

|
 |
| Music > Music Theory > Re: 7b5, or 7#1... |
|
| << Topic |
< Post |
Post 6 of 17 Topic 2333 of 2541
|
Post > |
Topic >> |
Re: 7b5, or 7#11?
by "David Webber" <dave@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Jun 22, 2008 at 06:21 PM
| "Steve Latham" <llatham@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:s5v7k.213$cv5.206@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FYI Dave, "add2" has become quite common in pop guitar circles in the
last
> 20 years to the point where some people are just calling it "C2".
Yes, but it is based on a miconception that one can specify inversions
with
this notation. I suppose one can try, but in general it won't work.
>This has caused a problem though because some of those same people have
>taken to calling Cadd9 "C9" which you can see is a mistake.
Yes.
> In any event,
> C2 or Cadd2 is a common voicing C D G C E, C E G D E, C x G D E or very
> commonly, C E G D G.
So why, when add9 existed already? The last three D's *are* a 9th
above
the root!
> But I don't see any harm in calling any of these "add 9" instead.
I think it is for the best. :-)
Dave
--
David Webber
Author of 'Mozart the Music Processor'
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion/sup****t see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm
> Steve
>


|
17 Posts in Topic:
|
"Steve Latham" |
2008-06-22 03:42:30 |
|
LJS <ljschenck@[EMAIL |
2008-06-21 21:47:29 |
|
"BobW" <nimb |
2008-06-21 23:08:55 |
|
"David Webber" |
2008-06-22 08:08:24 |
|
"Steve Latham" |
2008-06-22 16:29:12 |
|
"David Webber" |
2008-06-22 18:21:02 |
|
"Steve Latham" |
2008-06-22 17:57:52 |
|
"David Webber" |
2008-06-23 10:19:48 |
|
Melodious Thunk <thunk |
2008-06-23 18:37:35 |
|
"David Webber" |
2008-06-24 08:37:47 |
|
"Steve Latham" |
2008-06-24 18:34:22 |
|
LJS <ljschenck@[EMAIL |
2008-06-25 06:45:58 |
|
"Fiona Abrahami" |
2008-06-22 11:35:53 |
|
"Steve Latham" |
2008-06-22 16:48:33 |
|
"Fiona Abrahami" |
2008-06-22 18:21:03 |
|
"Steve Latham" |
2008-06-22 17:58:45 |
|
LJS <ljschenck@[EMAIL |
2008-06-22 08:12:20 |
|
Post A Reply:

|
|
|
|