" True chords "

[bluemtgrass]

I know this was a thread a while back but I cant find it.
An arguement ensued beyween me and a fiddle player as
to what constitutes a " true chord ".
I tried to explain there was a difference of opinion but
he steadfastly insists only two notes are needed. Its not
that I disagree but I always like to look at both sides of
the coin. What can I send him or tell him ?

http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[Tim]

Some music theory books will say that a chord is two or more notes sounded together. #I did a quick search online and found similar definitions at several sites. #Here is just one sample chord definition (http://www.answers.com/topic/chord-music). #You can see from that that any two or more notes fit the original definiton, even if they didn't sound good together. #The more modern definiton / common usage is a little more restictive.

[Bob DeVellis]

One common usage is to call two notes an interval and more than two a chord. But I have no idea who gets to decide which definition is "right." If you look here (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:chord), you'll see that both definitions are out there, although the three-note version seems somewhat more common.

[kudzugypsy]

well, if you really wanted to get into a good argument with him...say, ok, if you have these two notes, C, E ... what chord is it?....of course, it could be no less that 5 different chords if you looked at it that way. if you add a third note, say F, you start to further define the sound.
keep in mind that fiddlers, in general, THINK in doublestops, which is why they assume chords are only 2 notes. unless they had a flat bridge, and REALLY good intonation, it would be very hard for them to get a three note chord

[Tim]

well, if you really wanted to get into a good argument with him...say, ok, if you have these two notes, C, E ... what chord is it
But there is nothing in that early definition of a chord that requires the two notes sounding together to have been labeled.

[Dfyngravity]

In music theory you need three notes to make a chord. I am in college majoring in music and I have never seen in any of the books I used in high school or now in college say that two notes is said to be a chord. In playing mandolin is very common to use only two notes as a substitution for a chord because of the problem of only having four strings and because most of the time it is quicker.

When you are playing your basic chords like C, D, G, B or anything in that nature it is ok to take out the third or the fifth and then double usually the one or sometimes the other chosen note. However, if you are playing a minor chord you really can't play just the one and five because the minor 3rd defines the chord as being minor. But you can play a one and three for a minor chord substitution.

Then you start getting into more complex chords like 7th, 9th and so on, or what some people like to call jazz chords. If you are playing mandolin and trying to play some of these chords it is impossible to use all the notes because you are limited to four strings. So if you are playing a 9th or something more you have to take out some of the notes inorder for it to work on the mandolin. Usually the melody or what ever you are trying to voice will help determine what notes do not need to be played. Usually you can take out the 5th or 3rd(if it's major) and or the 7th. However, here you are still playing more than two notes together so it is still considered a chord.

So in theory two notes are not a chord, you need at least three. That's what it basically comes down to.

[JimD]

This is all a matter of semantics. I teach music theory at a conservatory and have been teaching college level theory for 25 years and performing and composing in several styles.

This is not an easy subject to make definitive statements about. Anyone that tells you that there is one correct answer is just misinformed.

Technically, a chord is only complete when it has at least 3 pitches but there are many cases in which you really only need two pitches(or even one -- but let's not open that can of worms)to imply a chord.

If you ponder the two pitches C and E, you'll realize that although the two pitches can be thought of as belonging to either C major (CEG) or A minor (ACE) --the lack of the root of the A minor chord will cause us to hear it as C major -- depending on context of course.

--play D minor, G7 then the interval C-E and you might as well be playing a C major chord. You would be hard-pressed to find anyone who hears it differently.

--on the other hand, if you play D minor , E7 then the interval C-E the implication starts to lean more toward A minor.

Throughout the history of music, and in many different styles, there have been many, many examples of harmony (chord structure and progression) being made clear by two or even one pitch.

Bottom line:

In a theoretical sense, a chord must have three pitches.

In practice, as few as two or even one pitch , in context, can imply chords in a very clear way.

[angrymandolinist]

Kudzugypsy's point about the ambiguousness of two notes being called a chord is an important one. G and C could be C without a third, a Gsus4 without a fifth, Am7 without a root or fifth, an Fsus2 without a root, and a lot of potential extended chords. More than my brain can come up with at the moment. But as soon as you add a third tone it's far clearer what the intended chord is.

Buut, reading JimD's obviously insightful post, the discussion over what makes up a chord is indeed more theory than anything. Many compositions for solo melody instruments, obviously incapable of producing even two pitches, imply enough harmony to keep the thing coherent and directed.

[Jasper]

quote "This is all a matter of semantics. I teach music theory at a conservatory and have been teaching college level theory"

Okay, I follow the discussion, but why do you call it music "theory?" If I remember right, a theory is a hypothesis that has been time tested to the point it is accepted as fact, even though it can't be fully proven in every scenario. So is there some fourth dimension of music that might lead to disproving that when the notes C,E,and G are played together, they come out sounding like something other than a C chord? This is just a curious tangent.:;):

[Philip Halcomb]

I've always been under the impression that a chord required 3 pitches as well. I believe it's called a triad. Anyhow, I do use 2 note and 1 note chords all the time as well, I'm completely comfortable calling them chords, although I do refer to them more often as double-stops.

[ira]

are you talking about chords during which you fret only 1 or 2 strings, as if that is the case, if you are still playing all 4 courses, there are generally more than 2 notes sounded.

[JimD]

but why do you call it music "theory?" #If I remember right, a theory is a hypothesis that has been time tested to the point it is accepted as fact, even though it can't be fully proven in every scenario. #So is there some fourth dimension of music that might lead to disproving that when the notes C,E,and G are played together, they come out sounding like something other than a C chord? #

Well, the term "theory" is the one that has been used for generations but it isn't usually meant in the way that you describe. Music theory is actually a collection of disciplines including harmony, counterpoint, ways of understanding composition, acoustics, ear training etc.

At various times in history there have been studies that fit more with your definition -- "musica speculativa" was the Latin term. These type of studies are more rare today. Now most music "theory" teaching is fundamentals (scale and chord spelling), harmony (interaction and progression of chords), counterpoint (interaction of simultaneous melodies) and form (how everything else relates to a composition's structure).

"Higher level" music theory, these days, is very specialized (i.e. a few professors writing to impress each other http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif ) and usually consists of discussions of different ways to describe the features of specific compositions.

Regarding a "fourth dimension" in which things aren't what they seem...

Well, it really is all about context, as I said before. The ear of the listener (trained or not) is the final arbiter for any real understanding of music. The rest is simply descriptive language.

[Tim]

Okay, I follow the discussion, but why do you call it music "theory?" #If I remember right, a theory is a hypothesis that has been time tested to the point it is accepted as fact, even though it can't be fully proven in every scenario.
If you look in a dictionary, you will frequently see multiple definitions for the same word. # In this context, theory refers to the principles and concepts versus the actual practice of the art.

[John Flynn]

Just to add another data point, the Virgina Tech Multimedia Music Dictionary says:

"Chord: The sounding of two or more notes (usually at least three) simultaneously."

I will add that outside of formal music theory it is common useage to talk about "power chords," which are just roots and fifths.

[twaaang]

With "implied" chords based on two notes, there is an "implied" third note. For the C-E note examples given, in one set of preceding chords the listener is led to expect a C major chord, and upon hearing C-E would add a G (and might even swear he heard it played); another set of preceding chords might lead to an expectation of A minor, and upon hearing C-E would add an A (or swear that it was already there).

Careful listening, and especially diligent transcribing, can lead to terrific revelations about what the performer did NOT play since, knowing what the listener strongly expected to hear, he could just "bypass" the expected note and play something more finger-friendly. -- Paul

[Lee]

Yes, a matter of semantics. Merriam-Webster uses this definition:
"three or more musical tones sounded simultaneously"

[Lee]

Quote:
"So is there some fourth dimension of music that might lead to disproving that when the notes C,E,and G are played together, they come out sounding like something other than a C chord?"

Yes, there is some fourth dimension of music.
The the notes C, E, and G played together will sound different depending upon how the scale has been been tempered. The C-E-G triad contains three intervals formed by the C-E, E-G, and C-G. The triad could be tempered perfectly such that the C-G fifth has a 3:2 ratio, and the E-note adjusted between them such that the C-E major third is a 5:4 ratio, and the E-G minor third is a 6:5 ratio. Described mathematically: 5/4 x 6/5 = 1-1/2. Tempered in this manner all three intervals are beatless, the triad is pure, very quiet, lacking in character and quite boring, IMHO.
In equal temperment the C-G fifth's 3:2 ratio becomes narrowed so the audible beat rate is about once per second. The E-note in between them is adjusted so the two intervals formed, the C-E and E-G, are beating differently than each other at approx. 6-7 times per second. This triad still sounds harmonious, the contrasting beat rates makes it very lively, though some would go so far as to call it noisy, IMHO.
The triad could also be tempered such that the two "internal" intervals formed by the C-E and E-G are beating equally at twice the speed of the altered C-G fifth. This triad is especially beautiful, retaining much of the purity and liveliness but without the noisiness of the other methods, once again IMHO.
The ways to temper a scale are infinte though the theories we use to legitimize them aren't. A chord is more like a family than a singularity.

[8ch(pl)]

Is the expression "incomplete chord" proper to use for those times when you play a doublestop instead of 3 notes in a Major chord?

[Lee]

"Doublestop" works for me.
"Incomplete" sounds derogatory. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Jasper]

quote "Is the expression "incomplete chord" proper to use for those times when you play a doublestop instead of 3 notes in a Major chord?"

I like to call those simple chords my "poor man's chord"...while they aren't as full and shiny, they do put the mando into play and sometimes the partial chord fits better than the full sound...maybe more mellow and low is required vs high and shiny, depending on the mood of the music. Of course, it could have something to do with my not so nimble fingers?!

[JimD]

"So is there some fourth dimension of music that might lead to disproving that when the notes C,E,and G are played together, they come out sounding like something other than a C chord?"
Yes, there is some fourth dimension of music.
The the notes C, E, and G played together will sound different depending upon how the scale has been been tempered.

Sure, different temperaments will make a chord sound different but they don't make C, E, #and G sound like something other than a C major chord -- simply another variety of one.

and how do you propose achieving these temperaments on a mandolin with fixed frets? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Tuning systems, just intonation and temperaments are very important considerations in music but not really applicable for most people here.

What we are dealing with on fretted instruments is a modified equal temperement -- like it or not.

[mandocrucian]

The problem with theory discussions is that it is by nature a left brain activity and can become bogged down in definitions, rules etc. etc. and winning the debate takes over, because that's what the left-brain likes to do. It becomes an algebra problem of descriptive analysis rather than being a sonic experience.

It (theory) can be an enertaining intellectual puzzle that some number crunching folks may go overboard with, to the detriment of their actual playing. (Sort of like the overweight guy in the sports bar who knows all the stats for the last 25 years for his favorite sport, but hasn't been on the field actually playing since high school.)

If we go with the definition that it takes three notes to make a chord, is a diad (2-notes) ever/never a chord? #Depends. #

If you are playing solo, then you've only got two notes, so technically (by the above agreed upon definition) it isn't. #However, if there's another instrument or two playing, while your two notes may not be a "chord", they probably are part of a chord in the composite sound of all the instruments. Bass plays a G, mando is playing B and D. Between both instruments, you have G B D, and thus a chord is produced.

Another scenario depends on the 4th dimension. If I play a G-B doublestop and then a beat later play a D-F doublestop above it, it might be considered that I have actually played a full 4-note G7 chord (GBDF), even though I didn't play all the notes simultaneously. #Just as there are visual afterimages, there's an mental audio afterimage of the G-B lingering in the mind when I strike the D-F, thus for prestigidatory (abra cadrabra) purposes, have produced a full chord in the listener's mind.

So if one takes everything too literally, instead of figuritively/metaphorically, it may well become a set of self-imposed limitations. (Stuck inside the box).

NH
catalog of mando instruction stuff (http://www.btinternet.com/~john.baldry/mando/hokkanen.html)

(Partial chord is probably a better term than incomplete chord, imo.)

[Nora]

I sure feel better about playing cheatin' (two note) chords, now.

[lindensensei]

An excellant example of the two note chords are Chris Thile's A5 and other various '5' chords he uses. #All it is - a double stop A major minus the third - but it voices very powerfully. #Otherwise the mere fact of chord construction through major, seventh, ninth, 11th, 13th etc implies piling on the triad. #So yeah, you need at least three notes for a chord, unless you're really good.........

And that means that you understand enough of where you are going to use leading tones, following tones, etc., to bridge what the ear hears and what the mind perceives.

But a couple very smart guys already said that, I think.

I think it depends on what type of music you play. All the different genres have different oppinions. Some of the jazz chords look like you use fingers you dont even have.

For me even a two fingered chord is a chord. If i use them as rhythymn its a chord. If i use the two notes as lead there notes.

That simple to me.