Every possible chord formed by playing three harmonics over a chromatic stopped root (EADG)

[Oscar South]

[url="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/134504/The%20Harmonic%20Algorithm.pdf"]https://dl.dropboxus...20Algorithm.pdf[/url]

[url="https://www.facebook.com/oscarsouthbass"]Oscar[/url]

Edited July 22, 2016 by Oscar South

[Rich]

I really enjoyed Every Possible Chord Formed By Playing Three Harmonics Over A Chromatic Stopped Root (EADG)'s first album, but their second was rubbish and then they split up. It was all Tony Goggle's fault, of course.

[AndyTravis]

Run away!!!

I'm so lazy.

[leftybassman392]

Meh!

[Mykesbass]

Well I found it interesting even though I didn't fully understand it. Thanks for sharing - hopefully some of the more erudite members will be along soon to add some more constructive comments!

[Oscar South]

[quote name='Mykesbass' timestamp='1469261212' post='3096974']
Well I found it interesting even though I didn't fully understand it. Thanks for sharing - hopefully some of the more erudite members will be along soon to add some more constructive comments!
[/quote]

Thanks!
Glad to hear that (at least a small cross section of) other musicians are interested in what bizarre theoretical niche rabbit holes we can explore! I hope the information is useful. Thanks specifically for speaking up over the general 'white noise' of apathy here. Much appreciated.

Harmonics on bass sound great and there's a rich and developing heritage in their usage, so hopefully this study (much bigger than just this spreadsheet) can add a few more layers of practicality to the field.

Edited July 23, 2016 by Oscar South

[paul_c2]

[quote name='Oscar South' timestamp='1469229161' post='3096902']
[url="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/134504/The%20Harmonic%20Algorithm.pdf"]https://dl.dropboxus...20Algorithm.pdf[/url]

[url="https://www.facebook.com/oscarsouthbass"]Oscar[/url]
[/quote]

I have to admit, I don't get any of the coding/notation/whatever they've used to describe harmonics. I get what harmonics are, and for me there's 3 ways to describe them: 1) conventional notation but with diamonds in the note heads 2) describing them as "string x, harmonic at xth fret" or maybe "string x, xth harmonic". But they've used something else.

Can you shed light on all the codes and stuff on the PDF???

[lowdown]

[quote name='Oscar South' timestamp='1469273404' post='3097092']
Harmonics on bass sound great and there's a rich and developing heritage in their usage, so hopefully this study (much bigger than just this spreadsheet) can add a few more layers of practicality to the field.
[/quote]

Agree.
Thanks for chart upload. I started to put together something similar a few years back, but got bored (some was stored in my head).
My older boy has just started exploring the harmonic chordal possibilities and will find this very useful.

Edited July 23, 2016 by lowdown

[Oscar South]

[quote name='paul_c2' timestamp='1469273657' post='3097095']
I have to admit, I don't get any of the coding/notation/whatever they've used to describe harmonics. I get what harmonics are, and for me there's 3 ways to describe them: 1) conventional notation but with diamonds in the note heads 2) describing them as "string x, harmonic at xth fret" or maybe "string x, xth harmonic". But they've used something else.

Can you shed light on all the codes and stuff on the PDF???
[/quote]

No problem. On the left is all the different possible combinations of three overtones (considering overtones 1, 2, 3 & 4). On the right is the locations of those overtones on the bass. In the centre, all the upper structures chosen are shown in function over each of the 12 possible bass tones.

Overtones:
E string:
1: E
2: B
3: E(8va)
4: G#

A string:
1: A
2: E
3: A(8va)
4: C#

D string:
1: D
2: A
3: D(8va)
4: F#

G string:
1: G
2: D
3: G(8va)
4: B

Everything else is explained in notes and key on the sheet itself.

I chose to limit it to the first 4 overtones because A) keep the study within workable realm, overtones 5 and 6 are b7 -31cents and 5th(8va), so just one new tone per string and it presents a lot of intonation issues C) overtones from 5 and up are not so accessible in a wider variety of techniques. I'm using a lot of tapped harmonics so it didn't make sense to include them when considering these three reasons together.

Edited July 23, 2016 by Oscar South

[Mykesbass]

[quote name='Oscar South' timestamp='1469273404' post='3097092']
Thanks!
Thanks specifically for speaking up over the general 'white noise' of apathy here. Much appreciated.

[/quote]

Yes, wasn't one of Basschat's finer moments. The way I see it is that at 52 I've learnt more in the last 4 years than I did in the previous 30. Much of that has come through people sharing stuff on social media and forums. Sometimes just knowing that people know this sort of thing can be fascinating, even if you haven't got the time or aptitude to learn it yourself. It may be worth asking a moderator (possibly not Rich after his earlier contribution) to move this to the theory section.

[Number6]

It's at times like these that i realise i am completely inept at music theory.

Thanks for the contribution though 👍

[alyctes]

I've looked at it, and I understand none of it as yet. But I'm grateful the OP has put the time and effort in. Thanks

[Rich]

Well that'll teach me to make an attempt at humour based on my pretty much non-existent theoretical knowledge. I couldn't find the "amazing stuff, but waaay over my head" smiley that I needed.
Thread moved, as suggested.

[gary mac]

[quote name='Rich' timestamp='1469294598' post='3097244']
Well that'll teach me to make an attempt at humour based on my pretty much non-existent theoretical knowledge. I couldn't find the "amazing stuff, but waaay over my head" smiley that I needed.
Thread moved, as suggested.
[/quote]

It made me chuckle Rich, on what had up to that point, been a chuckle free day

[Oscar South]

Thanks for the feedback everyone and I hope that the chart is useful and/or interesting to you. I'll post an update when the complete publication is released.

If anyone is interested to communicate further, please feel free to interact with me here:
https://www.facebook.com/oscarsouthbass

Best,
Oscar

[Rich]

I'm going to talk nicely to the print room at work and get them to print it out A1 size for me ☺ it's the sort of kick up the arse I need to actually learn something!

[Joebass]

Thanks for sharing your chart, Oscar.

A couple of observations:

Labeling everything in root position has obscured some simple chords.
f.ex. the D triad has been labeled as Gbm[sup]#5[/sup] in first inversion and A6[sup]sus4no5 [/sup]in second inversion. D/F# and D/A would be clearer.

Some dominant chords have been mislabeled as 6[sup]th[/sup] chords with an added b7.
f.ex. A6[sup]b7no5[/sup] = A7[sup](add[/sup][sup]13, omit 5)[/sup]. Personally, I would just call this A13.

~Joe

[Oscar South]

[quote name='Joebass' timestamp='1469445939' post='3098298']
Thanks for sharing your chart, Oscar.

A couple of observations:

Labeling everything in root position has obscured some simple chords.
f.ex. the D triad has been labeled as Gbm[sup]#5[/sup] in first inversion and A6[sup]sus4no5 [/sup]in second inversion. D/F# and D/A would be clearer.

Some dominant chords have been mislabeled as 6[sup]th[/sup] chords with an added b7.
f.ex. A6[sup]b7no5[/sup] = A7[sup](add[/sup][sup]13, omit 5)[/sup]. Personally, I would just call this A13.

~Joe
[/quote]

Hey Joe, thanks for the feedback (that's the real reason I posted this, so big thank you!).
It's all useful food for thought and relevant to me, so I'll address your points separately:

With regard to inversions, I'm not considering inverted voicings in the realms of this preliminary analysis. Here's the relevant quote from the larger document:
"The nature of the data collection process eliminates the need to consider inversions of each structure as the function of each possible overtone structure is shown over each possible chromatic root. Thus, all possible inversions will already be presented in the data."

With regard to '6' chords, while your suggested notation indeed looks a little cleaner, I choose to notate 6 chords like this because I find that the addition of the 6 changes the functionality and aesthetic of the chord in different ways to the 'usual' higher extensions. I find that writing '6' chords like this just gives me a little more relevant information at a glance. Another lesser consideration on this point is that this isn't my normal 'concert' chord reference system as I've modified it in a few ways in order to reduce subjectivity in interpretation. For example, A13 is not clear on whether the 9th and 11th will be present.

Thanks again for the feedback and don't hesitate if you find anything else.
I've made quite a few corrections and modifications to this chart since posting, so I'll update it soon (will make it obvious when the updated one is available).
Oscar

Edited July 25, 2016 by Oscar South

[Joebass]

[quote name='Oscar South' timestamp='1469452277' post='3098370']
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]"The nature of the data collection process eliminates the need to consider inversions of each structure as the function of each possible overtone structure is shown over each possible chromatic root. Thus, all possible inversions will already be presented in the data."[/font][/color]
[/quote]

Does that mean that you have it labeled somewhere as D second inversion? Because [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]A6[/font][/color][sup]sus4no5 [/sup]isn't really a functional chord and I see no reason to label it this way.

[quote name='Oscar South' timestamp='1469452277' post='3098370']
With regard to '6' chords, while your suggested notation indeed looks a little cleaner, I choose to notate 6 chords like this because I find that the addition of the 6 changes the functionality and aesthetic of the chord in different ways to the 'usual' higher extensions. I find that writing '6' chords like this just gives me a little more relevant information at a glance. Another lesser consideration on this point is that this isn't my normal 'concert' chord reference system as I've modified it in a few ways in order to reduce subjectivity in interpretation. For example, A13 is not clear on whether the 9th and 11th will be present.

[/quote]

I would urge you to rethink; this is a highly unusual and confusing way of labeling a chord that has an obvious dominant structure.

With the presence of the natural 3rd and flat 7, this is an A7 chord which makes the F# tension 13, [i]not[/i] an added 6th (regardless of its octave).
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]If you want to strictly communicate the chord tones and tensions present then A7[/font][/color][sup](add1[/sup][sup]3, omit 5) [/sup] would be the way to go.

I really like the chart but the current nomenclature seriously reduces its practicality (for me at least).

~Joe

[Oscar South]

[quote name='Joebass' timestamp='1469461812' post='3098497']
Does that mean that you have it labeled somewhere as D second inversion? Because [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]A6[/font][/color][sup]sus4no5 [/sup]isn't really a functional chord and I see no reason to label it this way.



I would urge you to rethink; this is a highly unusual and confusing way of labeling a chord that has an obvious dominant structure.

With the presence of the natural 3rd and flat 7, this is an A7 chord which makes the F# tension 13, [i]not[/i] an added 6th (regardless of its octave).
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]If you want to strictly communicate the chord tones and tensions present then A7[/font][/color][sup](add1[/sup][sup]3, omit 5) [/sup] would be the way to go.

I really like the chart but the current nomenclature seriously reduces its practicality (for me at least).

~Joe
[/quote]

That's ok. I'm not asking you to pay for it

I appreciate the time you took to give me feedback and it is valuable food for thought, but I can't see how I can convey responses any more clearly than I have done above. It's not important for you to understand the internal logic of the process at this stage, but if you feel inclined for reasons of personal interest to study the notes included on that spreadsheet, you will find that everything is presented clearly and unambiguously.

It's not a page from a Real Book (inside which you'll find dosens of different styles of harmonic notation with no conflict over which is correct!), it's an internal stage in a process of personalised analysis which I have made public for the interest of other specialists.

I'm glad that you like the chart however, I hope that you will like the finished product when it's officially released.
Here's today's spreadsheet!

Edited July 25, 2016 by Oscar South

[Joebass]

Fair enough. If this is for your own personal study you can label things how you wish. (Allan Holdsworth uses Cx for Cm6)

FWIW, the published New Real Books use [url="http://home.cogeco.ca/~douglasgifford/stuffholder/roehmer%20%26%20brandt%20scan.pdf"]“Standard Chord Symbol Notation”[/url] by Carl Brandt and Clinton Roemer as their model. It's well worth a read, Clinton Roemer literally wrote the book on professional music copying.

Best of luck finishing your chart and I look forward to checking out your end result.

~Joe

[paul_c2]

The above comments partially display my original concern - that its presented in quite an abstract, non-musical way. I know its an abstract idea but there's a proper way to notate harmonics (I've not come across dozens of variations in how its done though?) and also some of the chords are obviously too far removed from a "normal" chord (root 3rd 5th) to be a particularly accurate description.

For example, the notation could be done on the musical stave, if you're not going up too high then use the 8va on the bass clef (playing bass guitar reading treble clef is odd! And tenor clef........bluuuggggghhhhh) or simply describe them as the 2nd, 3rd, whatever harmonic on the (for example) D string.

For chords, a 9th chord implies that the chord is already a 7th; similarly an 11th chord has 1-3-5-7-9 and a 13th chord has 1-3-5-7-9-11 in it - more a thing that pianists can play (since the 13th has 7 notes in it) and for the others, guitar. A bass guitar having 4 strings can't really properly play anything above a 7th unless its accepted there's missing notes - which then changes it into an inversion of a simpler chord.

A sus2 and sus4 chord SUBSTITUTES a 2nd or 4th instead of the 3rd (ie its implied there is no 3rd in that chord) and a 6th ADDS a 6th onto a 1-3-5 chord, for example C-E-G-A is always going to be C6, and never a 13th (where are the 7th, 9th and 11th?)

[Oscar South]

Thanks for the input guys, it's all valuable and I don't want to appear dismissive, but I can't reply with anything but a repetition of my previous comments here:

This is one 'molecule' in the development process of an incredibly bigger creation, written in my own 'modified for task' shorthand, to be discarded after it's specific usefulness is exhausted. In fact it's just one of a number of this kind of chart, dealing with different instruments with different tunings. I've shared it for the interest of any enthusiastic individual who may take inspiration from it. Imagine if I did it all neatly with the all-too-subjective standardised chord notations and sheet music to go with. I'd be left with a dropbox full of beautifully legible unfinished documents, to be read by nobody.

I know this chord notation stuff is an opinionated area and that we're on an internet message board, but let's be grown up here. It's all basic stuff for any trained musician and we've all dealt with dosens of personalised systems which we disagree with in our professional life. There's no way that I'm going to change the personal shorthand that I'm working in (which 99.99% of is only seen by me) mid project. I value everyone's opinion and I've read and considered all comments, but let's not labour the point here. The finished product will be all nicely presented with formally scored music and 'standardised' chord symbols. Maybe I'll even stick the tabs in there just to cater to all audiences

Please let me know if you have any other comments, it's all food for thought.
Oscar

Edited July 25, 2016 by Oscar South

[Ceebass]

I love a good chord-symbol discussion! I do agree with Joebass on some of the labelling issues, but I understand the need for a certain methodological rigour when undertaking this kind of exercise. I was interested to see that you categorised the G6b9 and Dsus2b5 chords as 'impractical' rather than stemming from a melodic minor tonality- what was your rationale for doing it this way?

Cool project dude- you've set the Theory and Technique board on fire!

[paul_c2]

That's fair enough - the exercise has a usefulness to you, which may be different to others. What I'm saying is, to expand it into something with use to ME, I'd rearrange things slightly to identify the simplest form of the chords, and probably leave blank (I know the reason for your work was to evaluate it all, leaving no blanks...) most of the chords which are too far away from the more "normal" stuff to fit in musically to anything.

I am sure there are a few beautiful sounding chords based on harmonics out there which I've never played, at the moment I only use a couple of "safe" ones I've worked out already...