Double Bass Help me understand slash chords better

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

My point of view is anything else the useless. Maybe useless for you because you have your own perspective that, in my eyes, is a bit limited. Or you define a slash chord different than me.

I didn't say your point of view was useless, I said your generalization was useless ("Most of you are locked into a traditional perspective of (stacks of thirds) harmony. So a lot might not see through that"). We are perfectly aware of different views and perspectives, we are just answering in the context of the original post.

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

There is no b5maj7 chord. What you mean and what you showed by the scale is a maj7 #11. And that is not the same thing, because a b5 means there is no natural 5. But in your example there is a natural 5 too.

Pat Metheny use the F (natural 5) over the Bbma7(b5) a lot in his solo, so I guess it's ok.

 

[DoubleMIDI]

Pat Metheny use the F (natural 5) over the Bbma7(b5) a lot in his solo, so I guess it's ok.

And because of that the notation of a b5 is wrong, the fifth is there, so it needs to be a #11.
As long as we are talking 7-note scales this is always true. In 6- and 8-note scales some note needs to be left out or doubled.

 

[shwashwa]

the Bb maj9b5/A cant be an F maj 7 chord of any type because there is no Bb in the Fmaj7 and the Bb is the most important note in that chord as its the root. Now having said that, if you wanted to blow an F maj pentatonic scale over that it would work, but that doesnt make it an F family chord. there's a Bb in there. G/A is not a G9 with the A on top. the A is in the bass. A is underneath. the A sounds like the root of the chord. if you wanted to call it something else you would call it A7sus4 or A9sus4. its clearly a sus sound when you play it on the piano, G triad in the right hand over an A bass note. use the things stuck to the side of your head

 

[shwashwa]

i have a friend who would write G/A instead of A9sus4 because he's trying to communicate a specific voicing. so, thats one reason....

 

[DoubleMIDI]

I'm having difficulty understanding the rationale for your system. FYI.
G/Ab (Gmaj triad over an Ab in the bass.) Sounds like Abdim,maj7 to me. No need to Slash, IMO/IME.

You are almost right, it could be notated that way and it would be exactly the same. But with that kind of notation you would probably try to fill a note between the Ab and the B because diminished means usually a minor third, but in that case it is an augmented second. You see this if you write down the notes of the underlying scale. So the traditional notation is potentially misleading here.
Anyway, with all these slash cords around that one it would not make much sense to write one chord or the minority the traditional way in this example.
If you have a piece with mostly traditional stack of thirds notation and only a few (root bass) slash chords in there, the traditional way might be the better solution.

I just wanted to make a piece with slash chords only and sorted the ones out that would double a chord tone or form a (non-diminished and non-augmented) stack of third chord.
That was my compositional decision for that piece. Other people might have taken other choices.

In case of the F#/D or G/Ab the major chord has a stronger inner resonance than the diminished or augmented triad that could be found in the chord.

Another reason to write that as a slash chord is that the soloist is encouraged to use the upper chord as a center for his improvisation, not only in these two cases here, that could have been written in the traditional way as well, but in general. This enhances the sound of a slash chord.

If you want that sound from a slash chord it would make sense to notate it that way for the chord instruments, because otherwise you depend on the interpretation of the player which notes would have been chosen. If this is not important to you the traditional way works.
But I have written the chords for that piece in the traditional way and some chords have a lot of "alterations" to read, which is not very helpful in reading while playing.

When I made my transcriptions I heard exactly the notes from the slash chords and also in composition it is clear that the composer has chosen these chords as slash chords. And therefor it makes sense that in these cases the notation of slash chords is the best way to explain that to the musicians. So that kind of notation can be better in several cases but doesn't need to in all.

I know that sometimes the composers use the traditional notation, even if they perform the selection of notes that form the slash chords. If you can see that, good, but I doubt that most of you can see through that bunch of notes and alterations to find that out. But maybe you don't want that. Then be happy without that second form of slash chords and use them only for the inversion of the traditional stack of thirds chords. But this is your decision for your music then. It might not be a valid limitation for all other people.

BTW, has anybody played my chord progression on a chordal instrument yet?

 

[Tom Lane]

the Bb maj9b5/A cant be an F maj 7 chord of any type because there is no Bb in the Fmaj7 and the Bb is the most important note in that chord as its the root. Now having said that, if you wanted to blow an F maj pentatonic scale over that it would work, but that doesnt make it an F family chord. there's a Bb in there. G/A is not a G9 with the A on top. the A is in the bass. A is underneath. the A sounds like the root of the chord. if you wanted to call it something else you would call it A7sus4 or A9sus4. its clearly a sus sound when you play it on the piano, G triad in the right hand over an A bass note. use the things stuck to the side of your head

What about an FMaj7sus? F Bb C E and you can put the 3rd on top if you want, F Bb C E A

 

[lurk]

To my ear, if it's got an F, say, in the bass, it's some kinda F chord, and spelling it to reflect that if you can do so without jumping through too many hoops is the way to go. Bass Power!!! Of course, these pools of notes are not always functional in the traditional way. The comment on Bright Size Life a few back is right on the money. Listen to Jaco; he plays it as if it's a much simpler tonal scheme, cause it is. You gotta use your ears.

 

[PauFerro]

What about an FMaj7sus? F Bb C E and you can put the 3rd on top if you want, F Bb C E A

I had the same thought earlier on. I can relate that that chord much better than the Bbmaj7b5/A. As a bass player, it does encourage me to play Bb as my bass note, and the A later, like Jaco does.

 

[Tom Lane]

I had the same thought earlier on. I can relate that that chord much better than the Bbmaj7b5/A. As a bass player, it does encourage me to play Bb as my bass note, and the A later, like Jaco does.

It'd be interesting to read some additional master's on the subject, besides those who've already contributed. I think there are more than one music theory teachers lurking on TB.

I can see Don Kasper's argument that the function of the chord is paramount, is it a V chord or something else? How does it function? If I know how it functions, I know the notes I can use over it even if I don't know the best scale choice. I can also see DoubleMidi's argument that a symbol like Gmin/F is very friendly for keyboardists and guitarists who know to play a G Minor triad, but if the chord can be represented with extensions, then for the soloist, there's a layer of translation involved, effectively reading Gmin/F, F G Bb D as "Oh, that's F 6/9 sus so an F Lydian scale is a good choice here" and jazz bassists typically aspire to improvise their basslines, so then the slash notation isn't helpful to our reading of the chart.

OTOH, if the composer's goal is to specify a specific inversion of a chord: Bb7 | G9/B | C69, that's arguably clearer than Bb7 | B9#11b13 | C69 because it's both more concise and preserves the function.

And last, there are quartal chords like G9sus that are truly Fsus/G meaning G F Bb C, no 3rd or 5th of the G because it's not a G chord, as DoubleMidi said, it's not built on stacked 3rds, it's built on stacked 4ths.

And we haven't even touched on compound or polychords yet, C/Gb, the infamous Petrushka chord.

A lot of the confusion resolves around, IMO, no firm standards and many less than attentive theory students, including Pat Metheny. In fairness to Metheny, many composers didn't seem to - and still don't? - know the difference between a 7b5 and a 7#11. How many players still think that a suspended chord cannot contain the 3rd? or that a diminished chord can contain the Major 7th or a Natural 9th? or that a Minor 6th can contain the flatted 6th or the Natural 6th?

When I make charts, I have guiding principles:

as concise as possible, symbols instead of abbreviations: Co means C Diminished and you're free to add whatever extensions you like. OTOH, Co^ means you need to include the Major 7th in there at least. You can still have a 9th, 6th, 11th if you want, but the chart expects at least Eb Gb and B in your voicing. It's jazz, so if the harmony player doesn't wanna do that, that's their call.

Symbols instead of spelling things out: C^ for C Major 7. If the melody specifies a specific pitch and I think it's important to the character of the tune during the solos, then I'll include it: C-11 if there's a prominent F in the melody rather than C-

Ultimately, there are some more correct ways than others, but it's probably more important to be consistent than correct. Make a set of guidelines and for better or worse, stick with them for each project/publication. Next time, evolve.

And take a theory class because you'll be a better musician and a better communicator to other musicians.

 

[shwashwa]

What about an FMaj7sus? F Bb C E and you can put the 3rd on top if you want, F Bb C E A

a sus chord with the 3rd (or 4th) in the bass? stop over thinking it and use your ears

 

[Don Kasper]

Nicely annotated by the Greek Abo^

?????(What does this mean?)
I now have no idea what both you and DoubleMidi are talking about in this Thread!!!
Thanks?

 

[Tom Lane]

?????(What does this mean?)
I now have no idea what both you and DoubleMidi are talking about in this Thread!!!
Thanks?

Hmmm, I joked over your head. Not bad considering your puns! I'm playing on the fact that the Greek alphabet uses many symbols that are barely recognizable to most English speakers - clearly, some speakers have less recognition than others, a-hem. There's a computer programming language that the insurance industry uses that ONLY uses Greek symbols. How closely did you follow your Freshman frathouse orientation? Me neither, but I can code anything and have nearly all.

So, Abo^ - on a chart the "o" would be super-scripted like a Diminished sign, and the "^" would be also super-scripted, the triangle that's commonly used to indicate Major, as in C Major7 = C^7. But, if the triangle means Major 7, then the "7" is redundant. C = C Major triad. C^ = C Major 7. Co = C Diminished C Eb Gb. Co^ = C Diminished Major 7th, at least C Eb Gb B and you can add an A or a D if you like.

Abo^ = Ab Diminished Major 7th, or Ab Dim^7 in Kasperian? Or would you have used Ab o ^7 ?

But seriously, you get that 7b5 and 7#11 are meaningfully different? And that sometimes slash chords specify a specific voicing that's verbose to symbolize?

Beyond that, I think DoubleMidi was pointing out that a chart should be taken as a whole and in his example, even though he could have specified some of his chords without slash notation, he felt that having all of the chords as slashes made it more legible. Makes perfect sense to me. Not to put words in his mouth but I'm confident he'll whack me on the side of my head if I misspoke. I know how to sit on my hands.

 

[Don Kasper]

C Diminished Major 7th, at least C Eb Gb B and you can add an A or a D if you like.

Cdim7 = C, Eb, Gb, Bbb
Cdim7,maj7 = C, Eb, Gb, Bbb, Bnatural (A chord with "2" 7ths!)
C Dim, maj7 = C, Eb, Gb, Bnatural
QED!
Also - this thread is becoming Much Ado about Something (or Other)!
Thanks, Tom.

 

[Tom Lane]

Cdim7 = C, Eb, Gb, Bbb
Cdim7,maj7 = C, Eb, Gb, Bbb, Bnatural (A chord with "2" 7ths!)
C Dim, maj7 = C, Eb, Gb, Bnatural
QED!
Also - this thread is becoming Much Ado about Something (or Other)!
Thanks, Tom.

Hmmm.
Cdim7 = Co7
Cdim7, maj7 = Co7^
Cdim, maj7 = Co7

Co^9 !!!

You're right, we've slid sideways, but everyone on the thread are such theory geeks... I won't cry if it's deleted.

 

[Don Kasper]

would write G/A instead of A9sus4 because he's trying to communicate a specific voicing.

...but "G/A" is not at all specific in terms of an actual voicing - is the G triad in Root Position, !st inversion, 2nd inversion? In what register is the G triad?
If I needed a very specific voicing, I would just write it in conventional notation.
But that's me...
Thanks.

 

[shwashwa]

...but "G/A" is not at all specific in terms of an actual voicing - is the G triad in Root Position, !st inversion, 2nd inversion? In what register is the G triad?
If I needed a very specific voicing, I would just write it in conventional notation.
But that's me...
Thanks.

It is specific in that he wants to notes in a g Triad above an a bass note. That's four different notes. It avoids all the possible extensions and colorations available if he just writes a sus 4. different people can interpret that cord in different ways but when you see a g Triad above and a bass note is much less variation other than the triadic inversions like you say which he doesn't care about, as long as the 4 notes are there

 

[DoubleMIDI]

Beyond that, I think DoubleMidi was pointing out that a chart should be taken as a whole and in his example, even though he could have specified some of his chords without slash notation, he felt that having all of the chords as slashes made it more legible. Makes perfect sense to me. Not to put words in his mouth but I'm confident he'll whack me on the side of my head if I misspoke. I know how to sit on my hands.

Nothing to complain.

 

[DoubleMIDI]

It was the sound of the slash chords I was interested in, so to avoid a different sound that can easily happen in traditional stack of thirds notation I used the slash notation for the chordal instruments.
I even thought to keep that notation only for the soloists, but decided that for practical purposes (how musicians are trained and are often unwilling to learn a new perspective if they think it wouldn't be worth to do so) to use the stack of thirds notation too, even if it could be more complicated to read because of a lot of "alterations" that needed to be notated to show the scale to be used there.

Anyway, since there are modes based on harmonic major which is a scale structure usually not taught by jazz and classical music theory in my piece and which are needed to be used by some of the slash chords (in that neighborhood), the players have to learn that anyway, so they can also learn that these scales need to be used with this or that slash chord. So, at least for these scales it makes sense to write slash chord notation as a shortcut. But it is all about what you are used to read and accept and if you want that specific sound or not.

The traditional stack of thirds notation works well as long as you do not have an augmented second in there. Modes of harmonic major or minor can lead to an incorrect notation (dim) where the interval is not a minor third but an augmented second.
It is a bit like correcting a wrong b5 to a #11. But to find that out you need either more time than you have on sight reading or enough experience to know which chord symbol is not correct and how it needs to be interpreted.

I know that for many musicians in popular music a b5 and a #11 or any other enharmonic is the same note. But this is only a practical view on some instruments that cannot play different pitches for these enharmonics and it hinders to understand music theory correctly.

Most academic or introduction army book-based courses exclude alternative sights on music theory to get through as fast as possible based on historic development and needs for about 95% (or more) of the existing music literature. This is OK for a good basis in a short time. But often enough teachers and book authors have that sight and not more because they don't need it for their job or are not interested in the small rest.
There are of course exceptions, mostly from people who would like to explore new possibilities. Often composers of contemporary music and/or experimental computer music and electronics people.

There is nothing wrong to invite composers and theorists in here, but after some time when they finished their studies the experimental and research phase ended and they work with what they have found out during their earlier years, because experiments and research costs a lot of time and that means no money for that time which often they cannot afford.
So it could be that the spare-time researchers that do not work in theory in their main job might have a more open mind than the professionals for alternative perspectives, but they might also have less contact with the foundations of music theory.

My interest came to find out which musically useful scales exist beyond the ones I have already know. At some time I found the modes of harmonic major through the slash cords that needed them. That started my interest to find out if there is more, how useful other scales are from a musical, not a combinatoric view.
With my education as a computer scientist I know that combinatoric approach, but my musical education tells me that there are a lot of stuff in that about two-thousand scales that is not musically useful. So I tried to find categories to be more or less (like in certain ways to use them or less easy or intuitive) useful for musical purposes. So for me scales and chords are mainly two sides of the same thing, even if they are not used exclusively but enriched by non-scale notes for either harmonic tension / blurring clearness or by chromatic passing notes etc.
It makes a lot of sense to me and I'm rather self-critical, but I'm open to open discussion with anybody about it as long as both are listening and trying to understand the other.

But now I need my time for other stuff, maybe even writing on my book(-let), so I might not be that responsive during the next weeks.
Discussion seems to run well now, so I can leave that to others.

 

[chilensko]

IMHO, slash chords are very common among guitar players, the reason is they play a lot of drop 2 voicing which they work very nicely on the guitar.
So slash chords are a sort of shortcut to spelling the chords.
For instance root position of Cmaj7#5 = E/C
E
B
G#
C bottom note

3rd inv of C-7#5 =Ab/Bb
C
Eb
Ab (G#)
Bb
So hopefully is clear otherwise you can practice drop 2 voicing on a guitar or ask your guitar fellows.