Originally Posted by bzytzo
I was thinking from the Bm scale point of view, in which the fifth is F#, making the F a chromatic.
That's why I had a think and decided, for myself, that the chromatic F becomes a chord tone.
Your way of looking at it is simpler and better, no doubt about that.
If it's in a chord, it's a chord tone.
Think no further than that!
I have adjusted my way of looking at this.
Try seeing this point of view,
What do you see as the difference between a triad, a chord, and an Arpegio?
Ask yourself, why can the have the same notes yet be called different things?
We associate two things with with all of the above, function and quality.
Function and quality is not something a composer or player needs to make up, it is defined, and has been defined for centuries what this means.
Yes new names get applied to these definitions, but the notes are the same....it is still asking us to play the same thing...in a way.
As new instruments and technologies are developed, so does the use of theory.
It has to move and keep up to be relevent, the 20th Century would have brought ideas and instruments in a few decades that previously developed over those centuries.
One of these developments was the electric guitar techniques and technology. Listen to player "sweep pick" same technique as playing arpeggios, but you can sweep pick any notes, in any form, in any order you can form or play together as a run, or as a chord.
So it may not be argeggios you hear, but it sound like them. So the detail is in the definition.
It is not even about thinking chords are all made up ressonant notes, and runs are made up of resonant notes and dissonant notes, chords can have a dissonant resolution/note in function or a dissonant note in quality, and how they are used is for the composers mind to justify and for any listener to "get" or not "get".....as in the use of a b5, or a Diminished 5, or is that a #4...maybe an Augmented 4, or sus.aug4 (which i have only ever saw once used on a chart, but i questioned what sausage ment on the chart because it was written as susaug4), but again any of these can describe the use, but it is the most common or acceptable ones that get encouraged to be used.
Again this does not need to be so, modern music may seem uniform, but with so mant terms and notations meaning the same thing, it best to learn what is wanted by all these terms and just related them back to there use, not any single term, symbol or language being used to define it.
For me it would be b5, i see what is written, but my brain tells my hands "flat5". The same applies in most walks of life, and again if someone says to me the lowest open string, or the fattest open string, or the lowest note you can play etc...my brain always says "play E".
From all this confusion of ifs and maybees, we need to add experience, experience will let you see it for what it is, and also for when people who write or notate it wrong actually mean....but that again could be subjective to experience...sorry
As Febs writes, do not over complicate it, settle on understanding what is being asked for, yes you will learn complicated definitions. confusing definitions, but just reference them to a basic meaning and use.....as said experience will sort them out into how you want to hear or see them used.
Check out the link, one of wikkis good points is it can have lots of relevent links to check out and follow to explain definitions and terms used or expand on a reference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chord_(music