Double Bass The Major 7 #9 chord

[DoubleMIDI]

If I write by hand a polychord is always the higher on top of the lower chord, separated by a horizontal line because I think this is the most intuitive way.

When using oration programs I try to position a second chord on top if possible and a separation line as an extra element in between. But that might need edits if the music moves because of edits in front.

I find the backslash extremely counter-intuitive and would avoid it at all cost. For a single line notation I would prefer a single or double vertical line (| or ||) as a separator. Top chord to the left, bottom chord to the right and you can even add a specific bass note with a slash notation afterwards.

Example:
D||Em/C or D|Em/C for lydian
(Which is a rather bad example because you would rather notate Cmaj7#11,13, but it can be useful for other scales to avoid a lot of numbers and alterations. But I hope you get the idea behind.)

 

[Treyzer]

OMG......this is somewhat interesting, in a very theoretical kind of way, but if you don't realize that this thread is nearing the apex or possibly nadir of bass nerdiness...then you are indeed a bass Nd. To quote Someone who's given me some great insight and advice over the years "Sorry but I'm not going down that nerd-rabbit-hole." I do tend to fall into the more pragmatic, less dogmatic camp. OK Nerds, please resume...

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

We have only just begun.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

On a computer, to be clear, I would probably type AMa/GMa or whatever...but again, that's just a convenience.

I like your notation but I those Ma, Mi...
What is wrong with maj or min?

 

[Don Kasper]

From here:
https://www.cs.hmc.edu/~keller/jazz/improvisor/LeadsheetNotation.pdf

View attachment 3038895

BACKSLASH???\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\???
Pleeze!!! NO!!!!!
Maybe the worst nomenclature idea mentioned in this thread, (so far!)
Also - "D triad over C7" is just The Simpleton's Way (tm) of expressing "C9,#11,13". Calling this structure a "Poly-Chord" is just adding unnecessary layers to the Harmonic Onion (tm).
IMFO/IMW.
You're Welcome. (jk!)

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

I like your notation but I those Ma, Mi...
What is wrong with maj or min?

Nothing, really. They are just longer.

My main points about notation are summarized in my longer post above in answer to @John Goldsby. We are going to encounter many things, so we should be prepared to understand what we think they mean. I played a recording session last week where some chord symbols on some charts were written in ways that did not compute to my brain. During rehearsals, I wrote in versions of them that made more sense to me after hearing them in context. Some were more specific than i would have wanted, some less. When there is time, I usually try to annotate in my "native tongue" for myself. When there isn't, I'm usually trying to translate on the fly. Differences in preferred notation are going to happen. I don't think there is a lot to be gained by going through the process of mentally labeling them as a binary "right or wrong"; the overall goal is to understand, and once that understanding happens I have learned to translate a future instance of the same sort of thing.

One example that springs immediately to mind comes from years ago when i was playing in a fusion band led by a great guitarist who wrote really fun tunes in an interesting way. One of his favorite sounds in several arrangements he notated as "Bmi7#5" (in truth, it was any mi#5, but let's call it Bmi7#5 just for shizz and giggles), which really didn't compute because the chord he was playing didn't sound like an Ami chord at all. When I listened closely, he always used the same voicing: over the B in the bass, he'd play (from bottom to top) A-D-G. Once I figured out that I really heard that chord as Gadd2/B, all was right in the world. Until then, I had fits trying to understand it as an Ami chord. It's a simple sound, but the nomenclature can disguise that depending on how you learn to notate and hear.

I hear best in terms of function, but I'm sure he would have been equally confused if I had written a chart using that same sound and notated it as Gadd2/B. Which one is "right"? I don't know that it really matters as long as everyone can learn to hear what's going on. Once I figured out its the same basic sound as the First 2 chords of Steely Dan's "Peg" after the introduction...

i.e. - (CMa7-Gadd2/B... could also be called "Gadd9/B")
G G G
E E D
B B A

C C B

....everything clicked into place and I could play that sound. A rose by any other name...

 

[Tom Lane]

BACKSLASH???\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\???
Pleeze!!! NO!!!!!
Maybe the worst nomenclature idea mentioned in this thread, (so far!)
Also - "D triad over C7" is just The Simpleton's Way (tm) of expressing "C9,#11,13". Calling this structure a "Poly-Chord" is just adding unnecessary layers to the Harmonic Onion (tm).
IMFO/IMW.
You're Welcome. (jk!)

I like the vertical slash in text conversations. In Finale, I'll use a horizontal bar and try to clarify when I mean a triad versus a bass note.

But @Don Kasper, don't you think it's about who you're writing for? If I'm writing the chord for the improviser or bassist, C13#4 is best, but if I'm writing it for a "not very experienced" pianist then D|C7 is more likely to get the voicing I was expecting. Even experienced pianists? Sometimes... they're not so quick... Guitar? D F# A C E F# Bb, pick 4... E A Bb Gb? 3rd, 13th, b7th, #4? C713#4?
And duh, yes, I have charts for the pianist, sax, guitar, drums, and vocalist.
In MY world, I strive to communicate as effectively as possible to make the music happen as well as possible.

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

Also - "D triad over C7" is just The Simpleton's Way (tm) of expressing "C9,#11,13". Calling this structure a "Poly-Chord" is just adding unnecessary layers to the Harmonic Onion (tm).

Again, I view it differently. "D triad over a C7" means to me "I want this spesific sound, do not add other tones". A C13#11 means you can add or substract at will.

 

[Don Kasper]

Speaking of "Peg"...Here is the Intro (0:00 - 0:15), a beautiful example of harmonic complexity AND economy.
Note that only the Bass note and 1 note of the voicing changes every 2 bars (in m.1 - m.8). Note how the "X6/9" chord shares so much Harmonic DNA with the "X7#9" chord.

 

[Don Kasper]

A C13#11 means you can add or substract at will.

Who told you this?
C13#11 means exactly the same notes as "D triad over C7" - nothing more/nothing less.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement?
Thanks, Fredrik.

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

Who told you this?
C13#11 means exactly the same notes as "D triad over C7" - nothing more/nothing less.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement?
Thanks, Fredrik.

Probably. It depends on context, style etc., but as a ground rule: when a (experienced) chordplayer sees a C, he knows he can add a 6 or a ma7 or a 9 to color the sound. When he sees a C13#11, he knows that he doesn't have to play the 5th and/or the 9th (or even the 1st). (Edit: And the voicing is up to the player, as noted below). When I see a polychord, I interpret it as "play exactly this" (for guitar I would probably write a specific voicing).

 

[dreamadream99]

Who told you this?
C13#11 means exactly the same notes as "D triad over C7" - nothing more/nothing less.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement?
Thanks, Fredrik.

I have to assume the poster was referring to how the chord is voiced by the player.
The problem of course is that a chord is a chord, but a voicing is an interpretation of that chord

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

I have to assume the poster was referring to how the chord is voiced by the player.
The problem of course is that a chord is a chord, but a voicing is an interpretation of that chord

Correct, that too.

 

[dreamadream99]

Correct, that too.

Which brings up an interesting conundrum: if we posit that a notated polychord means “play this exactly”, wouldn’t the available number of fingers on that beat have something to say about that? It’s one thing to insist the chord be voiced with all 8 notes, but if you’re playing ragtime piano, then you only have 5 available treble fingers!

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

Which brings up an interesting conundrum: if we posit that a notated polychord means “play this exactly”, wouldn’t the available number of fingers on that beat have something to say about that? It’s one thing to insist the chord be voiced with all 8 notes, but if you’re playing ragtime piano, then you only have 5 available treble fingers!

No rules without exeptions.

 

[Don Kasper]

but if I'm writing it for a "not very experienced" pianist then D|C7 is more likely to get the voicing I was expecting.

I guess I would write out a specific, pleasant voicing, show that to the "NVE" Pianist and tell him that "the name of this chord is C7,9,#11,13"... and also encourage them to experiment/study/read about different ways to voice that chord in their practice, (off of the bandstand.)
"Give a man a fish....Teach a man to fish......"
IMO.
Thanks, Tom.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

Again, I view it differently. "D triad over a C7" means to me "I want this spesific sound, do not add other tones". A C13#11 means you can add or substract at will.

Cool.
Just a question.
On the piano, I could play
(Left hand) C - Bb, or C - G, or E - Bb, or E - G, or even G - Bb with the same D triad chord in the right hand.
But due to those left hand variations, the same "chord construction" would sound differently.
How would you accept your desired Aurality?
How much of your desired Aurality should the bass player understand and "imitate"?

 

[Rev. Cornelius]

Jamey Aebersold wrote a paper on chord nomenclature many years ago — it was a call to standardize chords. But, of course jazz keeps evolving, so the way composers and musicians notate chords keeps stretching. When Jamey wrote his paper, there were competing publishers who had developed their own chord symbols sets: Berklee, Advance Music, Sher Music, Hal Leonard, etc.

Just when we think we've got the "best practices" for defining standard jazz harmony, someone comes along and plays some fantastically weird sound, and they write a chord symbol for that sound. — I've worked with players who have invented symbols for 12-tone "Metatonal" chords (Randy Sandke), and composers who have codified the harmonies of Oliver Messiaen for jazz performance (Hubert Nuss). It's all valid, but I think there will always be discussions between composers and improvisors about "What did you mean when you wrote this chord symbol."

Darcy James Argue, arguably one of the foremost big band writers of the era, weighed in on chord symbols on the Finale website. I think the future of codifying chord symbols dwells in the domain of the notation software companies (as @Chris Fitzgerald discussed a few posts back).

It's worth downloading Darcy's chord symbol chart, even if you don't agree with everything he does:

Darcy James Argue on Chord Symbols. Click on the link the middle of the page.

John (and everybody else) - thank you for your posts.

I have bolded 2 passages from one of John's prior posts.

Regarding bold passage #1:
I learned my theory at Berklee during '74, '75, and '76 as part of a federally funded program for high school students who lived in Boston. At the end of the school year in '76 I approached our high school music teacher to sign up for his theory class as a senior elective. He handed me a blank copy of the final exam he was grading for that years class and began to ask me some questions. 10 min later I was enrolled and had just aced the final. However, as fall classes started he and I were always at odds because we learned our notation from 2 very different places in 2 very different times. Mine at Berklee in the '70's and he was a trombone player for a swing band during WW2 and later the Boston Symphony and Pops.

Which brings me to bold passage number 2. "It's all valid..." It is not only valid but essential. In my experience the discussions about this ever changing notation is the glue that binds generations of musicians and allows a continium to remain in an ever changing scene.

Thank you

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

Cool.
Just a question.
On the piano, I could play
(Left hand) C - Bb, or C - G, or E - Bb, or E - G, or even G - Bb with the same D triad chord in the right hand.
But due to those left hand variations, the same "chord construction" would sound differently.
How would you accept your desired Aurality?
How much of your desired Aurality should the bass player understand and "imitate"?

I'm usually not that picky myself, but I have met writers who are. If I want a specific voicing I would write it out. Same with the bass.

 

[Fredrik E. Nilsen]

That A - D - G is "pure" first inversion of Gsus2 with B in the bass
Your Gadd2 - a "pure" mu - chord of G major with B bass sounds different for my ears.
What's wrong about notating that chord as Bmi+7?

It isn't really a minor chord, it's a major chord with the 3rd in the bass. The only times you should use +5 in a minor chord is when it's part of a sequence like "Bmi - Bmi+(5) - Bmi6".