Take the 2-minute tour ×
Musical Practice & Performance Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for musicians, students, and enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have seen a few singer/songwriters use this and Incubus, though I can't think of which songs in particular. I've seen it done with a Dmaj most frequently. The 4 appears a half-step above the 3, creating a minor second dissonance that sounds pretty cool. They use the F# on the D-string and play the open G-string. I have seen people add the open B and E as well or an A on the low E-string but I can call those extensions such as 9 and 13 if D is the root of this chord. If I refer to the G as 11, Jazz theory (and my ear) tells me that it shouldn't be there or that it isn't a normal major chord and that voicing wouldn't be played if someone wrote Dmaj on a chart. However, it does still functionally sound like a major chord to me.

If I just look at the notes I could try to call it Gmaj7/D and the B is implied, but it doesn't sound that way and a simple II-V-I in G, landing on this chord, doesn't sound resolved, where a II-V-I in D does.

Similarly, is there a way to express in a chord symbol that two notes should be played directly next to each other, creating the same minor second dissonance? Such as, the 9 and b3 of a minor chord or the b7 and 13 in a dominant chord. That is a specific dissonance that is not expressed by the normal chord symbol and I have wondered how to write it for a while.

Thanks!

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Yes it should be noted maj add11

Similarly, is there a way to express in a chord symbol that two notes should be played directly next to each other, creating the same minor second dissonance?

No, chords describe notes, not voicing. add4=add11. I jazz theory we don't distinguish octaves, and it's always 11. Guitar players have invented sus/add2 vs sus/add9 and 4/11

share|improve this answer
1  
Thanks, my only further thought would then concern proper voicing of this maj add11. The 11 would have to be below the 3 or right next to it or you would get a nasty b9, essentially changing the function of the chord, right? Also, I think of 4 when thinking classically and 11 for jazz and my jazz training has taught me that to reflect the function of the chords written on the chart, notes that are a half-step below a chord tone should be voiced above that chord tone, which to me distinguishes octaves relative to other voices. Is there a term you are aware of to describe the tight voicing? –  Basstickler Jul 19 '13 at 9:33
    
Simply you cannot communicate this with a chord naming (well you could, as guitarists do, saying "add4" instead of "add11"; in Jazz theory it is always an add11,add9 as they are stacked in thirds 1,3,5,7,9,11) but you may not because that is not the purpose of chord naming. This is relegated to chords pictures(boxes) or 022100 notation in guitar or either score for piano and others. Definining voicings and octaves is not defining notes (harmony). –  user1352530 Jul 19 '13 at 9:39
    
Yes, the more I think about how that would be depicted the more I realize you would have to say which notes were doing it and that it would be quite inefficient. –  Basstickler Jul 19 '13 at 9:46
    
Good comment about having the 11th below the 3rd. Sus chords are sometimes voiced to include the 3rd, but in that case higher than the 11th, for the reason you named (b9). Depending on context, I guess your chord example could be a Sus. But I know of no standard symbol for including the third in a Sus cord. –  Gauthier Jul 19 '13 at 10:46
    
Well you stil could do some invesion notation if it was the bass note,like in Cadd11/F or Cadd11/E, but never Csus4add10or3 or Csus4add3/E-Csus4add10/E.In practical terms as guitar players often spell you could say Csus4/E, but its not correct by classical/jazz naming conventions and guidelines. Anyway there is not a chord naming convention standard, just traditional rules.They ALWAYS claim not to define voicings in chord names.For traditional harmony, its always a stack of 3rds 1-3-5-7-9-11 so a 4th is an 11 always if the third is there (sus4 exception as its quartal -not thirds stack- chord) –  user1352530 Jul 19 '13 at 10:56
add comment

In the jazz / pop sense with the 3rd omitted, you'd call it a "sus" chord - -> Csus4

In the jazz / pop sense with the 3rd included, it would be more like - -> Cadd4

In the classical tradition, these types of voicings are realized with a different type of notation called figured bass.

For the chord you speak about in your last paragraph, I would try building it and generating a chord name the way you would build a chord otherwise. It is hard to help until you mention specific chords.

Hope that helps!

share|improve this answer
    
I like the figured bass idea, I've studied it but I don't think enough people outside the classical world use it (and not many within it after Theory III, maybe organists). –  Basstickler Jul 19 '13 at 9:40
    
Figured bass realization has largely fallen out of practice, but every classically trained musician has dealt with it in their theory studies. –  jjmusicnotes Jul 19 '13 at 12:06
    
Figured bass becomes useful again when using computers, as a canonical form for chords. example. –  luser droog Jul 19 '13 at 20:16
    
What would you call it when the root note and the 3rd is present, but rather the 5th is omitted and substituted with a 4th? Is it still a sus4? If it is, how do you tell it from the case where the 3rd is omitted? If it is not, does it have a proper name? –  András Hummer Apr 9 at 14:37
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.