+ (add9) its not C9+ as you say. if it were a Dominant chord I would have written it as one:poke: its just the order of the symbols denote the chord type the same way it does with every other dominant chord. C Augmented is the chord, the extension is the 9, the added 9. the dominant chord is written the same way: C (Dominant) then the extension: C9#5, they are totally different chords.

Music theory/chord symbols needs to be simplified and that's the way i write them, Tone followed by chord type followed by extension. forget about adding words like ADD, why do we need them? the logic is already apparent

 

cool post btw

[guitar_face]

I haven't read JonR's response. I'm sure it's accurate but it might be a bit more that you want to know right now so here's my take. The chord you drew: x-3-2-1-3-x uses the notes C-E-G#-D Those notes could be a: C+ add9 = C - E - G# - D (Root on 5th) - most common name for that chord voicing E+7 = E - G# - B#(C) - D (Root on 4th) - less common name for that voicing Ab+ #11 = Ab(G#) - C - E - D (Root on 3rd) - least common name for that voicing There are other potential chord names for these notes, but these are all I have time for this morning. Any augmented triad can have three names. Since the intervals between each note is by definition a major third and since three major thirds divides an octave evenly, exactly and symmetrically . . . The choice of whether to call an augmented triad by a particular name depends on the context. A similar problem happens with diminished 7th chords (which are made of minor thirds, four of which divide an octave evenly, exactly and symmetrically) All of this will make much more sense once you get well into chord construction. For now don't worry about it and just keep with the book's program. cheers,

I think that would be the wisest thing for me to do right now .

 

At least I've cleared up that it wasn't a mistake in the book. This book has about one sentence every 2 or 3 pages so it's not very wordy or explanatory so far. But I am learning so I guess it was intentional to do it this way. Thanks everyone.

[JonR]

Music theory/chord symbols needs to be simplified and that's the way i write them, Tone followed by chord type followed by extension. forget about adding words like ADD, why do we need them? the logic is already apparent

Except it isn't. Chord symbols DON'T need to be simplified beyond the clearest abbreviation possible.

I understood what you meant (from context), but "C+9" looks like it could be a less informed person's mistake for either C9+, Cadd9, C(#9), C7#9, and maybe one or two other things.

"Add" is essential (with 9 or 11) to avoid the implication that a 7 is present.

Your logic - which makes sense in principle - seems to forget that extensions above 7 (9, 11, 13) are always assumed to include the 7. So we need some indicator to show that the 7 should be omitted.

I guess we could say "C9(no7)" - that would be logical! - but "Cadd9", like it or not, is the convention. (Conventions are important: we can't write chord symbols the way we think they should go; not if we are going to communicate with other musicians.)

 

I'm well familiar with all the usual jazz abbreviations (some of which go a little far, IMO, if one is not up to speed with them).

 

In fact, I don't much like the use of "+" because of its occasional ambiguity. It can be used in jazz to mean "#" (as in C7+9 for C7#9), which is a dumb abbreviation, because how much extra effort is it to add those other 2 little lines?

However, "+" at the end of a symbol is not too ambiguous. It can only refer to the 5th in that case.

[sgt mukuzi]

hmmmm i always thought + meant augmented

so C + means C augmented, I have seen it mean other things but thats just a cue to throw that particular book away.

C9 means C dominant up to the 9.

 

C+9 means C Augmented ADD nine

 

i`m never going to write ADD next to a chord, i just cant bring my self,

if we just dispenced with it we wouldnt need it

[JonR]

i`m never going to write ADD next to a chord, i just cant bring my self, if we just dispenced with it we wouldnt need it

But then we would be need to write a chord like "C9" differently. It would need to be "C79", or "C7/9" or something like that.

 

The thing is, it's much more common for a chord with a 9th to also have a 7th than it is for the 7th to be missing. And practical contingency means that short symbols are better for the most common chord types.

So we have "C9" for C-E-G-Bb-D (and "C9+" for C-E-G#-Bb-D) and "C(add9)" for the rarer C-E-G-D.

(It may not be rarer in rock music, but chord symbol vocabulary derives from jazz practice, and jazz musicians always add 7ths to their chords... they need to be told not to.)

[sgt mukuzi]

yea, for sure but i only see the + as an augmented triad, the root, three, sharp 5. that's all the + means to me. the + cannot mean anything dominant or diminished or anything else, its the name for root, three and sharp 5. once the seven is added the chord changes and it is no longer an augmented triad. C9 is different its not an augmented triad

 

thanks for taking the time to supply the examples and I see what your saying