TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- How chords are built - Finished I think

How chords are built - Finished I think

Ok I did a minor scale thing which was moreof a reference chart but now I am going to cover chords and how they are built etc. (Feel free to correct me if i get something wrong)

Key

b = Flat
# = Sharp
c = Minor
C = Major

Scales

Scales are either Major, minor, or modal (were leaving modal out for now). Scales are built using tones and semitones. A tone is the distance between two notes for example C - D = a tone, a semi tone is half that distance so c - c# (Db). The reason that the half (semi) tone up from c is not called c# and is called Db is that there can't be two C's in a scale. On a keyboard the distance between a white key and a black key is a semitone, the distance between white and white key is a tone (unless two white keys are next to each other EG E+F or B+A in which case this is a semitone also)

The way to work out a major scale is to start with the root note in this example we will use C then move up using this pattern

Root, Tone, Tone, Semitone, Tone, Tone, Tone, Semitone, back to root

So C major is CDEFGAB(C)

The way to work out a minor scale is to flatten the third and or sixth or seventh depending on which minor you want. See my other post for what types of minor you can achieve.

So C minor melodic would just be

CDEbFGAB(C)

Eb is a black key and only a semitone above D so gives a more moody feel.

Intervals

At this point it is necessary to explain intervals in order to understand chords. A scale has 7 notes in it the 1st,2nd,3rd,4th,5th,6th,and 7th. Chords are built on these, a 'Major triad' is a chord built using 3 notes the root (starting note of the chord usually the lowest note*) so using Cmaj the chords would be

The chords run down between the | |

|I||ii||iii||IV||V| |vi||vii| (couldnt get spacing right)


|C| |D| |E| |F| |G| |A| |B| (Root)
|E| |F| |G| |A| |B| |C| |D| (3rd) Note 'E' is 3rd note in Cmaj scale
|G| |A| |B| |C| |D| |E| |F| (5th) Note 'G' is 5th note in Cmaj scale

Types of Chord

There are many different types of chord but i'll explain the most common ones here.

Major triad - As above

Minor triad - Same as major but 3rd is flattened a semitone so C,Eb,G is C minor

Diminished - When the 5th note is flattened which happens naturally in scales on the 7th and 2nd

Sus 2 chords - Where the 3rd note in the chord is flattened a whole tone so Cmaj sus2 is C D G

Sus 4 Chords - Where the 3rd note is sharpened a tone so Cmaj sus4 is C F G

Add7 Chords this is where you include the 7th note up the scale in a chord so Cmaj add7 is C E G B (B is the 7th note in Cmaj and the 7th note up from the root note of the chord in this case 'C'

Mixing it up

So what is we start getting creative like Cmaj sus2 add7 which is simply C D G B (D is the 3rd flattened a tone and B is the 7th)

The same principle applies to 9th and 11th and 13th chords which are just the same as adding a 7th but count up to a 9th in your scale etc so the 9th in C maj is

CDEFGABCD (D is the 9th)

So C maj add9 is C E G D

Chords within a Major scale

A chord built on the

1st note in a scale is Major

2nd is Minor

3rd Minor

4th major

5th Major

6th Minor

7th Diminished (flat 5th)

chord sequences

These are something when your learning your dying to know but really are quite simple. The aim of a chord sequence is to give emotion by using different harmonies immediately after one another. All major chords will sound Happy and energetic (japanese snowboarding game style) so mixing them with minor chords from that scale can give moody results by sounding sad then happy etc. Using what we learned above it is easy to create a simple chord sequence for example a very common probably most common one to start is 1,4,6,5

So in C maj this sounds like [[ LINK REMOVED ]]


It really is up to the artist to decide what chords he wants to use get creative throw a sus2 or a add7 chord in see what that sounds like. It is important to note though that most chord sequences start with the 1st chord in the scale and end on the 5th. Its called a cadence there are others but 5th to 1st is a 'perfect' one. So basically to get back to the start of your loop/sequence end on the 5th chord so in C Major scale that would be G B D.

Chord leading/voiceing

In the audio sample above the chords do go together nice but sound like there is too much of a jump dont you think? There is good reason for this. Even though chords are built using the 1st 3rd and 5th it does not mean that the 1st must be at the bottom if we move the 1st note of a major triad up an octave leaving the rest alone we get whats called an inversion. This means that 1 to 4 will be smoother as the notes are closer together.

Sounds like [[ LINK REMOVED ]]


The result is smoother and flows better.

Anyway tired so if i have missed something someone let me know and correct any mistakes i made.



Roman numerals

Upper case is major and Lower is Minor. The letter refers to the interval of the scale and the chord built upon it.

I or i is the 1st chord
II or ii is the 2nd chord
III or iii is the 3rd
IV or iv is the 4th
V or v is the 5th
VI is the vi is the 6th
VII is vii is the 7th

Also a good way to tell if someone is talking about a major or minor scale is look at the I or i as this is the first chord of this is a i its in a minor key if its I its major

In major scales it goes

I,ii,iii,IV,V,vi,vii*

Minor is

i,ii*,III,iv,v,VI,vii

* means diminished as the 5th note is flat

There are with minors loads of variants of what i just said and I will have to ask my teacher and check early notes to write all of them down. It depends on which minor you are in but the above is for natural minor which i love.

Inversions

make sure your in a scale A minor is easiest start on 'A' and it is all the white notes.

for now we will do a 1,4,6,5 progression or a i,ii,VI,v if you want to know the way to write it.

this is how it looks



But to make it smoother we just invert some things which basically means keep the same notes but move them up or down an octave. So if we take the first chord and invert it moving the lowest note up an octave it will sound better. I have also jiggled with the other notes so all the notes are closer together. Keeping same notes only an octave lower. You can see note names are same





Here is the midi if it helps.

Midi

i'm sure people appreciate the effort but i think people will have more success if they just go to one of the many free online resources regarding theory.

its hard to understand sometimes because i dont have a piano or keyboard in front of me cuz im at work but with the samples..

VERY helpful!

+1 to you man ...
thanks again .. the last one was very helpful so is this

cheers!

Pick a root key, then go skip up the scale 2 keys then skip 3 keys, you have a minor chord. Pick a root key then skip up the scale 3 keys then 2 keys and you have a major.

I think this way is a lot easier than how you explained it :P

You are talking to [assumption] people who know nothing about theory. But you are using terminology and methods people who already know theory..know about.

Actually, didn't I say this already in another thread? [not being sarcastic.... i can't remember :/]

Overall useful post. I always use Piano Room for reference but it doesn't include an explanation.
There is one technical mistake:
"Sus 4 Chords - Where the 3rd note is sharpened a tone so Cmaj sus4 is C F G"

It is the 2nd note that is raised a half-step.

I was correct that it is the 3rd that is sharpened one whole tone up the scale you are working in. In c major this is of course a half step but generally speaking you move a tone. Just happened to hit the adjacent white key on that chord

Ah I see what you meant, there was just a bit of ambiguity in the original. Originally I misread it to mean that the 3rd note of the chord was being raised, not the 3rd note of the scale.

quote:

Originally posted by Sonic_c I was correct that it is the 3rd that is sharpened one whole tone up the scale you are working in. In c major this is of course a half step but generally speaking you move a tone. Just happened to hit the adjacent white key on that chord

you aren't correct

for 2 reasons.

The trivial one : The 2nd note of the chord is what you consider the 3rd note but that was just a slight oversight. YOu were thinking scale degrees without actually mentioning it.

and the real reason you aren't right.

the 3rd is not sharpened, it is ommitted and there is a 4 acting as a suspension. It might sound pedantic but you are teaching pedantic material. This is why i suggested you let people that know how to teach do it . IT might seem trivial but when you start going deaper into theory and start to look at voice leading and resolution, it is a pretty big deal. It would be like saying a C major chord is C E and F## . On the surface yes, but in theory , no. And this is what you are trying to teach; theory.

There are so many resources on line that teach it in a manner that won't confuse people. I know you mean well but i think you might be doing some of the people that are really interested in learning proper theory properly a disservice. I think you are being pretty irresponsible.

quote:

Originally posted by RichieV There are so many resources on line that teach it in a manner that won't confuse people. I know you mean well but i think you might be doing some of the people that are really interested in learning proper theory properly a disservice. I think you are being pretty irresponsible.

Whoa!

He's not teaching anyone how to remove teeth or an appendix or practicing amateur psychology or handing out unqualified legal advice on teh internets. I think people who take this sort of post seriously, anyway, are going to lean towards finding authoritative information that either corroborates or disavows what he's attempting to teach. I read through it and it didn't exactly differ with what I know but I'll admit, freely, to not being as knowledgeable on this subject as I should be.

Understand, I'm not dismissing the value of your correction regarding whatever erroneous information ought to be corrected but am questioning the spirit of the quoted text. I'm running on the assumption that we're all here pretty much to learn and exchange ideas. Even if the original post ought to be tweaked in order to make it more relevant, it's just as much a method for him to test his knowledge and refine it.

I don't think he put it up with the intention of being a one-size-fits-all ultimate resource for anyone. He asks, at the end of the first post, for people to give him correction, as needed. You've turned it into a rather ugly indictment against his post by framing it as irresponsible.

I'm all for pedantry and blunt critique. I think, however, that you're missing an opportunity to take your knowledge and add to the discussion instead, choosing to take an ostensibly moral exception to his contribution. He's trying to be helpful and you kind of crapped on that.

Please, disagree with him intellectually, all you want. To be honest, I learned more about theory in that disagreement than I have the past four years. For what it's worth, thanks. Currently, you're coming off as an insensitive, know-it-all douche-bag with a sadistic dint. That doesn't exactly frame you as a competent teacher.

teaching bad habits is irresponsible.
The information is out there tought properly if you want to learn.

You might not see the problem and feel like you learnt something but it would be like similar to someone taking piano lessons for a year from someone that is giving awefull advice. Chances are that person will end up with really bad carpel tunnel. This information might seem usefull but if you continue on your request to know more about music, it is probably going to cause confusion. Basically, you don't understand why the way he is teaching you is not in your best interest.

Ff the information wasn't available, then i suppose i would understand. But it is. I get the feeling the person posting is about 1 lesson ahead of his students. I call that being irresponsible.

quote:

Originally posted by RichieV teaching bad habits is irresponsible. The information is out there tought properly if you want to learn. You might not see the problem and feel like you learnt something but it would be like similar to someone taking piano lessons for a year from someone that is giving awefull advice. Chances are that person will end up with really bad carpel tunnel. This information might seem usefull but if you continue on your request to know more about music, it is probably going to cause confusion. Basically, you don't understand why the way he is teaching you is not in your best interest. Ff the information wasn't available, then i suppose i would understand. But it is. I get the feeling the person posting is about 1 lesson ahead of his students. I call that being irresponsible.

If I was paying him to teach it to me, I'd find your chastisement of him more useful. As I said, I got more out of the disagreement and, specifically, your point about the fourth as a suspension than I have in the past four years.

Again, I'll point out that he's not posting it as an end-all resource nor is he claiming superior expertise. The thread title is a timid "How chords are built - Finished I think" opposed to "The pent-ultimate reference manual for chord construction and progression - I know".

I'm not using the forum as a catch-all resource for knowledge concerning music theory. I think its discussion relevant but I'm not here to either prove my chops or bust anyone else's. If I want that from a discussion group, I have a membership at Keyboard Magazine Forum. Conversely, if I want a venue to discharge hostility there are a wide variety of flaming forums I would attend, as well.

If you're interested in correcting the information he presented then do so, but leave hectoring lectures about irresponsibility out of it unless you want me to point out how futile and perverse that is.

Edit to add: Finished

i'm not on here that often. I go on here when i'm bored between projects. I can't always be correcting people. I just don't think you know enough about theory to understand why having a solid proper framework an essential thing.

If it was more of a discussion , i would probably not care but he offers up his information as correct. Aside from his poor approach to teaching, it was actually incorrect and even when someone questionned the error, he insisted it was correct.

There are so many threads on here of people talkign about basic theory and it never gets anywhere beyond scales and simple triads. Message boards just don't provide a great place for structured learning.

quote:

Originally posted by RichieV There are so many resources on line that teach it in a manner that won't confuse people. I know you mean well but i think you might be doing some of the people that are really interested in learning proper theory properly a disservice. I think you are being pretty irresponsible.

+1

There are other resources on the internet that teach this information in a more complete manner. Sonic - save yourself the time and post a link instead!

quote:

Originally posted by RichieV i'm not on here that often. I go on here when i'm bored between projects. I can't always be correcting people. I just don't think you know enough about theory to understand why having a solid proper framework an essential thing. If it was more of a discussion , i would probably not care but he offers up his information as correct. Aside from his poor approach to teaching, it was actually incorrect and even when someone questionned the error, he insisted it was correct. There are so many threads on here of people talkign about basic theory and it never gets anywhere beyond scales and simple triads. Message boards just don't provide a great place for structured learning.

If I had some way to easily access the library of useful information you've constructed on the internet, let alone determining those teaching sites, such as through common citation of what you're claiming, that corroborates what you argue, in so far as your pedantic correction, I'd give you more credit.

As it is, you've shown up, here, without any reference to any portfolio of work or writing. You've antagonized a member who, so far as I can tell and without reviewing the sum of your posting history, has contibuted more than you and all you can offer is feigned moral condemnation because you showed up here and, once again, things weren't to your liking.

FFS! Start a thread and contribute something - anything - relevant and useful. That, at least, raises the bar for your complaint to have a margin of validity.

Have you taken the time to make any tutorials, on this board, that I'm unaware of? Kindly point me in the direction with a link.

What music do you have that you're associating with a name? Right now, the only thing I see from you is the psychological bifurcation of your personality, known as doubling. You hide, conveniently, behind a nick name and spout convenient opprobrium like a cerebral narcissist. You don't seem like an asshole in real life (from what I can discern reading between the lines of your prose). Why do it on this or any board?

Richie- v it is a shame you got so wound up. I really was just trying to contribute in whatever way I can. I'll think twice next time.

Thanks for stickin up for me eddie.

i akgnoledged that it was a nice gesture. I think if you framed your knowledge of theory in regards to how it applies to trance, that would be more valuable as theory sites don't really address that. But overall, teaching something that requires a structured approach, well it just doesn't work very well on a message board.

Hey, Sonic_c, really appreciate you sharing this with us.

From what I understand, you are taking some form of music lessons, and you are sharing with us what you are learning - I appreciate this.

To people saying about the fact that there are multiple resources on the net for learning theory, yes this may be the case, but a lot of them are a little difficult to follow, and dont always convey the information in a digestable format - it gets very boring.

The post that Sonic has put up is a real nice "overview" of theory, it kind of gives you the fundamentals of theory along with some of the terminology used, presented in an easy to read / understand format.

I appreciate this thread, and would imagine many other people who have no / very little theory (like me!) would find it a very good starting place.

As for suggestions, then maybe you should have a link to some sites which people could refer to, to extend on the basics of what you have mentioned, maybe also have a link to something like chordhouse or whatever it's called.

The only other thing I would like to of seen is, where you say "So in C maj this sounds like This" would of been nice if you had actually shown us the chord notes used, so we can cross reference to make sure what we thought it would be, is correct.

Also, a little explanation of things like when we see I-V-VI-II etc...

Thanks again!

Ok I will update this with pics and more samples.

Jim with regard to I V etc

Upper case is major and Lower is Minor. The letter refers to the interval of the scale and the chord built upon it.

I or i is the 1st chord
II or ii is the 2nd chord
III or iii is the 3rd
IV or iv is the 4th
V or v is the 5th
VI is the vi is the 6th
VII is vii is the 7th

Also a good way to tell if someone is talking about a major or minor scale is look at the I or i as this is the first chord of this is a i its in a minor key if its I its major

In major scales it goes

I,ii,iii,IV,V,vi,vii*

Minor is

i,ii*,III,iv,v,VI,vii

* means diminished as the 5th note is flat

There are with minors loads of variants of what i just said and I will have to ask my teacher and check early notes to write all of them down. It depends on which minor you are in but the above is for natural minor which i love.

Hope it helps

I added to first post for people searchin forum

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.