Re: number of chords

[David Raleigh Arnold]

On Monday 15 March 2004 16:48, David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
> On Monday 15 March 2004 10:04, Tiffany Weisman wrote:
> > I only meant the list as a starting point.
> >
> > I disagree that you shouldn't use "redundant"
> > notation. Cadd9 is different from Cadd2 or Csus2. As
> > is C9sus4 and C11. A higher chord extension suggests a
> > different way of voicing the chord. The 2 in there
> > suggests that you want the 2 and 3 or 2 and 1
> > producing the major 2nd cluster sound. A higher chord
> > extension would suggest you seperate the voices more.
>
> The more notes in a chord, the more likely a keyboardist is to
> cluster notes, and he couldn't care less about 9 vs. 2.  So what? 
> Horn players and bass players have to read the chords too, in a
> hurry, and they are not in the business of clustering anything. 
> Chords can't carry that much superfluous information without
> seriously inconveniencing the players.  Chords are not supposed to
> inconvenience the players, they are supposed to do the opposite. 
> daveA

I'm sorry, I shouldn't have written this.  I was tired.  I didn't really
think that very many people would be interested in a historical
perspective on chords, but I hoped that some might.  I was just trying
to explain what jazz chords were and what their purpose was, once upon a
time, when there was a system.  daveA

-- 
It's not that hard to understand the lesson of Viet Nam.  Never never
never never defend one tyrant against another, because The worst thing
that can happen is you might win.  The *Gulf* war was worse than Nam.
D. Raleigh Arnold dra@ (http://www.) openguitar.com address@hidden