PDA

View Full Version : chord help please! Em+



barefootgypsy
08-17-2014, 02:36 AM
Em augmented..... can't find how to play that! And it isn't a mistake on the song sheet, I thought it might be at first, but it's definitely not..... the progression is Em Em+ Em6

At a push I could play Em7 in its place but it wouldn't be right - and I want it right! As this progression is one of the special things about this particular song..... can anyone help, please?

Jim Hanks
08-17-2014, 02:51 AM
Heres one way. Play the normal Em chord 0432. The just walk up the 1st string to 0433 and then 0434.

Another way would be to walk up the 4th string like this:
4432 to 5432 to 6432

Or higher up on the 2nd string : 9777 9787 9797
(Having fun with GuitarToolkit this morning)

VegasGeorge
08-17-2014, 02:55 AM
Well, there is something wrong, like a misprint. A "+" indicates an augmented chord. Augmented chords are made up of major thirds, not minor thirds. You can't have a minor augmented chord. So, something isn't right with the chord symbol you're looking at.

barefootgypsy
08-17-2014, 02:55 AM
Heres one way. Play the normal Em chord 0432. The just walk up the 1st string to 0433 and then 0434.
That seems to fit just great! Thank you, you wonderful man!

:bowdown: ;)

Jim Hanks
08-17-2014, 03:01 AM
Well, there is something wrong, like a misprint. A "+" indicates an augmented chord. Augmented chords are made up of major thirds, not minor thirds. You can't have a minor augmented chord. So, something isn't right with the chord symbol you're looking at.
Not true. Augmented just means the 5th is sharp. So minor augmented is root, minor third, sharp 5. So e, g, c in this case. This is also a C major chord first inversion so you wouldn't often see it spelled Em+ but makes perfect sense on this case where the focus note is going from 5 to sharp 5 to 6.

barefootgypsy
08-17-2014, 03:10 AM
Not true. Augmented just means the 5th is sharp. So minor augmented is root, minor third, sharp 5. So e, g, c in this case. This is also a C major chord first inversion so you wouldn't often see it spelled Em+ but makes perfect sense on this case where the focus note is going from 5 to sharp 5 to 6. Thanks for your point - I did wonder about this, especially when I couldn't find fingering for the chord - but then, researching the song, I found this quote... “musicologists have praised the E minor augmented ascent, which is the first sound we hear.” It's interesting!

Booksniffer
08-17-2014, 05:18 AM
At a push I could play Em7 in its place but it wouldn't be right - and I want it right! As this progression is one of the special things about this particular song..... can anyone help, please?


Now you have me curious.... Would you mind sharing which song it is?

Wicked
08-17-2014, 06:17 AM
Not true. Augmented just means the 5th is sharp. So minor augmented is root, minor third, sharp 5. So e, g, c in this case. This is also a C major chord first inversion so you wouldn't often see it spelled Em+ but makes perfect sense on this case where the focus note is going from 5 to sharp 5 to 6.

I must agree with VegasGeorge. An augmented chord is two major thirds. Raising the fifth of a minor chord does not make it a "minor augmented" chord. It should be Em#5. (Or just call it C/E.)

Wicked
08-17-2014, 06:26 AM
Em augmented..... can't find how to play that! And it isn't a mistake on the song sheet, I thought it might be at first, but it's definitely not..... the progression is Em Em+ Em6

At a push I could play Em7 in its place but it wouldn't be right - and I want it right! As this progression is one of the special things about this particular song..... can anyone help, please?

They could mean EmMAJ7 (E,G,B,D#).... which makes much more harmonic sense.

EDIT: After reading your other post mentioning the ascent, I take that back. I would definitely go with Em, Em#5, Em6. (0,4,3,2 - 0,4,3,3 - 0,4,3,4)

But, Em Augmented is definitely not correct terminology.

barefootgypsy
08-17-2014, 06:27 AM
Now you have me curious.... Would you mind sharing which song it is?Ha-ha, I thought this question would come! It's "Blackberry Way" by The Move... written by Roy Wood...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELRHD4UCo74

barefootgypsy
08-17-2014, 06:32 AM
They could mean EmMAJ7 (E,G,B,D#).... which makes much more harmonic sense.

Thanks very much for your input, I appreciate it - and I had a feeling that my question might result in a little "discord" on the answer! Seriously though, Jim's first answer seems to suit the song just fine! And I see he's edited that post to put a couple of extra ideas in.... it's just Wizzard! ;)

VegasGeorge
08-17-2014, 06:42 AM
Jim, it's been a while since I was at conservatory, and I certainly don't remember everything I was taught there. But I do remember augmented chords. I looked for my Harvard Dictionary of Music, but I can't find it. But the definition under "augmented chords" in Wikipedia is exactly what I remember. "In music, an augmented triad is a triad, or chord, consisting of two major thirds (an augmented fifth). The term augmented triad arises from an augmented triad being considered a major chord whose top note (fifth) is raised, or augmented." You will not find a minor chord within a chord consisting of "two major thirds." So, there is no minor augmented chord, not now, not ever. You could have an E minor chord with a raised 5th, which might be styled as "Em+," the "+" indicating the raised 5th. But it wouldn't be an augmented chord.

Booksniffer
08-17-2014, 06:44 AM
Ah, great song!

Thanks. :)

Wicked
08-17-2014, 06:48 AM
I found the tab that has "Em+" written. Luckily they have the guitar tab written out for that chord... The notes are E,G,B,C.... which is Em add #5 (OR CMaj7/E).

I would stick with the progression I put in my previous post, or you can go with Em, Em add #5, Em6 (0,4,3,2 - 0,0,3,2 - 0,1,3,2)

Either one should work. It just depends if you prefer the ascent to be at the top of the inversion or the bottom.

EDIT: After listening to the tune again, I would definitely go with the progression on this post. It fits the original intent better than having the ascent on the A string.

Jim Hanks
08-17-2014, 08:26 AM
Jim, it's been a while since I was at conservatory, and I certainly don't remember everything I was taught there. But I do remember augmented chords. I looked for my Harvard Dictionary of Music, but I can't find it. But the definition under "augmented chords" in Wikipedia is exactly what I remember. "In music, an augmented triad is a triad, or chord, consisting of two major thirds (an augmented fifth). The term augmented triad arises from an augmented triad being considered a major chord whose top note (fifth) is raised, or augmented." You will not find a minor chord within a chord consisting of "two major thirds." So, there is no minor augmented chord, not now, not ever. You could have an E minor chord with a raised 5th, which might be styled as "Em+," the "+" indicating the raised 5th. But it wouldn't be an augmented chord.
Well, there's theory and then there's practice. :p I hereby stand corrected on the theory, but I still think it is fairly common practice to use the terms "augmented" and "raised 5th" interchangeably.

Wicked
08-17-2014, 09:26 AM
Well, there's theory and then there's practice. :p I hereby stand corrected on the theory, but I still think it is fairly common practice to use the terms "augmented" and "raised 5th" interchangeably.

You are correct that a raised fifth is referred to as an augmented fifth. The use of an augmented fifth, however, does not create an augmented chord in every case. A triad must contain two major thirds to be considered augmented.

It may seem like splitting hairs, but this particular instance is a perfect example of why standard labels are needed. The person who wrote the tab using the symbol Em+ created considerable confusion. A proper label would have removed any doubt.

Jim Hanks
08-17-2014, 10:01 AM
It may seem like splitting hairs, but this particular instance is a perfect example of why standard labels are needed.
Well, there probably are, but that doesn't mean everybody will use them. I learned about "standard written English" in school, but folks 'round here don't talk like dat. :-)

By the way, your signature image is wrong. With a caption like "thou shalt not" shouldn't he be holding something with 6 strings? :p

barefootgypsy
08-18-2014, 01:39 AM
To each and every one of you who has replied to my question, thank you so much - I guessed that it would initiate this sort of debate and thanks for taking up the baton - I have basic music theory but nowhere near conservatoire standard and I'm fascinated with complex chords - the most I learned about at college were 6ths, 7ths, 9ths etc - in the context of learning about 20th century music by Debussy and his contemporaries.... tabulation is something else I've learned about and now use, since taking up the uke. I'm truly indebted to you all for discussing this and educating me further! I'm going to print the thread off, and I'll try ALL the fingering suggestions.

The reason I'm attempting the song is the Seasons of the Ukulele, Season 131 (current) - songs by artists from a place you've called home..... Roy Wood (long hair and glasses in the vid) wrote this song (a hit in the UK) - he's quite a star from the 60's and 70's and he's from my town - Blackberry Way is held locally to refer to Blackberry Lane, a couple of miles from here.... we used to see him about but he's moved now. Still long hair and coloured shades!

Wicked
08-18-2014, 05:09 AM
Rules and theory are made to be broken. The progression is Em Em+ Em6. The progression shows a movement in the fourth note of the chord. So using the "normal" Em on a ukulele, the notes go GEGB GEGB# GEGC#. If you realise that pattern in the fourth note, and know the notes on your fretboard, the term "augmented" is not required, and you do not need to use a terminology dictionary. Obviously there is a lot of value in a common terminology, so the word "augmented" is a valuable communication tool and the terminology can be important.
In this case when you are working our the tune by yourself, what is important is that the B B#(C) C# progression in the chords seems to define the sound of the tune. Once you have heard the progression of notes and you can remember it, listen for it in other music and you will find it, or have a little noodle on it and create your own tune.
So instead of reaching for a chord dictionary, write out the notes in the chords, and see if you can also find the melody, and try to work out the missing notes in chords you have never seen before. Then check your answer with this type of post or a chord dictionary.

I think that everyone is in agreement on the mechanics. The problem was that the author of the tab chose to create their own name for a chord (Em+) and that caused confusion. To his/her credit, a guitar tab was used to define the "Em+", but it did not include the actual notes, so anyone who does not play guitar is unable to decipher the author's intent. Once we knew the actual notes, it became simple.

So, lessons learned:

1. Many tabs on the internet are confusing, incorrect or both.
2. There is no such thing as a "Minor Augmented" chord.
3. There is a correct name for every chord (In many cases, there is more than one name, depending on context - but you know exactly what the notes should be in every case.)

Most importantly, Barefootgypsy now has multiple options to play the tune she wanted. (Yeah, Team!)

sonomajazz
08-18-2014, 05:21 AM
Well, I'm totally confused here, but that's easy to do...

I'd like to see your interpretation of the tune, bfg, when you get it allfiggeredout!

barefootgypsy
08-19-2014, 05:17 AM
Well, I'm totally confused here, but that's easy to do...

I'd like to see your interpretation of the tune, bfg, when you get it allfiggeredout!Well if I get to do it, I'll post it here! The Seasons 131 is all about songs by artists from your home town, or places you've lived.... as I've lived most of my life in Birmingham, England, it's a steal for me, so many great bands (http://www.ranker.com/list/birmingham-bands-and-musical-artists-from-here/reference?page=1) came from my neck of the woods! I've already done a "Slade" song because of connections there! So .....

Down Up Dick
08-19-2014, 05:53 AM
Please remember, I am a chord newby and shouldn't even be in this thread but here goes. "Music Theory for Dummies" states that "Augmented triads are major triads that have had the fifth raised a half step, creating a slightly dissonent sound". And nowhere in the Augmented triads section does it mention minor notes at all. It appears to me that VegasGeorge is correct in his comment. And furthermore it's dumb that Am7 and C6 are the same darned chord!!

Extra info: Every other book that I have says about the same thing. Minor notes just aren't mentioned. It's all I + III + #V. ;)

Dan Uke
08-19-2014, 06:33 AM
I had a real life experience yesterday. We were playing a C7 (3433) and the guy says add a ninth to it (3435) to make it more jazzy. I just looked up the chord and it says Em7-5 or Gm6. I would have no idea how to play those chords on the fly but I knew how to add a ninth by adding the D to the first string. Is it wrong to say add a ninth?

Down Up Dick
08-19-2014, 06:38 AM
So apparently, chords are whatever you want them to be. So like Walter Mitty just imagine what you want, and you're playing it -- POW! I never realized that I was such a black and white person. Anyway, I don't wanna get into any more chord talk. I'm gonna go play some tunes in H minor with a twist. ;)

Wicked
08-19-2014, 08:29 AM
You can have a minor chord with an augmented 5th. It's not incorrect to refer to this as a minor augmented chord (or an augmented minor chord), in the same way we refer to minor seventh chords.

Sorry, but I have not been able to find a single instance of the term "minor augmented," nor have I found the symbol Em+ in any other instance. If you can find one, I would love to see it.

The proper name would be "E Minor Augmented Fifth" or Em#5.

In reality, the chord in the tab wasn't even Em#5. It was Em add #5 - which is an entirely different beast.

Again, it may seem like we are splitting hairs, but music has a very precise meaning for everything, otherwise it would all be a confusing mess.

Down Up Dick
08-19-2014, 10:05 AM
Ha! Didn't you read ubulele's comment? One just arranges the chord the way he wants it and then calls it what he wants it to be. It isn't a confusing mess, and everyone is correct. I'm sorry I'm being a pain, but I like things to make sense.

Jim Hanks
08-19-2014, 01:21 PM
I had a real life experience yesterday. We were playing a C7 (3433) and the guy says add a ninth to it (3435) to make it more jazzy. I just looked up the chord and it says Em7-5 or Gm6. I would have no idea how to play those chords on the fly but I knew how to add a ninth by adding the D to the first string. Is it wrong to say add a ninth?
I wouldn't say it is wrong to say add a ninth, but since you only have 4 strings what you're really saying here is swap the root for a ninth, so you end up with a rootless C9 chord - Bb E G D - so either of the other spellings is also valid.

CeeJay
08-19-2014, 01:44 PM
Again, it may seem like we are splitting hairs, but music has a very precise meaning for everything, otherwise it would all be a confusing mess.


...um it is isn't it ...clearly we have a case in point here ???

Wicked
08-19-2014, 03:14 PM
...um it is isn't it ...clearly we have a case in point here ???

You are correct, sir. So I suppose that I should say, "otherwise it would be a MORE confusing mess than it already is."

Down Up Dick
08-19-2014, 04:02 PM
If I were playing a piece with whatever chord she had (Ha! not likely) to play, and I turned it over to all the theorists for pages of confusion. I think I would take the chord notes on the music and search all my chord charts to find one like it. And that would be it. If I didn't find one, I'd skip it, or play a different tune.

However, she seemed to like the chord that Jim Hanks gave her. So, after a thorough search, I would use that one.
Or maybe Em7/G#6 (they sound the same.). ;)

ukantor
08-19-2014, 08:41 PM
When the very first musical instruments were invented, there were no music theorists to tell the players what they should be playing. How on earth did musicians manage?

John Colter

consitter
08-19-2014, 09:03 PM
Heres one way. Play the normal Em chord 0432. The just walk up the 1st string to 0433 and then 0434.Another way would be to walk up the 4th string like this:
4432 to 5432 to 6432

Or higher up on the 2nd string : 9777 9787 9797
(Having fun with GuitarToolkit this morning)

Kinda like playing a G7, except further up the neck?

ukantor
08-19-2014, 09:17 PM
Huh? G7 further up the neck is 4535. Now it IS getting confusing!

Jim Hanks
08-20-2014, 01:46 AM
Consitter is just saying the 434 part is the same shape as the 212 part of a standard G7. So yes, that's true.

ukantor
08-20-2014, 02:40 AM
Oh, I see - that explains it all.

Wicked
08-20-2014, 11:00 AM
When the very first musical instruments were invented, there were no music theorists to tell the players what they should be playing. How on earth did musicians manage?

John Colter

Blame it on Pythagoras.

Seanamon
08-21-2014, 02:51 PM
If I may add my 2 cents here, in case this was missed.

There are Augmented Triads, And, then there are Augmented Intervals.

Sometimes when music when is transcribed, it is done so with a very broad, fast and loose interpretation of a collection of pitches to more or less "describe" it rather than name it. Many times, there aren't actual normal or standard terminology.

For example, many times I have seen a G4 written out in a musical context. G to G4/D, for example.

There's no G4 chord, so then what we have is, either a very loose way of saying Gsus4, or G add 4/11, which makes less sense because of the minor 2nd dissonance between B and C, played simultaneosly If you played these notes G B C and D at once. So, The most likely idea, is that it's G C D - or Gsus4.

The same with the Em+. We know that an Augmented triad is essentially any major triad with a raised 5th. There's no debate here. Since the Emhas a minor 3rd, that eliminates the triad being an E augmented triad.

Therefore, it is most likely that Em+ is E minor, with a raised 5th.

It's not E minor, because if it were it would have a 5th. It's two notes of the Em, the E and the G (minor 3rd interval) So the implication is that it's E G B#. You could call it (B#) a C enharmonically, but no 5th from E is ever a C. E F G A B C - C is 6 letters from E, not 5. The only letter that's 5 letters from E is B. So since B is raised as an interval, it keeps it's letter and adjusts it's pitch by way of a #, therefore, the technical terms is B#.

I saw some people say that it's an inversion of C, but in this context it isn't. Enharmonically, it's the same pitches as a C/E, but "correctly" termed, it's not. Can you "think" of this as a C/E for simplicity sake? Absolutely. In fact, if I were telling someone that was not music theory aware, to play E G and C.

So, my conclusion is it's an Em with a raised 5th.

Hope this helps. Is it typically a chord? No. But it describes the assembly of a cluster of pitches from the root.

Best,

Sean

ukantor
08-21-2014, 11:31 PM
The responses to requests for help in how to play a certain chord, or sequence of chords, are amazing. The question was answered by the first response, yet this thread has rumbled on for five pages. The OP got what she needed right away. The rest is just bickering over what the chord SHOULD have been called.

If music theory is such an exact subject, how is it that all these practitioners can't agree with each other?

Jim Hanks
08-22-2014, 01:55 AM
If music theory is such an exact subject, how is it that all these practitioners can't agree with each other?
What would be the fun in that? :p

ukantor
08-22-2014, 02:05 AM
It's fun, Jim - but not as we know it!

JC

ukantor
08-22-2014, 02:14 AM
It is one thing to talk about chords, how to play them, and the alternative ways of playing them - that is useful - it is quite another to spend five pages bickering about what a chord should be called. It seems to me that music theory has a lot in common with medical science. There are a lot of experts, but they can't agree with one another.

Wicked
08-22-2014, 02:17 AM
If music theory is such an exact subject, how is it that all these practitioners can't agree with each other?

Actually, those with formal knowledge were in agreement from the start. The rest of the time was spent trying to share that knowledge clearly and accurately... Which is kind of the point of a forum, is it not?

ukantor
08-22-2014, 02:46 AM
Sorry, Wicked, I've just re-read the thread, and I don't see the agreement and sharing that you claim. I see a lot of confusion and counter suggestions.

Do I take it that everybody is now in agreement that the chord in question should have been labelled Eminor#5?

John Colter.

Dan Uke
08-22-2014, 03:28 AM
Actually, those with formal knowledge were in agreement from the start. The rest of the time was spent trying to share that knowledge clearly and accurately... Which is kind of the point of a forum, is it not?

I don't think people who are formally trained would disagree that an Minor chord cannot be augmented. It's those that know just enough to sound like they know what they're talking about. Then there's people like me who know nothing and appreciate the explanations.

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 04:07 AM
Sorry too, Wicked, but I never saw any agreement either. I'm not talking about the chord--just the thread. And Seanamon seems to have it right. :old:

Wicked
08-22-2014, 04:30 AM
Sorry too, Wicked, but I never saw any agreement either. I'm not talking about the chord--just the thread. And Seanamon seems to be correct. :old:

Seanamon is absolutely correct... but everything that he wrote is in agreement with several other posters on this thread.

There were a number of people (who appear to have formal music education) that posted within the first 2-3 pages and were all in agreement regarding the proper nomenclature for this chord - or were, at the very least, in agreement that there is no such thing as a "minor augmented" chord.

The ukulele is a wonderful folk instrument that does not need to be bogged down with too much theoretical knowledge to enjoy.... however, it can be extremely helpful to know a variety of aspects of theory - and, perhaps more importantly, it is helpful to have incorrect information corrected and explained. Thus, we have this fantastic forum - courtesy of the Ukulele Underground.

There never was a controversy here. The naming of chords is one of the few things in music that is completely objective.

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 04:51 AM
There was plenty of back and forth. You must have missed it. I think that barefootgypsy was happy with Jim Hick's solution at the very beginning of the thread, but then the "debate" and hazy explainations dragged on and on. I'll bet BFG's quite happily playing her tune now with Jim's suggestion. :deadhorse:

Wicked
08-22-2014, 05:11 AM
There was plenty of back and forth. You must have missed it.

There was back and forth, yes.... but this was between facts and opinions. That is not a debate. Facts win every time.

And yes, Barefootgypsy received more than one practical solution, but others wanted to know the "why." Thus, the continued discussion - and the reason for this forum.

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 06:22 AM
A debate is exactly that; a conversation about facts and opinions. Facts only win every time if they are valid. Made up facts can twist any subject into what one wants it to be. That's what Hitler and the nazis did. :old:

Wicked
08-22-2014, 07:04 AM
A debate is exactly that; a conversation about facts and opinions. Facts only win every time if they are valid. Made up facts can twist any subject into what one wants it to be. That's what Hitler and the nazis did. :old:

As I stated before, there are few things in music as black and white as chord names. There really is no room for debate here. It is what it is. No facts were made up. "Minor augmented" chords are not an actual thing, no matter how much we want to argue that they are.

It's kind of like asking a doctor for medical advice vs. asking someone who looks it up on the internet. Sure, you can choose to believe that rubbing some homemade concoction on your backside is going to cure your cancer - but the fact is that it won't.

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 08:17 AM
Well, Wicked, I for one think that this debate is finished. You've worn me down, but I have a question about your signature. I've been pondering it all this time. Shouldn't the words at the top say "Thou Shalt". . .? Then it would mean (to me): Thou shalt obey these commandments and play the Ukulele. Anyway, it's more positive--Just wondering. :old:

Wicked
08-22-2014, 10:14 AM
Regarding the discussion... Agreed.

Regarding the signature - the majority of the commandments are "shalt not" oriented. It rolls off the tongue a little more authoritatively.

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 10:38 AM
Well, you got the last word anyway. I hope we're on friendlier terms on the next thread. I'll try to be less bullheaded. :old:

ukantor
08-22-2014, 11:25 AM
"Well, you got the last word anyway."

That's just a sneaky way to get a last-er word.

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 11:42 AM
Yeah, you're right. :cheers:

Ukuleleblues
08-22-2014, 12:55 PM
Has anyone seen my pet raccoon, Alice? I thought I saw her wonder into this thread?

Down Up Dick
08-22-2014, 02:08 PM
No, she hasn't been here. Why don't you try another thread maybe one about food tunes. Raccoons like garbagey food. Maybe " When the moon hits a your eye, like a biga Pizza pie" yeah, that's " Amore". I'll bet Alice loves loves Pizza. Later. . . :cheers: