chord structures

Originally Posted by: HambergHow do you augment a 2nd? Flatten the root? This would change the name of the scale wouldn't it??? Lets see. a 4th and 5th can be augmented naturally. Im not seeing it with the 2nd.

If you're augmenting the second why would you flatten the root? An Augmented second is one and a half steps.

You simply raise the major second a half-step, the same way you augment fifths and fourths.

Originally Posted by: HambergIt also means A C E and C E G played at the same time. Bitonal.

Hmm...A C E and C E G played at the same time...

Let me think about what that would sound like:

A-C-E-G

Looks like a minor seventh chord to me. So it actually wouldn't be labeled Am/C, would it? Nope, it would be labeled Am7

isnt an agumented 5th or 4th only raised 1 half step?

Some composers Use Am/C to represent a bitonal voicing. So yes it would be an Am7. But at the same time the notation is used like that sometimes.

Originally Posted by: equatorYour sarcastic remark in the comparison of those chords to the Major and Minor Scales is also wrong.
As it has been said before, the fact that the scales have the same notes does not mean they are the same thing.
To understand why the scales are different, you have to understand the basic principle of Intervallic Reletionship.
Here is an example of this in the key of A.
*[1-b3]=A-C
*[1-#2]=A-C
Both result in the same notes(A & C).
But the first is a Minor 3rd interval.
The second is an Augmented 2nd.
That is the principle that differenciate the scales.
And what are scales after all?...a progression of notes with fixed intervals.

I have layed out the facts, now it`s time to move on.

Well, I hate to be a burden, because I know you're right and Joe Novice is wrong, but A-C isn't an augmented second. A to B# is an augmented second, and don't go all "but those are the same pitch value" on me. I know, I know, and I hate to be anal retentive, but A to C can't be a second, only A to some form of B can be an ascension of some kind of second. A to some form of G would be a descension of some form of second, and A to C would be an ascension of some form of third, etc. I see the point you're trying to illustrate, but could you try to illustrate it in a way that doesn't involve calling A to C a second of some form? Maybe replace the C with a B#?

Originally Posted by: Hambergisnt an agumented 5th or 4th only raised 1 half step?

Yeah, and if you raise a major second a half step it becomes an augmented second. 4ths and 5ths are perfect intervals, so you don't have minor fourths being raised to major fourths being raised to augmented fourths, but you get that with seconds.

Originally Posted by: JoeNovice"C6=(C,E,G,A)
Am/c=(A,C,E)
Nice try tough."

WRONG..... Am/C = (C,E,A,C,E) in open position. The symbol mean C in the bass.

C6= (C,E,A,C,E) in open position...... See?

If you can find all those notes on your guitar and can play them you will see they are identical. (minus the names of course)

C6 could either be a major 6th chord, C-E-G-A (which is essentially Am7 in first inversion) or, like I just said, a minor 7th chord, Am7, in first inversion. Or, hell, it could even be labeled C6 because IT's in first inversion, after all "6" is what you label first inversion chords with, right? That would make it E-G-C

I see where you're going with this, though. C E A C E. Yes, those are the same notes, but it's not the same chord. The chord behaves differently in each case, and that's why music theory does not just call them the same thing.

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonWell, I hate to be a burden, because I know you're right and Joe Novice is wrong, but A-C isn't an augmented second. A to B# is an augmented second, and don't go all "but those are the same pitch value" on me. I know, I know, and I hate to be anal retentive, but A to C can't be a second, only A to some form of B can be an ascension of some kind of second. A to some form of G would be a descension of some form of second, and A to C would be an ascension of some form of third, etc. I see the point you're trying to illustrate, but could you try to illustrate it in a way that doesn't involve calling A to C a second of some form? Maybe replace the C with a B#?

Hey Jolly, I think you missed the part when I said...

Here is an example of this in the key of A.

So here is the A major Scale:
[A-B-C#-D-E-F#-G#]
In relation to the root, "C#" is a Major 3rd, and what happens when you flat a major interval?...you get a minor interval. So if you flat the "C#" you get a C natural, which now is minor 3rd.
Now "B" is the major 2nd, right? and what happens when you sharp a major interval?...you get an augmented, so raise the "B" half step, and you have a "C". Thus, A-C is an augmented 2nd.
That is why I stated:
*[1-b3]=A-C
*[1-#2]=A-C
Both result in the same notes(A & C).
But the first is a Minor 3rd interval.
The second is an Augmented 2nd.

I see where you got confused. That example is not in the key of C.
It is in the key of A major.

Now about the chords...
Remember I said:
Now in respect to the C6 chord, and the, Am/C chord.

This is the structure of a Major 6 chord:
(1,3,5,6)
(C,E,G,A)

And the Am/c, is a slash chord; basicaly an A minor Triad with a C note on the bass.Now in respect to the C6 chord, and the, Am/C chord.
This is the structure of a Major 6 chord:
(1,3,5,6)
(C,E,G,A)

And the Am/c, is a slash chord; basicaly an A minor Triad with a C note on the bass.
(A,C,E)/C

(A,C,E)/C

Well, I found something to back up what I said.
*The Encyclopedia of Picture Chords for all Guitarists.(page 12)
*The guitar Grimoire-Scales & Modes.(page 12)
There you can see that a C6 chord is made of (1,3,5,6)
which in the key of C would be (C,E,G,A)
And this link, showing a Major 6 chord, in the key of G.
http://www.wholenote.com/default.asp?iTarget=http%3A//www.wholenote.com/cgi-bin/page_view.pl%3Fl%3D261%26p%3D1
Let me repeat, that the link shows a G6, but there you can see, the chord structure of the Major 6 chord.
which is, again: (1,3,5,6)
Now if He wanted to make an accurate comparison, he shoulded say.

The C6 no fifth, or like some people say a C6 shell chord.

Originally Posted by: equatorHey Jolly, I think you missed the part when I said...
So here is the A major Scale:
[A-B-C#-D-E-F#-G#]
In relation to the root, "C#" is a Major 3rd, and what happens when you flat a major interval?...you get a minor interval. So if you flat the "C#" you get a C natural, which now is minor 3rd.
Now "B" is the major 2nd, right? and what happens when you sharp a major interval?...you get an augmented, so raise the "B" half step, and you have a "C". Thus, A-C is an augmented 2nd.
That is why I stated:
*[1-b3]=A-C
*[1-#2]=A-C
Both result in the same notes(A & C).
But the first is a Minor 3rd interval.
The second is an Augmented 2nd.

I see where you got confused. That example is not in the key of C.
It is in the key of A major.

If you raise the B to a C you get a minor third, if you raise the B to a B# you get an augmented second. I know what key it's in, I'm not saying it's in the key of C, I'm saying A to C is a minor third, not an augmented second. I know they have the same intervallic value, but you'd have to label that C a B# in order for it to be an augmented second. As it is it's a minor third. See, if you go from A to C, you have to pass through the B, which would make it some form of third. A-B-C#-D-E-F#-G#-A, the augmented second would be a B#, not a C, understand? I know they're enharmonic notes, but technically it's wrong to call A to C an augmented second, that's all I was correcting. See, when you raise that B a half step, if you want it to be an augmented second, you have to call it a B#. If you call it a C it's a minor third. I'm not quite sure why you think I read it as the key of C... Even if I DID read it as such, the interval A-C is still a minor third, not an augmented second.

See, the part where you make a mistake here is where you say "raise the B a half step and you get C." That's true, but if you want an augmented second, you replace that C with the enharmonic B#. Understand? An augmented second from A is not C and if I put that on my music theory exam, my professor would eat my face.

Indeed....

Indeed....

More links where you can see that a Major 6 chord is made of (1,3,5,6)
D6=(D,F#,A,B)http://members.aol.com/chordmaps/part4.htm
C6=(C,E,G,A)http://www.guitarsite.com/chords3.htm#naming
C6=(C,E,G,A)http://www.jazzguitar.be/jazz_guitar_chord_theory_3.html
So, it is not correct to compare the two chords.
C6=...............(C,E,G,A)
Am/C=...........(A.C,E,)/C

Indeed.... :D

Am7=(A,C,E,G)......Am7 first inversion=(C,E,G,A)
...............................................C6=(C,E,G,A)

Indeed

Music Theory can be made into a complex subject as this post well shows. In my experiences (undergrad in Guitar Performace and Masters in Music Theory) there has never been a better example of people letting theory get in the way of understanding in music.


In effort to keep this short I will only choose a few quotes to address.

Equator

Neopolitan minor Formula...[1-b2-b3-4-5-b6-b7]

This is not correct. The formula is [1-b2-b3-4-5-b6-7]. Otherwise you would call it E phrygian.

Jolly....

Please consult me before you post in the theory forum. It would be best for your reputation in this section if you didn't say things like that.

I would rather not preserve my reputation if it means limiting my personal views on "music theory." It must be pointed out that we are discussing "theory" of sound and not physics. I have studied and read enough to know that in essence C major and A minor are the same collective and I have taught enough at the University level to say that to many guitarist can not work with their connection.

Yes if you want to be a picky bastard, they do have different sequence of intervals. The largest part of their sound is due to the harmony they are played with.

For example....

"If I were composing in Cmajor, and I decided to write the melody A-B-C-D-E" and end it like that, you would notice something funny about my composition, probably that it sounded like it was in A minor. No, you don't always start on the first note of the scale, but that IS your root note.

The character of your melody will be determined by what chords you choose to accompany it. If you play those notes while I play Cmaj7 G7 Cmaj7 then the enitre character changes. No longer does it sound like an A minor melody.

*The guitar Grimoire-Scales & Modes.(page 12)

This is quite possiblly the worst guitar information book ever printed. It is ripe with errors and contains tons of misleading information. The last time I looked in one was at a store with several other professionals. We used the book as the butt of a few jokes. That is how many errors it contains.

Let me repeat, that the link shows a G6, but there you can see, the chord structure of the Major 6 chord. which is, again: (1,3,5,6)
Now if He wanted to make an accurate comparison, he shoulded say.

The C6 no fifth, or like some people say a C6 shell chord.

There are lots of ways to play a chord with the 6th in it.

Let's not limit the situation. Everyone knows that the 5th of a chord can be omitted without theoritical consequence. That dates back to the 1500's or 1600's.

The chords I refer to (in open position) look like this.

E:0
B:1
G:2
D:2
A:3
E:X


Now.... is this C6 or Amin/C?


If you want to complain about it not being a real C6 due to it's lack of 5th....

E:3
B:1
G:2
D:2
A:3
E:X

C or Amin7/C ?

So, it is not correct to compare the two chords. C6=...............(C,E,G,A)
Am/C=...........(A.C,E,)/C

You have totally missed the point. Quit thinking of it on paper and play above chords on a guitar.

I must say that I understand where you guys are comming from and what you are saying. 10 years ago I would have been on your side of the argument but today I can not be.

In effort to keep this short I will only choose a few quotes to address.

Equator
Quote:
Neopolitan minor Formula...[1-b2-b3-4-5-b6-b7]


This is not correct. The formula is [1-b2-b3-4-5-b6-7]. Otherwise you would call it E phrygian.

You just keep embarrasing yourself, great teacher or whatever.
For your information, there are three types of Neopolitan Scales.
*Neopolitan=........[1-b2-b3-4-5-b6-7]
*Neopolitan Major=[1-b2-b3-4-5-6-7]
*Neopolitan Minor=[1-b2-b3-4-5-b6-b7]
Those formulas are found in my big pile of Theory books.
And I took the time to do quick search.There you go:

http://www.activebass.com/basics/stable.asp
http://www.e-chords.com/escalas.asp
http://www.all-guitar-chords.com/guitar_scales_left.php
http://www.looknohands.com/chordhouse/piano/
http://home.cybertron.com/~brtubb/text/027.txt
http://www.pianored.com/acordes-de-piano.html
http://www.laorejadigital.com/default.
htmhttp://www.8notes.com/resources/notefinders/piano.asp

Are you going to say that all the books I have, and the websites are wrong?
Or are you gonna pull another of your links with a different scale in a different key from under your sleve, like you did before?
If you feel like posting something, I suggest you go to the main page of this site and go three buttons up from theory, there is a forum that suits you.
Now your user name makes sense to me.

:confused:

This is nice infomation E. but still doesn't make any sense in relation to the root of this post.

What's the difference between E Nepolitian Minor and E phrygian? Do you use one in a special situation? Are they EXACTLY the same?

Here is the link I found earlier as a source for my understanding of the scale.Neo. Minor It's identical to the 5th link you provided. http://home.cybertron.com/~brtubb/text/027.txt (number 116 I think)

The internet is full of informationaly errors. Just look at some of the free TAB available. The best resource is usually books from respected companies. What books do you have with this subject?

Most of the other links you provide state exactly what you say and you are probably right but it doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing as E phrygian.

Originally Posted by: JoeNovice:confused:

This is nice infomation E. but still doesn't make any sense in relation to the root of this post.

What's the difference between E Nepolitian Minor and E phrygian? Do you use one in a special situation? Are they EXACTLY the same?

Here is the link I found earlier as a source for my understanding of the scale.Neo. Minor It's identical to the 5th link you provided. http://home.cybertron.com/~brtubb/text/027.txt (number 116 I think)

The internet is full of informationaly errors. Just look at some of the free TAB available. The best resource is usually books from respected companies. What books do you have with this subject?

Most of the other links you provide state exactly what you say and you are probably right but it doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing as E phrygian.

Ok. I can answer that real quick, with the same link you are talking about:
http://home.cybertron.com/~brtubb/text/027.txt
*The scale number 1 and the scale 25, prove that the Major and Minor are not the same.
*The Scale number 139 is the Neopolitan Minor, which is what I suggested,
and you called it Synthetic first, and then non-diatonic; and I proved you wrong.

You are looking at the wrong scale.
Scale number 116 is a Neopolitan.

See the difference?
The first is Minor, yours is just Neopolitan, and then there is another called "Neopolitan Major".
Each one with its own structure.

This is like talking to a horse with blinders on. Open up your mind and stop being so ANAL! :mad:

Equator....

Ok. I can answer that real quick, with the same link you are talking about:

Do you not read what I write. Never did I say anything about Neopolitian Ice Cream followed by a question. You didn't even respond to the questions I posed you directly. Here are the questions I asked you.

What's the difference between E Nepolitian Minor and E phrygian? Do you use one in a special situation? Are they EXACTLY the same?

What books do you have with this subject?

And in case you didn't read it the first time;

Most of the other links you provide state exactly what you say and you are probably right but it doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing as E phrygian

And showing the difference in interval structure between starting points in a scale PROVES NOTHING in a functional sense.

This is a question.... feel free to respond to this.... please dont answer something I have not asked.

If you improvise using the A minor scale [2122122] over C , F, and G, does this sound like A minor or C major to you?