Is this part of any scale?

Going to try this one more time. It is in a sense a maj triad with a #6 extension. (It evolved to this idea much later, and quite frankly is never used.) Actually, in it's simplest form, a 1st inversion minor in which the upper 4th is raised 1/2 step (or the original root raised). It is not "the augmented chord with a 6 extension." This idea has nothing to do with the augmented chord. Augmented chords (#5) are completely different puppies from Aug 6 chords. Augmented 7th chords are completely different puppies from Aug 6 chords.

The easiest explanation is this: In it's first machinations, the sub dominant minor triad (iv) is turned into a dominant chord by raising the first inversion 4th by one half step. (aug 6)(sorta where the tritone sub really gets it's start) In actuality we have a dominant IV7 to I or i, (a classical slight of hand) instead of the normal V7 to I or i, or in time where needed. This IV7 was annotated to a It6 or Fr6 or Gr6 (numbers in upper case,) or Aug6/X to I or i. The early evolution of secondary dominants. More evolution or machinations later to nowadays, they're known as secondary dominants. Or just plain dominants. The real difference between dominants and Aug6 is the resolution of the tritone. As I said long ago. The real important item of this chord is Aug 6 =3rd moves down, 7th moves up.
Dom 7 = 3rd moves up, 7th moves down. This idea becomes very important in terms of modern harmony much later.
More specific and general info is at:
http://www.utexas.edu/courses/mus612b/fmain/fdocs/notes/augsixth.html

I hope this clears this matter and puts a stop to this silliness.


[Edited by griphon2 on 02-15-2003 at 02:01 AM]

I have an excellent MIDI standard classical guitar repertoire website. Best heard with a Roland Sound Canvas SC-8850 or better. ALL transcriptions and sequences are done by hand. Some are very old and some are new. This stuff takes time. I don't always have a lot of it. All are readable with Cake Audio Pro 4 and above. Lately, I've spent most of my time in the Giuliani section. My point, is to make handwriten notes pretty close to what a human might play without screwing up the original written note.
To see this you must be able to read standard notation.
I've been wanting to do a jazz guitar section, with the same idea. Time, just don't have enough.
Check this out:
http://members.tripod.com/~griphon2/index-7.html

Originally posted by griphon2
Going to try this one more time. It is in a sense a maj triad with a #6 extension. (It evolved to this idea much later, and quite frankly is never used.) Actually, in it's simplest form, a 1st inversion minor in which the upper 4th is raised 1/2 step (or the original root raised). It is not "the augmented chord with a 6 extension." This idea has nothing to do with the augmented chord. Augmented chords (#5) are completely different puppies from Aug 6 chords. Augmented 7th chords are completely different puppies from Aug 6 chords.

I have been saying that in every post I have written on this subject. Of course the F, G, and I’s augmented 6 chord is completely different from the augmented 6 we understand today. This is why I am strongly against calling it (F, G, and I chord) an augmented 6. It is obviously not by the chordal system we have today. Chris even said it himself, this chord was rooted to describe the Dominant 7 chord we replaced it with. Since today these terms, augmented and dominant, are different; it is nothing less than confusion. You can't have 2 different augmented 6 chords. You can not tell me this chord in this arrangement is not an A Augmented 6 chord: A, C#, E#, F#. It is in fact, an A augmented 6. So what would you call: A, C#, E, F#??? An A augmented 6?? Well I thought the first one was an Augmented 6 chord?? See how this is completely confusing and unnecessary. I would call the 2nd one, Amaj#6; it is perfectly correct and it also prevents the confusion of the two. The F, G, and I’s augmented 6 is an OLD IDEA, maybe for the traditional theorist it is important, but modernly it is a obsolete. Stop trying to bring old stuff back to explain modern stuff, IT DOESN’T WORK!!!

Originally posted by griphon2
The real difference between dominants and Aug6 is the resolution of the tritone. As I said long ago. The real important item of this chord is Aug 6 =3rd moves down, 7th moves up.
Dom 7 = 3rd moves up, 7th moves down.

If this is the reason that you still call it (F, G, I chord)the augmented 6, it is still unnecessary. I strongly believe it should be left in the past. I'm also guessing that when you say the 7th in the augmented 6 chord, you are referring to the 6th. There is no 7th in the augmented 6th. The numbers after the names, well they do mean something (meaning they don't change to fit enharmonic analysis). The Aug 6, or as I'm going to put it, Maj#6. Still has the same resolution, the #6 still wants to go up. The modern Aug6, the 5th(#5) still wants to move up, usually 1/2 step. The 6th will move down, and 3rd will move up. I am mostly sure of the previous sentence for I have not used this theory in many years. I am still 100% sure of the Aug6's #5 moving up 1/2 step, when the F, G, I augmented 6 (Maj#6), the 5th will move with the root (adding to griphon's statement). Which established my point anyways. I do not disagree with your statement on the resolution of these chords, I am only showing the difference between the 2 different augmented chords. Geez, even writing about it is confusing me. LOL. I do not support this theory, I still believe you should follow your ear. Music is an art not a science, so all this is pure rubbish to a true creative mind. No Offense. If it helps some fine, do what you want. These rules clearly limit your creativity.

One last statement, I believe this difference of opinions is a good thing for I have learned something. Before I was unaware of the Augmented 6 that was used by the F, G, and I. Now I am, and although I don't agree with it being called that anymore. It has opened me up a little more. Chris, I have been looking into it, if you have any recommendations. That would be awesome. Griphon, I did try to look at this site.It didn't work. In the end, nothing has changed my mind, and I feel nothing will. My agruement is legit! The reason I rival all statements, that I don't agree with and are so traditionally valued, is the fact that all theories change. For that is what music theory is, a theory. This disagreement is an argument over those theories, and all these theories began as a Point of View (even the analytical ones). None are labeled facts, now are they??



[Edited by noticingthemistake on 02-15-2003 at 04:37 PM]

This is very disconcerting. I don't know what to say.
I guess to you, being right is more important. I am so, so sorry. I really hate to do this. Please forgive me.

Sorry, this theory is fact. You have not done one iota of any research or thinking. (and it's NOT what you've been saying in previous posts, and still not.) It's unfortunate it's still called theory. It's even more unfortunate that you won't listen (an extreme musical concern to me, and a lot of time being wasted), not only grammatically, at least your spelling. This is not past, it's quite generic to YOUR future. This constant misinformation, I will fight. Since you think your are smarter or more intelligent than everyone before you and denying a most PHD'd (link) information is insulting. Tunnel vision the size of an optic fiber is of great concern. If the forum wishes your misinformation; so be it.

Originally posted by griphon2 This is very disconcerting. I don't know what to say. I guess to you, being right is more important. I am so, so sorry. I really hate to do this. Please forgive me.

I’m sure it is man. When everyone thought the earth was flat and someone said it was round. I bet all those people were concerned as well. Not that I am comparing this incident to that one, or that I am one to change another’s mind, or that I am ultimately correct and you are wrong. I have stated over and over that, “those who read this can take my word or not, I could care less.”

Originally posted by griphon2 Sorry, this theory is fact. You have not done one iota of any research or thinking. (and it's NOT what you've been saying in previous posts, and still not.) It's unfortunate it's still called theory

I’m sorry but it is theory. The 3rd in a dominant chord doesn’t always have to go up. This is a theory!!! If you think it’s a fact then I feel sorry for you because music can go in any direction it wants to. Since music is expression, it doesn’t always have to be natural sounding. I went through this when I was talking to Chris. If you wish to be a DIE-HARD follower of this rule, that’s your choice. I say there is more freedom than that. And this is exactly what I have been saying the whole time. Go back and read my posts again if you have too.

Originally posted by griphon2 It's unfortunate it's still called theory.

Yeah, cause it would be great to have all the answers in music and a blueprint for writing the perfect song every time. What would the fun be in that??

Originally posted by griphon2 It's even more unfortunate that you won't listen (an extreme musical concern to me, and a lot of time being wasted), not only grammatically, at least your spelling.

Dewd, I’ve listened to everything you’ve said. Everything you have said has been nothing short of insulting me or trying to turn people of this forum against me. I have apologized to you on the count of our misunderstanding, you have not. I feel you should, you were not right nor did you give a fair explanation to what you were saying. It was a misunderstanding. It wasn’t until chris came and explained to me what you were even talking about. That I could understand what you were saying, about the F, G, and I augmented 6. On this new arguement, you have still not given any exceptional piece of information to even sway me to believe you. Even your explanations are indirect, like your copying it straight from a book. You never explain anything to anyone directly. You’ve only said I’m right your wrong, then an insult. Like my spelling, I never liked spelling anyways.

Originally posted by griphon2 This is not past, it's quite generic to YOUR future.

My future?? I’m sorry dewd, but I will never need this information. Most of the knowledge I have on music theory, I barely use. I don’t need it. I can write anything I hear in my head perfectly without any reference to theory. I don’t even need an instrument, just a sheet of paper to write it down. My only use of theory now is understanding music itself. I've done a pretty good job without such information.

Originally posted by griphon2 This constant misinformation, I will fight.

Well man, I’m kind of getting tired of it. I write the same thing over and over, and you still seem to misinterpret it. Or you just take something in what I wrote and then say I’m full of it. Your whole argument is saying your right and insults toward me. I’m surprised no one has said anything to you, I have tried to be as respectful as I can without taking your crap. So either put up or shut up!

Originally posted by griphon2 Since you think your are smarter or more intelligent than everyone before you and denying a most PHD'd (link) information is insulting.

Again, your immature attempts to make me look like a dick. Also, your link did not work, for me at least. I have never said I was smarter or more intelligent than anyone. I believe it was you whose implied you were smarter, at least smarter than me. Here’s the quote:

Originally posted by griphon2 To think that French, Italian, or German 6s is a new musical system, or your logic of Bach and Santana, insults, my and every decent musician's, that has spent much time in the realm, intelligence

I guess when you said “my”, you meant “me”. Then implied the word, “intelligence”, over my logic. To me and anyone, your saying your smarter than me along with every other decent musician. Also I am not denying any PHD information, I believe it all to be very truthful and very helpful to anyone interested in music. I will not follow it, I don’t think I’m insulting anyone by this. I have proven my point why I will not, and it is logical. I have no need for it, and I just can’t see why that p*sses you off so much. I am speaking of freedom, you are speaking like a dictator.

You guys are funny -LOL- I dig this sh*t. L0L

LOL..I know, isn't it?? It's stupid! He's ticked off because I choose to call it an Maj#6, rather than an Augmented 6. :rolleyes:

And the fact that I support writting music based on what you want to hear, rather than science. I don't care what he does.

Originally posted by noticingthemistake
I’m sure it is man. When everyone thought the earth was flat and someone said it was round. I bet all those people were concerned as well. Not that I am comparing this incident to that one, or that I am one to change another’s mind, or that I am ultimately correct and you are wrong. I have stated over and over that, “those who read this can take my word or not, I could care less.”

I'd like to clarify some of the stuff I said alittle before the arguements turns to another point completely. What I mean by this, is that just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it can't be true.

Originally posted by noticingthemistake
Also I am not denying any PHD information, I believe it all to be very truthful and very helpful to anyone interested in music. I will not follow it, I don’t think I’m insulting anyone by this. I have proven my point why I will not, and it is logical. I have no need for it, and I just can’t see why that p*sses you off so much. I am speaking of freedom, you are speaking like a dictator.

I am not discounting any theorist or anyone involved in music in a high degree than me. I have my views on this subject and maybe some have different views. My point of view on this subject of Maj#6 vrs. F, G, and I augmented 6's, is a legit way of getting rid of the confusion. I clearly demonstrated this numerous times and against any flaw that may have been seen. However if you choose one or the other, that's your choice. Theoritically, Mechanically, and Analytically both are legit. My opinion is that the F, G, and I augmented 6 causes much more confusion between itself and the "other augmented 6". So Maj#6 is easier and more direct based on modern chord structure.

On to the next debate: Figured Bass!

The link Griphon posted does work. BTW your going to have to alter your maj.#6 theory when dealing w/the French 6, you'll have to call it a Major b5#6!??!!

Originally posted by chris mood
The link Griphon posted does work.

It isn't working for me, my browser keeps freezing up. I dunno why, I would like to see it.

Originally posted by chris mood
BTW your going to have to alter your maj.#6 theory when dealing w/the French 6, you'll have to call it a Major b5#6!??!!

Just when I thought this couldn't have gotten anymore confusing. We now have THREE different augmented 6 chords. Right, the Aug.6 I propose, the French Aug.6, and the German and Italian Aug.6?? Or do the Germans and the Italians have different Augmented 6 chords also. If so, that's FOUR augmented 6 chords. It would have been nice to say this from the beginning, don't you think. So now that we're on a roll here, why don't we just start calling all chords with a #6 an Augmented 6 chord. Cause you see we're trying to take the confusion out of theory, right?? :rolleyes: LMMFAO!!!! At least that's what Griphon said, and he's the one who introduced this to the conversation stating and I quote:

Originally posted by griphon2
The idea of the site seems to me is to be taking some of the complication out of theory, excercises, licks, music, etc.

I think this conversation has done an absolutely astounding job of this . Sorry guys.

Also, the Majb5#6 is more well-known as a "7b5" chord. Enharmonically speaking, but the bottom line is these F, G, and I chords don't really exist much in modern music anyways. Griphon agreed.

Originally posted by griphon2
Going to try this one more time. It is in a sense a maj triad with a #6 extension. (It evolved to this idea much later, and quite frankly is never used.)

I do not insist those who came up with the F, G, and I chords stupid. I said it is stupid to use this idea now, cause in all truth the chordal understanding of that time is different from the one used today. When those chords were used they were probably just as useful as the dominant 7th we have today. Today, the chordal structure almost forbids the use of them. They simple contradict to many things, and although they are legit they don't work anymore under those names.

"My whole life is a dark room...ONE BIG DARK ROOM" - a.f.i.

Permalink

I'm sorry about all of this. Keep your view. I'm sorry Aug 6s ever came up. Chris, in the German 4/3 example 7 is a rewritten G#7 C/G G in Am. In the French 4/3 ex.8 is D7b5 G
and ex.9 D7b5 Cm/G G both in Cm. (forgot to mention, these b5 changes are also know as double tritones.)I've said previously, Aug 6s are very tedious. Augmented 6 chords are simply dominant chords. Thank goodness nowadays, Aug 6s are notated that way. (as dominants)

[Edited by griphon2 on 02-16-2003 at 11:49 AM]

Thank god that's over. :) Or their is at least an understanding. Griphon I never tried to change your ways of viewing this subject nor anyone else's. Those chords are very tedious indeed, especially nowdays. I think the F, G, and I chords would still hold up today if the dominant wasn't introduced. They were legit but ultimately confusing, and I guessing thats why they were renamed dominants. Also, this is why I was explaining them in more modern terms.

A small question. If each of the 3 F, G, and I chords were different. Would either the German or Italian chord be "7#5" or just a plain dominant?? I noticed there is one solid dominant 7 chord, and 2 altered (#5, b5). Chris stated the french 6 is the altered (b5) dominant 7 chord. Which one is the natural dominant 7, and which one is the other altered (#5) dominant 7 chord? Just wondering if this is the case.

Need to apologize, I made an error. Ex 7 is in C. I made an assumption I shouldn't have. It would still work in in Am. An easier can of worms.

Ok.

I don't understand your question.

A small question. If each of the 3 F, G, and I chords were different. Would either the German or Italian chord be "7#5" or just a plain dominant??

But, I'll try to answer in this way. Just throw out all the German, French, and Italian stuff. Any chord can be approached... dang, this is complicated. German, French and Italian Aug 6s are in essence dominant chords that have the same tritone. Ab7 and D7 have the same tritone. These two chords are know as double tritones. All dominant chords have this, it's b5 sub or relative. Not only do both chords have the same 3rd and 7th, their roots are tritones. That's why they can sub for each other, b5 or dominant 7. Now throw out the fanciful German, French and Italian Aug 6s. It's not a big deal for guitar players, because we can't voice chords exactly like a piano player. Some rules apply and some don't. Mostly, this can be done effectively by ear. The problem will!!! (I learned it the hard way, long ago.) arise if you orchestrate for other instruments, especially horns and winds from the guitar, and some lousy fiddle players. There are many, many, many, pitfalls. I would advise orchestrating on paper and checking on the piano.

Most of the examples were advanced examples of direct modulation to the key of G via tritone. The first three examples were a fancy way to get to the dominant thru a tritone secondary dominant. (in C or Cm) None of the examples shown, produced a #5. The logic is the same, though. b5 and #5 are within the same whole tone scale. (a borrowed chord idea) Any chord can be approached from 1/2 step above or below, by tritone, by 4th or 5th by a plain dominant or altered dominant. (remember I look at diminished chords as diminished or altered dominants, depending on what I want or the voice leading.)

I sincerely hope this helped.

The system or POV(now) is all this redundant knowledge I've acquired over a long time. Played professionally in just about all forms of music, except rap and/or hippoop.
You name it, I've probably played it at one time or the other for money. Classical guitar to pure jazz, in asundry of circumstances. Reading to non reading. Those pesky pents
and knowing how to alter them and understanding the extraneous knowledge is the key to modern day good guitar players. Pretty much all guitar players start with pents to play lead. Just moving pents can give the exact same results that all the knowledge in traditional theory provides. It's difficult to see at first, but incredibly easy to do. The theory helps with the tricks.

About the question I asked, I wasn't sure if you answered it or not. Haha That sounds kind of stupid so I'll clear up what I was asking. I'm going to use the formula basis this time. I know french, german doesn't mean anything but I'm going to use it as a reference to the 3 chords.

Chris said the French Augmented 6 chord was the following formula: 1, 3, b5, #6. And that the other two were different.

Now since these chords are really dominant 7 chords, enharmonically. Now to my understanding, there are 3 dominant 7 chord (2 are altered [#5, b5]). I'm kinda putting 3 and 3 together. Which ones are also called the italian, and german augmented 6 chords.

Here are the 3 dom7 chord formulas:

1) 1, 3, b5, #6 = french augmented 6.

2) 1, 3, #5, #6 = is this one of the other 2 chords(G, I)??

3) 1, 3, 5, #6 = if so, which one of the chords is this??

I am pretty much making a guess that this may be a fact. It makes sense but I don't know. That's why I am asking.

Italian = my understanding of this chord is that it is a Dom7 w/the 5th omitted

German = Dom7

French = Dom7b5

I have yet too see an example w/ a #5 (personally this is one of my favorite chords, I prefer the sound much better then the b5)

Hey Griphon, I just scored a steady Fri/Sat gig playing solo guitar (nylon) at a fancy restaurant when I'm not playing w/the band. I currently do finger style arrangements of jazz, pop, flamenco, and classical. The owner is a real big admirer of classical guitar, and I must admit, out of the 4 styles classical is my weakest, I've always played it for fun but never really got real serious w/it. I need to expand my classical reportoire and wonder if you could give me some ideas.
I'm pretty familiar w/ Carcassi, and do the Bach minuet and Bourree, as well as the staple Romance and a flamenco version of Austurias. I'm looking for some songs that sound pretty and make for nice backround (as well as impressive) For difficulty I'm looking for something in the middle of the road, say like around Bourree, something I can get to performance level in a matter of weeks, not months. Any Ideas?

Thanx man. Now I got a little more knowledge behind those chords. I also agree with the last statement, the altered dominant (b5) doesn't appeal to me as much either. The "m7b5" is a much better b5 chord. The "b3" balances out the tones a little better.

I know this question wasn't addressed to me, and Griphon would no doubt give a better answer. But one piece that people are very intrigued by is "Beethoven's Fur Elise". Especially on classical guitar and I think it's subtle enough for the atmosphere and still recognizable enough to catch an eye or two. Because everybody knows it and not many have heard it played on guitar, and it sounds awesome. It should have been arranged for guitar to begin with. :) I play it all the time on bass and people are amazed at it's quality of tone. It's a feeble request and probably sounds like something a poseur would say, but it does really sound good. It's also simple so you could quickly start playing it in your repertoire.

I know the 1st part of fur elise (the part everybody recognizes) but after that it starts to get out of range and you have to transpose stuff down and octave and so on. It's probably doable, but thats more of a project song. It's fun you use that little bit as a intro for songs in the key of Eminor, I'll use it for stuff like Song#41 by Dave Mathews and Voodoo Child. Beethovens probably rolling over in his grave about now.

Check out my classic guitar site (link) on page 9 of this thread. I can never remember the address. An old and cheap
guitar transcription and midi sequence is there. Fur Elise.