This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Suspended chord article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This article is all over the Internet, usually in a shortened form, at music sites and encyclopedia tyes of sites. How do we know who's ripping off whom? I looked into this because I was suspicious of the closing statment, "Contrast with sixth chord". That doesn't feel Wikipedian, it seems like something out of a textbook. It also sucks. Tell us why, don't just order us to go do it. This isn't Wikiversity. -- 63.25.105.14 ( talk) 21:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I have added some audio examples. Hyacinth ( talk) 09:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Fundamentally, this page is wrong: a suspended chord needs to be suspended from somewhere. Just stating "However, in modern usage, the term concerns only the notes played at a given time; in a suspended chord the added tone does not necessarily resolve, and is not necessarily "prepared" (i.e., held over) from the prior chord." doesn't necessarily make it so: it simply defines a x4th chord. (example- a C4th chord)
A suspended chord, by its definition, implies a suspension; i.e. the retained note is suspended from something. It doesn't just magically happen by itself.
Joe Gerardi ( talk) 22:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Is this correct? I don't know much about Jazz chord terminology (beyond the fact they usually ignore 7ths), but as far as I can can tell the first chord is actually G7sus2sus4, ie it has both "sus" notes but not the 3rd. Gsus (ie G7sus4) would surely be G-C-D-F? -- Jubilee♫ clipman 23:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
This example has thoroughly confused me as a novice who came to this article looking to become informed. It seems incorrect from my very very limited understanding of sus chords, but I am not knowledgeable enough to confidently make that call. I came to this article hoping to become less unknowledgeable but this example has made my confusion worse. The image's caption in this article cites a source. Yet the image is Hyacinth's own original image. Although I do not have access to the cited book, I have a hard time believing that the book would actually say anything about Hyacinth's original image. (Not in citation given?) Further adding to confusion, the image's description in the Commons does not match the caption given in this article. Seeing as this example is confusing and controversial, I would suggest its removal regardless of whether it is technically correct or not. Surely somebody could find a different cite-able example that serves to demonstrate the concept more straightforwardly? -- 108.181.232.201 ( talk) 01:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, The so-called "suspended chord" in the example box is not a suspension at all. It's what would either be called a subdominant over a dominant (IV/V) or dominant 11 (V11) - according to the way the chord is laid out and resolved, it would act as a dominant chord in both pop and classical styles. I can imagine how confusing this might be for a beginning theorist to look at. I'll try to change it ASAP with a better example, but if anybody comes up with something first this problem should be solved quickly! I also agree with some of the commentary on here - the music theory articles on wikipedia are in need of serious, organic improvement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.143.108.27 ( talk) 13:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.85.216.120 ( talk) 02:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I think that needs to be taken out. Did somebody go through every song ever composed and count sus4 vs sus2. Seems silly-- Brian Earl Haines ( talk) 22:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree. At the very least in needs a citation. 'Far more common' suggests it's rare at least but I play sus2 all the time. -- 86.153.11.189 ( talk) 20:56, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
The last sentence in the lead used to read, "The lack of a minor or a major third in the chord creates an open sound, which can suggest a minor or a major tonality." The dependent clause is wrong, and I removed it. The lack of a third suggests nothing. A missing third can't suggest a minor or major tonality because the third is what defines a minor or major tonality. It's like saying that the absence of the third suggests the presence of the third, which is painfully illogical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.187.191 ( talk) 20:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Why, what, where, and how does this article need to be cleaned up? Hyacinth ( talk) 06:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Your "Cmsus2" graphical example on the right doesn't jive with the entry you have in your "Suspended second chord table" lower down on the left!
(I don't dare correct this myself, since I'm tired of "the Wiki community" erasing corrections I make, and putting them right back to the original error. Very frustrating.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.235.222 ( talk) 20:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Cmsus2 image File:Sus_chord.png shows CDG, Suspended chord#Suspended second chord table Csus2 entry lists CDG. Same thing, no problem. Hyacinth ( talk) 09:54, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
What the reasoning behind the absence, presence, or placement of commas within or without of quotations? Hyacinth ( talk) 09:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Just for the record: There is no such thing as a Cmsus2 chord. This is an oxymoron. It's either Cm (C-Eb-G), Csus2 (C-D-G) or Cmadd9 (C-D-Eb-G). The image on the right side needs to be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.235.58 ( talk) 07:40, 23 January 2012
A new stub has been made for a so-called " Carpenters chord", actually an ordinary V9sus4. I suggest merging this here, although doing so may add little or no new content to this article. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 14:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
The article was created by User:Zmckowen (not by me). Hyacinth ( talk) 08:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
There is no reason to call the section References. There is no reason to swear at people. Though you describe my reverting as "edit warring" it does not meet the definition. There is no reason for hyperbole. Hyacinth ( talk) 09:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I can't agree with that although I don't consider myself as a full fledged musical theorist. I just feel the Bsus4 is perfectly resolving into the E minor. Specially when the band comes in. Anyone agree? Please correct me if I'm wrong. I couldn't find verifying material. RobGuitarTeacher ( talk) 21:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
The notes in a Bsus4 would be B, E, and F#. The song is in E minor, so we would expect the Bsus4 to resolve to a B major chord (i.e. the suspended E to resolve to a D#). Since the next chord is actually an E minor, the E in the Bsus4 does not resolve. By modern standards, the chord change isn't really dissonant, and I think that's probably what you're thinking about by saying it is perfectly resolving, but strictly speaking it isn't a resolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.161.135 ( talk) 19:40, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
In the "jazz sus chord" section, the definition in the first sentence includes the phrase "on the fifth scale degree of the key". Does this add anything to the definition, and is it even accurate? Ejb11235 ( talk) 23:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
SUS4 SUS2 AMGONUS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.108.214.172 ( talk) 10:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
While the chord given in the example can be interpreted as a G9sus4, it's much more realistic to me to analyze this as F/G. Same with the Wagner and the Bruckner. The pedal tones aren't intended to be roots of these chords, it's just supposed to be an underlying dissonance as the chords shift above it and finally resolve back to consonance. Fraktol ( talk) 15:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Suspended chord article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This article is all over the Internet, usually in a shortened form, at music sites and encyclopedia tyes of sites. How do we know who's ripping off whom? I looked into this because I was suspicious of the closing statment, "Contrast with sixth chord". That doesn't feel Wikipedian, it seems like something out of a textbook. It also sucks. Tell us why, don't just order us to go do it. This isn't Wikiversity. -- 63.25.105.14 ( talk) 21:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I have added some audio examples. Hyacinth ( talk) 09:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Fundamentally, this page is wrong: a suspended chord needs to be suspended from somewhere. Just stating "However, in modern usage, the term concerns only the notes played at a given time; in a suspended chord the added tone does not necessarily resolve, and is not necessarily "prepared" (i.e., held over) from the prior chord." doesn't necessarily make it so: it simply defines a x4th chord. (example- a C4th chord)
A suspended chord, by its definition, implies a suspension; i.e. the retained note is suspended from something. It doesn't just magically happen by itself.
Joe Gerardi ( talk) 22:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Is this correct? I don't know much about Jazz chord terminology (beyond the fact they usually ignore 7ths), but as far as I can can tell the first chord is actually G7sus2sus4, ie it has both "sus" notes but not the 3rd. Gsus (ie G7sus4) would surely be G-C-D-F? -- Jubilee♫ clipman 23:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
This example has thoroughly confused me as a novice who came to this article looking to become informed. It seems incorrect from my very very limited understanding of sus chords, but I am not knowledgeable enough to confidently make that call. I came to this article hoping to become less unknowledgeable but this example has made my confusion worse. The image's caption in this article cites a source. Yet the image is Hyacinth's own original image. Although I do not have access to the cited book, I have a hard time believing that the book would actually say anything about Hyacinth's original image. (Not in citation given?) Further adding to confusion, the image's description in the Commons does not match the caption given in this article. Seeing as this example is confusing and controversial, I would suggest its removal regardless of whether it is technically correct or not. Surely somebody could find a different cite-able example that serves to demonstrate the concept more straightforwardly? -- 108.181.232.201 ( talk) 01:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, The so-called "suspended chord" in the example box is not a suspension at all. It's what would either be called a subdominant over a dominant (IV/V) or dominant 11 (V11) - according to the way the chord is laid out and resolved, it would act as a dominant chord in both pop and classical styles. I can imagine how confusing this might be for a beginning theorist to look at. I'll try to change it ASAP with a better example, but if anybody comes up with something first this problem should be solved quickly! I also agree with some of the commentary on here - the music theory articles on wikipedia are in need of serious, organic improvement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.143.108.27 ( talk) 13:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.85.216.120 ( talk) 02:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I think that needs to be taken out. Did somebody go through every song ever composed and count sus4 vs sus2. Seems silly-- Brian Earl Haines ( talk) 22:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree. At the very least in needs a citation. 'Far more common' suggests it's rare at least but I play sus2 all the time. -- 86.153.11.189 ( talk) 20:56, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
The last sentence in the lead used to read, "The lack of a minor or a major third in the chord creates an open sound, which can suggest a minor or a major tonality." The dependent clause is wrong, and I removed it. The lack of a third suggests nothing. A missing third can't suggest a minor or major tonality because the third is what defines a minor or major tonality. It's like saying that the absence of the third suggests the presence of the third, which is painfully illogical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.187.191 ( talk) 20:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Why, what, where, and how does this article need to be cleaned up? Hyacinth ( talk) 06:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Your "Cmsus2" graphical example on the right doesn't jive with the entry you have in your "Suspended second chord table" lower down on the left!
(I don't dare correct this myself, since I'm tired of "the Wiki community" erasing corrections I make, and putting them right back to the original error. Very frustrating.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.235.222 ( talk) 20:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Cmsus2 image File:Sus_chord.png shows CDG, Suspended chord#Suspended second chord table Csus2 entry lists CDG. Same thing, no problem. Hyacinth ( talk) 09:54, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
What the reasoning behind the absence, presence, or placement of commas within or without of quotations? Hyacinth ( talk) 09:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Just for the record: There is no such thing as a Cmsus2 chord. This is an oxymoron. It's either Cm (C-Eb-G), Csus2 (C-D-G) or Cmadd9 (C-D-Eb-G). The image on the right side needs to be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.235.58 ( talk) 07:40, 23 January 2012
A new stub has been made for a so-called " Carpenters chord", actually an ordinary V9sus4. I suggest merging this here, although doing so may add little or no new content to this article. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 14:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
The article was created by User:Zmckowen (not by me). Hyacinth ( talk) 08:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
There is no reason to call the section References. There is no reason to swear at people. Though you describe my reverting as "edit warring" it does not meet the definition. There is no reason for hyperbole. Hyacinth ( talk) 09:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I can't agree with that although I don't consider myself as a full fledged musical theorist. I just feel the Bsus4 is perfectly resolving into the E minor. Specially when the band comes in. Anyone agree? Please correct me if I'm wrong. I couldn't find verifying material. RobGuitarTeacher ( talk) 21:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
The notes in a Bsus4 would be B, E, and F#. The song is in E minor, so we would expect the Bsus4 to resolve to a B major chord (i.e. the suspended E to resolve to a D#). Since the next chord is actually an E minor, the E in the Bsus4 does not resolve. By modern standards, the chord change isn't really dissonant, and I think that's probably what you're thinking about by saying it is perfectly resolving, but strictly speaking it isn't a resolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.161.135 ( talk) 19:40, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
In the "jazz sus chord" section, the definition in the first sentence includes the phrase "on the fifth scale degree of the key". Does this add anything to the definition, and is it even accurate? Ejb11235 ( talk) 23:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
SUS4 SUS2 AMGONUS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.108.214.172 ( talk) 10:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
While the chord given in the example can be interpreted as a G9sus4, it's much more realistic to me to analyze this as F/G. Same with the Wagner and the Bruckner. The pedal tones aren't intended to be roots of these chords, it's just supposed to be an underlying dissonance as the chords shift above it and finally resolve back to consonance. Fraktol ( talk) 15:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)