the myth of modes

[Whousedtoplay]

I beg to differ, (respectfully...)
While the "sus" designation calls for the "4" to be present in the chord voicing, a more complete aural approach INCLUDES the major 3rd (not the minor 3rd) in the overall tonality.
Here is what my ear tells me - (play at a piano, please):

View attachment 780876

This morning I broke the A string and, instead of changing it/wasting my time, I decided to explore the sonority of your sus chords (with extensions) on the keyboard. Usually as an amateur bassist I don't go "there" but not this morning.

I really liked your vision about the sus chords with extensions. What's more, while "messing" with that D9sus add3 chord, I've slightly changed it . Also, I know you said, "not the minor 3rd", but I went there anyway .
I don't even want to try to name those chords. Maybe somebody could help me with that task .

In short, I was "hooked" on the aural presentation of those characteristically-moody and , kind of "David Bowie-ishly" (as a POP musician) sounding, extended sus chords.
I could never have imagined that those "difficult to pronounce" chords would be so "Pop-ish".
The bass-line is just a simple root note in order to get that "moody" chord sonority across.
Thank you very much for opening my "ears" on those sus chords.

You have excellent taste music!

A short clip from it.

 

[HaphAsSard]

In the spirit of not letting a digression die (), a couple quotes:
"There is a rule requiring that the tone to which a suspension resolves does
not appear simultaneously with the suspension.
It happens, however, so often, that today we can raise no serious objection
to it. It is not well suited to piano music in close position. But in choral writing
Bach used it countless times (and of course also in his keyboard writing, etc.)"
Arnold Schoenberg, Theory of Harmony, transl. by Roy E. Carter (Berkeley/L.A.: University of California Press, 1983), p. 334.

(Note the typical Common Practice treatment of suspension notes, with preparation and resolution: what we call ritardo="delay" in Italian.)

"In jazz from the 1040s 1940s onwards you'll hear sus chords with the 3rd kept in alongside the 4th. This makes it more dissonant, but how much you hear of this depends on the internal layout of the chord, which is where the real art of jazz chord-voicing begins. Listen out for the contrasts between 'close' and 'open' spacings of the notes, between different registers, and between different inversions and/or positionings of dissonant intervals within the chord. For example, can you hear the difference with the 4th above the 3rd (...)?" [Examples follow.]
Carl Humphries, The Piano Handbook (San Francisco: Backbeat Books, 2002), p. 129.

So at the core, and by definition, a sus4 (or 11, if there's a 7 IIUC) chord replaces the third with a fourth; then Bach and jazz cats, as usual, don't give the proverbial and often put the 3rd back in anyway. Case closed, to me.

 

[static0verdrive]

In jazz from the 1040s onwards you'll hear sus chords with the 3rd kept in alongside the 4th.

Yeah but you should hear them 900 years later!!

 

[HaphAsSard]

Yeah but you should hear them 900 years later!!

 

[static0verdrive]

Sorry I couldn't resist. Back to the topic at hand... they don't mention minor vs major 3rd?

 

[HaphAsSard]

Sorry I couldn't resist. Back to the topic at hand... they don't mention minor vs major 3rd?

As you mustn't.
At a cursory glance, which is all I can provide right now, no they don't. I'd personally consider a chord with a minor 3rd and a 4th just a m7/add(♮)11. Either that or without the "add". (Do you guys use it with all non-dominant chords, or just tonics?)
Having a major 3rd and a 4th, regardless of spacing/relative positioning, calls for a different explanation, hence the "sus", IMO (FW my O IW).

 

[Whousedtoplay]

I'd personally consider a chord with a minor 3rd and a 4th just a m7/add(♮)11

Help me identify the following three chords:

D2 - G2 - A2 - C3 - Eb3 - F3,
D2 - G2 - A2 - C3 - Eb3 - F#3,
and
D2 - G2 - A2 - B2 - C#3 - E♮3.

 

[Don Kasper]

See below:
Here is my understanding of the term "Suspension" - Strictly Speaking - the G note, in the A7 chord below, is "suspended" (or held) INTO the D chord, and eventually resolves down to the F# (the Major third of D major), which creates a momentary dissonance (that of the "4th" in a D chord) that eventually morphs/resolves into a D major chord - also known as a "4 - 3 suspension", as the "4" moves to the "3". In earlier times, that 4th was NOT allowed to remain "un-resolved" - it always (eventually) moved to an F#(or an F natural). Back then, it was used to describe a "Melodic" (horizontal) phenomenon. (Please play at the piano.)

This Melodic device/practice, evolved/devolved into what, today, (20th Century musics), is largely thought of and used to describe a "HARMONIC" device - that is, it now is used to describe a chord that contains the 4th in the chord, but also MAY accept and allow the simultaneous sounding of the Major 3rd, as well, but not the Minor 3rd. It is now usually referring to a "Harmonic" Vertical phenomenon. This shift from melodic- to harmonic-speak, may be a contributing factor to some of the confusion around the "sus" term.
I see and hear, in the last century or so in jazz OR popular music, (and "classical" music), the common practice of associating the Major 3rd (not the Minor 3rd) with what is now commonly called a "Sus Chord". I believe/hear/practice and teach that a melodic/horizontal scale or mode "suggests" or "implies" (though not exclusively!) a certain harmonic/vertical chord, and that both exist together in what might be characterized as a "Symbiotic Relationship", so to speak. The chord supports the horizontal melodic notes, and the melodic notes thrive within that vertical harmonic chord. To my ear, a D9sus chord supports/allows the F#, along with the G, whether in a melodic OR harmonic context.
I don't have the time, energy or verbal abilities to engage and explore all of the various (and excellent, thought-provoking) ideas in this thread, (I wish I did), so I apologize if I seem to be ducking those questions and comments.
Thanks.

 

[Don Kasper]

WUTP,
Your first chord, above, containing the F and Eb, is a variation on the Sus chord that is easier seen and heard as "Amin7b5/D", or what some people would analyze and call "D7susb9". It is not considered a "minor sus" chord, but is a fairly dissonant/unresolved D Dominant 7 chord, which can often resolve to Gmin7. The F is part of the scale that is suggested by Amin7b5. It is part of the progression ii7b5 - V7b9 - i7 in the key of Gminor, (Amin7b5 - D7b9 - Gminor7).
Leave it to you to throw some harmonic gasoline on this fire! This is getting very deep into the (flammable) woods.
Nicely Done!
Thanks.

 

[joebar]

wow this thread has legs

we have everything in here-

its amazing because usually they are shut down due an argument by now.

learning great things here-

-as you were-

 

[DeaconBlues09]

See below:
Here is my understanding of the term "Suspension" - Strictly Speaking - the G note, in the A7 chord below, is "suspended" (or held) INTO the D chord, and eventually resolves down to the F# (the Major third of D major), which creates a momentary dissonance (that of the "4th" in a D chord) that eventually morphs/resolves into a D major chord - also known as a "4 - 3 suspension", as the "4" moves to the "3". In earlier times, that 4th was NOT allowed to remain "un-resolved" - it always (eventually) moved to an F#(or an F natural). Back then, it was used to describe a "Melodic" (horizontal) phenomenon. (Please play at the piano.)

This Melodic device/practice, evolved/devolved into what, today, (20th Century musics), is largely thought of and used to describe a "HARMONIC" device - that is, it now is used to describe a chord that contains the 4th in the chord, but also MAY accept and allow the simultaneous sounding of the Major 3rd, as well, but not the Minor 3rd. It is now usually referring to a "Harmonic" Vertical phenomenon. This shift from melodic- to harmonic-speak, may be a contributing factor to some of the confusion around the "sus" term.
I see and hear, in the last century or so in jazz OR popular music, (and "classical" music), the common practice of associating the Major 3rd (not the Minor 3rd) with what is now commonly called a "Sus Chord". I believe/hear/practice and teach that a melodic/horizontal scale or mode "suggests" or "implies" (though not exclusively!) a certain harmonic/vertical chord, and that both exist together in what might be characterized as a "Symbiotic Relationship", so to speak. The chord supports the horizontal melodic notes, and the melodic notes thrive within that vertical harmonic chord. To my ear, a D9sus chord supports/allows the F#, along with the G, whether in a melodic OR harmonic context.
I don't have the time, energy or verbal abilities to engage and explore all of the various (and excellent, thought-provoking) ideas in this thread, (I wish I did), so I apologize if I seem to be ducking those questions and comments.
Thanks.

View attachment 781787

Finally, after a half dozen pages, I understand the misunderstanding.

Don, after reading through your posts here, and checking out some of your music online, I've no doubt that you're ten times the musician I'll ever be. R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

That being said, I'm 99 percent certain that you misinterpret the meaning of the term "suspended" in this context.

Suspended can mean "taken away," or "withdrawn," as in "His license was suspended just 3 days after he took delivery of his new Dodge Charger SRT8," or "You must suspend any expectation of internal consistency or overall coherence if you wish to enjoy this Michael Bay movie we are about to watch." Or "suspend the third degree in this here chord."


Suspended can also mean "held above." As in suspension bridge. Or "When he saw the glowing disk suspended above him, Mike suddenly regretted going commando that evening."

It appears that you understood the word "suspended" in the context of suspended chords to mean "held up" rather than "omitted"(?) (I mean you pretty much drew and highlighted a suspension bridge on the sheet music up there...)


P.S. I know, it's crazy. Perhaps this was all just a matter of semantics after all?

 

[DeaconBlues09]

Sorry; I now agree that's a little ambiguous. I simply meant that I thought a sus chord didn't imply the third, therefore either a m3 or M3 could work.

Mind you, further reflection now makes me believe either third would sound wonky if the fourth is played - you know... like the fourth dated them both in the past, and it would just be awkward to hang out with either now in a sus chord buuuut (and here's where we get to theory vs rule or law) it would of course depend on the voicing; and I think that's what others are also pointing out in the recent posts above. A fourth much higher up might turn out to be a note that plays well with one of the thirds (like how a ninth works when a second doesn't, despite being the same note in different octaves)..? <- That last question mark is intended to convey that I THINK I get it and I'm looking for some confirmation, but I really don't know for sure.

Therefore to summarize my "understanding", a straight-up sus chord containing 1, 4, b7 won't have the third, but if the bass plays one of the 3rds, and say the guitar plays 1 + b7 and some higher 4th, it could still be considered a sus chord..? I would have expected to see that written as a slash chord personally though e.g. Csus4 / 3 (insert massive question mark!)

Carry on.

A ninth is a second an octave up.
Whenever a chord contains a number higher than 7, you are dealing with extensions that cross into a new octave.

It might help (some ppl) to subtract 7 and add an octave whenever they see a number over 7 in a chord voicing.

Thus 9 = 2 + octave, 11 = 4 + octave, 13 = 6 plus octave.

Note that there are additional considerations you must take into account when you draft an 11 chord that you don't in a sus 4 chord.
That is, when you see a D9 chord, the major third, fifth, and dominant 7 are assumed.

The seven needs to be explicitly added until you 'cross the octave threshold.' After you cross that threshold it is assumed, and assumed to be dominant.

That assumption may not suit the music you are trying to express, so you will either have to specifically omit, add, or alter, some of those degrees by using sus's, adds, Maj's, or what have you. Incidentally, there is a symbol for Maj7 (for using a non-flatted 7th), but I'm not quit sure how to add it in this post.

 

[danosix]

Here's a confession.
I have in the past spent quite some time learning music theory and most of it has been very benificial, but I have never ever seen any use in the concept of modes. And yes, I play jazz(y) music primarily.

In my view the whole mode thing is a big misunderstanding (yeah, I like a small dose of provocation, now and then ).
Say a song is in the key of G major and at some point you have a D7 chord.
Now I've heard teachers pointing out that the D mixolydian scale would be in order there.
Sure, when improvising a bass line you would use a c rather than a c# there. But that is because D7 has a c in it. And that is because you're in the key of G. The mere fact that Gregorian chant has used a mode were whole and half steps occured similarly is completely irrelevant.
And also, in a D mixolydian mode, the tonic would be D, not G.

In classical music this occurs all the time. In a Mozart sonata you may find a scale d-e-f#-g-a-b-c-d running up and down over a D dominant 7 chord (D7) and nobody will say that Mozart used the mixolydian church mode there. Because he didn't. He used the tones that were applicable to the key he was working in.
Using scales in pop or jazz music isn't any different.

Of course a D7 chord may appear in other keys than G major, and it can be interesting to analyze that, but when I am reading from a chord chart and see a dominant 7 chord, I just use the appropriate tones to that chord, including a minor 7th.
Again, the whole notion that a church mode existed with a shifted tonic doesn't come into play.

Also note that D mixolydian is not G major played from the 5th tone. That's just a memory aid. It's not like the ionian mode was the mother of all and the rest was derived from that.

Well anyway, I know most don't agree, but I strongly feel that studying modes in pop/rock music is clouding the vision of how chords function in a tonal (not modal) context.
Songs exist that are based on true modality but they are a minority and in my view don't justify the extreme focus modes receive in music teaching.

Feel free to disagree, obviously.
[\confession]

I'll go you one further - the whole focus on SCALES is over-blown.
YES we need to know the major, minor etc. well enough to play them without too much thought - but the tones of the chords (as you rightly mentions) are SO much more important.
Modes are indeed a memory aid that has become fetishized by some who have turned them into an "end" instead of a "means".
Once a player has reached a certain level of facility, it is more important to be developing your ears, rather than your fingers.
This is not an either/or thing - you need to play often and well enough to execute anything your mind "hears" or that you are asked to reproduce, so physical practice is essential - but playing music will give you most of the practice you need without resorting to exercises.
It's like going to the gym and stretching two hours then hitting the showers. Your scales and/or modes should be used to warm up the hands so that when you get down to musical practice they're ready. If you come across a piece of music you can't execute - then hit the exercises that will allow you to get the physical facility to manage it, then move on.

 

[Lanky Tunes]

I'll go you one further - the whole focus on SCALES is over-blown.

I think scales would get put in the right perspective if they were described as what they are: common collections of notes.

This means that they are worth learning to the degree they are commonly used in the genre one is playing.

This also means that it is the collection of notes that matter, not learning them as scales per se is what matters.

 

[static0verdrive]

A ninth is a second an octave up.
Whenever a chord contains a number higher than 7, you are dealing with extensions that cross into a new octave.

It might help (some ppl) to subtract 7 and add an octave whenever they see a number over 7 in a chord voicing.

Thus 9 = 2 + octave, 11 = 4 + octave, 13 = 6 plus octave.

Note that there are additional considerations you must take into account when you draft an 11 chord that you don't in a sus 4 chord.
That is, when you see a D9 chord, the major third, fifth, and dominant 7 are assumed.

The seven needs to be explicitly added until you 'cross the octave threshold.' After you cross that threshold it is assumed, and assumed to be dominant.

That assumption may not suit the music you are trying to express, so you will either have to specifically omit, add, or alter, some of those degrees by using sus's, adds, Maj's, or what have you. Incidentally, there is a symbol for Maj7 (for using a non-flatted 7th), but I'm not quit sure how to add it in this post.

I appreciate the reply! I should have clarified though... "I think that's what others are also pointing out in the recent posts above: A fourth much higher up might turn out to be a note that plays well with one of the thirds (like how a ninth works when a second doesn't, despite being the same note in different octaves)..? " I know the ninth is the second but an octave up, I was just hoping for confirmation (for the bold not the aside in brackets) that the others might have been saying that the third could work, but more likely only if using (say) the 11th... cheers

 

[static0verdrive]

I think scales would get put in the right perspective if they were described as what they are: common collections of notes.

Could we not argue that modes are essentially the same? I mean I know how they relate to our beloved Maj/min scales but if you think of those as just two of the modes, we have a couple more common collections we can internalize in order to express ourselves with a broader vocabulary.

Modes are indeed a memory aid that has become fetishized by some who have turned them into an "end" instead of a "means".

Nicely put! They've helped me for sure, but maybe I should move on now that I've started to intuitively know how they differ in sound/emotion and get back to practicing finding the note I hear in my head.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

the meaning of the term "suspended"

I truly feel your "pain".
I'm really mad at my teachers who taught me many many years ago about all those dis-dur, h-moll, etc..., instead of

They "brainwashed" me with all that "stupid"

instead of just teaching me this!!!

And here is my biggest problem with all those teachers is this.

From "Music Theory FOR The Music Professional" by Richard Sorce NEW YORK UNIVERSITY.

They still cannot clearly explain about that SUSPENSION in the section, "Nonharmonic Tones":

 

[Whousedtoplay]

Could we not argue that modes are essentially the same? I mean I know how they relate to our beloved Maj/min scales but if you think of those as just two of the modes, we have a couple more common collections we can internalize in order to express ourselves with a broader vocabulary.

I am completely happy with the following explanation:

Here is an interesting article to read for you,
"Jazz and Emergence (Part One) From Calculus to Cage, and from Charlie Parker to Ornette Coleman: Complexity and the Aesthetics and Politics of Emergent Form in Jazz"
by Martin E. Rosenberg - Independent Scholar (United States of America)
Inflexions 4: Jazz and Emergence (Part One) From Calculus to Cage, and from Charlie Parker to Ornette Coleman: Complexity and the Aesthetics and Politics of Emergent Form in Jazz by Martin E. Rosenberg

An interesting table from that article:

Knowing of modes helps me while reading the same article.

 

[danosix]

Could we not argue that modes are essentially the same? I mean I know how they relate to our beloved Maj/min scales but if you think of those as just two of the modes, we have a couple more common collections we can internalize in order to express ourselves with a broader vocabulary.
Nicely put! They've helped me for sure, but maybe I should move on now that I've started to intuitively know how they differ in sound/emotion and get back to practicing finding the note I hear in my head.

Yeah, they do have value - I'm not against them entirely - but once you know they sound of them, you can move on. Some people end up focusing on them to the detriment of all the other musical things they could be learning; that's when it becomes a problem - like anything else that is taken too far.
For me, it's almost certainly too heavy an emphasis on equipment, I spend time shopping/looking up/researching new "stuff" that I could be spending playing and learning new musical things.

 

[static0verdrive]

@Whousedtoplay While I don't always have the necessary time to truly delve into all the info in your posts right away, there is a wealth of info I'm extremely grateful for, and I look forward to really reading through them when I have a bit more spare time. Citing your references with links makes your posts even that much more invaluable! Thank you.

To everyone else, your insights are inspiring. This thread is why I Talk Bass.