Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Why does this chord progression sound good even though it's using notes not in the correct key?
- Thread starter DuckSoup
- Start date
Sorry, but I’m off today so I will keep going.
A major seventh chord is a major chord.
A minor seventh chord is a minor chord.
Those are not untrue statements.
Now do you see why specificity in terminology matters?
Or how about…
All major triads are major chords, but not all major chords are major triads.
Are we coming close to epiphany yet?
(Hint: this debate has nothing to do with music theory but rather language)
All major triads are major chords, but not all major chords are major triads.
Are we coming close to epiphany yet?
(Hint: this debate has nothing to do with music theory but rather language)
Well, nearly everybody is right, in a way. Triads are indeed chords, but chords are not necessarily triads.
Perhaps one source of disagreement, apparent or actual, is that the word "major," like many other terms in music, is used to apply to more than one concept.
From everything I've ever heard and seen in 50 years of playing (classical, rock, jazz, and world [whatever that means]), when you ask someone to play a C major chord, the overwhelming majority of the time what you're asking for, and what you get, is a C major triad: C E G. If that's not what you want, you typically ask for something else. So in usual practice, "major," as the specific name of a type of chord to play, routinely means major triad. You can always make an argument that that's sloppy, but in practice this is what's usually done.
But it's no less true that "major" has a sense as the blanket term for a whole family of chords that includes all the variants stringtapper mentioned, and for the reason mentioned. In this equally valid sense, Cmaj7, C7, C6, etc are all "major" chords in that they belong to the "major" family.
As in many things, it helps to define the context of the discussion.
Perhaps one source of disagreement, apparent or actual, is that the word "major," like many other terms in music, is used to apply to more than one concept.
From everything I've ever heard and seen in 50 years of playing (classical, rock, jazz, and world [whatever that means]), when you ask someone to play a C major chord, the overwhelming majority of the time what you're asking for, and what you get, is a C major triad: C E G. If that's not what you want, you typically ask for something else. So in usual practice, "major," as the specific name of a type of chord to play, routinely means major triad. You can always make an argument that that's sloppy, but in practice this is what's usually done.
But it's no less true that "major" has a sense as the blanket term for a whole family of chords that includes all the variants stringtapper mentioned, and for the reason mentioned. In this equally valid sense, Cmaj7, C7, C6, etc are all "major" chords in that they belong to the "major" family.
As in many things, it helps to define the context of the discussion.
Last edited:
Okay...it sorta seems that you are arguing that a triad is not a chord. You also seem to be arguing that C Maj notation is ambiguous, but that is not what I was taught. I was taught C Maj specifically designates a triad, but not an inversion.
Also it's really not that hard to understand the concept that a triad is a chord spelled with three notes. So I don't agree that there is a problem intermingling the term triad and chord. The teacher should take a moment to explain, as you did in post #60, and the student should learn to understand the nuanced meaning of these basic terms. If this is done there is no conflation.
This subject grows extremely tiresome and IMHO is off topic.
I don’t know where in the world you’re getting that I ever said a triad is not a chord.
When not specified in a chord chart? Yes, absolutely.
When not specified in a random post on the internet? No, not necessarily.
A major seventh chord isn't a major chord with a seven tacked on. It refers to playing the seven a half-step up.
On C7 the 7 is played as a Bb. On Cmaj 7 the 7 is a B. And so on. You can have a C minor chord with a major 7.
Nope, it refers to the quality of the seventh above the root. A major 7th chord has a…… wait for it, major seventh!
What you're saying about "playing the seven a half-step up" sounds like you're assuming that any "tacked on" seventh would by default be a minor seventh above the root. Maybe that's a common assumption where you're from, but I've never heard it (nor held it).
Well, as I am studying piano and playing jazz standards that include a lot of major seventh chords, I am noting that the major seventh chords I'm playing are all augmented at the seven by a half-step from where the basic seventh chords have the seven. Not sure how much more complicated it needs to get from there, but I'm sticking with what's working for the music I'm playing
Examples are helpful.
Well, as I am studying piano and playing jazz standards that include a lot of major seventh chords, I am noting that the major seventh chords I'm playing are all augmented at the seven by a half-step from where the basic seventh chords have the seven. Not sure how much more complicated it needs to get from there, but I'm sticking with what's working for the music I'm playing
Examples are helpful.
Hmm, yeah it sounds like you're taking a dominant seventh chord as a sort of "default" and then looking at major seventh chords as being an alteration of that. That's definitely making things a bit more complicated than they have to be. Better to simply learn the basic intervallic structures of the main types of seventh chords, rather than having to go through some mental Rube Goldberg machine to get to the answer.
Well, here's what I'm looking at. I use a DAW (LOGIC) while I am learning piano, which gives me the names of the chords I am playing, and looking at that is what's helping me stay straight on whether or not I am playing them correctly.
There may be other terms for things but if I play a Cmaj7 with an augmented seven and I flatten the third, this is what I see:
That may be an awkward term, but it's accurate to what I'm playing and it's accurate in terms of what I need to do with my fingers in order to get there.
Although reading back through that last post, now I'm wondering if this is a case of the dreaded "seventh/seven/Seven" terminology striking again.
"seventh chord" = chord that includes a seventh above the root
"seven chord" = a colloquial shorthand term for a dominant seventh chord
" (the) Seven chord" = chord built on the seventh scale degree of a key
"seventh chord" = chord that includes a seventh above the root
"seven chord" = a colloquial shorthand term for a dominant seventh chord
" (the) Seven chord" = chord built on the seventh scale degree of a key
Holy hell. Yeah, that's a nightmare within a hellscape. And a road towards a seriously ****-ed up understanding of music, and one that I suggest you move away from as quickly as possible.
Why? Because programming smart chord detection engines is hard. Ever tried modulating while you're using Logic's chord display? Yyyyyyeah… things will get weird. The computer can only go so far in understanding the context of what you're doing.
Also, you aren't "augmenting" the seventh in that example (well, depending on what key you're in). But in C major, the seventh above C is B-natural. In other words it's already a major seventh. If you were to actually augment the diatonic seventh above C you would get a B-sharp… which would sound just like a C (and also register as such in Logic's chord display).
Could be. I am not so concerned with how these terms are said as how they are written on the charts, because that's what I'm looking at when I play them.
It's augmenting where the "seventh note" is normally played in the C7 chord. Which, again, is kind of what you need to know in order to play the chord.
I'm not interested in moving away from what I'm doing as it's serving me pretty well in terms of learning to play these chord changes in the real book. I'm not sure what practical advantage I would gain from doing it some other way. Give me the chart, I'll play what's on the chart. That's kind of what happens in the real world. Is there any reason that's not reasonable?
The thing is, this may be a non-traditional approach but it is infinitely PRACTICAL in terms of letting me know what my fingers need to do. So that seems like an OK thing to me. We can continue this offline if you'd like; I'm not dismissing your ideas I just don't see the practical advantage and at the age of 61 having 40+ years spent in music I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the idea of changing how I learn to play music.
