Nashvile Number System Question

[maxr]

I have a rookie question on the Nashville numbering system. Having dealt with the dots and tabs in the past, I'm now learning this system (N.N. from  here on), using I II III IV V VI VII for each chord. To learn to busk N.N. on bass, my cunning plan is to go through a folk tune book marking up the chords in each tune I know  in N.N., then record the tune on fiddle and play bass against that.

 

A simple chord progression in the key of G Major (key sig. one sharp) could be e.g.

Chords: GMaj / CMaj / D7 / GMaj
N.N.:         I          IV       V      I

I understand that, but - another tune has the same key sig. of G written on the page (so the notes are from the G Major scale). However the tune resolves to E, and the first four bars of chords are Em / C / G / D etc., resolving to Em. So, the key signature's G (specifying which notes can be used) but I think the tune's in the relative, Em?

So, how would you write those four chords Em / C / G / D of this tune on the page in N.N. - would you relate the N.N. chord notation to the key signature of G, or the actual sounding key of Em?

Thanks, Max

Edited Saturday at 18:51 by maxr

[Stub Mandrel]

My understanding is that you use the same notation for the major key and its relative minor.

 

Minor chords are denoted with an 'm' e.g. VIm would be Am in C.

[Dad3353]

The NN uses the diatonic notes in the key indicated. If in Em (I...), C would be VI, G is III and D is VII. All one has to know is one's Major scale and one's natural minor scale to allocate the NN Roman numbers. 

If using Arabic numbers, the number would simply be that of the relative major, with a minor chord being indicated with a '-' sign, so, for a song in Em (so annotated in  'G Major'...), the notation would be 6- 4 1 5. Personally I prefer the Roman system; it seems clearer to me.

Edited Saturday at 19:05 by Dad3353

[Lee-Man]

1 hour ago, maxr said:

I have a rookie question on the Nashville numbering system. Having dealt with the dots and tabs in the past, I'm now learning this system (N.N. from  here on), using I II III IV V VI VII for each chord. To learn to busk N.N. on bass, my cunning plan is to go through a folk tune book marking up the chords in each tune I know  in N.N., then record the tune on fiddle and play bass against that.

 

A simple chord progression in the key of G Major (key sig. one sharp) could be e.g.

Chords: GMaj / CMaj / D7 / GMaj
N.N.:         I          IV       V      I

I understand that, but - another tune has the same key sig. of G written on the page (so the notes are from the G Major scale). However the tune resolves to E, and the first four bars of chords are Em / C / G / D etc., resolving to Em. So, the key signature's G (specifying which notes can be used) but I think the tune's in the relative, Em?

So, how would you write those four chords Em / C / G / D of this tune on the page in N.N. - would you relate the N.N. chord notation to the key signature of G, or the actual sounding key of Em?

Thanks, Max

I would write it as 6415

[Dad3353]

The link below has a good stab at explaining it ...

 

The Nashville Numbering System ...

 

It starts to become cumbersome quite quickly, though. 

[BassTractor]

4 hours ago, maxr said:

So, how would you write those four chords Em / C / G / D of this tune on the page in N.N. - would you relate the N.N. chord notation to the key signature of G, or the actual sounding key of Em?

 

Edit: read @Dad3353's reply. My post is wrong.
I'll still leave my post here as it contains notions that I think are important.


First, it's best to let go of the very idea that one sharp "means" G major. One sharp in the notation means only that: one sharp.  It's not a key signature and it could go for a number of different keys, regular ones and weird ones alike,  G major being a known one of those.

As you say, this is E minor.
You then number the chords according to the key it really is in, and in this case Em / C / G / D then become Im, VI, III, VII. 

In this notation, the numbers show a type of harmonic functionality.
Say: traditional music will normally end in a V, I, and you wouldn't wanna write that down as III, VI (which would belie the true functionality).

Edited Saturday at 22:53 by BassTractor

[Dad3353]

1 hour ago, BassTractor said:

First, it's best to let go of the very idea that one sharp "means" G major. One sharp in the notation means only that: one sharp.  It's not a key signature and it could go for a number of different keys, regular ones and weird ones alike,  G major being a known one of those.

As you say, this is E minor.
You then number the chords according to the key it really is in, and in this case Em / C / G / D then become Im, VI, III, VII. 

In this notation, the numbers show a type of harmonic functionality.
Say: traditional music will normally end in a V, I, and you wouldn't wanna write that down as III, VI (which would belie the true functionality).

 

S'not true of NN, though, where the notion of simplicity is privileged. The Arabic numbers, instead of Roman, make it easy to note easy charts, but give much less information once the songs become complex. I never use NN, and I treat it as equivalent to Tab : useful for simple stuff, but no more. I don't see any advantage with 6-, 4, 1, 5 when  i, VI, III, VII does the job so well. 

Edited Saturday at 22:24 by Dad3353

[BassTractor]

16 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

 

S'not true of NN, though, where the notion of simplicity is privileged. The Arabic numbers, instead of Roman, make it easy to note easy charts, but give much less information once the songs become complex. I never use NN, and I treat it as equivalent to Tab : useful for simple stuff, but no more. I don't see any advantage with 6-, 4, 1, 5 when  i, VI, III, VII does the job so well. 

Thanks, Douglas.
I should've investigated just a bit before hitting Submit.

Very weird system, and to my mind also rather musicality-defying.
I'll not spend time on such a system. 
 

[Dan Dare]

Like any tool, NN is useful for its intended purpose. It's an aid to session players/singers who need charts that help them learn and play or sing a piece (which could be in any key) quickly when the meter is running and time is money.

 

Most of those pieces will have quite a simple structure - three or four chord pop/country numbers and similar. It isn't, as Dad observes, intended or ideal for more complex music. Unless you are a busy session player who is up against the clock, it probably isn't worth using.

[knicknack]

On the contrary, I live by NN for most of my professional work... if it's not written, i'm at least thinking in it! Such a great way to cover lots of ground very quickly and communicate with people. 

To the original point... I always think in the relative major! 

 

Song Charting Made Easy: A Play-Along Guide to the Nashville Number System  is a really great resource for getting comfortable with the system. 

Edited Sunday at 11:29 by knicknack

[Stub Mandrel]

It's  best when used as intended... for dead simple three or four chord vamps.

[knicknack]

I think it's more commonplace (naturally) across the pond. I seem to find myself working with US and canadian guitarists a fair bit, some of which is reasonably complicated rock/fusion and they all communicate in this manner. Many a session with someone's scribblings in front of me! Regularly having 3/4 days notice max being able to operate this way is a godsend.

 

My own style is somewhat of a hybrid... I use goodnotes on the ipad, and find reading my own scribbles way easier than anything typed. I also find handwriting them helps songs stick in my mind, and often means when the time comes i'm less likely to need notes anyway. In case this is of interest to anyone, here's some recent examples. Often written in the back of a van trying to hear the bass on an iphone speaker!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[tauzero]

On the odd occasions when I use a similar system, I use what is apparently the Roman numeral analysis (no, I didn't know that until five minutes ago), with upper-case numerals signifying major and lower-case minor (which avoids the confusion of Im also meaning 999, admittedly unlikely to cause a problem, but it means one fewer letter for a minor).

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numeral_analysis

[TimR]

18 hours ago, tauzero said:

upper-case numerals signifying major and lower-case minor

 

That was my first thought. 

 

VII and vii etc 

[Stub Mandrel]

On 27/10/2024 at 18:37, tauzero said:

of Im also meaning 999, admittedly unlikely to cause a problem

 

Unless you play one of these...