Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Christopher Smith wrote: [snip] The thing I have to remind all my jazz theory students is that jazz/popular chord symbols have nothing to do with the key. They are completely independent.[snip] Thank you for that very clear statement, which if anybody ever told me, I have forgotten. It's good to be reminded of these things from time to time, for those of us who aren't working with them all the time. -- David H. Bailey dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Darcy James Argue wrote: If you write the chord symbol F#mi6, then the correct voicing in all cases is F# A C# D#. There is nothing complicated or ambiguous about it. Thanks -- I had forgotten that chord nomenclature is independent of key signature. That's one of the great things about this list -- we get reminded from time to time of things that we probably learned at one time and had forgotten. :-) -- David H. Bailey dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Christopher Smith wrote: On Jan 17, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Adam Golding wrote: Yeah the 'popular' chord notation (anyone know where this came from originally?) Strangely, it came from an adaptation of classical figured bass. This is why the exception to the all chord members are major unless otherwise specified rule is THE SEVENTH, which is minor by default, because the first 7th chord in classical music was a dominant seventh chord. The thing I have to remind all my jazz theory students is that jazz/popular chord symbols have nothing to do with the key. They are completely independent. A C7 is the same four notes no matter what the key signature is. Incidentally, if you want an F#m triad with a D added, you would call it F#m(b6) in the most standard system. This is the second chord in the James Bond main theme, in case anyone thinks it is too far out to consider in popular music. And that Bond, James Bond harmonic pattern goes back to Harold Arlen, if not earlier. Raymond Horton ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Ray Horton wrote: Christopher Smith wrote: On Jan 17, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Adam Golding wrote: Incidentally, if you want an F#m triad with a D added, you would call it F#m(b6) in the most standard system. This is the second chord in the James Bond main theme, in case anyone thinks it is too far out to consider in popular music. And that Bond, James Bond harmonic pattern goes back to Harold Arlen, if not earlier. Harold was a spy? ; cd -- http://www.livejournal.com/users/dershem/# http://members.cox.net/dershem ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
At 12:16 AM -0500 1/18/09, Christopher Smith wrote: On Jan 17, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Adam Golding wrote: Yeah the 'popular' chord notation (anyone know where this came from originally?) Strangely, it came from an adaptation of classical figured bass. This is why the exception to the all chord members are major unless otherwise specified rule is THE SEVENTH, which is minor by default, because the first 7th chord in classical music was a dominant seventh chord. Hi, Christopher. I'm afraid that's quite the opposite of what I teach. Popular chord symbols (which were first adopted and then adapted for jazz) actually came from early 20th century Tin Pan Alley sheet music. It included either guitar boxes, ukulele boxes, or banjo boxes, but couldn't include all 3 so they added an alphabetic indication of the chord so it could be realized by any chordal instrument. It had, as far as I can see, absolutely no connection with baroque figured bass, which was a totally different system dependent on a bass line and related to the prevailing key and key signature (as you mention). In fact I would hazard a guess that the great majority of Tin Pan Alley songwriters wouldn't have recognized figured bass if it bit the on the, er, base! And the rules you cite (quite correctly) were simply an outgrowth of the most common chord vocabulary of the time, a vocabulary that can actually be found in the barbershop harmonies of the '90s and even in Verdi. Those Tin Pan Alley publishers believed in KISS!! One danger in the early days was that the chord symbols too often represented the right-hand chord (for the pianist), but did NOT indicate function or bass note. That was still true as late as the sheet music of Richard Rodgers, and you can't always trust his chord symbols to mean what we think they should. And I don't recall seeing fractional notation, indicating an inversion and/or a bass note, prior to the early '60s, although my experience at that point was not drastically broad. I believe that it was the songs of Bert Bacharach, among others, that required that notation, since it was he who popularized the subdominant over dominant bass as a cadential chord rather than just a pre-cadential chord. (IV/V - I, rather that V7 - I) The thing I have to remind all my jazz theory students is that jazz/popular chord symbols have nothing to do with the key. They are completely independent. A C7 is the same four notes no matter what the key signature is. Exactly so. On this we are in complete agreement, but to me it is a clear differentiation from figured bass. Same problem, same need; totally different solutions. John -- John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music Virginia Tech Department of Music College of Liberal Arts Human Sciences Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:john.how...@vt.edu) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html We never play anything the same way once. Shelly Manne's definition of jazz musicians. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On Jan 18, 2009, at 10:11 AM, John Howell wrote: One danger in the early days was that the chord symbols too often represented the right-hand chord (for the pianist), but did NOT indicate function or bass note. That was still true as late as the sheet music of Richard Rodgers, and you can't always trust his chord symbols to mean what we think they should. This remains a danger when using original published music as the basis for contemporary interpretation, even before any consideration of alternate harmony. Bass notes (inversions) are either not considered or sometimes incorrectly indicated. And I don't recall seeing fractional notation, indicating an inversion and/or a bass note, prior to the early '60s, although my experience at that point was not drastically broad. I believe that it was the songs of Bert Bacharach, among others, that required that notation, since it was he who popularized the subdominant over dominant bass as a cadential chord rather than just a pre-cadential chord. (IV/V - I, rather that V7 - I) I don't know if Bacharach was early in this practice or not, but alternate bass notes are characteristic of his music (not only in the cadential example indicated here), and he was intentional in his choices. (I tried to improve the bass line of a piece of his I played probably a thousand times in the pit of Promises, Promises. It was a short lived attempt and Burt was quick to let me know he wasn't pleased. I didn't like his bass lines either, but it was his music (and his money!). Chuck The thing I have to remind all my jazz theory students is that jazz/ popular chord symbols have nothing to do with the key. They are completely independent. A C7 is the same four notes no matter what the key signature is. Exactly so. On this we are in complete agreement, but to me it is a clear differentiation from figured bass. Same problem, same need; totally different solutions. John -- John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music Virginia Tech Department of Music College of Liberal Arts Human Sciences Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:john.how...@vt.edu) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html We never play anything the same way once. Shelly Manne's definition of jazz musicians. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On 18 Jan 2009 at 13:11, John Howell wrote: One danger in the early days was that the chord symbols too often represented the right-hand chord (for the pianist), but did NOT indicate function or bass note. That was still true as late as the sheet music of Richard Rodgers, and you can't always trust his chord symbols to mean what we think they should. Were the chord symbols printed in the publications of Richard Rodgers' music his symbols, or those of an arranger? Frankly, I strongly doubt that we should attribute them to Rodgers himself. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Probably a publisher's interpretation of Rodgers' piano/vocal versions. Rodgers was a fine melodist, but there are many re- harmonizations (some quite substantial) of his songs that are stronger, by far, than his versions. Some Tin Pan Alley composers wrote solid basic harmony and good bass lines (Porter most of the time, Arlen, Vernon Duke, for sure, Harry Warren, Waller, Ellington - many, in fact). Rodgers music is almost always re-interpreted in this way in modern versions, and there's a good reason. Chuck On Jan 18, 2009, at 11:50 AM, David W. Fenton wrote: On 18 Jan 2009 at 13:11, John Howell wrote: One danger in the early days was that the chord symbols too often represented the right-hand chord (for the pianist), but did NOT indicate function or bass note. That was still true as late as the sheet music of Richard Rodgers, and you can't always trust his chord symbols to mean what we think they should. Were the chord symbols printed in the publications of Richard Rodgers' music his symbols, or those of an arranger? Frankly, I strongly doubt that we should attribute them to Rodgers himself. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
At 2:50 PM -0500 1/18/09, David W. Fenton wrote: On 18 Jan 2009 at 13:11, John Howell wrote: One danger in the early days was that the chord symbols too often represented the right-hand chord (for the pianist), but did NOT indicate function or bass note. That was still true as late as the sheet music of Richard Rodgers, and you can't always trust his chord symbols to mean what we think they should. Were the chord symbols printed in the publications of Richard Rodgers' music his symbols, or those of an arranger? Frankly, I strongly doubt that we should attribute them to Rodgers himself. A valid point, David, although Rodgers was certainly a better-trained musicians than, say, Irving Berlin, and I doubt that he needed a musical secretary. But I wouldn't even attempt to untangle the probable web of songwriter; arranger (if any; Rodgers did play piano pretty well); editor (probably hired by his publisher); and publisher ( businessmen always blamed for errors or editorial decisions, but very seldom having anything to do with them). Given his background, I would certainly expect the chords to have been his, but I have no way of proving it. (I wonder whether orignal mss. exist somewhere. Or whether Rodgers' wife had anything to say about it in her book.) Certainly the written piano chords in the sheet music must have been his, whether or not he personally derived the chord symbols from them. No competent songwriter would leave those to chance. One huge difference between his sheet music and that of later songwriters is the number of harmonic changes per measure rather than letting a single chord suffice for a full measure or more. (Not unlike many questions about baroque music, actually, including the harmonic comparison of Bach and Handel!) John -- John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music Virginia Tech Department of Music College of Liberal Arts Human Sciences Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:john.how...@vt.edu) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html We never play anything the same way once. Shelly Manne's definition of jazz musicians. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On Jan 18, 2009, at 9:17 PM, John Howell wrote: At 2:50 PM -0500 1/18/09, David W. Fenton wrote: Were the chord symbols printed in the publications of Richard Rodgers' music his symbols, or those of an arranger? Frankly, I strongly doubt that we should attribute them to Rodgers himself. A valid point, David, although Rodgers was certainly a better- trained musicians than, say, Irving Berlin, and I doubt that he needed a musical secretary. But I wouldn't even attempt to untangle the probable web of songwriter; arranger (if any; Rodgers did play piano pretty well); editor (probably hired by his publisher); and publisher ( businessmen always blamed for errors or editorial decisions, but very seldom having anything to do with them). Given his background, I would certainly expect the chords to have been his, but I have no way of proving it. (I wonder whether orignal mss. exist somewhere. Or whether Rodgers' wife had anything to say about it in her book.) Certainly the written piano chords in the sheet music must have been his, whether or not he personally derived the chord symbols from them. No competent songwriter would leave those to chance. One huge difference between his sheet music and that of later songwriters is the number of harmonic changes per measure rather than letting a single chord suffice for a full measure or more. (Not unlike many questions about baroque music, actually, including the harmonic comparison of Bach and Handel!) Richard Rodgers had apparently said to an interviewer once, I would kill an orchestrator who changed one of my voicings or words to that effect. I don't know the citation exactly, but I certainly remember the gist of it vividly, that he insisted on the vertical content of his music to be just so. Like Jerome Kern and Stephen Sondheim (that spring to mind right away), he seems to have written fairly complete piano accompaniments to his songs, which were then orchestrated with a minimum of added material. The guitar chords in the published sheet music were almost certainly added later by an editor, and do not reflect the way Rodgers himself thought of his harmony. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On Jan 18, 2009, at 1:11 PM, John Howell wrote: At 12:16 AM -0500 1/18/09, Christopher Smith wrote: On Jan 17, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Adam Golding wrote: Yeah the 'popular' chord notation (anyone know where this came from originally?) Strangely, it came from an adaptation of classical figured bass. This is why the exception to the all chord members are major unless otherwise specified rule is THE SEVENTH, which is minor by default, because the first 7th chord in classical music was a dominant seventh chord. Hi, Christopher. I'm afraid that's quite the opposite of what I teach. Popular chord symbols (which were first adopted and then adapted for jazz) actually came from early 20th century Tin Pan Alley sheet music. It included either guitar boxes, ukulele boxes, or banjo boxes, but couldn't include all 3 so they added an alphabetic indication of the chord so it could be realized by any chordal instrument. That alphabetic indication of the root of the chord predates Tin Pan Alley by a considerable number of years in guitar, accordian and ukelele music, along with the convention that I mentioned of 7 meaning an added minor 7th. This was in use in the late 19th century at least, along with various indications for chord type such as min for minor and min7 for a minor triad with a minor 7th added. Most of the other stuff was added in later (as you mentioned, in the early 20th century) to add extra functionality to the basic system, and wasn't really overseen by anyone to set standards, which is why there are so many different standards even today. It had, as far as I can see, absolutely no connection with baroque figured bass, which was a totally different system dependent on a bass line and related to the prevailing key and key signature (as you mention). In fact I would hazard a guess that the great majority of Tin Pan Alley songwriters wouldn't have recognized figured bass if it bit the on the, er, base! True enough, but the chords were mostly added by editors working for the publishers (many of the piano arrangements were done in house, too!) The editors probably had some musical education, and may have been familiar enough with the figured bass concept of adding intervals above the bass, so making that into adding intervals above the ROOT instead was an easy step. You have to admit, the system shares much more with figured bass (and the later Roman numeral system) than with the previous systems of guitar chords dating back to the 16th century, where a random letter or symbol (like ) was assigned to a specific voicing of one chord! (example: C+ actually meant a D major chord in a certain position. Weird.) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
At 7:56 PM + 1/17/09, Lawrence Yates wrote: Apologies to all and thanks on behalf of my idiot, cloth eared student. Having spoken to her teacher, it now seems that the child (aged 18 years!!!) incorrectly identified the chord as a DOMINANT 7th then didn't listen to what her teacher said in reply. And they say standards aren't falling! Well, 18 is not a child, but it IS too late to start learning music theory, which should be absorbed effortlessly (along with piano lessons) between ages 7 and 10 after solid Kodály preparation starting in pre-school! But selective hearing is nothing new. It seems to arrive along with puberty. As any parents of teenagers!! John -- John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music Virginia Tech Department of Music College of Liberal Arts Human Sciences Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:john.how...@vt.edu) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html We never play anything the same way once. Shelly Manne's definition of jazz musicians. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Chord identification
Would anyone like to identify this chord: C#;D;F#;A;d;c# I thought it was Dmajor7 but this is being disputed - Does the C# in the bass change things? Thanks, Lawrence -- Lawrenceyates.co.uk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On 17-Jan-09, at 17-Jan-09 1:32 PM, Lawrence Yates wrote: Would anyone like to identify this chord: C#;D;F#;A;d;c# I thought it was Dmajor7 but this is being disputed - Does the C# in the bass change things? How is it being disputed? It certainly contains all the same notes as Dmaj7/C# (the slash indicates the bass note in the case of an inversion) but the context is everything. What key are you in and what are the chords on either side? What is the style? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
I've no idea what the context is - one of my students has asked me to help her identify it - her music teacher says it's not Dmaj7. Maybe it's the slash C# that's missing and the teacher is being pedantic. Thanks anyway. Any other offers would be welcome. Thanks, Lawrence ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On Jan 17, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Lawrence Yates wrote: I've no idea what the context is - one of my students has asked me to help her identify it - her music teacher says it's not Dmaj7. Maybe it's the slash C# that's missing and the teacher is being pedantic. Thanks anyway. Any other offers would be welcome. It's possible for it to be C#7(sus4,b9,b13), kind of like a triple suspension V chord in the key of F# or F#m. I hear a lot of it in Chabrier, Ravel, DeFalla and other Spanish and Spanish-influenced composers. It is also quite common in jazz (think that chord alternating with C#7). I think I remember it also being the second chord in Bach's Air for a G String (in the key of D, of course.) Without a context, or even a style, it's hard to say. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Apologies to all and thanks on behalf of my idiot, cloth eared student. Having spoken to her teacher, it now seems that the child (aged 18 years!!!) incorrectly identified the chord as a DOMINANT 7th then didn't listen to what her teacher said in reply. And they say standards aren't falling! Sorry, Lawrence (who meant well) -- Lawrenceyates.co.uk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
F#mi6 would have a D#, not a D nat. The chord in question is unambiguously DMA7/C#. - Darcy - djar...@earthlink.net Brooklyn, NY On 17 Jan 2009, at 2:49 PM, dhbailey wrote: Or it could be an F#m6. But I would dearly love to know what the original teacher is saying it is, if he/she is saying it isn't a Dmaj7. -- David H. Bailey dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On 17 Jan 2009 at 14:13, Christopher Smith wrote: I think I remember it also being the second chord in Bach's Air for a G String (in the key of D, of course.) Well, yes, because of the descending bass passing through the leading tone while the tonic chord is still sounding, the vertical sonority is going to be a D chord on top of a C#, that doesn't make it a D Major 7 chord, because it's not functioning as a 7th chord at all. It's only a passing dissonance, and trying to analyze every single incidental vertical configuration will lead to complete madness. So, no, I wouldn't at all say that a D Major 7 in 3rd inversion occurs as the second chord of the Air. To say that makes a mockery of all functional harmonic analysis. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Darcy James Argue wrote: F#mi6 would have a D#, not a D nat. The chord in question is unambiguously DMA7/C#. Really? If the 6th is built from the natural minor? What rules govern this situation? Must it be the melodic minor one builds chords from? Of course if we're looking at the F#m6 as the ii of E, then you're right, but if we're looking at the F#m6 as the iii of D . . . And if we're looking at F#m6 as the vi of A, then it depends on the form of the scale one chooses to use, doesn't it? -- David H. Bailey dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
If you write the chord symbol F#mi6, then the correct voicing in all cases is F# A C# D#. There is nothing complicated or ambiguous about it. Cheers, - Darcy - djar...@earthlink.net Brooklyn, NY On 17 Jan 2009, at 4:46 PM, dhbailey wrote: Really? If the 6th is built from the natural minor? What rules govern this situation? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
Yeah the 'popular' chord notation (anyone know where this came from originally?) ignores the key signature. 'm6' is short for minor 3rd, major 6th, probably just because this is far more common (i have a hard time hearing the minor 6th as a chord note in any context here, actually). You're thinking more like figured bass notation, which depends both on the keysignature, and on the bass note, where V64 under G in C major is differentf from V64 under D in C major... 2009/1/17 Darcy James Argue djar...@earthlink.net If you write the chord symbol F#mi6, then the correct voicing in all cases is F# A C# D#. There is nothing complicated or ambiguous about it. Cheers, - Darcy - djar...@earthlink.net Brooklyn, NY On 17 Jan 2009, at 4:46 PM, dhbailey wrote: Really? If the 6th is built from the natural minor? What rules govern this situation? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On Jan 17, 2009, at 3:08 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: On 17 Jan 2009 at 14:13, Christopher Smith wrote: I think I remember it also being the second chord in Bach's Air for a G String (in the key of D, of course.) Well, yes, because of the descending bass passing through the leading tone while the tonic chord is still sounding, the vertical sonority is going to be a D chord on top of a C#, that doesn't make it a D Major 7 chord, because it's not functioning as a 7th chord at all. It's only a passing dissonance, and trying to analyze every single incidental vertical configuration will lead to complete madness. So, no, I wouldn't at all say that a D Major 7 in 3rd inversion occurs as the second chord of the Air. To say that makes a mockery of all functional harmonic analysis. I guess I wasn't clear. Your explanation above would be a very GOOD reason why Dmaj7 is not a good name for the chord (though some would use that chord symbol any way, but go ahead and try to reason with THEM!) 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Chord identification
On Jan 17, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Adam Golding wrote: Yeah the 'popular' chord notation (anyone know where this came from originally?) Strangely, it came from an adaptation of classical figured bass. This is why the exception to the all chord members are major unless otherwise specified rule is THE SEVENTH, which is minor by default, because the first 7th chord in classical music was a dominant seventh chord. The thing I have to remind all my jazz theory students is that jazz/ popular chord symbols have nothing to do with the key. They are completely independent. A C7 is the same four notes no matter what the key signature is. Incidentally, if you want an F#m triad with a D added, you would call it F#m(b6) in the most standard system. This is the second chord in the James Bond main theme, in case anyone thinks it is too far out to consider in popular music. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
