"Chords are just arpeggios"

"Chords are just arpeggios played fast" is absolutely correct

If you are down strumming, you first hit the 4th string and then the 3rd, then the 2nd and lastly the 1st string. They are played in sequence, not simultaneously. The fact that the separation is not easily heard does not make them actually simultaneous.

All chords are arpeggios. Even if you pluck all 4 strings, if you record that on an oscilloscope, you will find that the 4 strings do not start absolutely simultaneously. Therefore, stop quibbling. It is not possible to manually play 4 strings simultaneously - all chords are arpeggios.

Nuf said

sopher
 
sopher said:
"Chords are just arpeggios played fast" is absolutely correct

If you are down strumming, you first hit the 4th string and then the 3rd, then the 2nd and lastly the 1st string. They are played in sequence, not simultaneously. The fact that the separation is not easily heard does not make them actually simultaneous.

All chords are arpeggios. Even if you pluck all 4 strings, if you record that on an oscilloscope, you will find that the 4 strings do not start absolutely simultaneously. Therefore, stop quibbling. It is not possible to manually play 4 strings simultaneously - all chords are arpeggios.

Nuf said

sopher
Click to expand...

Although I agree that a strummed chord is a fast arpeggio....
If you can't hear the separation, and need to slow it down mechanically..... is there a difference if you pluck them simultaneously?

Here's a thing....
An up strum and a down strum do sound different.
So you can can hear a separation. The first note in the attack is different, and the last note on the stack also makes a difference
And a fast strum sounds different from a slow strum, which is really the same as a slow vs fast arpeggio.

But if you pluck, you don't hear the separation.

In the end, its the ear we are trying to influence, by up strum, down strum, or pluck.
If we make a difference in how we play it to get that sound... then there is a difference.
 
<pedant alert>
When you downstrum a re-entrant tuned Ukulele, are you playing an arpeggio or a broken chord?

I suggest the latter as you are not going low to high through out but start high then drop to low

Does it really matter?
</pedant alert>

Seriously, one of the features of reentrant tuning is it down plays the difference between the down strum and the up strum since the strum in both directions starts with a high note.

As others have pointed out elsewhere it also changes the chord voicing compared with linear tuning as it puts the "bass" of the chord in a different place i.e. You are playing different inversions of the chord with the two tunings
 
I'd say that many, but not all, chords are just arpeggios played fast. Besides when they are plucked (simultaneously), what about when a chord has a 7th in it, for example? That note is in the chord, but it is not in the arpeggio....

bratsche
 
bratsche said:
I'd say that many, but not all, chords are just arpeggios played fast. Besides when they are plucked (simultaneously), what about when a chord has a 7th in it, for example? That note is in the chord, but it is not in the arpeggio....
bratsche
Click to expand...

You could play arpeggios for all types of chords, not just triads- 7th chords, dim7, aug, etc
 
Okay, I concede your point. I was commenting while so fondly remembering my teen years, and the violin arpeggio studies.... 1,3,5,1,3,5,1,3,5,1,5,3,1,5,3,1,5,3,1.... up and down three octaves (sometimes four), major and minor in every key. Ugh! ;)

bratsche
 
As I have sometimes told students- you have to do it, it is good for you, like eating your vegetables!
 
Wanna cite the Federal Statute or Supreme Court ruling that so narrowly defines arpeggio?
 
ubulele said:
First, check any dictionary. Almost all say somethings like:
arpeggio: the notes of a chord played in succession, either ascending or descending.

Then, try Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpeggio

Yes, a lot of people (even many regarded as authorities) use "arpeggio" as a fancy synonym for "broken chord," but technically arpeggios are only certain types of broken chords.
Click to expand...

Don't be the old fart that thinks that dictionaries are the world of God and language is immutable. Dictionaries are always changing and they are always behind. They add words to the dictionary and change the meanings of words all the time because they haven't kept up with life.

For pianos I will accept fancy smancy broken chords vs arpeggios. For ukes, broken chords = arpeggios, most chords are normally played inverted and there is no difference. It isn't reasonable to say arpeggios are only non-inverted when most of the chords are inverted - don't you want to insist that everyone is "strumming inverted chords, not chords?" You make me laugh. Especially when you think wiki is some kind of supreme reference. You know that's not allowed in formal bibliographies, right. Hey, you can call them broken chords, or you can call them arpeggios, or you can call them hippopotamus, but I'll call them all arpeggios, and "technically" it's all good. I hope you can lower your nose enough to read this without hurting your neck! ;-)
 
In my Guitar Lessons I learned: The term "arpeggio" means 2 different things:

1. The notes of the chord are played in succession (broken chords)
2. Arpeggios as melodic patterns using the notes of the chord
 
In 2nd grade I learned that the Moon is made of cheese.

Sometimes, what you learn is not necessarily correct.
 
There seems to be constant confusion on this thread between “non-inverted” and ”in order”. An inverted chord is simply one where the bass note is not the root. Even by the strictest definition, arpeggios can be broken root position chords or broken inverted chords.

I’m generally in agreement with ubulele here, but I think the ukulele does make the question of what should count as “in order” a little complicated. Even on a piano, arpeggios go up and back down again—who’s to say that a broken chord that starts on the high 4th string, goes down to the low 3rd string, and then comes back up again on the 2nd and 1st strings isn’t an arpeggio and a half (or rather half an arpeggio and then one)?

David
 
Last edited:
Well said, sir! In my mind arpeggio is a technique, like stacatto.

Arpeggio is playing notes sequentially, one after another, rather than all at the same time... and fingerpicking over chords is also arpeggio chords, even when I'm inserting color tones and transition tones while changing chords. There are strummed chords and arpeggio chords, A or B.

Just like stacatto chords don't have to be played strictly in ascending or descending order - chord is one thing, stacatto is a quality of that chord, as is arpeggio or strummed. All else is making a differentiation without a difference
 
Well, what an interesting discussion!
Most of this went right over my head, but I do realize this isn't about me.
I should clarify myself, at this point.
I only want to understand music theory to the point that I need to in order to improve my playing to the point where I'm happy with it, apply chords and melodies to the songs I write, and not just come up with catchy lyrics.
I need to be able to tell what key others are playing in, and not just other ukers, but guitarists and wind instrument players and such. And know what key a singer needs to sing in to suit her voice.
But, I am glad that this sparked such a lively and informative discussion, but mostly, I'm glad we're all still getting along. We're pretty grown up here at UU, and we do have the ability to agree to disagree.
I think it's a good idea to define music theory terms to suit ourselves as ukulele players, and not be too concerned about the other instruments. Maybe.
Thanks everyone for your wonderful input, and carry on.
I think I am going to order Edly's book.
ubu, I'm not sure I'd know when you digress. LOL. You guys are so much more knowledgeable than I....
 
Every so often I hear a pianist or guitarist dismiss the ukulele as a toy. The uke is not a real musical instrument, they say, and the people who play it never develop any real skill or knowledge. I get tired of listening to those people. And I get mighty tired of reading that attitude here on an ukulele forum!

*sigh* Here we have uke players arguing that centuries of music theory cannot be applied to our instrument. We should reject the dictionary definition of "arpeggio" because... well, because it wouldn't be convenient on uke. And anyway theory is hard, which makes it an evil conspiracy and we're better off without it. We should get to use all the fancy-schmancy words, whether we understand them or not!

To paraphrase 30 Rock's immortal Dr. Spaceman: "Arpeggios are whatever we want them to be."

Which of course is not true. Words have meanings. Music has underlying theory whether you understand it or not. You can play arpeggios (not to mention scales) on ukulele. There is no need to dumb down the uke by claiming that you are playing "arpeggios" when in fact all you are doing is fingerpicking chords. The ukulele is better than this.

I am a hobbyist with little knowledge of theory. But I RESPECT my instrument. If you are genuinely curious about arpeggios and chords, please go read a book about music theory. If you are not inclined to learn about theory, that's ok. But don't tell me it's because theory is too complicated to apply to the ukulele. The ukulele can handle it.
 
I agree that many strummed chords will not be arpeggios and also that you can play arpeggios by playing strings out of order.

What I meant to point out is that if you, say, slowly strum a G chord repeatedly, you end up with a 2nd inversion arpeggio going up and down:

G4 D4 G4 B4 G4 D4 G4 B4 G4 D4 ...

Obviously, this doesn’t hold for all chords, but it does suggest that the claim that strummed ukulele chords are just fast arpeggios is sometimes not wrong.

David
 
I wish this forum be a friendly one as ukes are to us.

Myself I am a simple player .. strum mostly. Where I have something like arpeggio is when I solo then can do upwards or downwards, but slow thumb strum certainly also I count as one. Now we have mostly reentrant ukes ... i hope this is not another low G advertising thread lol?

ubulele, well he is a very serious person from posts I have seen. Scary too since he attacked me once, I remember that my whole life and was like wtf was going on in his mind? Wish you peace in mind and aloha feel if you can have. Relax maybe a little.

Despite our ukes are somewhat limited, that limitation is only something that can be used as an advantage. Our instrument is also a mighty chord machine. I play as a daily practice common chord sequences in the keys from 4 flats to 4 sharps. Major and minor. Someday I will probably widen that to all 12 keys.

Unlike guitar its easier to play with ukulele practically all the chords that are written in the songbooks. Something has to do with the reentrant tuning nature that I advertise lool. Our instruments are not castrated guitars that require to learn a whole bunch of chords to make them sound right ;)
Now I was a bit rude too, but hope in a funny way.

https://ukebuddy.com/ukulele-chords
 
Hippie Guy said:
Serious question. Is an arpeggio a picking pattern? I was asked to settle a debate on this at the HIUR and formulated an answer, but I'm not set on it.

At the time, I said, an arpeggio is the chord tones played IN ORDER, up or down. Like: C E G C G E C. On the other hand, a "picking pattern" is ANY ORDER of plucked strings while holding a chord. So a picking pattern could be an arpeggio, but only in certain instances.

Anybody know the true definition - if there is such a thing?
Click to expand...

Therefore, a chord may be an arpeggio, but an arpeggio is not a chord.
 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
acmespaceship said:
Every so often I hear a pianist or guitarist dismiss the ukulele as a toy. The uke is not a real musical instrument, they say, and the people who play it never develop any real skill or knowledge. I get tired of listening to those people. And I get mighty tired of reading that attitude here on an ukulele forum!

*sigh* Here we have uke players arguing that centuries of music theory cannot be applied to our instrument. We should reject the dictionary definition of "arpeggio" because... well, because it wouldn't be convenient on uke. And anyway theory is hard, which makes it an evil conspiracy and we're better off without it. We should get to use all the fancy-schmancy words, whether we understand them or not!

To paraphrase 30 Rock's immortal Dr. Spaceman: "Arpeggios are whatever we want them to be."

Which of course is not true. Words have meanings. Music has underlying theory whether you understand it or not. You can play arpeggios (not to mention scales) on ukulele. There is no need to dumb down the uke by claiming that you are playing "arpeggios" when in fact all you are doing is fingerpicking chords. The ukulele is better than this.

I am a hobbyist with little knowledge of theory. But I RESPECT my instrument. If you are genuinely curious about arpeggios and chords, please go read a book about music theory. If you are not inclined to learn about theory, that's ok. But don't tell me it's because theory is too complicated to apply to the ukulele. The ukulele can handle it.
Click to expand...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well, you have a few things misconstrued.

No one is saying that centuries of music theory cannot be applied to our instrument. The definition of arpeggio is hardly music theory. It is semantics. And we are not rejecting the "dictionary definition of arpeggio". I looked in a lot of dictionaries and it is not always defined as "ascending or descending". Many define an arpeggio as notes played not all at once, with no reference to required order, some say it is "usually ascending" (which means it doesn't always have to be, so it can be other orders), and yes some say it is ascending or descending. Just because some dictionaries define it that way doesn't mean that all dictionaries do. And the differences in the dictionary definitions just reflect the differences in meanings. Like I said earlier, language is not immutable.
 
sopher said:
No one is saying that centuries of music theory cannot be applied to our instrument. The definition of arpeggio is hardly music theory. It is semantics.
Click to expand...

Yes semantics exactly. Now there seems to unfortunately in english wikipedia mentioned of ascending or descending order. And many poor kids sitting at piano have I guess learned what a "real" arpeggio is by the teacher with a whip cane stalking and jumping forward yelling "That's not an arpeggio! .....".

Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information anyways, but I checked it also in few other languages regarding arpeggio. My finnish says that it is often from low to high as instead to play all notes same time. Something like that.
Swedish and norwegian wikis make no mention on order. Nor does the german version.

But as told it is anyways semantics. We can't define a word and force others to think some limited way. Language has been and forever will be an evolving thing except in a very limited scientific context. There also debate continues...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IamNoMan
Arpeggios, broken chords, & Strumming frustration
Replies
2
Views
443
Ukejenny
Ukejenny
fumanshu
Harp+ukulele=nice arpeggios, solo and chords
Replies
0
Views
379
fumanshu
fumanshu
G
Tabs/Chords Ukulele Chords/Tabs for "Home" by Robert Crumb and the Cheap Suit Serenaders
Replies
4
Views
182
bilbo56
bilbo56
BiosphereDecay
I can't add chords with more than one of the same note on different strings in Flat.
Replies
3
Views
182
Bill Sheehan
Bill Sheehan
chris667
  • Poll
Is "cowboy chords" a derogatory term?
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
2K
Grandpa Ronald
G
Top Bottom