Chord Challenge: What is this Chord?

[rEaLiTy|cHecK]

it is not an fmin(9)b5... the g is non chordal. naming chords has to do with spelling, yes, but you must consider function first and foremost. 9ths resolve downwards; the g in this chord resolves upwards. when you play that chord, the g in the soprano has the natural tendency to resolve upwards. and though i cant remember this video, im pretty sure she had the G go up to the Ab.

fmin7b5 in first inversion.

[rEaLiTy|cHecK]

o.k. it is a C11 instead of C13...LOL, but I'm still on the question, as to why can't you call that first chord a AbmM7(add13)?...

I can see it either way as a Fm9b5 or a AbmM7(add13) both would include the same notes...my only thought is that you would name the chord with the bass root note which is (Ab), unless in her playing she is just inverting the bass root of the chord and playing the Ab as if she altered the root as if there was a bass player playing the (F).

again, function is the most important thing. it's not an ab minor chord cuz that 1 isnt a regular chord in the major setting... 2  even if it was altered it wouldnt be followed by a G minor chord.

[sjonathan02]

SJ, I believe that 4HG is correct.

The Bb/C chord only goes up to the 11th (4th 1 octave up), while the BbM7/C chord includes the 13th (6th 1 octave up).

Naming extended chords such as these, can become complex and ambiguous, (did I say that?  ).  Which is one big reason that it's a continuing learning process for me.   

According to virtual piano.com (where you can put in C11 and it'll show the notes on the keyboard) it's not a C11 but rather a C13.

This is me----->

[sjonathan02]

it is not an fmin(9)b5... the g is non chordal. naming chords has to do with spelling, yes, but you must consider function first and foremost. 9ths resolve downwards; the g in this chord resolves upwards. when you play that chord, the g in the soprano has the natural tendency to resolve upwards. and though i cant remember this video, im pretty sure she had the G go up to the Ab.

fmin7b5 in first inversion.

Very interesting.

[4hisglory]

According to virtual piano.com (where you can put in C11 and it'll show the notes on the keyboard) it's not a C11 but rather a C13.

This is me----->

How can it be a 13th without the 13th??  if you don't have that A, it can be a 13th

[cas10a]

again, function is the most important thing. it's not an ab minor chord cuz that 1 isnt a regular chord in the major setting... 2  even if it was altered it wouldnt be followed by a G minor chord.

O.K. now I see where you coming from...I didn't think to look at it that way.


BroAllan...I guess it's a challenge for me at times also...

[Mysteryman]

Keep this up and I may jazz up my style some more.

[4hisglory]

again, function is the most important thing. it's not an ab minor chord cuz that 1 isnt a regular chord in the major setting... 2  even if it was altered it wouldnt be followed by a G minor chord.

The Ab (??) chord was said to come before, not follow.  So it could function like that.

[musallio]

I know I'm still an amateur and all, but I've just been playing this chord over & over, trying to establish what the root note really is.
I concluded that the root should really be F.
This is an example of where the original progression should have gone from a 2 to a 3, but the 2 is sub'd by a 4 (Ab subing the F in this case--just like we would normally sub a 2 with a b6 in a 6-2-5 progression).

So based on that, this chord should be called an FmSomething

F7(b5,#9) in the 1st inversion...
 

[sjonathan02]

How can it be a 13th without the 13th??  if you don't have that A, it can be a 13th

Did you NOT see my face(s)? 

I'm telling you what it said at virtual piano.com.

[BroAllan]

Did you NOT see my face(s)? 

I'm telling you what it said at virtual piano.com.

BTW SJ, Thanks for the beautiful pics of you wedding.  We're all proud and happy for you and your lovely wife.
"May the Lord continue to bless you and keep you, and cause His face to shine upon you..."   

[sjonathan02]

BTW SJ, Thanks for the beautiful pics of you wedding.  We're all proud and happy for you and your lovely wife.
"May the Lord continue to bless you and keep you, and cause His face to shine upon you..."   

Thanks, bruh. I receive that prayer in Jesus' name.

[darkwing]

I was thinking the same...maybe a AbmMaj7add13

Duh!  What was I thinking.  I have to change my stance and agree with both of you here.  AbmM7(13) makes a lot of sense here.

Out of sight, out of mind...since I rarely see minor-Major chords in use in Gospel music, it didn't even occur to me.   

[rEaLiTy|cHecK]

again i say function speaks most here. to any of you have not had a chance to listen to the her playing it, go here: http://www.showmethat.com/index.php?pr=DVD_CLIPS and click view video under cassandra o'neil... the change happens as she's going into the chorus the first time.

forget about letters and numbers just for a second. when she hits that chord, listen to where your ear is expecting her to go. im pretty sure when she hit that g minor chord right afterward, it was no surprise to you. theoretically, that makes sense because iii follows ii (in an earlier post i defined this chord as ii half diminished 7 in first inversion). however, iii does not follow IV (theoretical guidelines state: down a fifth, down a third, up a second). so if it was some kind of chord with Ab as its root, following the guidelines, the chord following would be VII, ii, or V.

it is important to learn the letters and the numbers, but these things only define what you are listening to. the aural part of music is by far the most important. learn to trust your ear, while learning the system of theory, so that you can define what it is that you've already learned.

[chevonee]

Lawd Have Mercy!!! Note to self- Chevonne don't get this video...You're not ready for it

[4hisglory]

im pretty sure when she hit that g minor chord right afterward, it was no surprise to you. theoretically, that makes sense because iii follows ii (in an earlier post i defined this chord as ii half diminished 7 in first inversion). however, iii does not follow IV (theoretical guidelines state: down a fifth, down a third, up a second). so if it was some kind of chord with Ab as its root, following the guidelines, the chord following would be VII, ii, or V.

it is important to learn the letters and the numbers, but these things only define what you are listening to. the aural part of music is by far the most important. learn to trust your ear, while learning the system of theory, so that you can define what it is that you've already learned.

Either you keep forgetting, or you don't know that theoretically, a chord a half step above the target chord is also correct also.  If you need the theory explained, i can do that also.

Actually, any chord can "theoretically" lead to any chords as long as your voicings are tight.  People get stuck on the ii V I or diatonic chords to often.

[sjonathan02]

Either you keep forgetting, or you don't know that theoretically, a chord a half step above the target chord is also correct also.  If you need the theory explained, i can do that also.

Actually, any chord can "theoretically" lead to any chords as long as your voicings are tight.  People get stuck on the ii V I or diatonic chords to often.

Because it's hard enough to try to follow THAT; if you go incorporating all the possibilities at the same time, it's information overload. 


Which is why I'm still stuck (because no one has addressed my question) as to why it can't be some type of "slash" chord. 

[rEaLiTy|cHecK]

Either you keep forgetting, or you don't know that theoretically, a chord a half step above the target chord is also correct also.  If you need the theory explained, i can do that also.

Actually, any chord can "theoretically" lead to any chords as long as your voicings are tight.  People get stuck on the ii V I or diatonic chords to often.

a chord a half step above the target chord is correct when it's a dominant chord. there was no C or Gb in the chord so that's out of the question.

yes i am using very classical theory here, and you may view it as being "stuck" in "ii-V-I", but that is because the chord she used is very classical. it spells and functions like a ii half diminished chord passing between V and iii.

if you didnt get a chance to watch the video, please do; the link is my previous post. listen to what she does with the g in the right hand right before she goes to g minor. it resolves upwards, which leads me to the conclusion that the g is a retardation to the Ab.  the chord is spelled: AbF/BEb(G~>Ab). rearrange that into thirds, and u get F Ab B Eb. no G because the G resolved upwards.

that spells Fmin9b5.

[4hisglory]

yes i am using very classical theory here, and you may view it as being "stuck" in "ii-V-I", but that is because the chord she used is very classical. it spells and functions like a ii half diminished chord passing between V and iii.

yeah, you are stuck in the 1800's.   But thats cool.  In theory, the V (or subs) should be dominant but in reality, these guys are using any chords.

[rEaLiTy|cHecK]

^lol music is music doc. V went to I in Bach's time, it still does now .