Triads, chords, voicings, inversions

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 15 Jun 2005 12:47 am

By the terminology I have been taught, {135, 351, 513} are {root position, first inversion, second inversion} of the 'closed voicings' of the chord, as some others have said.

The 'closed' voicings are the 'cyclic permutations' of pure stacked thirds (sorry, that's a math term - it means that the characters 135 are shifted left, and the one all the way to the left is cycled around to the end, so 135 cyclically permutes to 351 which cyclically permutes to 513 which would then cyclically permute back to 135). The process of 'inverting' a chord is this idea of 'cyclically permuting' the notes, by what I have been taught. YMMV, but there is some logic to this naming convention.

Anything else, by this terminology, is an 'open'-voiced chord. I also agree with Burton that the root/inversion terminology is determined by the bottom note in the chord.

Similarly, if we considered a dom7th chord, there are three closed-voiced inversions, {135b7,35b71,5b713,b7135}, or {root position, first inversion, second inversion, third inversion}. Same deal with the cyclic permutations. Again, opening up the voices leaves much room for different voicings of each of these root-position and inverted chords.

This is just terminology, I don't get too worried about it. It's a way of communicating. The notes on the staff tell you what the chord is, anything else is an interpretation of that chord.

I'm sure there are other people who label these differently. This is sort of like the discussion a while back about "Is it true that every 13th chord must have every single stacked third {1,3,5,b7,9,11,13}?" Some people say yes, some say no. But even when they mean 'Yes', some say 'Yes', some say 'Oui', some say 'Si', etc.

Jeff Lampert · Post by **Jeff Lampert** » 15 Jun 2005 1:08 am

Open or closed voicings do not change the inversion. EGCE, ECGC, EGC are all 1st inversion C major chords.

Sorry Burton. I didn't notice your post, which was later confirmed by Dave Mudgett that the three voicings b0b refers to are "closed voicings". Makes sense.

------------------
Jeff's Jazz
[This message was edited by Jeff Lampert on 15 June 2005 at 02:09 AM.]

Bruce Clarke · Post by **Bruce Clarke** » 15 Jun 2005 3:03 am

Bobby and Jon, I dig your replies to my previous post, a bit of humour,I like it!
To seekers of knowledge, I would suggest that they study the posts by Jeff, Larry, James, Dan and Ed. These guys have nailed it, they know whereof they speak, they have got it RIGHT!
To those who prefer to invent their own systems of musical theory, this is O.K., several composers have done this, with varying degrees of success. They did it from a secure knowledge base of traditional theory though.
Anyone who tries it without that basic knowledge is likely to encounter communication problems, like a person who speaks only Chinese in a roomful of people who speak only German.
Dizzy Gillespie said "When you know that your music is founded on fundametal principles, you don't give a damn what other men say. You know its the truth if it's fundamentally correct, It's got to be the truth"

Michael Holland · Post by **Michael Holland** » 15 Jun 2005 5:08 am

Right you are, Bruce and previous posters. And the reason for the 'six-three' and 'six-four' designation is the intervals between chord notes. In the first inversion, the interval between the lowest chord note is a minor third and the interval between the lowest and highest tone is a minor sixth. In the second inversion the intervals are perfect fourth for the first interval and a major sixth for the whole span of the inversion. Does kind of help to speak the language doesn't it?

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 15 Jun 2005 6:42 am

Re Schoenberg & pedal steel ... why not, music is music is music; some may choose to limit the PSG to A&B pedal E9 "licks", but the PSG has the properties to make it the ideal controller for the virtual instrument ... the ability to merge and morph between multitone structures, as well as approach and leave notes/chords in any desired way ... quartertone scales anyone?

Re six-three type chord terminology: as Michael explained, this made use of the classic terminology of the day to quickly communicate the structure being discussed/played ... sort of the Nashville notation of the time. It is however a bit ambiguous as it does not separate minors from majors and the likes.

Re computers and music: In order to make "calculations" math based as opposed to lookup table based, I use a simple system (like six-three et al) except that it is based upon halftones; R,3,5 becomes 43 ... R,b3,5 becomes 34 etc. for relative calculations. For specific calculations, the MIDI note numbers go in halftones, so the system embraces the MIDI also.

There are two things in all disciplines = math and jargon; These two things are used in an attempt to make a "self consistent" description of that which is being considered. Math is math, but organizing jargon to give an obvious meaning is another matter!

Alan Shank · Post by **Alan Shank** » 15 Jun 2005 8:57 am

"Inversions are voicings, but voicings are not (necessarily) inversions. For example, you could play 10, 6, and 4 on E9 to get the 5th, 3rd, and tonic notes of a major triad. This is not any of the inversions because the notes are not in the prescribed order (135, 351, 513), but it IS a major triad (three notes of the proper scale tones)."

You are confusing "inversions" with "voicing." The inversion refers only to the note in the bass; it says nothing about the voicing, i.e. whether the chord in in "close" or "open" position.

I agree that an inversion is still a triad.

Personally, I use the term "inversion" in a general sense to refer to root position and any other arrangement of the bass note, and also in a strict sense to refer to an arrangement of a chord with other than the root in the bass. So, I would fill in the word "inversions" in that sentence. Whatever.
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 15 Jun 2005 10:17 am

Okay, { 135, 351, 513 } are the three closed voicings of the major triad. 135 is the root position closed voicing, 351 is the first inversion closed voicing, and 513 is the second inversion closed voicing.

Did I get it right?

I don't agree with those who would say "it doesn't matter what you call it". As musicians, we should be able to speak the common language of all musicians. As steel players, we may speak it with an accent

, but we still need to be able to understand what other musicians (and composers) are saying.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/Hotb0b.gif" width="96 height="96">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6)

Dan Burnham · Post by **Dan Burnham** » 18 Jun 2005 7:11 pm

I agree with Bobby and maybe I can share some insight from a Musical Stand Point. Lets get a way from the steel and go to music. We will use the key of C and think in terms of a piano.

Here they are:
1. C Major = C E G
2. C Major 1st Inversion E G C
3. C Major 2nd Inversion G C E

Now not disputing what others have said I must correct some information previously mentioned respectfully and please take it that way. Understand I studied Music Education at the University of Tennessee back in the early 80's. The way I was taught then in 1st and 2nd year theory, the way I just presented the order is the only acceptable way of arrangements of the notes.

Use the chart presented above:

1. To build a root chord you use the
Root, third, and fifth of the chord (via)
C E G (Absolute, and the rules say you can't change this. Don't argue with me, argue with those who developed the overtone series and western music theory.

2. To build a First Inversion you take the third, fifth, and then place the root note of the chord above the fifth:
(Example)
E G C

3. To build a Second Inversion you take the fifth of the chord and then place the root of the chord and the third of the chord at the top of the chord structure in that order:
(Example)
G C E

Now why do I say this is true:

Chords are based upon harmonics and overtones. (I know bla bla musical terms)

E C G is not a Second Inversion chord because the rules say you have to sequentially work up the harmonic scale.

A Chord is only 3 Notes composed of the Name assigned to the chord:
(Example)

C E G = C Major
C Eb G = C Minor

Chord theory is an absolute and has never changed to my knowledge, but other concepts of music has. In theory year one you learn:

No Parallel 5th's can move one to another
(Example)

G-----C

C-----F

You see in the above example we are in the key of C and I'm going to F but I'm going from one fifth to another.

In year 2 you learn that you can do what you want.

Now the reason a root chord can't have 4 notes is because it would confuse musicians and that is why they established a rule that required when you go past the third note of the chord you must attach it to the end of the chord name.
(Example)
C Major = C E G
C Major 7 = C E G B

By learning the rules it allows the musician to know what notes are to be played.

You can have Root, 1st and 2nd Inversions not only in major chords but minor as well.

I hope this sheds some light on the subject.

[This message was edited by Dan Burnham on 18 June 2005 at 08:16 PM.]

Burton Lee · Post by **Burton Lee** » 19 Jun 2005 1:43 pm

To belatedly answer Bobby Lee's question:

Even though a root-position chord is technically not an inversion, I have often heard the entire set referred to as the "three inversions of the major triad." I think any musician, no matter how snooty, would accept that.

[This message was edited by Burton Lee on 19 June 2005 at 02:48 PM.]

Adrienne Clasky · Post by **Adrienne Clasky** » 20 Jun 2005 8:47 am

Did someone call for the Havard Dictionary of Music? LOL. On Inversions, it says Bobby Lee is right. (It mentions him by name. No, really.)

"Voicing" is longer and more confusing:

"(1) The adjustment of the general tonal quality of a stringed keyboard instrument or of individual pitches to produce consistency throughout (blah, blah)." It goes on, but talks about a piano and a harpsichord and "modifying the shape and flexibility of the plectra."

The second definition begins with this sentence "The adjustment of organ pipes for proper speech, loudness, and modifying the characteristics of the mouth." Unless you are holding your bar in your mouth, I don't see how this pertains.

Well, that was helpful.

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 20 Jun 2005 12:26 pm

Most of my chords are perversions.

There are an unlimited number of perversions, both open and closed.

Dan Burnham · Post by **Dan Burnham** » 23 Jun 2005 5:53 pm

You know this is the very reason I am reluctant to try to help others regarding questions about music theory.

You always got someone in the wings that opens their mouth and instead of helping they expel their ignorance in one sentence or less.

You people are the very reason why the pros don't participate on this forum.

Don't take my word for it, ask Buddy Emmons, John Hughey, Herby Wallace. According to them you guys got all the answers there is no need for them to reply.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 23 Jun 2005 7:05 pm

Dan...
If there was no lightheartedness involved in music, we'd all be playing dirges.

------------------

Steel players do it without fretting

http://www.waikiki-islanders.com