Talk:Chord (music)

message: What is a triad? Hyacinth 05:50, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Triad

message: *"A beautiful example of this is the "major-diminished", with a minor third, diminished fifth, and major seventh.  This resolves to a fully diminished seventh."
I removed the above example from Chord (music)#Nonchord tones and dissonance, as it is an example of an seventh chord resolving to another seventh chord, both of which are extended chords. Hyacinth 23:28, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed

message: I reverted edits by User:202.147.86.99 because the information on seventh chords contradicted itself and, more importantly, was inaccurate.
First the article stated:
*"There are three main types of seventh chords."
:When the previous article said, "There are 6 types of seventh chords composed of the following intervals" and gave correct details.
Then the article states:
*"There is only one form of the seventh chord."
:This is followed by sections labeled "Major chords" and "Minor chords", which are not seventh chords (and, with sevenths, are each two types of seventh chords), and the last section "Seventh chords" also declares they above sections did not describe seventh chords.
I'm not sure what this is, vandalism, a test, someone very mistaken about music theory...? Hyacinth 21:40, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverted

message: IMHO, a chord should be built from thirds, i.e. the definition seems to be incorrect without mentioning that point: 
In music and music theory, a chord (from the middle English cord, short for accord) is three or more different notes or pitches sounding simultaneously, or nearly simultaneously, over a period of time. For example, if you simultaneously play any three (or more) keys of a piano, you have just played a chord.
For example, if you play simultaneously C, D and E, it will be not a chord, but a cluster. ---lulu- 21:00, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Read the rest of the article.  What you define as a chord is actually a tertian chord. Hyacinth 21:04, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: I've added the template on countering systematic bias because this page is mainly about Western chords.  Get rid of it if you think it's unnecessary Andeggs 22:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't call myself an expert, but from my (brief) reading of the article, there is a Western bias.  However, it can easily be explained.  In other cultures, alternate scales are used, and within the musical tradition of a culture, certain intervals will be preferred.  Therefore, alternate scales will give rise to alternate chords, but much of the theory is still the same.--Chris van Hasselt 22:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

text: What are some chords that are missing? Hyacinth 05:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no expert either but I think it's less that chords are missing and more that some cultures compose their note patterns completely differently. See Raga, Chinese musicology, maqam and so on. A good place to start with this is, suitably enough, the page on Classical music Andeggs 07:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do those things have to do with chords? Hyacinth 17:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That indeed is the question which I believe this article should answer before the systematic bias banner is removed. For example, the fact that the same melody can differ from major to minor depending on where it is played on a scale in Chinese musicology must have some impact on the way chords are constructed in that context. I'm not expert enough to know what this impact is though! Andeggs 15:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The trouble is, not many non-Western styles use "chords" in the way Western music does.  The very notion of "chord" is pretty Western.  However, I think the intro should be changed.  A statement should be added to the effect that "chord," in its most general sense, refers to a musically meaningful set of notes that can appear as a simultaneity.  A link should be added to "Set Theory (Music)," which addresses chords in this sense.  Then the article should say that it treats chords in a Western context. Tymoczko 22:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes those are good edits Tymoczko. Still not totally happy with "For information on non-Western styles, consult the Wikipedia articles specific to that style." as its a bit of a cop-out IMO. Anyway...Andeggs 07:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I agree that it sounds like a cop out.  We could just remove the sentence perhaps. Tymoczko 13:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cop-outs are ok in wikipedia. Contributions by an editor do not have to be complete. A signal to people with other knowledge to chip in is acceptable. −Woodstone 14:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: This isn't quite right.  There are some non-Western styles that use chords -- for instance Gypsy music, some African music, and so on.  In the cases I'm thinking of, the chords are triads, but I'm sure there are examples of non-Western styles that use nontriadic chords.  I think the balance is about right -- chords are predominantly Western, but they exist in some other styles; however, this article is mostly concerned with Western chords. Tymoczko 20:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I ask again, what are some of the chords that are missing? Hyacinth 05:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systematic bias 

message: I have proposed, at Template_talk:Infobox_Chord#From the root, that the infobox be modifed by adding a list of intervals from the root (I don't know how to do it myself) and would appreciate comments and assistance. Hyacinth 04:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Template:Infobox Chord

message: I have used the following alternate chord symbols. If they are common, I'd like to have them added:
* Diminished triad: C-
* Diminished seventh: C-7
* Augmented major seventh: CaugMaj7
* Augmented seventh: Caug7
* Minor major seventh: CmMaj7
: The symbol, -, shouldn't be used to indicate diminished chords. It can be used for minor type chords though, and is already used in the article (under seventh chords) to show the minor seventh. (Mark, 12 May 2006)
Hey, I've got a question.  What is the name for the chord that is of notes 1-2-3-4 or 5-6-7-1 of a scale?  I have "tetra" or something along the lines of that as it's name but I don't think that's right.  Anyone have a name?  I've found an example in Debussy's Reflets dans l'Eau where there is a passage where a fast C♭-B♭-A♭-G♭ is played down and then returns up in reverse order.  It then changes to C-B♭-A♭-G♭ (perhaps an augmented version of this chord?).  Thanks in advance.
:See tetrachord
So I was right then!
:Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 23:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chord symbols 

message: I propose that we develop some sort of standard or guideline as to what information goes on the Chord (music) and Harmony articles. See discussion at Talk:Harmony#Chord (music) and Harmony. Hyacinth 00:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chord (music) and Harmony

message: Generally I propose that there could be a better ordering or organization to this article. Specifically, I feel that nonchord tones are an important enough part of what chords are that this stub section could go in the introduction. Anyone else have thoughts/opinions on this? Hyacinth 00:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Order/priority of information

message: ...about the connection between the chords and the musical scales. Can it be said that a Cmin chord is naturally constructed on the C minor scale? or is it possible for it (Cmin) to be constructed on the C major chord? (which would just about send my head spinning) And Dmin which is said in the article to be contructed on the C major scale, can't it also be said to be contructed on the D minor scale? Thanks a lot to anyone who can clarify this for me! --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. 20:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A bit confused 

message: The article uses the terms "chromatic" and "diatonic", but without adequate explanation. These terms are the cause of serious uncertainties at several other 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 00:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Diatonic and chromatic

message: I suggest, that the statement "...the third is often played on top of a sus4 chord; in jazz theory, this doesn't negate the quality of the chord as a suspended chord." is changed. I believe, there can be no third in the sus4 chord (the same goes for sus2), just the tenth (in modal music). It than has to be explained what the tenth is. With your permision I will look into it.--Yovi 20:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Third in a suspended chord

message: Is it possible to include sound files of each individual type of chord? I think that would be a great thing to have in the article, but i don't know if it is possible or if it really is a good idea.  Marky1991 23:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's certainly possible - I already did it for the C Maj and D min examples, in the form of MIDI files. When I have some time I may do some of the others, although I will probably use some decent synth sounds  and upload audio files next time around. --Stephen Burnett 17:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound? 

message: From the article:
When taking "any scale" and building a triad with a base in the scale, the second, third, and sixth intervals, when used as a root, will form a minor triad. The root, fourth, and fifth form a major triad, whereas the seventh will form a dimished triad.
I was skeptical about the 'any scale' part, so I decided to try it with a minor scale. Example, the natural minor scale in the key of C is (C D Eb F G Ab B) and the triad that would be denoted I would thus be C Eb G, which is a minor triad. Can someone who knows what this statement should actually say, tighten it up to be correct? Clearly doesn't seem to apply to 'any scale'.
--Amusingmuses (talk) 21:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose any major (Ionian) scale is meant. Now corrected. Also reverted to the small roman numerals for minor chords, which fits with this. −Woodstone (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman numerals & Major/Minor 

message: Could somebody analyze the 82 second long rap song
What They Hittin' Foe
as an example... Jidanni (talk) 00:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analyze a rap song 

message: with the result that the brain "supplies" the complete expected chord in its absence.
I think you need to add two .ogg files here. One with the item
missing, for our brain to supply it. One with it already supplied.
That way we will know what you are talking about. Jidanni (talk) 00:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  brain supplies examples 

message: I removed the Harmonic Seventh from the list of seventh chords. The article is implicitly about chords in 12 tone equal temperament and the presence of a single chord from another temperament was a jarring anomaly.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuffink (talk • contribs) 11:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How is that jarring? The harmonic seventh is a seventh chord. If you feel that the article is lacking in general feel free to contribute. Hyacinth (talk) 06:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harmonic Seventh 

message: I think the Chord notation article should be merged here as already proposed in the past on this talk page. Since the chord notation is included here I don't see any purpose in having a separate article which either duplicates the same material or adds other topics about chords themselves and not just the notation. I would like to do this but I don't think I have enough time and skill AlfredoM (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Chord_notation#Merging_with_Chord_main_article. Hyacinth (talk) 17:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging with Chord notation 

message: Why does, "this article needs additional citations for verification"? Hyacinth (talk) 05:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Refimprove

message: The chord shows the notes C and G, and also D-sharp-and-a-half, and A-sharp-and-a-half. However, the midi file simply plays a C, E-flat, G, B-flat chord, your typical minor seventh chord. Is this a mistake? Does this need a different file type, since midi doesn't do quarter-tones?
Aurora Illumina 02:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds a bit sharp to me (so right on target for this purpose), I have good but not perfect pitch. MIDI is able to output a continuum of tones though.Synchronism (talk) 03:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it is. I normally have relative pitch, but not when it comes to quarter tones. When I open it in a midi viewing program however, I see a minor seventh chord and not a quartertonal representation. So maybe it's correct, but I'm not the one to go to for this. I haven't had that much experience with quartertonal music, so I'm not sure. Aurora Illumina 03:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Just tested the midi file out on different programs, and comparing it to a minor seventh chord (one that was manually written in the program). They're the same; this chord is wrong, at least on my computer. Aurora Illumina 03:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have the proper programs to access the MIDI data in that file so I would suspect that you're right, although, the easiest way to produce a quarter-tone on a MIDI keyboard is to use a pitch bending feature which would often appear as a vertical vector overlaying the notes on the staff, rather than a duration straddling the staff lines. Perhaps contact the filemaker, I believe they are an active contributorSynchronism (talk) 03:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

text: The new Ives chord sounds right. However, I'm not sure how to embed a file like this either. Aurora Illumina 00:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated it but that file has now been removed for some reason, the edit summary didn't give a specific reason why this referenced file was removed, I'd be interested to know why I thought it provided an interesting historical perspective.Synchronism (talk) 10:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Hello - I was wondering what to do with the file. The trouble was; there was nothing in the article about microtuning, so there was nowhere to put it or explain it. If it's felt to be particularly relevant to the page (and it is a chord!) then could someone add a little about super-chromatic chords at the end and plant it there? Then it WOULD be an interesting historical perspective, I agree. Redheylin (talk) 17:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Did the article have any thing/explanation about equal temperament? Hyacinth (talk) 20:41, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, aside from the file in question and its caption and the comparison file.Synchronism (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So should we remove all equal tempered chords from the article? Hyacinth (talk) 06:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why... Equal temperament is the standard nowadays after all. Aurora Illumina 13:58, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Er... no.  It would be nice if there was some prose about that for it to accompany though.Synchronism (talk) 19:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What would be nice if there was prose about what to accompany what? Hyacinth (talk) 04:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be nice if changes in tuning over time and the corresponding differences in the precise sounds of chords were discussed in the body of the article to give greater contextual relevance to those files. That's all, sorry about the excess of pronouns and lack of precision but I don't see how it would be beneficial to remove all equal tempered chords from the article.Synchronism (talk) 11:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

text: I haven't played with microtonal music before, so I'm not sure what that section would include after this Charles Ives chord. The file is currently linked to on the article on Quarter tones. As for the file itself, the program I use to write music doesn't support quarter tones, so I can't improve on the file myself. While the quarter tones are there in the file, there is a bit of strange buzzing on the file, which I'm not sure if it can be fixed or not as I can't really play that much with the file. Either way, the file should probably include the chord played in solid (blocked) in addition to broken, if possible. Aurora Illumina 20:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You could set up a +12/-12 portamento with a linear curve, put your notes on a single line and make your note changes with controller information. And all the very best! Redheylin (talk) 20:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the Charles Ives chord - midi file 

message: The article currently lacks any context for the tuning of any of the chords contained in it, all of which are apparently 12TET. Hyacinth (talk) 13:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: H, hello; don't really understand "context for tuning" - please explain, or why not go ahead and make the edit? You want an "A=440" sample or something? Sorry to be so thick. Redheylin (talk) 23:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nowhere to put or explain any of the chords in the article. Hyacinth (talk) 13:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh! I think the four basic chords might be nearer the top, "intonation" could do with a bit of text and linking, the extended and added chord tables are pretty much OK and there's still nothing about microtone harmonies. I do have a source for that but that brings up the whole citations issue, which might be greatly improved in general. Redheylin (talk) 20:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tuning context

message: :::::No, Aurora has correctly identified a second source of dissonance in close harmonies in the lower register (other than temperament): the clash of harmonics. It's particular odd-numbered harmonics that do this, therefore a sawtooth wave will be dissonant whereas a sine wave, having no harmonics, will be least. You can hear low triads generated by sine waves in harmonic intonation by using an FM synth in additive mode, then decide whether there is a third effect. Redheylin (talk) 18:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also the fact that my 'whole number ratio theory' was thinking based on just intonation. The C + B almost four octaves apart do form a ratio of exactly 15 in just intonation, but in equal temperament (which is what we use most commonly), it comes to approximately 15.102, which is a significant difference here. With a perfect fifth, the difference is really small (1.5 in just intonation, and 1.4983 in EQT), so the dissonance is reduced. Aurora Illumina 19:32, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But why did E and F then work? -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 20:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The E and F is at approximately 3:10 in Space Conquest, right? The chord is slightly dissonant. It's similar to a chord in Looping Piece No. 1 in B major, at about 12 seconds in. The chord is a B major seventh chord (B, D♯, F♯, A♯). The reason why the chord isn't instantly dismissed as being dissonant by the listener is that the chord is of a relatively short duration, and the chord is simply a there to lead into the following chord, which is a straight B major chord. Aurora Illumina 21:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the first note after the long note in the middle of the phrase. And it's not because of duration; I opened the sheet music, and held the chord. I like it. And you know how I am with dissonance. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 22:11, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, that's strange. It truly does sound significantly better than a C+B (even a higher C+B than this F+E.) Aurora Illumina 22:33, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 31 January

message: :When it comes to this file, with a bunch of various chords here, , the third chord includes an F+E+A+C, and it's not fully consonant. This is a major seventh chord. It does seem that, when there is such a chord, the seventh interval (the E in this case) should be the top note for it to be the most consonant. But this still doesn't solve the question about why C+B is significantly more dissonant than F+E... Aurora Illumina 03:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea, since my previous harmonics-based hypothesis was blown out of orbit with equal temperament. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 03:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think maybe here we arrived at the effect of sum and difference. I tried producing just-intonation sine-wave chords at low register and found that the octave was fine, thirds and fifths ok by themselves but the minor third created when all three were played was "clashing": as far as I remember we have such a sensation of dissonance when the amplitude modulation caused by the interaction of the two equals around 20 Hz. Have not done the maths yet, sorry. Redheylin (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that doesn't really explain why E and F are better than C and B. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 19:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a hypothesis; that the subjective experience at different interference frequencies is less or more tolerable. Or, look at the wave and see if the amplitude of modulation is greater. Redheylin (talk) 20:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I tried experimenting with the F+E vs. C+B some more. They both sound dissonant; maybe I and RadicalOne are just for some reason used to hearing the E+F together, as we've used it somewhere in pieces we've created, while we haven't used the C+B before. Aurora Illumina 20:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't except for that one (initially accidental) time in Space Conquest. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 20:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Also, yes, it is not quite consonant, but I like the sound of this quasi-dissonance, unlike minor chords, for example. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 20:53, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 1 February

message: I have another small theory, though I'm not sure if it only applies to me or not. Take an Fmaj7 chord (F A C E), for example, and take a simple major 7th interval (F E). The first one can be viewed as an F major chord, with an E on top as a leading note into a following chord, usually a straight F major chord. The F major chord in the bottom overpowers the single E note on top, so the E is viewed as being separate from the chord. The chord with only two notes, F and E, doesn't have any such separation, and thus is more dissonant. When it came to the chord I had in my music file there, the E was in the middle of the chord, so it's not easily separated, and thus the chord will still be dissonant. Aurora Illumina 02:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I played around in MIDISwing testing this; if the chord is dense (all in one octave) it is quite easily one of the worst chords I have ever heard. The only way it works is if the chord is FACFACE - in which I rather like the sound of this chord - and the bottom F must be at least F3. But yes, such a chord does move very nicely into FACFACF. But this trick does not work with C Major chords, oddly enough. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 04:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 3 February

message: I was playing around on my synthesizer, and made a very unexpected discovery. If embedded in a chord, semitones, even if directly adjacent, can be consonant - even better than a minor chord. Likewise, semitones, if spread far enough apart, can sound very good indeed.
F-A-C-E-F FAC ACE ACF FACE FACEF 
FFE FFF 
-RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 21:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a bit surprised you like these chords, given how you treat dissonance. I've used the F-F-E and F-F-F-C-E chords before, but I haven't used something dense like that. It's not the most consonant chord out there, but dissonant chords can be used simply for the purpose of leading in or resolving into a consonant chord. Aurora Illumina 22:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Except these chords aren't dissonant like a minor chord. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 22:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And evidently dissonance is subjective; I seem to find these chords slightly dissonant, but passable, while minor chords (C E♭ G) and dominant seventh chords (C E G B♭) are things I just find natural. Aurora Illumina 22:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The FACEF is more dissonant than the FE chord, but I must admit I find the dominant seventh to be pure noise. -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 23:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Pure noise"? Try spreading the notes out more and see what happens. And add an F major chord after the C-E-G-B♭ chord and see what happens. Aurora Illumina 23:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Most of the edits to this talk page since about the end of January have been forum-like, not really what this page is here for. Guys, it was tolerated for a while, but really should not continue. I just put the "not a forum" tag at the top of the page. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Consonance (music)|Consonant]] [[Semitone]]s?!?! 

message: :An interesting point to note: if you invert an interval (such as a third to a sixth) the quality of the new interval will be opposite to the original. For example if you invert a major third you get a minor sixth. This means that if you invert the intervals of a chord such as C major and transpose the inversion to C you will get an A minor chord as shown below:
The above image doesn't work out, and I made the annotated image below it to demonstrate. Hyacinth (talk) 12:38, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Transposition.jpg

message: Unfortunately there are still a few comprehensible sentences on this page. References, however, for the rest, have not been forthcoming Redheylin (talk) 00:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Attention

message: Hi Paolo, I always thought that a slash "/" in chord symbols indicates the bass note. So C/G would mean the second inversion of C major. You do not seem to make a distinction between Cm(M7) and Cm/M7. I'm not sure if that is correct. −Woodstone (talk) 05:33, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have found this notation in this article and/or other Wikipedia articles somewhere, before my edits. I believe I have also seen "minor/major seventh chord", or "minor/major sixth chord". If you think that Cm/M7 or similar symbols may be confused with a chord inversion, please feel free to delete them. Paolo.dL (talk) 09:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Cm/M7" is a standard usage (see minor major seventh chord) and in  context it is not ambiguous: though "slash chords" are used as Woodstone describes (also for non-inversions—e.g. "Cm/D" indicates a C minor triad, its voicing unindicated, plus a D in the bass), but this would never occur with "M7" or "M6" following the slash. /ninly(talk) 17:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we get a source/sources at Chord names and symbols (jazz and pop music) and Inversion (music)? Hyacinth (talk) 08:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately sources are rare in Chord names and symbols (jazz and pop music) (as well as in this article), and I guess this is also because there are millions of different "conventions" for nomenclature and notation. In the articles for specific chords sometimes references are given for a specific notation. But Cm/M7 was in many different articles, and I have also seen Cm/M6 in Sixth chord, so I think we can safely accept (while searching for references which most likely will confirm it) that the slash is used in this context to divide "chord" quality from the quality of the additional interval. Paolo.dL (talk) 13:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Unfortunately sources are rare in Chord names and symbols (jazz and pop music) (as well as in this article), and I guess this is also because there are millions of different "conventions" for nomenclature and notation." Errm... those ARE the sources. Could we start with a show of consensual authority that chord names (and symbols) differ in pop and jazz from other music? As regards the finer point, I'd remind you that many well-known classical harmony treatises take the notation "Dim7" as referring to a "diminished dominant seventh", enharmonically equal to an added 6 - and no slash? I personally find this unsatisfactory since it is used in the context of diminished triad chords, but would not venture to invent my own wikipedia notation to avoid the ambiguity. This is why I have continually and vainly requested citations. Redheylin (talk) 01:22, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

text: The point that seems to be getting missed is that ideally sources should come before info, not after. See WP:CITE. As you can see, it would have been easier to start with sources (adding symbols, rather than creating a massive unverified list and then trimming the unverified entries while attempting to verify others and add new verified ones). Hyacinth (talk) 14:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is not missed. And I agree. But in practice the opposite occurred. So now we have a lot of useful information, provided by many different editors, often without references, and we are forced to accept temporary imperfection. We (you included) tried to reduce the imperfection, for instance by inserting some new references, but we did this starting from a text which already existed. That's how eventually a good article comes out. I would not have been able to write the article from scratch. For instance, I prefer discussing here whether the slash is used or not, rather than ignoring the possibility it is used. And if other editors confirm it is used, then I trust them, even though they do not provide references. − Paolo.dL (talk) 20:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding editors' random assertions: How long do you trust other editors? And how far? What if editors said that the slash is never used this way? Or that whales fly? Hyacinth (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Still looking for evidence that chords are named differently in pop and in classical music. Redheylin (talk) 02:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I meant that there are "millions" of different (sets of) symbols, often differing by small details. So, we need "millions" of sources. We need the notable ones that are backed by notable authorities and the rest can go. Redheylin (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Redheylin, I opened a discussion about pop and jazz notation in the relevant talk page. I am interested in your opinion about this particular topic, but in this talk page there's another thread which deserves more attention (see below). Paolo.dL (talk) 11:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Hyacinth, I trust only experienced editors, who have a long history of contributions. When in doubt, I ask others, unless I have a reference confirming or rejecting the opinion/edit of the unknown editor. But most of this article was written much before I started editing and watching it. I trust those who edited and watched the page before me. I agree that a lot of sentences were obscure, and the structure of the article was a mess. Paolo.dL (talk) 11:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inversions 

message: It seems a bit complicated and convoluted at the moment. Perhaps something like this would clear things up?
'The notes of any given key may be written out in the form of a scale. The notes of this scale are numbered in ascending order, and are referred to as scale degrees. Triads may be constructed above each scale degree, and are named according to their scale degree. Thus, the triad formed above scale degree one is called Chord I, and the triad above scale degree five called Chord V. This system coexists with another system, which describes Chord I as the tonic, Chord V as the dominant, etc.
'Depending on the notes in the mode, such as whether or not it the key is major or minor, the triads built above scale degrees will have different qualities. Thus, they may be major, minor, diminished or augmented. These may be labelled in specific ways: a major chord is usually written with uppercase roman numerals, and a minor chord with lowercase roman numerals. For example, in a minor key, the tonic is described as i. Diminished chords are usually indicated by the use of a small circle, and augmented with a plus sign.'
I don't have any references right now but should the above meet with some approval I'll make an effort to find a textbook to cite.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.243.36 (talk) 01:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplifying the description of scale degrees 

message: I removed the info below since it exclusively concerns jazz chord tablature, which has its own article linked here, leaving only a basic introduction. The detail re notation far exceeds the scope of an article on the chord as such and much info already given elsewhere in the present article is duplicated here. I shall check whether this information is present in the relevant article.
 
Major, minor, augmented, and diminished chords 
:3-note chords are called triads. There are four basic triads (major, minor, augmented, diminished), and they are all tertian, i.e. defined by the root, a third interval, and a fifth interval. Since most other chords are obtained by adding one or more note to these triads, the name and symbol of a chord is often built by just adding an interval number to the name and symbol of a triad. For instance, a C augmented seventh chord is a C augmented triad with an extra note defined by a minor seventh interval:
::
C+7           	=	C+            	+	m7
augmentedchord	 	augmentedtriad	 	minorinterval
:In this case, the quality (minor, in the example) of the additional interval is omitted. Less often, the full name or symbol of the additional interval is provided. For instance, a C augmented major seventh chord is a C augmented triad with an extra note defined by a major seventh interval:
::
C+M7          	=	C+            	+	M7
augmentedchord	 	augmentedtriad	 	majorinterval
:In both cases, the quality of the chord is the same as the quality of the basic triad it contains. This is not true for all chord qualities, as the chord qualities "half-diminished", and "dominant" refer not only to the quality of the basic triad, but also to the quality of the additional intervals.
Rules to decode chord names and symbols 
:The amount of information provided in a chord name/symbol lean toward the minimum, to increase efficiency. However, it is often necessary to deduce from a chord name or symbol the component intervals which define the chord. The missing information is implied and must be deduced according to some conventional rules:
# For triads, major or minor always refer to the third interval, while augmented and diminished always refer to the fifth. The same is true for the corresponding symbols (e.g., Cm means Cm3, and C+ means C+5). Thus, the terms third and fifth and the corresponding symbols 3 and 5 are typically omitted. This rule can be generalized to all kinds of chords,
General rule 1 achieves consistency in the interpretation of symbols such as CM7, Cm6, and C+7. Some musicians legitimately prefer to think that, in CM7, M refers to the seventh, rather than to the third. This alternative approach is legitimate, as both the third and seventh are major, yet it is inconsistent, as a similar interpretation is impossible for Cm6 and C+7 (in Cm6, m cannot possibly refer to the sixth, which is major by definition, and in C+7, + cannot refer to the seventh, which is minor). Both approaches reveal only one of the intervals (M3 or M7), and require other rules to complete the task. Whatever is the decoding method, the result is the same (e.g., CM7 is always conventionally decoded as C-E-G-B, implying M3, P5, M7). The advantage of rule 1 is that it has no exceptions, which makes it the simplest possible approach to decode chord quality.
According to the two approaches, some may format CM7 as CM7 (general rule 1: M refers to M3), and others as CM7 (alternative approach: M refers to M7). Fortunately, even CM7 becomes compatible with rule 1 if it is considered an abbreviation of CMM7, in which the first M is omitted. The omitted M is the quality of the third, and is deduced according to rule 2 (see above), consistently with the interpretation of the plain symbol C, which by the same rule stands for CM. 
provided the above mentioned qualities appear immediately after the root note, or at the beginning of the chord name or symbol. For instance, in the chord symbols Cm and Cm7, m refers to the interval m3, and 3 is omitted. When these qualities do not appear immediately after the root note, or at the beginning of the name or symbol, they should be considered interval qualities, rather than chord qualities. For instance, in Cm/M7 (minor-major seventh chord), m is the chord quality and refers to the m3 interval, while M refers to the M7 interval. When the number of an extra interval is specified immediately after chord quality, the quality of that interval may coincide with chord quality (e.g. CM7 = CM/M7). However, this is not always true (e.g. Cm6 = Cm/M6, C+7 = C+/m7, CM11 = CM/P11). See specific rules 5 and 6 for further details.
# Without contrary information, a major third interval and a perfect fifth interval (major triad) are implied. For instance, a C chord is a C major triad, and the name C minor seventh (Cm7) implies a minor 3rd by rule 1, a perfect 5th by this rule, and a minor 7th by definition (see below). This rule has one exception (see next rule).
# When the fifth interval is diminished, the third must be minor.
All triads are tertian chords (chords defined by sequences of thirds), and a major third would produce in this case a non-tertian chord. Namely, the diminished fifth spans 6 semitones from root, thus it may be decomposed into a sequence of two minor thirds, each spanning 3 semitones (m3 + m3), compatible with the definition of tertian chord. If a major third were used (4 semitones), this would entail a sequence containing a major second (M3 + M2 = 4 + 2 semitones = 6 semitones), which would not meet the definition of tertian chord.
 This rule overrides rule 2. For instance, Cdim7 implies a diminished 5th by rule 1, a minor 3rd by this rule, and a diminished 7th by definition (see below).
#Names and symbols which contain only a plain interval number (e.g. “Seventh chord”) or the chord root and a number (e.g. “C seventh”, or C7) are interpreted as follows:
#:*If the number is 2, 4, 6, etc., the chord is a major added tone chord (e.g. C6 = CM6 = Cadd6) and contains, together with the implied major triad, an extra major 2nd, perfect 4th, or major 6th (see names and symbols for added tone chords).
#:*If the number is 7, 9, 11, 13, etc., the chord is dominant (e.g. C7 = Cdom7) and contains, together with the implied major triad, one or more of the following extra intervals: minor 7th, major 9th, perfect 11th, and major 13th (see names and symbols for seventh and extended chords).
# For sixth chord names or symbols composed only of root, quality and number (such as "C major sixth", or "CM6"):
#:* M, maj, or major stands for major-major (e.g. CM6 means CM/M6),
#:* m, min, or minor stands for minor-major (e.g. Cm6 means Cm/M6).
# For seventh chord names or symbols composed only of root, quality and number (such as "C major seventh", or "CM7"):
#:* dom, or dominant stands for major-minor (e.g. Cdom7 means CM/m7),
#:* M, maj, or major stands for major-major (e.g. CM7 means CM/M7),
#:* m, min, or minor stands for minor-minor (e.g. Cm7 means Cm/m7),
#:* +, aug, or augmented stands for augmented-minor (e.g. C+7 means C+/m7),
#:* , dim, or diminished stands for diminished-diminished (e.g. C7 means C/7),
#:* , or half-diminished stands for diminished-minor (e.g. C7 means C/m7).
#Other specific rules for extended and added tone chords are given in the main article.
Examples 
:The table shows the application of these generic and specific rules to interpret some of the main chord symbols. The same rules apply for the analysis of chord names. A limited amount of information is explicitly provided in the chord symbol (boldface font in the column labeled "Component intervals"), and can be interpreted with rule 1. The rest is implied (plain font), and can be deduced by applying the other rules. The "Analysis of symbol parts" is performed by applying rule 1.
:
Chord Symbol       	Chord Symbol                   	Analysis of symbol parts	Analysis of symbol parts	Analysis of symbol parts	Analysis of symbol parts	Component intervals	Component intervals	Component intervals	Chord name
Short              	Long                           	Root                    	Third                   	Fifth                   	Added                   	Third              	Fifth              	Added              	Chord name
C                  	                               	C                       	                        	                        	                        	maj3               	perf5              	                   	Major triad
CM                 	Cmaj                           	C                       	maj                     	                        	                        	maj3               	perf5              	                   	Major triad
Cm                 	Cmin                           	C                       	min                     	                        	                        	min3               	perf5              	                   	Minor triad
C+                 	Caug                           	C                       	                        	aug                     	                        	maj3               	aug5               	                   	Augmented triad
C                  	Cdim                           	C                       	                        	dim                     	                        	min3               	dim5               	                   	Diminished triad
C6                 	                               	C                       	                        	                        	6                       	maj3               	perf5              	maj6               	Major sixth chord
CM6                	                               	C                       	maj                     	                        	6                       	maj3               	perf5              	maj6               	Major sixth chord
Cm6                	                               	C                       	min                     	                        	6                       	min3               	perf5              	maj6               	Minor sixth chord
C7                 	Cdom7                          	C                       	                        	                        	7                       	maj3               	perf5              	min7               	Dominant seventh chord
CM7                	Cmaj7                          	C                       	maj                     	                        	7                       	maj3               	perf5              	maj7               	Major seventh chord
Cm7                	Cmin7                          	C                       	min                     	                        	7                       	min3               	perf5              	min7               	Minor seventh chord
C+7                	Caug7                          	C                       	                        	aug                     	7                       	maj3               	aug5               	min7               	Augmented seventh chord
C7                 	Cdim7                          	C                       	                        	dim                     	7                       	min3               	dim5               	dim7               	Diminished seventh chord
C                  	                               	C                       	                        	dim                     	                        	min3               	dim5               	min7               	Half-diminished seventh chord
C7                 	                               	C                       	                        	dim                     	7                       	min3               	dim5               	min7               	Half-diminished seventh chord
CmM7  Cm/M7  Cm(M7)	Cminmaj7  Cmin/maj7  Cmin(maj7)	C                       	min                     	                        	7                       	min3               	perf5              	maj7               	Minor-major seventh chord
Redheylin (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excised paras 

message: The opening sentence of this article reads "A chord in music is any set of notes that is heard as if sounding simultaneously."
It then cites Benward & Saker (2003). Music: In Theory and Practice, Vol. I, p. 67&359. Seventh Edition. .
I own this book and can pledge that it specifically defines a chord as "three or more pitches sounding simultaneously."DaddyTwoFoot (talk) 23:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Later in the article, Ottó Károlyi's Introducing Music is cited as saying, on page 63, that "Two or more notes sounding simultaneously are known as a chord." I have the 1982 Penguin printing of that book open in front of me now, and that is indeed what it says. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, my point being that the opening sentence is an erroneous citation. The book does not match what this article states the book says. I'm aware that other sources say it is two or more pitches, and some say that it's three or more. This book says it's three or more, so any citation of it should reflect that.74.85.202.167 (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing is stopping you from fixing it. I haven't looked to see if broken or arpeggiated (un-simultaneous) chords are cited, but that seems uncontroversial enough. __Just plain Bill (talk) 00:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentence 

message: I have initiated a formal RM action to move Musical scale to Scale (music). Contributions and comments would be very welcome; decisions of this kind could affect the choice of title for many music theory articles.
NoeticaTea? 00:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move: "Musical scale" → "Scale (music)" 

message: This article's structure is messy. So messy in fact, that parts of this article are only clear to people who don't really need to read it. There are all kinds of problems, such as not explaining jargon before use, but also the order in which things are discussed, such that later parts of the article need to be read first in order to understand earlier bits. I also get the feeling that a lot of essential information / theory is simply missing. I can understand not wanting to go into detail in an introductory article, but at least make sure to cover the fundamentals. And I think more examples would help laypeople as well, even if you cannot provide a MIDI file for each one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.114.146.117 (talk) 16:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback 

message: To my mind the lead section is very long - would anyone object to me trimming it down? I think each of its paragraphs is about twice as long as it needs to be, and goes into rather more detail than a lead section requires. Regards, The Land (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section 

message: This relates not just to this page but to all the assorted chord pages on Wikipedia. When I first was learning about more exotic chords, I'm sure I can remember each chord being defined not just using traditional terminology (major triad = root, major third, perfect fifth) but using ordered pitch-class intervals (major triad = {0, 4, 7}). i.e., simply define your root as '0' and count the number of semitones up from there (...4, 7). It clicked with me and  helped my understanding of chords.
But sometime between then and now that has been removed from every chord page. I think that's a mistake. I can imagine the argument that won the day was something like 'we don't need this, it's esoteric music theory'. But it's very easy to grasp. For readers who haven't come to grips with music jargon yet (and if they're consulting the wiki to learn these concepts that's pretty likely) it's a very intuitive starting point.
It certainly didn't hurt to have it in there. It helped me understand, it might help others.
141.168.250.245 (talk) 03:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: How about creating an overview table of all mentioned chords on this page, with columns just the chromatic scale. The first few header rows would have the classical interval names (minor/major third, perfect fifth. etc) and abbreviations (m3/M3, P5), a further row could have the number of semitones from the root (not pitch class in view of 9ths etc). After that each row would have the name, the used symbols and for each note in it a cross in the corresponding columns. For example like (more to be added and perhaps some reordering of rows would make of clearer):
Chord              	Chord                          	Chord                        	Interval                     	P1	m2	M2	m3	M3	P4	TT   	P5	m6	M6	m7	M7
Chord              	Chord                          	Chord                        	Interval                     	d2	A1	d3	A2	d4	A3	d5/A4	d6	A5	d7	A6	d8
Chord              	Chord                          	Chord                        	Semitones                    	0 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6    	7 	8 	9 	10	11
Short              	Long                           	Name                         	Note in C                    	C 	CD	D 	DE	E 	F 	FG   	G 	GA	A 	AB	B
C                  	                               	Major triad                  	Major triad                  	P1	  	  	  	M3	  	     	P5	  	  	  	
C6CM6              	Cmaj6                          	Major sixth chord            	Major sixth chord            	P1	  	  	  	M3	  	     	P5	  	M6	  	
C7                 	Cdom7                          	Dominant seventh chord       	Dominant seventh chord       	P1	  	  	  	M3	  	     	P5	  	  	m7	
CM7                	Cmaj7                          	Major seventh chord          	Major seventh chord          	P1	  	  	  	M3	  	     	P5	  	  	  	M7
C+                 	Caug                           	Augmented triad              	Augmented triad              	P1	  	  	  	M3	  	     	  	A5	  	  	
C+7                	Caug7                          	Augmented seventh chord      	Augmented seventh chord      	P1	  	  	  	M3	  	     	  	A5	  	  	M7
Cm                 	Cmin                           	Minor triad                  	Minor triad                  	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	     	P5	  	  	  	
Cm6                	Cmin6                          	Minor sixth chord            	Minor sixth chord            	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	     	P5	  	M6	  	
Cm7                	Cmin7                          	Minor seventh chord          	Minor seventh chord          	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	     	P5	  	  	m7	
CmM7  Cm/M7  Cm(M7)	Cminmaj7  Cmin/maj7  Cmin(maj7)	Minor-major seventh chord    	Minor-major seventh chord    	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	     	P5	  	  	  	M7
C                  	Cdim                           	Diminished triad             	Diminished triad             	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	d5   	  	  	  	  	
C7                 	Cdim7                          	Diminished seventh chord     	Diminished seventh chord     	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	d5   	  	  	d7	  	
CC7                	                               	Half-diminished seventh chord	Half-diminished seventh chord	P1	  	  	m3	  	  	d5   	  	  	  	m7	
−Woodstone (talk) 15:04, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it! I think that's a neat and elegant solution that should hopefully please everyone.141.168.250.245 (talk) 03:36, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I polished and reordered the table to make it more informative. What do others think? Can we replace many of the existing tables with (fragments) of this one? −Woodstone (talk) 07:16, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chords on Wikipedia (pitch-class intervals!) 

message: "A chord, in music, is any harmonic set of pitches consisting of two or more (usually three or more) notes (also called "pitches") that are heard as if sounding simultaneously.[1][2] " Thus, a jangle of discordant noise (not an intentionally different atonal  set) is also a chord?  Or should our definition /description include Tomy...'s idea that it is desired/pleasing/intentional? Kdammers (talk) 09:35, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discordant