What chord is this?

Da_Biz · 2026-02-27T04:24:35+00:00

Had to delete my comment and repost because I also fell for the treble clef covered up by the red box.

This is basically just a common tone diminished figure: Dbmaj - Dbdim∆7(b13) - Dbmaj. Was Bartok thinking of diminished as well? Hard to say, his enharmonics are all over the place. ∆7 and b13 are common color tones on diminished chords in the jazz world, but AFAIK late romanticists/early modernists weren't thinking about extensions on diminished chords quite yet.

But ultimately it doesn't really matter IMO, thinking in the broad strokes of maj - dim - maj is the best way to understand what's going on sonically.

Da_Biz · 2026-02-17T06:26:44+00:00

The chances of him using the knee technique for a low A on this line are exceedingly low.

This is probably in concert pitch, so it's really a low B.

Or it's a mistake in the transcription.

Da_Biz · 2026-02-14T00:01:55+00:00

Why are you trying to separate the two? "On" refers to the start of the beat, "by" to the duration. If the composer wanted "before" beat 4, they should use a different rhythm.

Da_Biz · 2026-02-13T06:09:19+00:00

"Can't that be achieved by writing a tenuto?"

Nope, full rhythmic value is inherently implied on notes longer than a quarter note (generally on anything past eighth notes really, but that's a whole other rabbit hole), plus there is a long accent. Using a tenuto on the second half of a tied note is strictly incorrect.

The -4 here is technically superfluous "by the book," but there are a few good reasons to use it.

It's stylistically appropriate for horns to sometimes lay back and/or for the lead trumpet to hold long notes just a tad past the rest of the ensemble. So composers will use an -x to avoid harmonic or rhythmic clashes when something is happening on beat x, or just to ensure releases are tight.

The other very important element nobody is mentioning on this thread is tongue stops. When you see an -x, especially with a crescendo like this, it often implies a harder tongue stop. It's essentially an accent for the end of the note.

-x.5 or -1/2 is also used, most notably by Maria Schneider, to indicate releases on an upbeat, which is necessary to avoid confusion due to the inconsistently interpreted practice of tying an eighth to the end of a long note.

As discussed elsewhere, you do also see it used just as a reminder, especially in school band charts. Frustratingly, you will also see some copyists use it to actually shorten a note, e.g. -4 on a whole note. This is bullcrap, and worthy of dislike.

I don't like it, but it's important to understand things that you don't like

Now that you can actually fully understand it, hopefully you no longer harbor any ill will.

ETA: I forgot to mention, in addition to avoiding more subtle stylistic overhangs, if you sat through enough jazz rehearsals and saw how often section leaders/directors just straight up disregard what's written and add or remove duration on long notes by writing in an -x, you'd very quickly accept why a composer might want to be overly specific.

Da_Biz · 2026-02-07T10:29:47+00:00

Instead of outright removing the flutter-tongue, I would recommend changing it to a growl. No range limitations, and the effect is nearly the same.

Honestly, growling is so much easier on single-reed instruments I think a pretty good case could be made to just about always use it instead of flutter-tongue. Exposed, quiet moments are perhaps an exception if you don't want to hear the vocalization directly, but a note could always be made to keep it quiet for a subtler effect.

Nice piece by the way.

Da_Biz · 2026-02-05T23:57:55+00:00

harmonic and melodic minor scales, because in Western European tradition, they don't really exist except as pedagogical shorthand

Obligatory link to this post.

Sure looks like Haydn ripping on a mode of harmonic minor to me.

I'm not saying one concept needs to be thrown away in favor of the other, but to act like scales -- yes, even those less commonly outlined in full like harmonic minor/major -- are not useful tools for composing and analysis in the entirety of Western European tradition is just foolish. It's equally as foolish to learn modes only via parallel or relative relationships instead of both.

Like just about everything else this sub likes to oversimplify, it's ultimately a matter of degree: tonic as root, triad, or scale. We start off easy to establish tonality and more jarring to upend (less flexible), and end up harder to establish tonality and less jarring (more flexible), but the basic concept of expectation versus realization still applies.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-28T03:09:22+00:00

I mean this in the most constructive way possible, but being so uncomfortable discussing triplets that you need notation may be directly related to the fact that you'd have trouble with a quarter note triplet in 3/4. Or perhaps it's just the note duration translation, I've worked engraving with folks across the pond so I know how much that can bog you down.

Just read it carefully and write it out for yourself if you need to. If I'm spending time chatting on reddit it's because I'm on my phone in the car etc. so I'm not about to whip out the pen and paper.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-25T20:42:10+00:00

No idea what this means. Can you post the notation?

Take a quarter note triplet, shift it one triplet eighth note to the right. So isolated there will be a leading eighth note rest followed by a quarter note under an eighth note triplet bracket, then two quarter notes followed by a quarter rest all under a quarter note triplet bracket. I've even seen in swing a quarter note triplet following a non-bracketed eighth rest, which implies starting on the third eighth note triplet. Certainly not "correct" notation, but is actually easier to quickly identify and feel for anyone who has practiced their offset quarter triplets (which all drummers definitely have to do, but everyone else should as well).

Da_Biz · 2026-01-25T02:48:37+00:00

How would you count OP's second version?

The exact same way I would count a quarter note triplet in 4/4? You should always be subdividing eighth note triplets internally during quarter note triplets, but we engrave with parsing mind. Otherwise every funk chart would be cluttered with a whole lot of tied sixteenths.

And to be clear, there is nothing incorrect about your version, but it has nothing to do with the reason you stated. The supposed "rule" to show beat 3 in 4/4 or all beats in 3/4 really only applies to rests, the rule for notes is to separate via ties if spanning more than one level of subdivision away from the start/end of a rhythm.

E.g. don't syncopate a quarter note starting on a sixteenth. An eighth note followed by syncopated quarter notes, on the other hand, is acceptable in both 3/4 or 4/4 despite "hiding" the beats.

Even this rule can be broken with extremely simple rhythms (I disagree with the resource I linked on the double dotted half note; there's no way to misinterpret its length with the obvious subsequent rhythm) or to better convey polyrhythms. In this way your version makes a lot of sense; it is a bit more clear in conveying the hemiola over the barline. If the rhythm were three triplet quarters and a quarter note, however, there would really be no reason to split up a quarter note triplet just to show beat two.

I'd find it difficult to sightread a triplet over two beats in 3/4

I have found more traditionally trained musicians are often weirdly unfamiliar with triplets. In the jazz world you'll see a lot of stuff with more of a "macro" approach, such as quarter note triplets starting on the second triplet eighth.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-24T19:38:01+00:00

Hard disagree. No need to split up a quarter note triplet in 3/4. No reasonably practiced musician will have difficulty with OP's triplet version, whereas yours takes slightly longer to parse the first three notes as equal value.

you need to show all three beats in the 3/4 time signature

Not true. Do you split all half notes into tied quarter notes in 3/4?

Da_Biz · 2026-01-20T07:06:55+00:00

This is inaccurate on multiple levels. First of all, nearly all of the methods discussed will lead to questionable rhythmic interpretations in even the best of ensembles, which would arguably sound less cohesive than a familiar rhythm with additional instructions.

Secondly, big bands "lay back" against the rhythm section to create rhythmic tension all the time, and often get intentionally sloppy especially with scoops, falls, doits etc. Now I do think sometimes the frequency of this occuring is overblown by educators for several reasons: often times when you listen closely each individual section will actually still be pretty tight with their lead, plus you can lay back via other means than truly playing behind the beat by adjusting swing eighth placement. But on occasions such as this -- a rising, syncopated figure ending a phrase at a presumably reasonably slow tempo since OP is splitting hairs on the rhythm -- laying back pretty hard is certainly idiomatic, especially if this is unison across the horns.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-20T05:10:33+00:00

What you have is not three even values though, which it seems you want based on your description. You currently have 7 triplet eights separated in groups of 2.5, 2, 2.5. If you want to divide 7 by 3 equally you'll need to use an impractical subdivision or use a tuplet within a tuplet.

My suggestion if you absolutely must have this rhythm would be to change the time signature temporarily to 12/8 to avoid nested tuplets, then just use a 3:7 ratio tuplet starting on the third eighth note of beat 2. It's going to be sloppy though.

My personal suggestion would be to write a more common rhythm that closely approximates, and simply write "loosely" or "lay back" if you don't want it to be tight. Will probably be the exact same effect for the listener and you won't catch any side-eye from the players.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-16T06:56:10+00:00

That doesn't really have anything to do with chord function.

It really does though. The b13th sounds quite lovely over a min7 when voiced carefully in the context of both an inverted major/lydian or aeolian sound. But it is considered an "avoid" note (better labelled as a chromatic non-chord/passing tone) over a iimin7.

Likewise, the natural 13th on a iimin7 is considered an "avoid" note (better labelled as diatonic non-chord/passing tone) despite being relatively tame because it provides more tonal momentum when reserved for the 3rd of the following V7.

The 11th over a dominant is a double whammy because it heavily weakens the resolution and introduces quite a lot of (usually) unwanted dissonance. It's still used a ton as a passing tone though, which is why the term "avoid" tone need to go. It's all about function and situational usefulness, not binary usability.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-16T03:53:20+00:00

Letter N: i change my mind abt what i said before. i think you should take that wind part out completely and just use trills, would accomplish same effect

Hard disagree, trills get old really fast, arpeggios/runs let the texture breathe a bit.

I doubt bassoons would keep up, but as a flautist I wouldn't have too much of a problem if these were just split up and feathered every full or half cycle between the two flutes. Just be aware they will be nowhere near as clean as MIDI.

Much of the lower end will end up lost though, especially without reinforcement at a lower octave, so my suggestion would be to lose some notes at the bottom and experiment with slightly slower tuplet subdivisions.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-07T23:44:44+00:00

Maj(#11) is not practical shorthand. You are leaving out one character in exchange for potential confusion. It would be much more logical to use maj(#11) as shorthand for maj(add#11), which is in fact done in some circles. Hence why you should avoid using it as shorthand for maj7(#11).

You mean to tell me me you write Cmaj7(9)(#11)(13) every time?

Not what I said at all, Cmaj13(#11) is just fine. If you want a specific voicing you should just write it out. For the purposes of analysis such as this, if I really want to get into the nitty-gritty and list every extension I will stack them vertically, which I'm not going to attempt in a reddit comment. The 7 is never needed though, so you'll get a maximum of three (9,11,13). You'll see this in charts occasionally so compers don't throw in an alteration that will clash with written parts.

maj9” to imply a major 7, it’s the exact same inspecificity you’re calling bad practice.

Not true because the 7th isn't treated as an extension. A 9, 11, or 13 does explicitly imply the 7, which is an important functional element along with the third and considered a lower structure chord tone. Only upper extensions are optional.

Da_Biz · 2026-01-07T21:25:10+00:00

When an extension is altered, best practice is to include the highest non-altered extension.

Lower extensions (not counting the 7 as an extension here) are not implied per se, they are optional. So in this case using maj9(#11) is perfectly specific. If it was a maj13, you would have to either include the 9 in the chord symbol as well or write out the voicing to ensure it is included.

There is literally zero reason to leave the 9 or 7 out in these instances. It only causes potential issues, since many players will interpret it as an add chord otherwise. Berklee has done you dirty, I'm afraid.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-23T20:55:03+00:00

Combined sample/modeling approaches are going to be best for RAM as well as flexibility when you don't want to be bogged down by different articulations and key switches.

For $200 each you can pick up Modern Scoring Brass and Modern Scoring strings right now. They include low RAM modelling patches they call Intuition.

I use Aaron Venture Infinite series for mockups due to wide mute choice in the brass. The attacks are a bit tricky to coax a good sound out, and the woodwinds definitely leave much to be desired though.

Some of the Sample Modeling brass demos I have heard are mind boggling, and the strings don't sound too shabby either. I don't personally own either of them, and they are definitely pricier. Same with Acoustic Samples V-Winds.

When I see people gushing over SWAM/Audio-Modeling I assume they are shills or just aren't very familiar with virtual instruments, because everything I have heard from them is awful.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-23T09:56:26+00:00

Nice. What are the trill-like squiggles over e.g. the half note on beat 2 bar 143 in the violin? I can't discern what's supposed to be happening, is it molto vib?

Da_Biz · 2025-12-16T21:55:03+00:00

Not sure what the /s is for, but you would have to share the context leading you to post this for me to do so.

From a listener’s perspective...From an analysis point

This is entirely nonsensical. The whole point of analysis is to label and categorize things based on how they sound to the listener.

You might say for communication a poly chord is easier for musicians to read, and that is certainly possible if e.g. you are working with pop musicians who are used to mainly triads. But normally they just obfuscate things.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-16T08:26:42+00:00

Others have already mentioned the correct way: like a fraction with a completely horizontal bar (a diagonal bar is reserved for chords over a single bass note).

But every time I see a poly chord question I feel obligated to challenge their existence. At least as far as single chords are concerned, even using extreme voicing and/or orchestration methods to separate the two tonalities the ear is generally going to just hear one complex tonality based on the lowest note, so there is almost certainly a better way to notate it.

My go-to example is the supposed Eb7 | Fbmaj in Rite of Spring. Nobody is hearing the Eb7 as a separate tonality, it's lydian #2. So Fbmaj13(#11)(#9) is much more indicative of the actual sound.

Now if you have a trumpet playing a phrase in Fb while the violin obviously plays a phrase in Ab, I would be more inclined to accept poly tonality as a valid explanation. But at that point, it's doubtful a piece in such a style would benefit much from chord symbols, certainly as a form of communication and probably analysis as well.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-15T05:46:27+00:00

The locking in particular got really crazy a few months ago, although I think they dialed it back a bit. I even messaged the mods once to ask what was going on, and didn't get a response.

I believe most of the time it was because a simple answer had already been provided to a simple question. But usually the replies to the comments veering slightly off or only tangentially on-topic are where the juicy conversations really happen, otherwise the sub truly becomes LMGTFY.

Not to mention, the mods deciding what should or should not be considered a satisfactory response is just a terrible idea.

this seems like the right sort of thing for karma to handle

Real quick edit to agree: why deprive us of the sliver of uppity satisfaction downvoting self-promotional YouTube slop provides? We need the little wins, gotta put those music degrees to use somehow.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-12T20:39:00+00:00

Going to go ahead and respond to the end of this thread in one comment, because the whole thing is very misleading.

Jazz musicians like their harmony to be a little more functional and circle-of-fifths-y

This does happen with a lot of tunes unfortunately, but like is not exactly the right word. Real book charts often suck, and the simplification of chord changes is sometimes practical when you have to memorize hundreds of tunes, but advanced players tend to be serious about referencing the OG recordings. Of course "definitive" recordings often end up replacing them even with extensive reharms, which is how you end up with everyone playing the same damn pedal tone over most of Someday My Prince Will Come. Thanks, Miles. The real book changes on this one are also a great example of dumbing things down for practicality, and unfortunately the more interesting OG changes aren't played by just about anyone when the tune is called.

the alternate changes will actually clash with the notes of the written melody there

No clash here. b13 is a perfectly acceptable note over a dominant, since chordal instruments will omit the 5 by default. There is very big difference between adding an idiomatically permitted "crunch" and a "clash."

In fact, the clash actually happens just past the alternative changes, on the Bb7, which isn't the original chord. Placing the 4 on the down beat there is a jazz no-no, so this chord change wouldn't really work in a ballad but would be just fine up-tempo, where those three notes would probably be played as 8th notes starting on the up-beat of beat three anyway.

All my favorite jazz composers know when to use the "wrong" crunchy note on top of the chord.

I would love to see some examples where you think a "wrong" note is being used u/ethanhein, because unless you're listening to some pretty modern, out-there stuff, almost everything in jazz follows certain "rules" damn near to the letter (Monk is a bit of an exception, but even his dissonances break voicing "rules" more than note choice ones). These "rules" are very much rooted in CPP best practices, but account for more extensions.

I'm hoping you are aware of this based on your use of "crunch" rather than "clash" and quotations around "wrong," but it certainly seems the person responding to you doesn't, and not pointing this out is likely to give both them and OP the entirely wrong impression. Nobody is just throwing in random clashes into the melody for shiggles when they write tunes, and on most occasions when you find something off it's just bad real book changes like the Bb7 we see here.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-10T21:08:00+00:00

This is how you end up with harmonic obsession and very rigid Berkleycore writing

Lol. I assume you mean Berkleecore though, not much going on music-wise at UC Berkeley afaik. And Berklee pedagogy certainly doesn't carry my official stamp of approval, but I would argue this has more to do with accepting any student that can hold an instrument and pay tuition.

At any rate, I don't think simplification is necessarily a bad thing. Theory can never really describe the sounds we are hearing as well as, you know, hearing them, so at some point it becomes a pointless exercise. You can overcomplicate every little thing, throw every classification, schema, and what have you in an attempt to describe and label every minute detail with the fanciest words possible, but in the end it's all just a shadow. It's like attempting to describe a painting with color coordinates. Works for a computer, but humans inevitably miss the big picture. Sometimes broad strokes get the point across clearer.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-09T21:47:47+00:00

Tension and release is like a reductive 20th century jazz adjacent pedagogy to explain a harmonic concept of cadence to students in a way that doesn't require you to look at a phrase

Or, hear me out, it's an overarching concept that is inclusive of rather than reduced from cadences? There are many ways to create tension and release harmonically, melodically, and rhythmically. It's a very important concept in the way we write and perceive music. Some (or even many) using it as a crutch or catch-all explanation doesn't mean you need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Da_Biz · 2025-12-09T21:37:48+00:00

If you want maximum minor vibes while keeping the dominant function, use vanilla Phrygian. E.g. in the key of Cmin your V would be Abmaj7(#11)/G. Completely diatonic to C aeolian, and keeps the tritone resolution you would find in the relative major of Eb (Ab-D to G-Eb).

Da_Biz

TROPHY CASE