I think it's acceptable to call a minor chord with a raised
fifth a minor/augmeneted. It makes perfect sense in
some cases to view it that way, and to describe it that
way, and if it helps communication, why not?

The James Bond theme revolves around a minor chord
moving to a minor/aug to a minor/double-aug back to a
minor/aug (now we're really pushing the boundaries). I
think it's much easier to "see" the music doing that than
Am, Fmaj7/A, D7/A

But I'm no stickler for the nomenclature, I just love the
sounds.

Kirk

Dear Kirk,
You can call any chord any name you desire for your self. However when communicating with other musicians in the musical community it is best to use the proper designated name for a tone cluster other wise they won't know what your talking or writing about.

Certainly in TV and Radio rehersal time is expensive and the powers that be want to get the most bang for the buck and if they have to stop a rehearsal because of a fuzzy name to decipher what was intended by the writer ... who do you think would be eliminated for not using correct designations? Something to think about....

It is difficult enough to put together something following printed directions... fuzzy names do not do well..

Who would you want to do a job for you... one who knows... or one who is guessing and making up names? Take care and be the best you can be. Charlie

Hey Charles.

I was actually thinking of the countless recording
sessions I've done where the players call chords by all
kinds of names in order to get the message across. If
we were to restrict ourselves to associating only with
players who know exactly what to call every little
musical nuance by its proper name, we'd be dealing
with only a fraction of the wonderful pool of talent that
exists.

I have beeen an active and respected member of the
musical community where I live for the last three
decades. I get hired for the music I make, not the words
I use to describe it.

As for who would want to do a job for me? I can't ever
recall anybody passing up on working for me. I work
with professionals, and if you're a professional, you
don't pass up on any job. Some of the professionals I
work with actually do know the proper terminlology for
every little nuance of music, but they are the minority,
and the more musically boring and unimaginative of the
lot for the most part. The proof of the player is in the
music he or she makes, not what they call it.

Be the best you can be, Charlie.

Kirk

Dear Kirk,
I worked with many band teachers in the schools and they were good at what they did. Creativeness... no.. at least not in creating music .... they danced to a single drummer... but not innovative musical aspects. I only met one who was creative. He was a Jazz Violinst.

I did meet a few others who were creative ... one was a custodian who played on the side....

There are many talented musicians who are very skilled in playing their horn

Sometimes a musician will forgoe their intent when raising a family that they love. Some of us are successful in being in music, using our craft, raising a family, practicing our skills, using creative gifts in the way we planned. Sometimes a few detours need to be made along the way. Charlie

Dear Kirk,
In those James Bond themes .. very simply put ... you are hearing a moving voice pattern. Charlie

Moving voice pattern? That says nothing to me..

How would you describe exactly, in words, Charlie?
Let's say we're in Am, and I want you to convey to me
the James Bond thing. How would you put it to me
exactly?

Kirk

Dear Kirk,
Check these lessons. #1362 Moving Voice #1, #1365 Moving Voice #2, #1366 Moving Voice #3. The moving voice patterns may only use part of one of the lessons, instead of all of it. Basically a moving voice chord is a movement within a chord that changes while the chord remains stationary. Here is an example in Aminor.

Am

Fmaj7

Am6

Fmaj7

Am

Put your own rhythmic patterns in the pattern. Hope this helps. You could repeat the pattern over and over again

Charlie

Hi Charlie.

I haven't been to the 3 lessons you suggested as I do
know what a moving voice is. My question was, How in
shorthand English would you describe the Am example
of the 007 theme? I notice that even though you say it's
a moving voice within a stationary chord that you've
given each of the chords its own name.

The only point I was trying to make originally is that if it
helps communicate the identity of a note cluster to call it
minor/augmented -- then why not do it? Most of Music's
language is so unintuitive and opaque that it makes
very little sense to most players. It scares the hell out of
them and they shy away from figuring out the structure
of music...the way it all hangs together. If I can get one
of my students to do that -- to understand some aspect
of the unity of music -- then I'm a happy guy. If he or she
can hear the moving voice we are discussing and to
ascribe to it the minor/augmented connotation AND
PLAY IT KNOWING WHERE IT IS ON THE
FRETBOARD, then I've done my job. Whether or not the
terminology is exact according to orthodox methods is
irrelevant to me. It's the notes played that are the only
concern, and with what kind of heart and sensitivity.

My only formal teaching was in Montreal in 1965. I was
16. I went to Mrs Ballard for three lessons. Each time I
asked her to play me something. I needed inspiration
and I reckoned if I could hear someone really good
play, it would fuel me along. She refused each time,
with a different lame excuse. After the third time, I
realized she couldn't play. She could tell me about
crochets and minims and show me the diagrams in the
book, how to put my foot up on a little stool, how I
should forget everything I was playing (I was playing
the blues). She had all the right terminology and
academic lingo. She just couldn't really play. It's the
playing I've always loved, the sounds, the moods.
Words are man made, music is magic.

Kirk

Dear Kirk,
If you look at the example I gave, the notes that are constant are the low A, the upper notes C and E. THe moving voice is on the 4th string and moves from E, to F, to F# and back to F.. then starts all over again. It travels through the notes that are constant. Follow the exact fingering that I gave. You should be able to hear the movement.True, along the way, the exact name of the chord will vary due to being specific. The the melodic line with in the constant chord changes is called a moving voice. I don't know how else to explain what is there. The sound should clue you in.

There are somethings that do not give exact names, such as chord symbols because they are just too complicated and that is where music notation comes into play describing things musical. Of course if a person does not read music then there the problems become more difficult to explain. An example would be a tonal cluster, in music notation that is just too complex as a symbol. Example would be the notes, from the lowest to the highest strings, E, Bb, D#, A, D, G# and someone else might be playing the notes C#, G, and B#, F#, as one sound. The chord symbol would become a nightmare to read and understand.

Sorry for digressing on the chord symbol.

If we have a basic chord and a melodic line snakes its way through the notes, the name of the chord might change for a moment or two, but the basic overall chord sound would remain the same.

With respect to giving some thing a different name, that is ok when your with a group of people that understand that aspect. Sure why not call a specific chord a transmission, or a glimpk as long as the group knows that. However, if your communicating with others in a long range situation and are not able to see their faces, then words and examples are needed.

Musically there are many who do not have the foggiest idea of what they are doing, except that it works and sounds good. GREAT. There aren't too many that have that skill and ability.

We just don't have a minor augmented chord..... You can spell the notes differently all you want to, but that does not change what the chord is, If it looks like a cat, runs like a cat, makes a sound like a cat, then it probably is a cat... unless it came from some other location, other that earth...

If you have a student... and you know the correct name or way of doing something.... would you not pass along the correct information? It is one thing not knowing, so you can't pass along correct information, but if you know the correct information, and do not pass it a long, then that person is doing a dis service to their students


I had some teachers who knew next to beans about the instrument.. a second lesson was not necessary.... . So I know where you have been and that same road.

Generally information is helpful. If you know and disregard the information then you are not all you could be. Are you satisfied? If so great. If not then there is information out there for you.

Take care.

Charlie

So you could say that the fifth of the Am chord moves
up to a sharp five, then moves to a six, then back down
to the sharp five?

Kirk

Dear Kirk,
You could say that if you wished, to communicate to others who are lacking music theory backgroundto call it a sharped 5th on a minor chord, since enharmonically it is a not a Minor chord with a #5.It becomes the 3rd of a Major chord that exists for a moment in time. THe basic chord is minor. However, eliminate that thought of a #5 with those who do understand music theory.

It will depend on whom your communicating with in how you respond. Unusual designations of chord tones would be considered somewhat "backwards".

In society today, if you can sell it, do it. of course this opens the door to a lot of other things.

Our ability to read and understand things elevates civilization somewhat It does not remove greed and selfishness in this oversimplification statement that I just wrote.

Part of the task of any individuals who contribute lessons to any site, is to raise the level of understanding of all.

If you create lessons, then you have a task to help those who are lacking skills to assist them, little by little, to gain understanding of music music theory.

You can avoid using the term theory, if it rattles some guitarists.

Remember the music came first, then the theory as a way of explaining how something was done, or created. Man's nature has an inate desire to teach and explain. Best to avoid sudo music theory though. Good luck in your efforts. Charlie

Good. That's all I wanted to say here -- that the moving
voice can be seen as a raised fifth of the minor chord: a
minor / augmented.

To the originator of this thread (Dexter, did you have
any idea what a can of worms you were about to
open?), it seems that even though, for all intents and
purposes, you cannot call this chord a minor /
augmented -- no such beast, officially -- but if you're
ever hanging out here with me, I'll know exactly what
you mean and we'll make harmonious music together.

Kirk

Dear Kirk,
I thought about what you presented in using a terminology of a minor chord with a raised 5th or #5. This opens a real can of worms if not careful. Here is the reason why.

If we have a diminished chord and present it as a diminished chord with a raised 5th or Gdim#5 = Gm or we could have a Gdim ##5 = Eb chord.. Here are a few others Gaugb5 = G, Gaugb5b3 = Gm, Gaugdim??? or Gaugbb5b3 = Gdim b2sus4b6 = Ab maj 7... The point of this is for you to see just how far chord symbols can be taken away from normal chord symbol usage and how such usage makes things abnormal...Basically the system of chord symbols could be a complete chaos

The regular system of chord symbols leaves a lot to be desired.. abnormal designations takes it even further away and adds to confusion. Anything can be given any name .. but if we call a pillow a tin can, and a match a drink of water, the language becomes very clouded. If a person cannot read, the page of chicken markes is meaningless. So what do we need to do.?. How about training that person to read and become a literate person? Designations for conventional chords in unconventional terms are not the elements of informed and literate musicians unless the unconventional terms are explained in full prior to their usage.

Here is one for you.. simple... yet perhaps not within your frame of reference... What scale do you get with a mirror inversion of the C major scale? Something to think about. Charlie

Hey Charles.

Wouldn't it be great if everyone could read and write
perfectly -- English or musical notation -- but many of
us, for whatever reason, don't. A good example is the
word "forum". The plural of forum is fora. It's really a
Latin word, so saying "forums" is wrong, but we all
know what it means, and I would never chastise
anyone for using forums instead of fora.

As for augmented-minor, right or wrong, it conjures up
one thing only to my mind: a minor chord with a raised
5th, so there's no real can of worms for me on that
score. The rest of your examples, yes, worms squirming
everywhere, but for me, minor-augmented is a simple
concept.

If by mirror image of the C scale you mean a backwards
scale, ie. semitone-tone-tone-tone-semitone-tone-tone,
then I guess we're looking at a phrygian mode.

All the best,

Kirk

Well if every one did things perfectly we would have no need for teachers, judges, and other things. I'm not among the perfect. Lots of errors. But if we strive to help others, then we have contributed much. I am on this site because it allows me to give something back to the community while I'm still on this bucket called earth.

And its ok for you to see things differently, but if you know what the correct answer should be then passing that information along as best you can is important to do that service and there is nothing wrong about mentioning that in your opinion ..... seems logical. With an opinion no one can defeat that aspect because it is an opinion. Marching to a different drummer.. a different paradigm.

Chris gave you some high ratings in your playing ability and that would be good enough for me with respect to his taste. Take care. Charlie

Phew! Thanks Charles for the understanding.

If you're interested yourself in hearing some of my
music, go to
Mp3.com/kirklorange where you can stream a
bunch of tunes.

I'd love to have a listen to your music Charlie. Is there
anything online?

Dear Kirk,
I don't have anything on line. I do have some a tiny bit of my original music located in my lessons and on my list marked original music.

I don't have the skill in placing things and knowing how to do that task on line.

We all have our limitations. Perhaps one day I will have someone guide me along that way. Charlie

All you have to do is ask, Charles. If you have anything
you want converted to Mp3 or anything else, get
someone to burn it on CD and send it to me. I can load
it up on the internet at one of my many sites. It can then
be accessed, downloaded, streamed... whatever.

Anytime, just drop me a line and I'll send you my
mailing address.

Cheers,

Kirk

Kirk, I really don't understand what point you are trying to make. I am trying to decide if you are a true believer that music theory is for the most part hog wash or if you have just decided to elect yourself as the poster child for non comformity.

It is true that you do not need to know or understand music theory or even certain terminology to become a good guitarist. (I am not assuming to know what you do and do not know) I have heard your recordings and personally, I think you are an outstanding guitarist.

But to truly operate as a professional musician, a basic understanding of widely accepted terminology and sight reading skills are needed, it's simply a fact. (I am just for arguments sake taking for granted that you do not sight read or undertsand accepted terminolgy,)

If you don't believe me, go and audition for your local city orchestra next time they need personel. If you are unable to sight read, you could be the best guitarist in the world...and completely useless to them. Apply for a permanent position at any advertising firm as a staff musician and see what happens. The best thing you will ever be able to hope for is to submit a composition as a "freelance"

Here's why. It comes down to a common knowledge and understanding of how you relay your (and others) music to other musicians. When you make a master composition, you have to be able to relate to musicians of all instruments exactly what their role is. You can't just say, "well, here's a chord progression, let your creativity come up with something". You would have one hell of a mess.

You have carved yourself a very nice niche and make a living doing what you love. Can't ask for more than that.

But to preach to all that will listen that a structured knowledge is not really needed, is outright crap. To make a good living, a musician needs every edge they can gain and no skill is wasted.

Just my opinion - Chris-

Dear Chris,
Well put. Your becoming one of the wise men. Charlie

Hi Chris.

I thought I had got my point across previously, but
obviously I didn't.

I don't really have time to go into it all in greater depth,
nor the desire. It goes without saying that if you want to
be a guitarist in the local city orchestra that you should
learn how to sight read.

What I'm trying to get across to anyone who is spooked
and turned off by pedantic nit-picking of terminology is
that it's still the music coming out of the guitar that's the
goal; that the structure of music can be understood in
different ways and using different words; that seeing in
your mind's eye a note cluster as a minor/augmented is
not taboo. I think we're doing some a disservice here by
going on and on about what to call this or that. So
serious, so academic, no fun...

I'm simply trying to pass that on to them, to let the many
players here who don't see themselves playing in the
local orchestra or earning their living playing guitar that
it's FUN. The only reason I added my thoughts to this
thread is that I liked the idea of a minor/augmented. It
made perfect sense to me.

Of course, if you'd rather I keep my views and opinions
to myself, just say so and I'll butt out. I certainly don't
need to come here and contribute, but I often enjoy it.

All the best,

Kirk

I respect your opinions an views very much, I just didn't agree with this one. I see your point that the young players can become intimidated and might lose sight of something that is as important as anything; artistic expression.

Not everyone should be a teacher, I am positive there are many who do much more harm than good. Not everyone will travel the same path. But I also believe when done correctly and with patience there is a lot of knowledge and theories that can really help the aspiring guitarist to achieve their goals whether it be a weekend warrior in a local band or a proffessional concert musician.

Your views and opinions are very insightful and much appreciated here. The very nature of this forum which allows musicians such as yourself to express and debate opinions is what makes this place unique and it would be much less unique without you.

-Chris-

Hey Kirk:

I want to butt in with my two cents on this one.

1) I think your point of view is _extremely_ valuable... especially coming from someone who plays as well as you do.

2) I think we're doing some a disservice here by
going on and on about what to call this or that. So
serious, so academic, no fun... I agree -- sometimes -- but in this particular thread, can you tell... I'm _having fun_. If I want to have fun playing music, I'm going to play guitar... If I want to have a good, nit-picking, academic converstation about music, I'm gonna post to the Theory Forum in Whole Note.

I agree that it's a disservice to make people spooked about asking theory questions for fear of being ridiculed. Thinking about my first post in this thread, maybe I _did_ take a somewhat humorous tone that might have been construed as making fun of the original poster for having asked the question... I _didn't_ mean it that way... but if it came across that way I deserve a smack upside the head.

Buuuut... Isn't there somewhere I can go to dissect the fine points of music terminology? I try very hard to convey my feeling that this stuff is NOT the magic information that turns ordinary humans into cape wearing, building leaping, master musicians. It seems to me though, that the "theory" forum should be a place where those of us for whom this sort of discussion really is _recreational_ can let loose. I swear, upon my honor, a discussion of whether a C#9#5 with no major third or b7 can still be properly called a C#9#5 is my idea of FUN. Okay, that's sick... I probably need professional help... but it's true.

3) I'm in total agreement with the spirit of your comments -- music should be fun, music theory really doesn't make or break an instrumentalist... there are good jobs in the music world for people who know their theory backwards and forwards, and there are good jobs in the music world for people who can play their asses off whether they know a sharp from a flat on paper. The great 20th century composer Paul Hindemith said that one of the dirty little secrets of classical music was that the typical high school music teacher reads music better than the typical world famous virtuoso. The world famous virtuoso isn't world famous for being a great music reader... he/she is famous for being a kick a-- instrumentalist.

Tha preamble is just working up to this point:

The only reason I added my thoughts to this
thread is that I liked the idea of a minor/augmented. It
made perfect sense to me.

I may agree with you in spirit... but I draw the line on this specific... all I can say is "NOooooooo..... nooooooooo... say it isn't so, Kirk!" minor/augmented is not, to the best of my knowledge, a sensible concept. We'd have to call regular augmented chords "major augmented" ... minor/augmented is very nonstandard. If we decide "anything goes" in music terminology we're skrewed! There'll be no way to talk about music sensibly at all. Everyone will have their own private little musical vocabulary:

"When I say a major chord, what I mean is a chord that has not sharps or flats in it... when I say minor, I mean a chord that has 4 or fewer notes..." this sort of thing will be very easy for beginners, it won't scare-off a single one. Anything means anything -- it's an easy system to master: Hey kids, just make it up as you go along. Ultimately, obviously, the cause of music, neither teaching it, nor learning it, would not be served this way.

Maybe I'll have to eat a great big crowfeather sandwich when someone very knowledgeable (in an academic way) comes along saying, "'minor augmented' is a well known kind of chord derived from the blah blah scale... etc." .... but to the best of my knowledge minor augmented is not a legit thing to call a chord... it makes chord names messier than they already are, and god knows they are messy enough as is.

4) I'm still having FUN.

Doug.

Hi Doug. Thanks for the response.

Firstly, if this were in the "Theory" forum, I wouldn't have
said a thing. This is the Instructional forum, where in my
opinion I should be able to add my two cents worth
about non-conventional ways of looking at note
clusters. I never said it was the proper way of
describing a Fmaj7/A in the context of a moving voice in
an A minor environment (see how wordy and difficult it
becomes to describe?), I simply said, and still say, that
it makes perfect sense to me to call it a minor/
augmented.

As for having to call regular augmented chords "major
augmented" to differentiate them from "minor
augmented", if there was such a thing, we already do
that with many other chords: 7ths, 6ths... indeed we
have, officially, a chord called a minor major 7th. How
confusing must that be to a beginner?

I'm going to have a strum... I've been toying around with
the James Bond theme. I think I'll let my ears have the
pleasure...

All the best,

Kirk

Weird, I responded to this once already, but it seems it never made it 'into print' -- oh well...

Firstly, if this were in the "Theory" forum, I wouldn't have said a thing.

LMAO@SELF! I can't believe I am such a doof! Wow... uh, so, ok this _is_ the instructional forum... I'm so embarassed.

officially, a chord called a minor major 7th. How
confusing must that be to a beginner?

Very confusing! The 7 chords in general are confusing. If you want something really horrible take dim7, the 7 in that chord is quite crazy. My point about minor augmented wasn't that allowing that chord name would mess up a perfectly orderly system... hardly! The point was that the ad hoc system which has arisen for naming chords is plenty confusing enough as is... no need to add another unweildy name that contradicts one of the few standard "rules" left.

Doug "doesn't even know what room he's in" McMullen

Hi Kirk and everyone else
I have been watching this thread with great interest. I hear what you are saying Kirk about PLAYING the music being the most important thing but when it comes to actually talking about the music you play there has to be some rules.

If someone knows enough to know what you are talking about if you said minor/augmented then they certainly know enough to call it by a more proper name which minor/augmented is not.

I think that any walking bass line or moving voice is better denoted and easier for ME to understand , not being a theory giant, by the use of slash chords as shown above in several other post. If you told me to play a minor/augmented chord, I would just look at you like a cow looking at a new gate hahahaha.
I do want to say that not only do I respect your opinion, I value it also, but in this case I think you are wrong and out voted
Chet

Hi Chester.

I agree, if someone knows enough to know what minor /
augmented conjures up, they surely know the proper
description. But I never said it was right, I said that I find
acceptable to call it that. I knew instantly what Dexter
was referring to, and it meant one thing only to me: a
minor chord with a raised fifth. But that's just me.
Obviously it didn't do that to the rest of you, and for the
life of me I can't understand why. It seems so logical to
me...

Some players are sticklers for proper theoretical
parlance, some are not. I'm from the latter batch.

Keep on twangin' though, that's what it's all about.

Kirk

Hi Again Kirk
I see the difference in the points of view. I too am not a stickler for theoretic terms and I guess I would have been able to figure out what was meant but as I said , calling it a slash chord (Ab/C) would have been much easier and clearer for me , and I think for everyone.
I think maybe another "misunderstanding"that we have here is that most of us believe that if someone ask a question like this here on Wholenote, the deserve the "most right" answerand not just a "get by" or "yeah do it if you want to" type answer and in this case would you agree that the most right answer is that this is really an Ab chord no matter what the use is?
Chet

If I can butt in here...

I think it's a question of context.
The identification of the chord depends on what is clearest in the situation.

So, on its own, this chord is certainly an Ab triad, no contest. (1st inversion if we want to be pedantic.)

But if it was in a chord chart in between a Cm and a Cm6, then I would find it clearer to see it called "Cm(#5)".
"Ab/C" would be OK, but I think - in this context (which is pretty common) it diverts the attention from what is going on in the music - which is a Cm passage with a rising melodic line.
("Ab/C" might tempt someone to play a full Ab barre chord, leaving the C to a bass player. This might upset the smoothness of the chord line, by putting too many Ab's in the chord.)

I'd also find "Cm(b6)" acceptable, but I can see that with a rising line it makes more sense to think of the previous 5th being raised. (Just as in notation, we assign chromatic notes in a rising line with sharps, and in a descending line with flats.)
Also, "Cm(b6" assumes the presence of a 5th, which could again disrupt the intended sound of the line.

It's not a question of "call it what you like" - but "call it what is clearest to read", what is most likely to achieve the end result.
IOW, it's a notation question, not a theory question.

However, it would also be wrong (IMO) to encourage the idea that "hey, does that mean there's such a thing as a minor augmented chord?"
I mean, the answer is really "yes and no": "yes", in that kind of situation, as a passing voicing; but "no", not in the same sense as there are major, minor, aug and dim chord types.

JonR

Dear Jon,
Good point of view. Charlie

"Cry Me a River" (Julie London version) has, in the Real Book, as its first four chords:

Cm Cm(#5) Cm6 Cm7

Which perfectly describes the moving line there.

To describe that motion any other way would, in my mind, make much less sense.

www.CalebsMusic.com