A sus is a sus.
someone's chord chemistry is ascue.
A sus chord implies the 4th be added.
in other words, an A with a D in it.
An Asus2 may imply a 2 and a 4.
but a sus means add 4. (no 3rd)

timidi


A sus is a sus.
someone's chord chemistry is ascue.
A sus chord implies the 4th be added.
in other words, an A with a D in it.
An Asus2 may imply a 2 and a 4.
but a sus means add 4. (no 3rd)

You really should be certain of your theory before telling us that our "chord chemistry is askew(sic)" because you are completely incorrect.
 
A sus2 substitutes the 2 for the 3.  A sus4 substitutes the 4 for the 3.  
 
Here's the textbook we use at college.  
http://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Harmony-Theory-Practice-Fifth/dp/B002LM5JS8/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264684645&sr=8-3
 
if you wish to say that my "chord chemistry is askew(sic)" then you should buy this book, study what it says about sus chords then come back and we'll discuss it. 
 
IF you only have "sus" after the chord name then it implies sus4.  but Asus2 is NOT ABDE.  ABDE = A add9 sus4

I've read this thread through but I don't think the OP got a real answer to his question: what does the keyboard player want him to play?

A2 probably, and incorrectly means Aadd9. My college text has example songs that have chords written as A2 and Aadd2 when checking the score are really Aadd9, not Asus2. (Elsewhere in the text exactly the same chord pattern is called Aadd9). I see this fairly often in guitar music. A quick Google search shows thousands of sites saying the same thing. I know others have said this, I'm confirming that this is very common.

You're going to have to ask the keyboard player if A2 means you play a C# note or not. The safe way is just play Asus2, if he want the C# he'll be playing it!

Brett

spacey


If your text book has A2 written and really means Aadd2 I'd say it's wrong and is no surprise to me.

What I said was, it has A2 written and really means Aadd9.

Brett

spacey


If your text book has A2 written and really means Aadd2 I'd say it's wrong and is no surprise to me.

What I said was, it has A2 written and really means Aadd9.

I know what you said. And it didn't surprise me it was wrong. If it meant Aadd2 it should have indicated it. They are not the same and shouldn't be considered or assumed to be the same.

Spacey, I don't think you've got it.

Let me start from the beginning

• major 1-3-5     
• minor 1-b3-5    
• sus2  1-bb3-5 more often written as 1-2-5 but the former shows the missing 3rd.
  
• sus4  1-#3-5 more often written as 1-4-5 as above.
  
• 6     1-3-5-6   
• 7     1-3-5-b7  
• 9     1-3-5-b7-9 or 1-3-5-b7-2
• 11    1-3-5-b7-9-11 or 1-3-5-b7-2-4
• 13    1-3-5-b7-9-13 or 1-3-5-b7-2-4-6
• add9  1-3-5-9 or 1-3-5-2
• add11 1-3-5-11 or 1-3-5-4
• add13 is incorrect it's 6.

add2, and 2 are commonly seen in guitar music but are incorrect. If there is a 3 or b3 it's add9. If there is no 3 or b3 it's sus2.

Spacey, you are unnecessarily rude and it's people like you that have made the Cakewalk forums less pleasant for everyone lately. I didn't say you don't know anything, that's just you being defensive and rude or maybe drunk. We had a communication problem, or more accurately you had a communication problem, and I said "I don't think you've got it" - then explained myself.

My second version of the 13th is correct. 9ths have a flat 7th because 9ths have a flat 7ths.

Yes there a mistake,which I'll fix. I'd happily bet my formal music quals against yours. The point is you seem to think that both A2 and Add2 are correct and that is not true. Unless of course you'd like to come up with an authoritative source?

spacey

Brett


Spacey, you are unnecessarily rude and it's people like you that have made the Cakewalk forums less pleasant for everyone lately. I'd happily bet my formal music quals against yours.

Yes there are mistakes,which I'll fix. The point is you seem to think that both A2 and Add2 are correct and that is not true. Unless of course you'd like to come up with an authoritative source?

You insulted me. You attacked me.
You can't read. I've stated plainly, clearly what an A2 is and the inconsistancies of naming chords, not just the A2.
I'm not addressing the rest, I think you've said it better than I could.
 
Bye Brett. And I do wish you well. Or at least you get over it.
 
 

I have edited my above message. I did not insult or attack you. You were then very rude and patronising which is uncalled for.

I asked you specifically what an add2 is and you you've ignored it. That is what this whole discussion between the two of us is about.


BTW in this comment above:

"The thing with suspended chords is simple ( regarding the fact that if 2 or 4 is not written, the sus4 being the most common one would assume it implies a sus4 ) Also a note of interest...in a chord progression of I-IV-V the IV chord is a great place to use it."

I think you mean the V chord is a great place to use it.

C-Fsus4-G? I don't think so

I think you mean the V chord is a great place to use it. C-Fsus4-G? I don't think so

 
exactly what I thought.
 
this whole thread is getting a little testy.
who invented a sus2 chord anyway? It still doesn't make any sense to me.
How can an add9 nine chord also be a sus chord?
sus means 4?
 
come to think of it, I've never seen a sus2 chord in a chart. But, if I did I'd probably just take a drag from my cigarette for that measure or play an add9.
 
I'm not lookin for a fight.  really.
just bored.

spacey


The only thing "testy" to me in this thread is when somebody makes statements like you and Brett did. Both of you stated others didn't know what they were talking about. Brett was directing his. How do you guys expect people to respond?

I never said you didn't know what you are talking about. You misunderstood what I said in message #35, when I tried to draw your attention to this in #37 you got all pissy, and when I tried to make myself clear in #41 you went off the deep end. At no time did I attack or insult you, the worst thing I said was "you haven't got it" meaning you don't understand me.

The ridiculous thing is I was agreeing with you and you couldn't work that out!

You write poorly and your reading comprehension is poor, then you blame everyone else for it. Instead of assuming that everyone is out to get you, you should assume other people are acting in good faith, after nearly 2400 posts on one forum you should have worked that out by now. But after these ridiculous outbursts of yours there's no way of dealing with you any more.

Well that was certainly a bewildering mishmash of text.

mgh


i'm still waiting for someone to tell me why the 9 chord has a flat seventh in it!

That one's easy - a 9 chord has a b7 for the same reason a 7 chord has a b7.

But be careful here. Apparently if you learn too much theory, you might end up getting a bit thin skinned...

drewfx

mgh


i'm still waiting for someone to tell me why the 9 chord has a flat seventh in it!

guys it don't matter. play it, if it sounds good, then great, if not, play something else. no point squabbling over a minor technical point WHICH NOBODY GIVES TWO HOOTS ABOUT! the fact is, whether A2 or Aadd9 when played on guitar with anything else it'll sound the same! Both are fine!, hell, you could play Esus4! so c'mon, maybe we can get this thread onto some different point. Such as:

we have an easy I-IV-V progression, tell us some interesting chords which would work well here and give a bit more for the listener: I agree with spacey here somewhat, but playing a sus4 then regular chord works well here:
eg Asus4 - A - Dsus4 - D - Esus4 - E (E7)

right, your turn

First part:
What you're talking about is what i've always referred to as a 'dominant 9th' chord.  Just like a 'dominant 7th', as drewfx said, has b7 so does the dominant 9th.    The 'major 9th' does not have a b7 but the natural 7th same as a major 7th.   A completely different sound/feeling.
I'm not sure how correct those terms are but they've been good descriptors for me in differentiating.
 
Second part:
We song writing folk tend to get stuck in 'chord' thinking.   It's really cool stuff but if we were to approach a song more along the lines of melody it would give a different set of results.  Let melody steer the song and chords just serve as a frame after the fact.  Experiment with different scales (harmonic minors or 5 note whole tone scale...???)
for example you say I,IV, V song.   I say let the melody have a life of it's own and instead of putting box chords underneath it try adding another harmony to it that may or may not fit I,IV,V.   After you've got a harmony to the solid melody then try playing around with a rhythmic type phrasing for a lower harmony.
It can be extremely simple but make it have a kind of pattern to it's phrase.  It can be I, IV, V or it can fall on the 3rds of those chords, as Janet suggested which will add a much different feel, or it can be moving in it's own weave underneath the upper melodies (like "Just My Imagination" Temptations).  It doesn't matter so much what pattern it just matters to not be too locked into the chord as real music is moving and can not be contained in chords for too long before it sounds stale.
Then, again, don't believe a word of it if you can't get it to work.