Nashville Number System: Is that all it is?

[Russell L]

I'm pretty sure both use fractions = chord/bass note.

NNS = 5/2 (5 chord in 2nd inversion)

Roman = V/ii (5 chord in 2nd inversion)

Ok. Surprisingly, I had never thought about it. I've written hundreds of regular charts, lead sheets, as well as sheet music, but never had to do a number chart -- or read one, for that matter.

So, in the key of C, an F chord with an A in the bass (first inversion, F/A) would be written as IV/I or 4/1. Correct?

 

[Russell L]

Some musicians need to be careful about that inversion notation.
What is the meaning of numbers 6/5, 4/3, 4/2, etc.?

View attachment 2852573

http://learnmusictheory.net/PDFs/pdffiles/02-09-SATBPartWriting5SecondInversionTriads.pdf




I've thought it was 2-

True this.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

Just as a comic relief only (nothing serious)!

as one of those folks who has shed plenty of blood, sweat, and tears crying: WUTP) doing Schenkerian analysis at the graduate level

BUT...

I got my master's degree in music years ago and am not in music academia anymore(!!!).

A note to myself.
DO NOT STUDY Schenkerian analysis at the graduate level if you want to be in Music!

 

[Whousedtoplay]

4/1. Correct?

That kind of notation would confuse me as a beginner musician.
I truly believe that NNS - is to simplify the standard notation and help a musician/bass player to transpose a/any song for an immediate performance. I doubt that NNS is to emphasize the inversions.
P.S. But of course, there will be some TB members who would disagree with me on that subject.

 

[Russell L]

That kind of notation would confuse me as a beginner musician.
I truly believe that NNS - is to simplify the standard notation and help a musician/bass player to transpose a/any song for an immediate performance. I doubt that NNS is to emphasize the inversions.
P.S. But of course, there will be some TB members who would disagree with me on that subject.

Yeah, I agree, it would confuse me, too. And you're likely right that the NNS doesn't even show inversions, or, god forbid, a chord with a non-chord tone in tbe bass.

I only have a BA in music, but remember studying figured bass. Dunno if anyone uses it anymore.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

a chord with a non-chord tone in tbe bass.

1/2 - is it Second inversion of I or a "normal" I with the second scale degree in the bass (like C/D)?

 

[Russell L]

1/2 - is it Second inversion of I or a "normal" I with the second scale degree in the bass (like C/D)?

That sounds wrong. First inversion means having the 3rd in the bass, second inversion means having the 5th in the bass, third inversion means having the 7th in the bass.

That's the way I learned it. Inversions applied to triadic harmony or harmony beyond the triad built in 3rds.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

C/D would be fourth inversion (9th in the bass).

 

[Whousedtoplay]

That sounds wrong. First inversion means having the 3rd in the bass, second inversion means having the 5th in the bass, third inversion means having the 7th in the bass.

That's the way I learned it. Inversions applied to triadic harmony or harmony beyond the triad built in 3rds.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

C/D would be fourth inversion (9th in the bass).

I am just trying to show how confusing that simple NNS notation could be for some amateurs like me.
In C major triad - only 3 notes! -it would be difficult to have that fourth inversion.
C with D in the bass - isn't an inversion.

 

[Russell L]

Yes, C9/D or Cmaj.9/D would more correctly be fourth inversion. C/D doesn't imply a 7th, so you are correct that it isn't a real inversion.

 

[Russell L]

I am just trying to show how confusing that simple NNS notation could be for some amateurs like me.
In C major triad - only 3 notes! -it would be difficult to have that fourth inversion.
C with D in the bass - isn't an inversion.

Yep. Meant to quote you on my last post.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

What if I decide to get smart and write the following:

1m7 I 47 - as in Dm7 I G7 I ?
It's confusing.

 

[Russell L]

Agreed.

Hey, just saw an explanation that said that 1/3 means first inversion 1 chord (as in C/E, C chord with the 3rd in the bass). So, maybe C/D could be 1/2?

Sigh, I'd just rather have a normal chart. Of course thay means the key must be predetermined.

 

[buldog5151bass]

And that is exactly why this system is designed the way it is - easy transposing.

 

[BassAndReeds]

What if I decide to get smart and write the following:

1m7 I 47 - as in Dm7 I G7 I ?
It's confusing.

I think we should accept NNS for what it is, which is a quick way to jot down popular country music, so songs can be quickly recorded to CD. I don't think your example is a country music chord progression, so in that regard: 1)You are correct, the NNS is confusingly in this regard, 2) the NNS was not made for this particular chord progression example.

As a cover band bassist, the NNS is great. It never gets confusing, cause popular music is easy. But I'd stick with actual lined notation paper if you want to get fancy. The NNS isn't designed for all music types.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

I think we should accept NNS for what it is, which is a quick way to jot down popular country music, so songs can be quickly recorded to CD. I don't think your example is a country music chord progression, so in that regard: 1)You are correct, the NNS is confusingly in this regard, 2) the NNS was not made for this particular chord progression example.

As a cover band bassist, the NNS is great. It never gets confusing, cause popular music is easy. But I'd stick with actual lined notation paper if you want to get fancy. The NNS isn't designed for all music types.

You have said it perfectly.

 

[inanimate_carb]

Here's a chart that the great Lee Sklar wrote for himself and later posted on Facebook a few years ago. Inarguably, Sklar has more musicality and documentable experience than 99.9% of TalkBass membership put together. Don't forget he can read standard lines-and-dots music at a symphony player level. If he's using NNS and getting paid triple-scale for it, it's probably a legitimately usable system.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

Here's a chart that the great Lee Sklar wrote for himself and later posted on Facebook a few years ago. Inarguably, Sklar has more musicality and documentable experience than 99.9% of TalkBass membership put together. Don't forget he can read standard lines-and-dots music at a symphony player level. If he's using NNS and getting paid triple-scale for it, it's probably a legitimately usable system.

View attachment 2852913

It's certainly a legit system, but I think that particular example is one for notes for himself rather than sharing a chart with the band. For a band setting, I'd prefer lyrics with either Nashville numbers or chords. If it's something intricate, give me notation.

 

[Ekulati]

I think that particular example is one for notes for himself rather than sharing a chart with the band.

Yup. I've done this kind of thing since day one (at age 11 or 12, before I knew it was a "system" which had a name etc). If I'm just charting for myself, I use all kinds of little extra marks and things to remind myself of details. If I'm charting for someone else to read I keep it very simple and consistent. And this means it usually works better for very simply structured tunes, where inversions etc. come into play minimally if at all.

I've always thought the main advantage of using numbers instead of letter names or notation is for easy transposition, i.e for a singer, etc. All the other stuff, making the system more complex, is just fluff, often the product of folks (like us here on these forums) with a little too much time on their hands. Of course, I could be wrong.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

I will note that as we move from scribble on paper to charts in apps on our iPads where we can transpose the chords at will, NNS has a lot less value for bassists.

 

[Ekulati]

...if you want to be in MUSIC!

Hmm.... Who said anything about not being in music?