Talk:Triad (music)

message: A triad is always a 3-note chord built in thirds. The previous wording of the article suggested that it could be a 3-note chord built in some other way. 3-note chords built otherwise are more accurately called tri-chords. Also, the article delved into some marginal information relating to triads but without citation. Because they were so tangential, I deleted them. I understand my changes were reverted once. I hope this clarification helps explain the changes I've made once again. Jordan 20:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: definition of triad

message: The article uses the term "diatonic" without adequate explanation. This term, along with chromatic, is the cause of serious uncertainties at several Wikipedia articles, and in the broader literature. Some of us thought that both terms needed special coverage, so we started up a new article: Diatonic and chromatic. Why not have a look, and join the discussion? Be ready to have comfortable assumptions challenged!
– Noetica♬♩ Talk 06:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Diatonic and chromatic

message: This is a fun exercise in combinatorics which I think would be an interesting wikipedia article (or section thereof). I think this article would be the most natural home for this topic. Then again, one can do the same for tetrachords etc but I don't think those are as useful. Btyner (talk) 03:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't make out what the antecedent of the "this" is supposed to be in the above remarks. There are, of course, nineteen possible non-enharmonically, non-transpositionally equivalent triadic subsets of the chromatic scale. By calling triads "trichords" one would seem to be invoking the method of Allen Forte, however, who counts inversionally related pairs as single sets and thus gets only twelve of what he calls "trichords". Standard combinatorics simply says there are 12! / (3! 9!) three-membered subsets of a twelve-membered superset and nothing about transposition or enharmonic equivalence. You can easily reduce 12! / (3! 9!) in your head (without recourse to a calculator or to pencil and paper) to 10 x 11 x 2 = 220. This figure includes twelve positions of eighteen triads (12 x 18 = 216) and four positions of the augmented triad. TheScotch (talk) 08:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of essentially different trichords

message: What parts of this article need to be cleaned up and how? What is missing from the article? Hyacinth (talk) 13:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. Hyacinth (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: "Primary Triad" redirects to this article, but this article does not explain what a "Primary Triad" is. Can anyone oblige with a definition? 86.132.49.96 (talk) 15:40, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Hyacinth (talk) 14:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  So what is a "Primary Triad" then? 

message: I've stared at it for three minutes and I understand nothing. 146.90.124.75 (talk) 11:32, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The image with the triangles is indecipherable 

message: C1 - C2 - G2 - C3 - E3 - G3 is called a triad, not a hexad. A triad is not 3 pitches, but 3 pitch classes. Likewise, a tetrad is 4 pitch classes, pentad is 5, and so forth.
Therefore the first sentence should be something like "In music, a triad is a set of three notes (or "pitch classes") that can be stacked vertically in thirds". (Note means both pitch and pitch class, according to the wikipedia article.)
 SeventhHarmonic (talk) 20:57, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Your point is well-taken, but you are slightly misrepresenting what the Wikipedia article Note (music) says. In fact, it maintains that "a note is the pitch and duration of a sound, and also its representation in musical notation (♪, ♩)." It then goes on to say, "A note can also represent a pitch class" (my emphases). So, even assuming (incorrectly) that Wikipedia is a reliable source, there is the same ambiguity in the word "note" that exists with "pitch". One of the really annoying things about musical terminology is that it was not carefully crafted and vetted by scientists, philosophers, and lawyers to be as unambiguous as possible, before turning it loose on the world. Yes, we should be careful not to encourage confusion, so this article should be corrected for precision, but most musicians are accustomed to using phrases like, "the pitch C", when in fact what they mean is "the pitch-class C", only they don't want to sound like some anal-retentive, humorless, egg-headed university professor or Wikipedia editor.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:30, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So how exactly do you suggest the article be corrected? SeventhHarmonic (talk) 08:58, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much as you suggested, with a link to that academese term "pitch class", for the benefit of ordinary musicians who will not be familiar with the expression.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. SeventhHarmonic (talk) 01:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pitch vs. pitch class 

message: The paragraph reads:
Some twentieth-century theorists, notably Howard Hanson[2] and Carlton Gamer,[3] expand the term to refer to any combination of three different pitches, regardless of the intervals amongst them. The word used by other theorists for this more general concept is "triad".[4] Others, notably Allen Forte, use the term to refer to combinations apparently stacked of other intervals, as in "quartal triad".[5]
Let me divide the paragraph into three chunks so I can better comment on them.
Chunk A
Some twentieth-century theorists, notably Howard Hanson[2] and Carlton Gamer,[3] expand the term to refer to any combination of three different pitches, regardless of the intervals amongst them.
Question: Which term? Given the context of the paragraph, I can only think of "triad" being the term here referred to, 
Chunk B
The word used by other theorists for this more general concept is "triad".[4]
Question: As opposed to what? If referring to it as "triad" makes these theorists "other theorists" unlike Hanson and Gamer, then what term did Hanson and Gamer use?
Chunk C
Others, notably Allen Forte, use the term to refer to combinations apparently stacked of other intervals, as in "quartal triad".[5]
Yet others now? Chunk A stated that Hanson and Gamer expanded the term to refer to any three-tone chord regardless of intervals. How can Allen's intervals be even more "other" than "any intervals"? WuggetZukker (talk) 07:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You have been the victim of a (probably well-meant) mis-correction. Recently, someone changed "trichord" (the term used by "other theorists") to "triad". I have fixed this mistake. I will double-check Forte's terminology for three-note quartal chords.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:33, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strangely written paragraph 

message: The intro of your "Triad (music)" page says "Note: Inversion does not change the root. (The third or fifth can be the lowest note.)" and this is a useful clarification of the definition, so a reader won't think it's overly restrictive regarding chord-inversions. But later in the "#Construction" section there is no mention of inversions, so (based on the info in this section) a reader might assume that a triad must be 1-3-5 with 1 as its lowest note.  Of course the combination of Intro plus Construction will clarify, but adding a clarification (about inversions) would make the "Construction" more internally complete, and thus better. Craigru (talk) 18:45, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  describing triad-variety (including inversions)