-
Hey guys. Simple question that I have no idea. I have a song I’m writing and notating for our next rehearsal. This song is a cross between a hard hitting McCoy and a fusion thing. It’s got nothing but power chords. You know 5ths. In the past I’d just say C with the letter p after. Or I’d call it Csus and emphasize the 5ths. But this isn’t that. Soloing I’d probably apply then as minor chords (I think) but they’re not played that way. Not yet at least. Not until rehearsal. I’ll asked my pianist and sax player what they’d call them.
Sorry. Basic question I should know the answer to. If I had some rock guitar books I could see.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
06-18-2024 03:07 PM
-
A quick web search told me:
"The notation of power chords is simple, you only have to add the number '5' to the note that you want to use as the root - like C5, A5, and so on."
-
They’re usually written as C5. You might have to explain it to non guitarists. But it’s regularly used on the tab/chords with lyrics websites guitarists use.
Edit: Quick Mick beat me to it.
-
I just remembered. 5! Yes. Thank you. C5.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
"Power chords" are properly played as the root and the fifth, two strings, two notes, so not really chords.
At some point people started saying that "root fifth root" were power chords, but that's not the way it was done because those sound lame... "Two strings, good, three strings bad".
Also, in actual use it is typical to include other two string two note forms in the general "power chord" style, so you may have the one chord played as the root and fifth, but may slip that root down a half step while holding the previous fifth so that the lower note becomes the third and the upper note becomes the root of the new five chord in first inversion (still just two strings)... similar things like maintain the power chord style through progressions, even though some of those things are not strictly " power "chords" ".
-
But what to name it if you (a) double the 5th an octave higher or (b) invert that voicing? For example: (a) G-D-D(8va) or (b) D-D(8va)-G.
Debussy liked that inverted chord, used it in pieces such as Clair de Lune.
-
You use some other representation, e.g., figured bass or tablature or (gasp!) music notation. The granularity of "chord symbols" is limited.
Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
Well, yes, but I had common lead sheets in mind, i.e., only melody and chord symbols.
-
I've always seen them notated as (no 3rd).
For example, C (no 3rd).
-
5 Originally Posted by henryrobinett
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
So, is there a chord symbol for a 4th "chord"? - C4 (C-F) rather than C5 (C-G), I'm thinking of Debussy's chord = C-C(8va)-F
Maybe C4/C ? - although that would require a footnote on the lead sheet to explain that the /C is an octave lower.
-
Probably not man, if you're playing Debussy you should know how to read.
C5 works because power chords are so common with guitar, but non guitarists will probably still have to think about it.
-
I guess he does not want to play Debussy but use Debussy voicings in a jazz context.
The Influence of Claude Debussy's and Maurice Ravel's Music on Jazz, as Seen in the Compositions of Bix Beiderbecke, Bill Evans and Miles Davis
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/161989275.pdf
-
That's probably right. If you're arranging you can write the specific voicing on the bar.
-
Christian Miller?
Paging Christian miller.
Christian Miller, please report to the thread for an unsolicited lecture on modern use cases for figured bass notation.
-
Tablature and chord grids mofos
-
Wouldn't most people assume that that's a superfluous notation for playing a regular triad, i.e. wouldn't you want to make it clear that the third is not to be played? Originally Posted by Christian Miller
There goes my decision not to post this: Figured bass - Wikipedia Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
Why would this not be Csus? Is it important to omit the 5th? Originally Posted by Mick-7
As I've railed in the past, chord symbols are shorthand that relies on convention. They are not meant to replace standard notation. If the arrangement really demands a specific voicing, why not just write it out in standard notation? It's very common for charts to be a mix of chord symbols and fully-notated cues.
$0.02, YMMV
SJ
-
Yeah — I mean, they are different. In practice a quartal will be what a guitarist plays for a 7sus chord, but as you mention about the fifth, they aren’t the same thing. Originally Posted by starjasmine
Agree about the symbols though … there’s a reason why Debussy just wrote what he wanted, I would imagine.
-
In monk transcriptions, you’ll often see an instruction at the beginning like “symbols are for solos only, during head Monk plays open fifths in left hand and clusters in right” … sometimes clarity is preferable to standardization
-
Convention you mean? Can't see I've seen many of his autographs but use of figured notation had been out of vogue in classical music for some time already during his life... Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
Originally Posted by RJVB
I was just being tongue in cheek.
Still — Christian would know more about this, but conventions generally spring up for a purpose and figured bass was less capable of fully representing what a composer wanted as time went on. Sometimes things just fall of vogue but it can be partly due to utility too. Not sure on that one.
-
As a general rule of thumb composers have become more strict in writing down what they wanted rather than expecting performers to share the same conventions re: execution. Not just w.r.t. what the basso continuo player(s) would play but also dynamics, where to add ornaments etc. There are exceptions of course: Schutz was pretty precise about what he wanted and Bach also had a habit of writing out how he would have realised the figured bass. (In this light the generous use of rubato in late romantic music is rather surprising to me.) Originally Posted by pamosmusic
I would guess that this was both an evolution akin to fashion changes (i.e. without particular reason) and related to the fact that new music was being publised more readily and being distributed more widely combined with the realisation that not everyone everywhere would understand the composer's intentions. (And maybe they simply observed what happened with earlier publications that still left a lot-and-now-too-much to the performers.)
One can be pretty certain that this has been studied...
-
I have been playing guitar for over 50 years and always thought power chords are what went from the wall plug to the amplifier.
-
As I mentioned, I'm thinking in terms of standard chord symbols, like you'd see on "Real Book" type lead sheets, a la the OP's original question: the chord symbol for a "power chord" (root & 5th). Originally Posted by starjasmine
The Debussy voicings I was referring to are very specific: an octave + 5th, and octave + 4th - no other notes in them. The bottom two notes are usually an octave, or occasionally a 5th ("power chord") played in the bass, so I suppose they would be a type of "figured bass" notation as suggested.
On the guitar they'd be these sort of voicings.
1-x-3-x-1-x
1-x-3-3-x-x
Actually, now I don't know where I saw the bass power chord + tonic note voicing, I may have just mistook a bass power chord + simultaneous melody note as a discrete voicing - so F5 may suffice for that.
The question is (to everyone), would C (no 3rd) imply the same notes as C5? That is, can C5 be either a 2 note chord (C-G) or 3 note chord? (C-G-C) Originally Posted by starjasmine
Reply With Quote
What Do You Consider the Biggest Improvement in...
Today, 03:34 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos