Doesn't Am6 = A minor w/ major 6 (A, C, F#)? How would you write A minor with a minor 6 (A, C, F)? Am6dim? Am(b)6?
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
There are a few different things you could do. First, you could just write Amin b6. But because the notes are those of an F major chord you could also write it as an F in first inversion, which would be an F with a subscript 6 next to it.
All an inversion really means is that the root note is not on bottom. In this case the 3rd (A) is on bottom, so it's first inversion. If the notes were arranged with the fifth (C) on bottom, then it would be second inversion. That would be written with a subscript 6 over 4. The number comes from the new intervals that are created by rearranging the notes.
Hope that helps.
F6 or F^6 would be F A C D. You only use "6" to indicate first inversion when using Roman Numeral Analysis.
F64 means nothing.
A first inversion F major chord in guitar notation would be F/A.
The difference between Am6 and a 1st inv F major chord is the E and the function of the chord. If you're playing an A minor blues you would call it Am6, if you're playing a Mozart piece that would be the IV6/5 chord in C major.
Am6 has an F# and is not related to any inversion of F major.
If you wanted to notate an F natural over an A min you *could* refer to it as a b13.
All depends on context really...
Aminb6, A-b6How would you write A minor with a minor 6
does this work as well?
Ami(-6)
and I am totally out to lunch to think that when playing a "6th" chord, you generally shy from the 5th much as you shy from the 3rd when playing a sus4 or sus2 ?
so the fact that the chord is spelled out A C F not having a 5th there doesn't really matter because we're still wanting the context of the chord to be a form of an A chord in the setting of the piece of music?
...been a while since college theory classes, as is probably quite obvious![]()
and I am totally out to lunch to think that when playing a "6th" chord, you generally shy from the 5th much as you shy from the 3rd when playing a sus4 or sus2 ?
Ami(-6) is something I've never seen anywhere. If you want A C F you would notate it as Amin(add b13 omit 5)
so the fact that the chord is spelled out A C F not having a 5th there doesn't really matter because we're still wanting the context of the chord to be a form of an A chord in the setting of the piece of music?
Short answer:
Am6 contains the notes A,C,E,F#, e.g. with the minor 3rd, perfect 5th and major 6th.
I dare you to find one piece of published music with that notation. If you do, I'll find 10 others that write it F/A.
Doesn't Am6 = A minor w/ major 6 (A, C, F#)? How would you write A minor with a minor 6 (A, C, F)? Am6dim? Am(b)6?
The notation I wrote is standard Jazz form, check any "New Real Book" volume and you'll see similiar notation. Often times there's different ways to notate a voicing depending on the sound and texture that you want.
Your ability to find 10 examples or 10 times more of something is meaningless.![]()
But why an Aminb6 doesn't exist AS a chord symbol is because it doesn't make sense to have two half-steps on top of a chord in fundamental position.
WARNING: for those who don't know about theory please keep reading you will learn!
Try on a piano, if you can, the sound of A,C,E and F all together. It clashes!
So, the first inversion a Maj7 chord is not practical (FMaj7/A). It is actually an avoid sound in Pop music.
No, it's not meaningless, it just shows a greater prevalence in convention. And that's what chord symbols are - convention. The more common it is, the more "correct" it is. And that's why calling the chord A C F "Amin(add b13 omit 5)" is "incorrect," it just isn't used anywhere. I'm not talking about the general habit of writing chords that use "add" and "omit 5", there's plenty, and a in a lot of situations, there's good reason to. Maybe not all the time in jazz (add chords are rare, since they're triadic and not tetradic), but definitely in other music. There just isn't ANY good reason here, since its way too much unnecessary information, and potentially obfuscates chord functionality. It's a basic F triad in inversion. You find me this specific notation for this specific chord on a lead sheet or a chord sheet and I'll rescind my point, but I contend that you wont for all the reasons I've given so far in this thread.
WARNING x2: The following will descend into the realm of utter music nerddom.
I'm going to have to disagree with you big time on the Fmaj7/A, there's plenty of "pop" (see, jazz, rock, all popular music) with major seven chords in inversion. I can think of several instances in the musical I'm playing right now of this very chord going back and forth from an Fmaj7/A to a Bb6 in the finale. It only "clashes" if you attempt to hear the A as a root, which is problematic for several reasons. Let me explain.
The basic definition of a tertian extension is a harmonic note that adds color to a chord's sound but does not interfere with its function. For example, the 11 on a minor seven chord will make it sound very colorful, but you can still hear it as a minor seven chord within a functional progression. The reason why this is, is because in order for a tension NOT to change the function of the chord, or create "unacceptable" dissonance, it must be a major 9th up from one of the notes in the basic triad. Consider your run of the mill major 7 chord. What's a major 9th away from the root? Duh, the 9. What about the 3rd? The #11. The 5th? The 13. And those are the extensions you're going to find on a major 7 chord. You won't find the 11, because it creates a minor 9 dissonance with the third, thus "confusing" the stable tonic or subdominant function of the chord. Even your bizzare tensions like #9 (favorite of Duke Ellington's) don't create minor 9th dissonances with any notes in the triad and are thus "acceptable" for the tonal purpose (albeit highly, highly dissonant).
The exception of course is dominant chords. Minor 9th dissonances are actually acceptable since the point of the dominant chord is to create tension to resolve to a tonic, and so the main qualm about minor 9 dissonance - that it confuses functionality - is moot (dominant chord's have a dissonant function). Getting too carried away though presents problems. You won't be able to have a natural 9 with a b9, or a #9, because it creates a non-tonal cluster of TWO minor 9 dissonances (root to b9 to natural 9, or natural 9 to #9 to natural 3). You also won't be able to have a natural 11, since the natural 11 is the target tonic note of the dominant chord, and including that dissonance will confuse a lot of things about the chord, and will make it not work.
Getting back on to the topic at hand, this is the reason why there can't USUALLY (exceptions of course) be an A minor triad with a b6. There is a minor 9 (technical minor 2nd) dissonance between the b6 and a note in the functional triad, the 5th. Minor chords have a stable tonic, or in some cases subdominant function, and so when the b9 dissonance is added into the mess, the ear rejects the notion that it is hearing a "stable" sound, and instead searches for another note to hear as the root.
It instead will hear "F", because, like I said before, there is a fifth between F and C. The 5th, being the 2nd partial in the overtone series, creates a foundation for the ear to hear the F more firmly. Oddly enough, this is FURTHER solidified by the A of all notes, because the major third is the 4th partial in the overtone series (the octave is number 3). This is why you're not likely to hear an Am6 (A C E F#) as an F#-7(b5) chord in first inversion - there is no minor 9 dissonance, and there are no harmonically-enforced notes like the fifth or major third that resonate with the F# as opposed to the F in the chord A C E F.
Going back to what I said about extensions, the definition of "acceptable dissonance" was a major 9 up from the triad, not the full tetrad to the seventh. This is because the seventh in a lot of cases IS a tension of sorts - it doesn't change the function of a chord and just adds more color. A major chord doesn't have a different function from a major 7, for example. When you're worried about the half step different between the E and the F of an F major 7 chord in first inversion, you shouldn't be. In fact, if that were "forbidden", you couldn't have ANY inversion of a major 7 chord, since every inversion would include that half step.
Half steps from chord tones to tensions is "unacceptable", but tensions to chord tones is often very cool. You'll hear plenty of guitar players/piano players voicing minor 9 chords with the 9 and the minor 3rd a half step away from each other. I personally like it when dominant seventh chords are voiced with the 13 and b7 near each other, and I'm also a fan of a major 7 chord with a #11 next to the fifth in the upper register, although YMMV.
