Conference napalm::guitar

    Wait A_Minute...Maybe Tabulation Would be Easier. 
    Please don't be Proud.Any Chords will do.
    
    
        Crazy_Five_Fingered_Al

    
	Em11 or A11 or D13 or Bm11#5 ... ;)

        _ _ _ _ _ _
        O O O O O O
        _ _ _ _ _ _
    
    

    
    
    1|OPEN              1|OPEN         1|OPEN     
    2|*1*		2|*3*          2|*3*      
    3|*2*               3|*2*          3|*2*      
    4|*3*               4|*3*          4|OPEN     
    5|OPEN              5|OPEN         5|OPEN     
    6|MUTE              6|MUTE         6|MUTE     
    
    I really like these three chords but I dont know what they are called
    ,hope you understand the TAB ( six strings ,*3* means hold down 3rd
    fret on that string , 1 being top E)
    	These chords mixed with chords like D7 ,Aminor ,Aminor7 and C are
    quite cool if your in a melow kinda mood , bin tryin to write a song on
    a combination of these chords for ages but I cant quite find the right
    progression .
    	
     	All time best favourite chor has still got to be E7 or a simple
    open G ,the simple ones are sometimes overlooked.....
    	J (who's band has fallen apart and is quite depressed about it)

    try a 
    
    dir/title=chord

    re -3
    	Your first chord is a Fmaj7, the second one is a Amaj7 and...
    I cant remember what the third one was.
    
    	re good chords
    	try     A6             Em7(The wish you were here 12 string sound
                                    for a six string)
    		3              3
    		2              3
    		2	       0
    		2              2
    		0	       2	
    		M              0
    
    
    		Give em a go,
    
    Also get your self a good chord book.
    
    
    P.K.

    oops re -1
    
    My first chord is A7 not A6 sorry
    
    P.K.

    >the second one is a Amaj7
    
    Off by one fret...the second chord is a second inversion Dmin9 with the
    7th omitted.  The third chord is a second inversion D (add 9) with no
    3rd.
    
    Paul 

	3
	3
	0
	0
	2
	3

is a nice G chord when you want more of the fifth to sound especially
when tansitioning from a D chord since you can leave your ring finger
in place on the third fret.

Jim

   
    This one is even nicer as a G5 chord:
    
	3
	3
	0
	0
	x
	3

      db - who generally hates 3rds, especially 3rds in the lower voices

    If you want an emphasis on the third (particularly if you are 
    fingerpicking a tune and need the high b for the melody), you
    can use this G chord (its a bit of a stretch, though):
    
    	7
    	0
    	0
    	0
    	x
    	3
    
    Other handy chords:
    
    D:		       D6:    D7:     D7:    Dmaj7   Dmaj7
    	5		7	8 	5	5	9     
    	7		7	7  	7	7      10
    	7		7	7	5	6      11
    	0		0	0	0	0	0
    	x (Unless you want an A in the bass)	.	.
    	x		.	.	.	.	.
    
    A:  
    	5 (half barre with index finger)
    	5
    	6
    	7
    	0
    	X (Unless you need/want A/E)
    
    The above is handy, since it frees up your pinky to add a 6th or
    a 7th (or 9th):
    
    A6:		   A7:		   A add 9	  A13 (no 7th)
    	
    	5		5		7		7	
    	7		8		5		7
    	6		6		6		6
    	7		7		7		7
    	0		0		0		0
    	x		x		x		x
    

    On the chords in .3:
    
    I tend to agree with Paul Harmon (.7) that the second is a Dm9.  The
    first can also be considered an incomplete or "no root" (NR, as they 
    say in the chord books) Dm9, second inversion since the A is on the 
    bottom.  Even the third chord can be heard as a Dm9, albeit missing 
    both the 3rd and the 7th.  Depends on the context.
    
    
    							John

    The first chord in .3 is an Fmaj7 in first inversion.  The notes
    present are a f a c e; spelled in 3rds, that's f - a - c - e, which is
    an Fmaj7.
    
    Paul

    Paul,
    
    I realize that, but the notes of a Dm9 are D-F-A-C-E; that is, the last
    four notes of a Dm9 are the same as the four notes of an Fmaj7.  And you 
    can play a chord with various omitted notes, including the root.  That's 
    why chord books will show F-A-C-E as both an Fmaj7 and a Dm9 (nr).
    
    How you hear it depends on the context.
    
    							John

    But if the complete definition of something is present, and that's all
    that's present, how are you most likely to hear the chord?  Even if
    someone plays a complete Dm9 right before this chord, I think the
    absence of a D will probably steer your ear in the direction of hearing
    a D to F root movement (it would mine, anyway).
    
    I'm also drawing a strong distinction between "what's the textbook
    definition of the chord you have in front of you" and "how might this
    collection of notes be used".  You seem to be dealing with both questions
    at once, and I was only dealing with the first.
    
    Paul

    Paul,
    
    I understand what your saying, but it's been my experience that you
    can't just deal with the textbook definition of a chord.  Context is
    the ultimate arbiter.
    
    Besides, what's textbook?  In the chord book I use most of the time, 
    that note collection is shown as at least these two chords, and 
    probably others that I haven't noticed.
    
    FWIW, I listened to this in the context of an "Am, Dm (or Dm9), E" set 
    of chords, substituting the Fmaj7/Dm9(nr) for the Dm, and it sounded 
    more like a Dm9(nr) to me than Fmaj7.  But perhaps even more as an Am
    variant (A-C-E-F, so Am6?), thus bridging between the Am and the Dm 
    of the basic chord set.
    
    In a different context, I'm sure it would come across as Fmaj7.
    
    Anyhow, I'm not saying that it isn't an Fmaj7.  I'm just pointing out
    that there are other possibilities.
    
    								John

    re: .0
    
    If you're itching to learn "fancy new chords", you might want to do
    what I did a couple of months ago and pick up a jazz guitar instruction
    book or two.  I found one by Mickey Baker (?) by accident at Tower
    Records one day and bought it on impulse.
    
    It has lots of "unusual" chords that sound weird when played by
    themselves, but sound great when played together in the sequences
    that the book is loaded with.  The second half of the book has
    lots of nice lead-style runs based on the chords.  There are also
    special-purpose chord sequences like intros and endings.
    
    This particular book was written around 1955 (!) and is pretty dry
    (he even gets a bit testy at times, which is kind of interesting :-))
    but the stuff sounds great.  Wish I had more time to go through it...
    
    Chris

    I think Clapton would call it an Fmaj7 and Steve Morse would call
    it a Dm9. Page would call it a G13sus2sus4.

    
    > Anyhow, I'm not saying that it isn't an Fmaj7.  I'm just pointing out
    > that there are other possibilities
    
    Agreed - lots more than just Dm9, too.  Maybe where our mileage is
    varying is in how the sound of that chord hits us.  I can't think of
    any context where that chord wouldn't sound like an Fmaj7 to me
    unless a different bass note is present (and if your use of the word
    "context" is that direct, we don't disagree at all).
    
    My perspective is just that definitions exist outside of context, and that 
    one which uses everything at hand and leaves nothing unaccounted for is
    "better" than one which depends on something that isn't present.  That's
    what I mean by "textbook".
    
    Ok, is there any life left in this horse?  8^)
    
    Paul

    re Fmaj7
    	Since I called it that I thought I should respond.
    
    	I would have never called it a Dm9, cause up until now
    I would never have known how to play it without going to a book...8^).
    
    	I was thinking of that chord in the context of playing in C.  As
    that is the only times I have used that chord eg Band on the run, and
    Doesn't that chord get a run in "Stairway to Heaven"?
    	Also move it up two frets and you got the second chord to Lying
    eyes by the eagles.
    
    	Well I should drop a chord in while I'm here
    
    Here it is The intro chords to tequila sunrise, a good acoustic guitar
    song for the campfire.
    
    	 G     G6
         3     3
    	 3     3
    	 0     0
    	 0     2
         2     X
         3     3
    
    P.K.

    In the context of "Band on the Run" the first chord is Fmaj7 (in fact,
    I'd not play the low A, only the four highest strings).  "Moving it
    up two frets" gives you a Gmaj7 if you mean
    
    		2
    		3
    		4
    		5
    		x
    		x
    
    or G6, if you mean
    		0
    		3
    		4
    		5
    		x
    		x
    
    

    Paul,
    
    Just out of curiosity, if you play the sequence
    
    1|	o   o   o
    2|	1   1   1
    3|	2   2   2
    4|	4   3   2
    5|	o   o   o
    6|	x   x   x
    
       Am6  ?   Am
    
    
    does the second chord still sound like Fmaj7 to you?  To me it sounds
    like a variation on Am when played in this sequence:  Am6, Amb6 (aka
    Fmaj7), Am.
    
    (By the by, I was wrong in my guess that ACEF would be Am6.  Am6 is
    ACEF#.  So I guess, in terms of an A chord, ACEF would be Amb6 or some
    such thing.)
    
    Anyhow, that's how my ear/brain hears it.  But I realize it's very much
    a subjective thing.
    
    Later.
    
    
    								John
    
    
    
    
    

FWIW, you'll find that how you hear a given "ambiguous" chord often depends not
only only its context within a harmonic progression, but on which bass note is
played in conjunction with it. Try this with your personal favorite "trick
question" chord if you don't already know what I mean. Apart from using a
conscious selection of bass note to provide the harmonic context you want, you
can also use this technique to decide which "feel" you *do* want to a chord if
you're unsure.

(I do a lot with "dissonant" chords when writing a song on guitar, and I don't
worry about what the chord *names* are until I'm all done- and then only so'se I
can notate it for other folks.)

Bob

    
    	A fun exercise to learn chords and intervals is to take any
    	chord and figure out what it's called if you used any other
    	note as the root.  For example, a Cmaj7 chord has C-E-G-B notes 
    	in it so just figure out what it's called in E, G or B.
    
    	Just start your do-re-mi from E, G, or B instead.
    
    	Tom
    

re:  .21

That's kind of an unnatural question for me, because I would never think of
a chord as an "Amb6".  To me this is like going to the bother of calling a
"C" note a "D double-flat".

But also, I don't really deal with the concept of 6th chords because the whole
designation seems unnecessary to me.  A major 6th chord is an inverted minor
7th chord, and a minor 6th chord is a half-diminished 7th chord.  I can't see
any benefit in keeping track of two things to call each of these chords; there
are enough things to keep track of in music that really are different.  In 
general I find it easier to process the automatically complex question "how 
many ways can I use this chord" if I keep the question "what do I call this 
chord when I think about it" as simple as possible.

I understand that you're talking about "what it sounds like".  I guess I'm
trying to say that that way of *thinking* about it is so foreign to me that it 
wouldn't occur to me to say that it sounds like that.

Now, I did speak too hastily when I said that I couldn't think of any context
where the chord we've been talking about sounds like a Dm9 to me.  If I play
an A7 before it, the dominant function of the A7 creates a pretty strong 
suggestion of Dm9.  But a split second later, my ear zeros in on the "a - f - c"
part of what it's hearing and says "nope, it's Fmaj".  If there were a d 
present, I'd be zeroing in on the "d - f - a" part.  In college, I had to
spend an hour a day, 5 days a week for two years transcribing 4-voice 
counterpoint by ear; I suspect the experience made an indelible impression that 
explains why my first concern is "what is it" instead of "what could it sound 
like".  

Funny how many different experiences different people can have while hearing
the same sound, isn't it?

Paul

    Paul,

    I understand what you're saying.  My experience was different.  More
    than 20 years ago I took classical guitar lessons from a classically
    trained musician.  He knew nothing about jazz, blues, whatever.  So he
    looked at everything in terms of pure, formal theory.

    And I knew nothing about chords back then (I was a trombone player
    before that and had never gotten into chord theory).  When I'd ask him
    the name of a particular combination of notes, he'd examine it and say
    something like, "Well, in this context it's a <whatever> chord."  So I
    got in the habit of trying to do the same thing (I say "trying" because
    I still cannot do it "on the fly" like he could).

    Also, I got interested in "no root" chords because of what I discovered
    when I was studying formal music theory in such books as "Harmony" by
    Piston.  That is, chords built on the seventh of the scale (for
    example, B-D-F or B-D-F-A in the key of C) are often treated as
    incomplete dominant chords.  So B-D-F is an incomplete G7, and B-D-F-A
    is an incomplete G9.  The point was that it depended on the context, in
    this case the fact that the dominant is such an important chord in most
    western music.  So when a B-D-F appears in a place where a G or G7
    would normally go, people tend to hear it as a G7.

    So thinking in terms of context is kind of driven into me.

    Anyhow, what I find useful about this entire exercise is that it gets
    me thinking about the possibilites.  While thinking of F-A-C-E as an
    Fmaj7, I probably would not have pictured or "heard" it as part of an
    Am6->Am progression.  But when I think of it as an Am variant (Amb6, or
    maybe Am13.  I'll have to check my books at home to see if the latter
    is a possibility), then Am6->Amb6->Am leaps out at me.  That's just the
    way it works for me.

    (FWIW, in this case I suppose the second chord could simply be treated
    as an Am, and the F note as a passing tone between the Am6 and the Am. 
    But I digress...)

    This has been a fun discussion, one that has gotten me back into this
    stuff again.  I had let it slide.

    Later.


    							John
    
    

    Well, it's definitely not an Am13 either (Am13 is a just a compound
    interval version of Am6), so the passing tone analysis will have to do
    for the Am6 -> Am/add b6 -> Am progression.
    
    							John