types of suspended chords?

[musallio]

Ok now,
all the guys have said what I've been saying along except for Diverse:

Dirvese, for the sus2 , you use this formula : 2-3-5....& your explanation was that a suspension is when you take something up, hence the 1 is suspended, hence it's not there in a sus2....

I know that this is how aljeres & Hammondman! also understand & teach the sus2..
But then other teachers & software that's out there uses this formula:

1-2-5..

So please,can someone explain these clashes

[T-Block]

Ok now,
all the guys have said what I've been saying along except for Diverse:

Dirvese, for the sus2 , you use this formula : 2-3-5....& your explanation was that a suspension is when you take something up, hence the 1 is suspended, hence it's not there in a sus2....

I know that this is how aljeres & Hammondman! also understand & teach the sus2..
But then other teachers & software that's out there uses this formula:

1-2-5..

So please,can someone explain these clashes

O.K. mus, I'm going to assume that the 2-3-5 voicing Diverse is using is for the RH.  THe root of the chord will mostly likely be played in the LH.

Now, the 1-2-5 voicing is mostly what guitar players do to make a sus2 chord.  So, basically u got the piano players version and the guitar players version.  Hope that helps.

[musallio]

O.K. mus, I'm going to assume that the 2-3-5 voicing Diverse is using is for the RH.  THe root of the chord will mostly likely be played in the LH.

Now, the 1-2-5 voicing is mostly what guitar players do to make a sus2 chord.  So, basically u got the piano players version and the guitar players version.  Hope that helps.

Thanks for trying to clear things up T..if that was the case, then I would be happy..

but I think Diverse would disagree with you..
Also the reason I say they think the root is not there at all (even in the LH) is because I saw in this vid by Hammondman!) he didn'd have the root at all & he called the chord a Csus2, that made me go 

But I understand what you just said

[rspindy]

Ok now,
all the guys have said what I've been saying along except for Diverse:

Dirvese, for the sus2 , you use this formula : 2-3-5....& your explanation was that a suspension is when you take something up, hence the 1 is suspended, hence it's not there in a sus2....

I know that this is how aljeres & Hammondman! also understand & teach the sus2..
But then other teachers & software that's out there uses this formula:

1-2-5..

So please,can someone explain these clashes

The confusion again lies with trying to compare the chord symbols to traditional theory.  The 2-3-5 voicing can work as a 2 - 1 suspension.  If you think about it, 2-3-5 is the third inversion 7th chord (without its 5th) built on the 3rd of the intended root.  If C maj were our intended chord, E min7 is the 7th built on the third of C major.  The effect would be similar if you did the 3rd inversion E min7 (with the 5th) resolving the D to the C of a C maj7.

This case is treating the harmony as a true suspension requiring a resolution.  If it were not to resolve then we would never have a C anything.  In contemporary harmony these so called "suspended" chords are not required to resolve, thus, if a C root is indicated then it will be present otherwise it is not a C chord and would probably more clearly written as "Em/D (no 5)".

The sus2 naming didn't really get a lot of use until the advent of 60's Brit Rock rock and roll.  It is also sometimes referred to as an "add 2".  The names for the "guitar" chord symbols at times seem to have been pulled out of a hat.  This r and r usage is possibly the most common meaning of the "sus2"

One thing to consider also is that a I sus2 (using 1 - 2- 5) is an inversion of a V sus4.  C sus2 = [C D G]  G sus4 = [G C D].  Thus the chord is a bit of a hybrid acting both as I and V.

The most common suspensions do resolve DOWN (making the suspended note higher than the resolution) with the 7-8 suspension being the most common exception.  Sometimes, this upwardly resolving suspension was called a "retardation" to distinguish the two types of resolution.  But this just created two terms for a process that was functionally identical.  You will never see a "ret 2" (retarded 2) chord.  If not just for the fact that it would seem un-PC.

You will find in the case of chord symbols that there are some points of disagreement as to the exact meaning.  These symbols were created as needed and different people sometimes came up with different names and symbols for the same thing as well as used the same symbols to mean different things.

[musallio]

The confusion again lies with trying to compare the chord symbols to traditional theory.  The 2-3-5 voicing can work as a 2 - 1 suspension.  If you think about it, 2-3-5 is the third inversion 7th chord (without its 5th) built on the 3rd of the intended root.  If C maj were our intended chord, E min7 is the 7th built on the third of C major.  The effect would be similar if you did the 3rd inversion E min7 (with the 5th) resolving the D to the C of a C maj7.

This case is treating the harmony as a true suspension requiring a resolution.  If it were not to resolve then we would never have a C anything.  In contemporary harmony these so called "suspended" chords are not required to resolve, thus, if a C root is indicated then it will be present otherwise it is not a C chord and would probably more clearly written as "Em/D (no 5)".

The sus2 naming didn't really get a lot of use until the advent of 60's Brit Rock rock and roll.  It is also sometimes referred to as an "add 2".  The names for the "guitar" chord symbols at times seem to have been pulled out of a hat.  This r and r usage is possibly the most common meaning of the "sus2"

One thing to consider also is that a I sus2 (using 1 - 2- 5) is an inversion of a V sus4.  C sus2 = [C D G]  G sus4 = [G C D].  Thus the chord is a bit of a hybrid acting both as I and V.

The most common suspensions do resolve DOWN (making the suspended note higher than the resolution) with the 7-8 suspension being the most common exception.  Sometimes, this upwardly resolving suspension was called a "retardation" to distinguish the two types of resolution.  But this just created two terms for a process that was functionally identical.  You will never see a "ret 2" (retarded 2) chord.  If not just for the fact that it would seem un-PC.

You will find in the case of chord symbols that there are some points of disagreement as to the exact meaning.  These symbols were created as needed and different people sometimes came up with different names and symbols for the same thing as well as used the same symbols to mean different things.

Wow...History is very important...Now I understand the better why there is all this confusion

[seemunny]

Wow...History is very important...Now I understand the better why there is all this confusion

lol i hope i didn't confuse you! 

[musallio]

I'll give this a shot. I can take correction if needed and some of this might be repeating what has already been said:

• 1-2-5 = _________________sus2
• 1-4-5 = _________________sus4
• 1-4-5-7 = _______________7sus4
• 1-2(9)-3-5 = ____________ Major add 9 (when the 3 is present, the 2 becomes a 9)

        so a better way to say it is:
        1-3-5-9

• 1-b3-5-7 = ______________ m/Maj7

• 1-b3-4(11)-5-b7,9 = ______ minor7,9,11 (when the 3 is present, the 4 becomes an 11)

        so a better way to say it is:
        1-b3-5-b7-9-11

I got this perfectly CMoony

[seemunny]

I got this perfectly CMoony

Now, that's what i'm talkin' bout!

[diverse379]

wow this post really took some deep turns

I apologize for not getting back to yall on this post

T-block is right I would probably use this chord

the 235
in my right hand against a root 1 in the bass

but the truth is that the 2 is actually a suspended one
that resolves or doesent back to the one

I got my information
from the mark harrison book pop piano

and from an old jazz teacher named jaki byard
an old school head well versed and had quite a few recordings


the problem with listening too deeply to the ideas from the younger cats

although extremely talented
unless they are trained (not self taught)

a lot of times you will get some different terminologies and concepts

not to say they are completely wrong

theories are just that theories
conjectures
and attempts to explain phenomena
in our case music phenomenon

so I dont know why aljiers or hammond man illustrated the sus2 the way they do

but I am willing to bet if we all got into a room together

we would walk out agreeing

because truth is truth and sometimes the way you see something is that way because of a particular perspective

[jonesl78]

This is an excellent post.

Diverse, if I understand correctly, you have the 1 in the LH and 235 in the the RH. Wouldn't that be a add9 since the root and the 3rd are present. If you could, what would be your entire voicing for a chord like this because it seems that the chord has already resolved.

[musallio]

Very Well said Diverse...great stuff

This is an excellent post.

Diverse, if I understand correctly, you have the 1 in the LH and 235 in the the RH. Wouldn't that be a add9 since the root and the 3rd are present. If you could, what would be your entire voicing for a chord like this because it seems that the chord has already resolved.

I would also call it an add9 .
But I guess it depends on the sound 1 hears, & sometimes it doesn't sound right to end with a  1/2-3-5, in which case you want to resove that, say, to 1/1-3-5...
So in effect, it should really be the sound that dictates the name...If that is not the case, then 1 of these 2 proposed theories would have to give way for the other.

But like Diverse said, if we were all to be in 1 room & go through the stuff, we'd probably come out in agreement

[diverse379]

This is an excellent post.

Diverse, if I understand correctly, you have the 1 in the LH and 235 in the the RH. Wouldn't that be a add9 since the root and the 3rd are present. If you could, what would be your entire voicing for a chord like this because it seems that the chord has already resolved.

the sus2 and the add 9 are the same chord the difference is the sus 2 resolves  to a regular major chord
 
the add 9 by function of its name just adds the 9
to the major chord and leaves it there

[seemunny]

I think it just comes down to whether or not the 3 is present.

No 3, you have sus2

With 3, you have add9


But i think yall know that. Yall just playin around. lol

[diverse379]

I think it just comes down to whether or not the 3 is present.

No 3, you have sus2

With 3, you have add9


But i think yall know that. Yall just playin around. lol

oh yeah that too

I slipped that one
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
 like we used to say

ah doy!
(in my most mentally challenged voice)

[rspindy]

Whether it is a sus2, add2, or add9 also depends on who is writing the chord symbols in the music.  Chord symbols are among the least standardized or consistent of any music term.  If it is a guitarist writing them, then you may even see some stranger combinations.

The chord symbols tell little more than the group of notes that can be played.  It tells nothing about voicing and do not always indicate the tensions (9, 11, 13) that can be used.

In general, use the chord symbols as a basic guide.  From there you can work with different possibilities.

[diverse379]

Whether it is a sus2, add2, or add9 also depends on who is writing the chord symbols in the music.  Chord symbols are among the least standardized or consistent of any music term.  If it is a guitarist writing them, then you may even see some stranger combinations.

The chord symbols tell little more than the group of notes that can be played.  It tells nothing about voicing and do not always indicate the tensions (9, 11, 13) that can be used.

In general, use the chord symbols as a basic guide.  From there you can work with different possibilities.

i agree and disagree

yes it does seem to be open to interpretation
and yes if you see a seventh chord symbol
often you can add a ninth or an 11th even a 13th

however
today chart writers are often highly trained and learned musicians
many times they are graduates in music and hold masters degrees sometimes phd,s

they are employed by the record labels to put together the symbols and write out the lead sheets for the hit records

when this is the case the symbols tell you quite a bit

such as which tension should appear first in the chord based on how the chord is spelled

[musallio]

i agree and disagree

yes it does seem to be open to interpretation
and yes if you see a seventh chord symbol
often you can add a ninth or an 11th even a 13th

however
today chart writers are often highly trained and learned musicians
many times they are graduates in music and hold masters degrees sometimes phd,s

they are employed by the record labels to put together the symbols and write out the lead sheets for the hit records

when this is the case the symbols tell you quite a bit

such as which tension should appear first in the chord based on how the chord is spelled

I do not dispute the fact that today's chart writers are often highly trained & learned musicians.
But still, I have to agree with everything Rspindy said...In my short time playing, I have experienced it..

for instance, if one gives you a chord, say like this:
Em7 (no 5)/CM7 (no3, no5)

this chord does not tell me the exact voicing of the chord that will make it sound as nice as the writer intended.
This is just the way I've expressed this particular voicing:

C-B/E-G-D

Now what is the possibility that you will ever find this chord named the way I've just named it (I did so so that the proper voicing would be played..Yet still, someone can twist it around to suit their positioning & it may lose the flavor I wanted to express.

We all know that what I've named above would be simply labelled as a "CM9 chord"..
Now how can we ever know the voicing the writer wanted us to play? where should the melody note be?
Ok, I'm sure the point is heard now..

[diverse379]

I do not dispute the fact that today's chart writers are often highly trained & learned musicians.
But still, I have to agree with everything Rspindy said...In my short time playing, I have experienced it..

for instance, if one gives you a chord, say like this:
Em7 (no 5)/CM7 (no3, no5)

this chord does not tell me the exact voicing of the chord that will make it sound as nice as the writer intended.
This is just the way I've expressed this particular voicing:

C-B/E-G-D

Now what is the possibility that you will ever find this chord named the way I've just named it (I did so so that the proper voicing would be played..Yet still, someone can twist it around to suit their positioning & it may lose the flavor I wanted to express.

We all know that what I've named above would be simply labelled as a "CM9 chord"..
Now how can we ever know the voicing the writer wanted us to play? where should the melody note be?
Ok, I'm sure the point is heard now..

If you ever saw a chord like that in a book you should make sure the chart writer never works again

most chart writers know that there are two  goals one  to make the chart as easy to read as possible'

and second on the list is to make it possible for the reader to be able to voice as accurately as possible the voicing

which is why we see so many slash chords in todays charts


I have made my living reading charts
literally
I began playing in churches as a full time musician before I knew many songs

so reading charts mainly the song books of richard smallwood
and wow gospel and kirk franklin

enabled me to perform my job well

moreover,
I was able to write chord charts from hymns
which allowed me to play the hymn very close to how it was written

this dual ability to both read and write charts
enabled me to work in big churches where reading was preferred
even though my reading was very poor with preparation I managed to do a good job

so You will never catch me bashing chord charts

My only advice to anyone who has difficulty is

stick with it

it took me over 6 months to learn my first song from a chord chart

I believe it took me nearly 7 months to learn total praise from the chord charts

but it was time well worth investing

now I can write a chord chart simply from hearing a record

I have several ways I can interpret any chart

and I can play a song on the fly from seeing a chord chart for the first time

there were some questions that you raised

where does the melody go?

if you read at all then you should read the melody in the right hand
on the choir voicings which will appear in most lead sheets

when in doubt read the actual chord

also voice your chord from the melody down as opposed to from the bass up
this way your melody will always be on the top and your arrangement will be better accepted



otherwise

just play some standard R&B voicings or jazz voicings
they should do very well

to be honest the R&B voicings seem to work better for most contemporary gospel charts

another big thing is time and groove

it is easy to lose the groove when looking at a chord chart especially when you are new to the game

always keep a groove going
some type of beat and syncopation that you have moving from measure to measure

there are many books that teach accompaniment styles to handle exactly this type of question

I like where this post is going because
the reading of chord charts is a very valuable skill and
I would hate to see anyone short change themselves
due to a few mishaps early on


trust me the charts are getting better and better

companies like verity and zomba
have very very very accurate charts

I have gone through many of them I have all the wow song books
and the majority of the song books written in the last 8 years
in he gospel genre

I can attest that the charts are very true to the original recordings

and the one or two chords that missed the mark is not worth giving up on chart reading

believe me


back in the days charts were hit or miss
which is why many older heads dont like charts
due to bad first impressions

but this is a new day

so pick up a wow book
and just start digging in

use your ears
and your eyes
and your heart
and learn a song better then you ever have before

how do I do it

I have chords that I know work (see many of my posts on left hand chords voicings
and phat voicings instantly

I play the melody at all times possible
unless I am backing up a choir

I always try to play chords or chord shells in my left hand


always groove whenever possible

[musallio]

^^^
Wow! This post alone is so invaluable!!!I should print it out & show it to friends who will be interested to read it!

Just out of interest Diverse, how would you show this voicing on a chord  chart:

C-B/ E-G-D..

[sjonathan02]

^^^
Wow! This post alone is so invaluable!!!I should print it out & show it to friends who will be interested to read it!

Just out of interest Diverse, how would you show this voicing on a chord  chart:

C-B/ E-G-D..

C major 9?