Members mctimes3 Posted August 9, 2004 Members Posted August 9, 2004 what are the name of some 2 note 3 note and 4 note chords ex. one 3 note chord is called a diminished chord??
Members Mike_E_McGee Posted August 9, 2004 Members Posted August 9, 2004 2 notes do not a chord make. 2 notes make an interval. 3 notes can be chords (called triads). Triads come in a few flavors (Major, Minor, Diminished, and Augmented). When you get to four notes, the complexity increases a bit.Look at three note chords as two intervals. You've got a root note (the note that the chord is based on). A third above that is the second note (often called the third). A third above that is the third note in the chord (called the fifth). The quality of these thirds tell us the quality of the chord. For instance a minor third stacked on a major third gives us a major triad. A minor triad is a major third stacked on top of a minor third. Augmented is a major third stacked on another major third. A Diminished triad is two minor thirds stacked up.Those are the 4 types of triads. Now we can add another third (major or minor) to each of these triads to get all the types of seven chords.A Major 3rd on a major triad gives us a major seven chord.A Minor third on a major triad gives us a dominant 7 chord.A Major 3rd on a Minor chord gives us a "Minor with major 7" chord. (Nope, they don't all have tricky cool names).A Minor third on a minor triad gives us a minor seven chord (-7).A Major 3rd on a diminished triad gives us a "Half diminished" seven chord (also called "minor seven flat 5" since it is tyhe same as a minor seventh chord with a flatted fifth).A Minor third on a diminished triad gives us a fully diminished seven chord.I don't know what the tricky names are for augmented triads with another third stacked on (perhaps augmented with major seven or augmented with minor seven??)
Members Mike_E_McGee Posted August 9, 2004 Members Posted August 9, 2004 Oh yeah, power chords...no such thing. Power chords are usually just the interval of a perfect fith. That's two notes, so it isn't a chord. Sometimes they are played with the root doubled an octave higher. Okay, you're playing three notes technically, but you're only playing two different notes. It's a misnomer.
Members D8rkn3ss Posted August 10, 2004 Members Posted August 10, 2004 thats not entirely accurate. a 2 note chord is known as a dyad, while a 3 note chord is known as a triad. Obviously, the less notes you have, the more ambiguous the harmony will be, but this isnt necessarily a bad thing. So powerchords are chords, they just are ambigous in nature, being that they'd fit over both a major or minor chord of the same root. example G5 fits over both G major and G minor. If you wanted to get real crazy, G5 could fit over an Em7 chord, or a Cmajor or Cminor 9 chord.
Members Mike_E_McGee Posted August 10, 2004 Members Posted August 10, 2004 In my sad world diad stands for "Delivery Information Aquisition Device". I can't wait to get back to studying music!!!
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 10, 2004 Members Posted August 10, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss thats not entirely accurate. a 2 note chord is known as a dyad, while a 3 note chord is known as a triad. Obviously, the less notes you have, the more ambiguous the harmony will be, but this isnt necessarily a bad thing. So powerchords are chords, they just are ambigous in nature, being that they'd fit over both a major or minor chord of the same root. example G5 fits over both G major and G minor. If you wanted to get real crazy, G5 could fit over an Em7 chord, or a Cmajor or Cminor 9 chord. Diads (or dyads, i've seen it spelled both ways) are NOT chords...they're just, well, diads. On a stringed instrument, they're also known as 'double stops'. To be a 'chord', you must have at LEAST 3 notes, and the intervals must be tertial (aka 'in thirds'). This means that 'power chords' are NOT, by definition, chords. It also means that suspensions are not, by definition, chords. So, Shamus was (technically) correct.
Members D8rkn3ss Posted August 10, 2004 Members Posted August 10, 2004 Why the distinction that a true chord must have 3 notes? Thats dogmatic {censored} too many classical theorists have pushed down people's throats. People on this very board have claimed its the functioning of notes that indicate the harmony, not how many notes are in a "chord." 2 notes imply a harmony, and how it resolves defines that chordal function. Actually i can go deeper, often with just a single melody line you can deduct the chordal functioning. So the problem as I see it, is if its less than 3 notes its not a chord, but if its more than one, its not a single melodic line. See my point? It's like ignoring all the 2 melodic line polyphonic pieces bach and hundreds of others wrote. These pieces certainly were not all double stops because as violinsts and guitarists use them, due to tuning restarints, double stops are in parallel motion, and usually 4ths on guitar. these 2 melodic line pieces were not all parallel. Chords are implied no matter what.
Members Mike_E_McGee Posted August 11, 2004 Members Posted August 11, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss Why the distinction that a true chord must have 3 notes? Thats dogmatic {censored}... from my copy of the Harvard Concise Dictionary of Music:"Chord. Three or more tones sounded simultaneously, two simultaneous tones usually being designated as an interval." I was taught the same by my college theory prof (way back when). I'm not trying to push anything down anyone's throat. I was just trying to give as complete an answer as I could to the question asked. When speaking about counterpoint you say that "chords are implied no matter what." I think there's a subtle distinction that you are missing. Harmony is implied, not chords. Counterpoint and harmony are inseperable.Like you said, harmony can be implied by a single melodic like. You can still hear the harmonic motion of a V to I. This does not mean though that the monophonic line is actually a series of chords. It is just that a well written line can imply harmony.
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 11, 2004 Members Posted August 11, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss Why the distinction that a true chord must have 3 notes? Thats dogmatic {censored} too many classical theorists have pushed down people's throats. People on this very board have claimed its the functioning of notes that indicate the harmony, not how many notes are in a "chord." The DEFINITION of a chord requires at least three notes. Grab a dictionary of you must...and possibly do some further research into the music-geometry links. There's nothing oppressive or dogmatic about a simple definition. 2 notes imply a harmony, and how it resolves defines that chordal function. Actually i can go deeper, often with just a single melody line you can deduct the chordal functioning. I am well aware of implied harmony..."implied" is the key word. I am also well aware of the original post, which made no mention of function, context, or melody. But if you REALLY want to go deeper into it, I'm your Huckleberry. So the problem as I see it, is if its less than 3 notes its not a chord, but if its more than one, its not a single melodic line. See my point? It's like ignoring all the 2 melodic line polyphonic pieces bach and hundreds of others wrote. These pieces certainly were not all double stops because as violinsts and guitarists use them, due to tuning restarints, double stops are in parallel motion, and usually 4ths on guitar. these 2 melodic line pieces were not all parallel. Chords are implied no matter what. You mention Bach's 2-voice contrapuntal music...and then turn around and say that violinists only use double stops in parallel motion? Perhaps you should look into Bach's contrapuntal violin music (add his cello works, too)...oblique, contrary, similar motion all used FAR more than parallel motion. Regardless, just because 2 notes are sounded at once, it does NOT mean that they must be implying a specific harmony. This is ESPECIALLY the case in 2-voice compositions, where the melodic integrity of the individual voices takes great precedence over the vertical structures (which only truly matter at cadence/resolution points...otherwise, aside from avoiding parallel fifths/octaves or improperly handled dissonances, the 'implied' harmony is essential non-funtional and thus of little to no importance). 3-voice counterpoint is considerably different, because then you DO have chords to contend with. But that's THREE voices, not two.
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 11, 2004 Members Posted August 11, 2004 Originally posted by Shamuspizzbutt You said "huckleberry"!
Members padtrek Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 alright, I completly understand all this technical talk and that's all well and good....but how the hell do I play an H#?
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 Originally posted by padtrek alright, I completly understand all this technical talk and that's all well and good....but how the hell do I play an H#? In German, "H" is used to designate the note we know as "B". (they use 'B' to indicate what we call 'B flat'). So, H# would be known by its simpler enharmonic name: C.
Members D8rkn3ss Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 Originally posted by Shamuspizzbutt from my copy of the Harvard Concise Dictionary of Music:"Chord. Three or more tones sounded simultaneously, two simultaneous tones usually being designated as an interval."I was taught the same by my college theory prof (way back when).I'm not trying to push anything down anyone's throat. I was just trying to give as complete an answer as I could to the question asked.When speaking about counterpoint you say that "chords are implied no matter what." I think there's a subtle distinction that you are missing. Harmony is implied, not chords. Counterpoint and harmony are inseperable.Like you said, harmony can be implied by a single melodic like. You can still hear the harmonic motion of a V to I. This does not mean though that the monophonic line is actually a series of chords. It is just that a well written line can imply harmony. 1) Dictionaries are not the best place to go for information for domain specific jargon such as music. Fundamentally, no one will ever refer to a powerchord as an interval, that word useage should be saved for advanced chordal treatment discussions. I think the vernacular is more important than clinical definitions. It's how language evolves, and in this case, it should. 2)In analysis, the harmony generally relfects the chords of the key, I ii, iii, IV, V, vi, viio in major. so basically its a matter of syntax. Intervals are a measurement for chord construction, but they imply a chord/harmony, whichever label you prefer. In all my college music theory classes, I was taught that if you have a C note , and an E note, that's a C major chord regardless of the lack of 5th. Obviously it depends on the context, the differing voices that may also playing, but just here, lets say it is just those two notes, thats a C major. I can qoute right out of stephen kostka and dorothy paynes tonal harmony book, but i dont have it in front of me.
Members D8rkn3ss Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 Originally posted by Auggie Doggie You mention Bach's 2-voice contrapuntal music...and then turn around and say that violinists only use double stops in parallel motion? Perhaps you should look into Bach's contrapuntal violin music (add his cello works, too)...oblique, contrary, similar motion all used FAR more than parallel motion. Regardless, just because 2 notes are sounded at once, it does NOT mean that they must be implying a specific harmony. This is ESPECIALLY the case in 2-voice compositions, where the melodic integrity of the individual voices takes great precedence over the vertical structures (which only truly matter at cadence/resolution points...otherwise, aside from avoiding parallel fifths/octaves or improperly handled dissonances, the 'implied' harmony is essential non-funtional and thus of little to no importance). 3-voice counterpoint is considerably different, because then you DO have chords to contend with. But that's THREE voices, not two. 1) You misread my post. I said specifically: that double stops were popularized on violins. I honestly dont know a violins tuning, so I specifically did not bring up that in regards to violins, but I did say that in regards to guitars, doublestops represented parallel motion, specifically in 4ths. This had little to do with me talking about implied chords/harmony.I know all about the differing forms of contrapuntal movement thank you. that was my point about plyphonic lines: 2 lines imply a chord/harmony. I think we all know this. 2) I'd tend to disagree about the vertuical harmony being nonfunctional. I tend to believe music is whats in between the start and final cadences, so the ends dont matter. I'll stop philosophizing. But it's subjective. 3) in 3-part harmony there are many instances where 2 notes double eachother, or some kind of harmonically ambiguous chord is formed, like a root, 5th and 7th. that may match your definition, but it still isn't "proper" as far as tonality. and so what? if it sounds good it is good, to qoute the cliche.
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss 1) You misread my post. I said specifically: that double stops were popularized on violins. I honestly dont know a violins tuning, so I specifically did not bring up that in regards to violins, but I did say that in regards to guitars, doublestops represented parallel motion, specifically in 4ths. This had little to do with me talking about implied chords/harmony. Double stops, on guitar, violin, or onkloonk have nothing to do with parallel motion, nor does the tuning of the instrument have anything to do with what double stops are possible. I think you may be a little confused as to what a double stop is; a double stop is simply two notes being sounded simultaneously on an instrument...I think you're thinking of playing 2 notes with one finger (which is only one of many ways to play a double stop). If they were 'chords', then they would be called as such, and the term 'double stop' would not exist. I know all about the differing forms of contrapuntal movement thank you. that was my point about plyphonic lines: 2 lines imply a chord/harmony. I think we all know this. No...they DON'T always imply a chord; they are much more horizontal events than they are vertical. Lots of appoggiaturas, eschappees, cambiatas, anticipations, suspensions, etc...especially on weak beats...they all add up to a lot of nonessential/nonfunctional harmonies. While your entry-level 1st-species 2-voice counterpoint exercises analyze each pair of tones as PART of a chord, as soon as you move into 2:1, 3:1, 4:1, etc, and of course florid counterpoint, the number of functional harmonies quickly takes a nose-dive while the horizontal aspects take on greater importance. 2) I'd tend to disagree about the vertuical harmony being nonfunctional. See above. I tend to believe music is whats in between the start and final cadences, so the ends dont matter. I'll stop philosophizing. But it's subjective. What's NOT subjective is the number of notes required to form a chord. Double-stops are not chords. Power chords are not chords. Implying a chord and playing a chord are two different things. 3) in 3-part harmony there are many instances where 2 notes double eachother, or some kind of harmonically ambiguous chord is formed, like a root, 5th and 7th. that may match your definition, but it still isn't "proper" as far as tonality. and so what? if it sounds good it is good, to qoute the cliche. Nobody was bringing up the question of what sounds good or bad; merely the number of notes required to form a 'chord'. Just because a couple generations of guitarists have relied heavily on fifths does not mean that we should start calling them power 'chords'. It's misinformation...and guitarists are already victims of more than their fair share of that. The term 'power chord' originally had NOTHING to do with root-fifth voicings. It was a marketing catch-phrase for someone's text (predating the rock and roll era) which taught MOVABLE CHORDS...the new system was called the 'Power Chord System'. Somehow, that name was bastardized (and very incorrectly) for something entirely different.
Members Auggie Doggie Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss 1) Dictionaries are not the best place to go for information for domain specific jargon such as music. Ummm...he got that from a MUSIC dictionary, chock full of nothing BUT domain-specific jargon. I think the vernacular is more important than clinical definitions. And I think truth and fact are always preferable to inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading information. It's how language evolves, and in this case, it should. Or DE-evolves, as is the case with someone promoting a simple root-fifth compound tone to the status of a 'chord', when it is, in FACT, not a chord.
Members Mike_E_McGee Posted August 13, 2004 Members Posted August 13, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss I can qoute right out of stephen kostka and dorothy paynes tonal harmony book Stephen Kostka?!? Stephen Kostka?!? THAT BASTARD STOLE MY WIFE!!!!! no, not really...
Members mukuzi Posted August 17, 2004 Members Posted August 17, 2004 Originally posted by D8rkn3ss 1) You misread my post. I said specifically: that double stops were popularized on violins. I honestly dont know a violins tuning, so I specifically did not bring up that in regards to violins, but I did say that in regards to guitars, doublestops represented parallel motion, specifically in 4ths. This had little to do with me talking about implied chords/harmony.I know all about the differing forms of contrapuntal movement thank you. that was my point about plyphonic lines: 2 lines imply a chord/harmony. I think we all know this.2) I'd tend to disagree about the vertuical harmony being nonfunctional. I tend to believe music is whats in between the start and final cadences, so the ends dont matter. I'll stop philosophizing. But it's subjective.3) in 3-part harmony there are many instances where 2 notes double eachother, or some kind of harmonically ambiguous chord is formed, like a root, 5th and 7th. that may match your definition, but it still isn't "proper" as far as tonality. and so what? if it sounds good it is good, to qoute the cliche. dude calm down and reread your {censored}you need to
Members D8rkn3ss Posted August 20, 2004 Members Posted August 20, 2004 I know my {censored}. this was a disagreement over the application of terminology. I'll leave it at that.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.