Em7 scale?

[jayarroz]

I have already written on this but it just keeps going! I think Em7 is something I have seen more commonly as a guitar chord E G B D. Put whatever flavor you want on it! But get back to practicing guys

 

[mutedeity]

Invalid Link Removed

In particular read part 3 of "seventh chords", "Naming 7th chords".

 

[Pacman]

Fair enough, man. That's a bunch of new ones on me.


Now, how many of those have you seen on an electric bass gig? "F diminished minor"? These are NOT accepted chord symbols....

 

[Pacman]

Invalid Link Removed

In particular read part 3 of "seventh chords", "Naming 7th chords".

Look at ANY other accepted text. Try the Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levin, or any college text....

I'll tell you this - you won't find "minor minor" or "Diminished major" on the bandstand.....

 

[mutedeity]

Fair enough, man. That's a bunch of new ones on me.


Now, how many of those have you seen on an electric bass gig? "F diminished minor"? These are NOT accepted chord symbols....

The point I am making is that 7th chords are named based on the triad and the 7th. What you are saying is correct to a degree though. Yes the third will change in a minor, the fifth will change in an augmented. It's just that what you are talking about is incidental rather than causal.

You won't see long hand at all that I can think of, but what I think is important is understanding how those chords are adapted from longhand, and how it affects how you might read something that, to me, comes across as ambiguous when put into perspective.

 

[HaVIC5]

Look at ANY other accepted text. Try the Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levin, or any college text....

I'll tell you this - you won't find "minor minor" or "Diminished major" on the bandstand.....

That's the classical terminology for seventh chords. You won't see it on the bandstand, but you might see it in your occasional college music theory textbook. They're just archaic terms that are nice to know only to avoid confusion.

You won't see long hand at all that I can think of, but what I think is important is understanding how those chords are adapted from longhand, and how it affects how you might read something that, to me, comes across as ambiguous when put into perspective.

Right, but most people who are playing tunes and reading chord symbols don't come from the classical music background and therefore have a completely different frame of reference. Its always important to look back on the history of what you're talking about, yes, but the average layman won't come with the baggage.

 

[mutedeity]

Right, but most people who are playing tunes and reading chord symbols don't come from the classical music background and therefore have a completely different frame of reference. Its always important to look back on the history of what you're talking about, yes, but the average layman won't come with the baggage.

Even at that though, and this is the point, what we are talking about is disambiguation and clarity. I don't think it can be argued, then again I have been known to be wrong there, that the least ambiguous, contemporary way to write [E G B D] as a chord is emin7, rather than Em7. Right? Even Emin7 would be preferable.

 

[CapnSev]

Err no.... Mixolydian has a major 3rd not a minor 3rd so one of the two main chord quality notes is wrong.

Simple answer to OP question is any scale with a flat 3rd and flat 7th. Now they all have different color tones. The a better answer you need to know how the Emi7 is functioning such as....

i in minor (aeolian)
II in major (dorian)
III in major (Phrygian)
iv in minor
vi in major (locrian)

Could be a chord sub such as iii or vi for a I major chord. Those are a few ways it may be functioning.

I meant that those two modes can cover a pretty broad spectrum is all. It was kind of un-related to the OP, sorry.

 

[onlyclave]

Even at that though, and this is the point, what we are talking about is disambiguation and clarity. I don't think it can be argued, then again I have been known to be wrong there, that the least ambiguous, contemporary way to write [E G B D] as a chord is emin7, rather than Em7. Right? Even Emin7 would be preferable.

Comment deleted by mod

Hackneyed web references that cite other sources as "Interesting Chords for Pianists"? Ima7 IIm7 IIIm7? Power chords listed alongside augmented 6ths? Is there where you get your musical "education"?

F7 would be pronounced "Eff seven" in any music theory class, guitar chord book or band stand. None of this "major-minor seven" business.

 

[mutedeity]

You are so full of crap!

Hackneyed web references that site other sources as "Interesting Chords for Pianists"? Ima7 IIm7 IIIm7? Power chords listed alongside augmented 6ths? Is there where you get your musical "education"?

F7 would be pronounced "Eff seven" in any music theory class, guitar chord book or band stand. None of this "major-minor seven" business.

Just go back to your root notes now Miles.

 

[Pacman]

Even at that though, and this is the point, what we are talking about is disambiguation and clarity. I don't think it can be argued, then again I have been known to be wrong there, that the least ambiguous, contemporary way to write [E G B D] as a chord is emin7, rather than Em7. Right? Even Emin7 would be preferable.

I don't think the root in lower case or upper case matters. In many fonts, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference in a reading situation - one of the reasons I hate the m/M difference between minor and major in chord symbols. If I see Em7, I know what it means in a millisecond. EM7 I may screw the pooch and play minor until my ears tell me something's wrong.

Number charts? IIIm7 and iiim7? Won't matter - you don't see those in number charts. You see 3m7.


But that's not the topic of this thread....

 

[Pacman]

Huh? a min7 chord will be formed as a tertian harmony over any scale that has the intervals [1,b3,5,b7] or any scale that has the enharmonics of those intervals. I don't know how it would be assumed that it must be dorian.

I don't believe he said "must be dorian". He said, without context, he sees min7 chords as a "ii" or dorian function. In most contemporary music, that's a fine call, and I think most jazz/contemporary musicians would make it as well.

Even in diatonic context the first scale you would assume it to originate from, all things being equal, would be aeolian since it is the implied to be the tonal centre for a minor "key". Even at that I think it would be making a big assumption just to think aeolian every time you hear a min7 chord.

In the music that most of us play here (given that we're discussing this on the BG side of talkbass), min7 chords more often than not function as a ii. In fact, even when they're the tonic of a minor key, dorian is the preferred much of the time.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

There's nothing confusing about Em7 - because E major with a minor 7th would be E7.

Agreed. At some point each musician dealing with lead sheets has to realize that the system of nomenclature for chords symbols is not standardized, and isn't likely to be anytime soon; there are too many books out there from too many sources, and most "speak" chord symbol in their own particular dialect. It should be the responsibility of the professional musician to be able to converse in these dialects even if we would prefer to converse in our native accents.

It's all well and good to argue about whether "mi7b5" or "Ø" is the correct way to notate a ii chord in minor, but the truth is that any professional musician should not be thrown by either, and should know what is meant. heck, the changes themselves are almost always different from source to source, and it doesn't mean you have to relearn the tune. I'll attempt to attach an example I use in some of my classes about the differences in changes and nomenclature on the same tune from different sources.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[thycrusader]

http://www.studybass.com/tools/chord-scale-note-printer/



D.Don

The sites creator is my instructor.

 

[mutedeity]

Agreed. At some point each musician dealing with lead sheets has to realize that the system of nomenclature for chords symbols is not standardized, and isn't likely to be anytime soon; there are too many books out there from too many sources, and most "speak" chord symbol in their own particular dialect. It should be the responsibility of the professional musician to be able to converse in these dialects even if we would prefer to converse in our native accents.

It's all well and good to argue about whether "mi7b5" or "Ø" is the correct way to notate a ii chord in minor, but the truth is that any professional musician should not be thrown by either, and should know what is meant. heck, the changes themselves are almost always different from source to source, and it doesn't mean you have to relearn the tune. I'll attempt to attach an example I use in some of my classes about the differences in changes and nomenclature on the same tune from different sources.

That's all true. But it doesn't stop me from having the opinion that it's a poor way to write it. Nor does it stop me from analytically critiquing the concept of chord nomenclature. Should it?

 

[Pacman]

That's all true. But it doesn't stop me from having the opinion that it's a poor way to write it. Nor does it stop me from analytically critiquing the concept of chord nomenclature. Should it?

Sure, if you like getting worked up about nothing.

I tell my troops all the time: you can complain about what "should" be, or you can deal with what "is".

This is one of those times.

 

[jayarroz]

when will this thread end....... Em7 It's a guitar chord

 

[zeppelinfreak]

Really? Why are we having so much trouble with a simple Em7 scale?

Its just E major, with a minor 7.

So E F# G# A B C# D E

 

[jayarroz]

hmmm that seems to be the issue, everyone see's it different. I don't see Em7 as a Major Minor chord at all, but this has been argued through out the whole thread!

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

That's all true. But it doesn't stop me from having the opinion that it's a poor way to write it. Nor does it stop me from analytically critiquing the concept of chord nomenclature. Should it?

Stop you? No. But if you critique in such a manner as to say things like, I don't think it can be argued, then again I have been known to be wrong there, that the least ambiguous, contemporary way to write [E G B D] as a chord is emin7, rather than Em7. Right? Even Emin7 would be preferable.", you're going to have to deal with people who feel that, in fact, it sure can be argued that the best way notate that chord is by using a symbol many people have never seen on a lead sheet.

Invalid Link Removed

In particular read part 3 of "seventh chords", "Naming 7th chords".

An online theory primer. What is this supposed to prove? That one easy way to teach novice students what seventh chords are is by detailing what kind of triad it is and what kind of seventh is added? So stipulated. But as far as this discussion, that point is made completely irrelevant by the fact that chord symbols are shorthand shortcuts meant to be easily read on the fly. Suppose they were driving instructions that you had to read to get where you were going. Would you rather read, "rotate the steering apparatus sharply in a clockwise motion", or "turn right"? Once people know how to turn the wheel, all they need to know is where and when to do it.

On the other hand Em7 looks like E major with a minor 7 which would be a dominant. Anyone that understands roman numerals for chords will see the upper case E as representing a major triad.

I play with a lot of trained and degreed musicians, and none seem to have any trouble confusing Em7 with E7. I have never heard of anyone being confused about this until just now.