What chord is this?

[Cogs]

The song is in the key of E. This chord is played quickly at the end of the chorus before it resolves back to the E chord:
E A D G B E= string
X X 6 6 7 6= fret
the notes are: G# C# F# A# I don't know if that is "theoretically" correct, but whatever.

[djinn1973]

Best guess...
F#/Ab
F#add9/Ab

[Guitar_Mc]

I'd say its either an F#/add2(or 9), or A#m7/add6.
(I'm only guessing. I can't read music anyway)

Either way, the chord can't be "theoretically incorrect". Its just music. Theory exists to understand the music, not box it in to rules (IMHO).

[Kap'n]

I'd be looking at the F# variant, too. Alternately, I'd see it as the third inversion of A#sus4 6, but I'm funny that way.

[pc]

It's kind of a poly-chord. Nothing wrong with what anyone has said already because you can think of it as any of those. I'd probably think of it as Gb (F#) triad with a 9th in the bass, but it'd be cool as a sus-chord too. In this case, Absus9: 1 - sus4 - b7 - 9.

[Guitar_Mc]

Of course, you could always tune your guitar down a half step and make it an F with a 9 in the bass.

[Cogs]

Either way, the chord can't be "theoretically incorrect". Its just music. Theory exists to understand the music, not box it in to rules (IMHO).

I agree. I was only thinking in terms of notation (sharps or flats).

[Offshore Angler]

It's kind of a poly-chord. Nothing wrong with what anyone has said already because you can think of it as any of those. I'd probably think of it as Gb (F#) triad with a 9th in the bass, but it'd be cool as a sus-chord too. In this case, Absus9: 1 - sus4 - b7 - 9.

Yep, but since the tonic we resolved to is an E, I'd say F# instead of Gb.

[pc]

Yep, but since the tonic we resolved to is an E, I'd say F# instead of Gb.

Sorry: you're exactly right. I spaced the part about the key of the song.

[Offshore Angler]

Yep, there are four sharps in the key, and hence there must be an F#, in this case along with a C#, G# and D#.

[Cogs]

My bad- I meant to say the notes were:
Ab Db Gb Bb
What chord is it now?

[Iowegan]

If you're in the Key of E you would put it as a chord that was created with the notes in that scale. It's a consistency thing if you were writing the charts out for others.

[tggs]

I am no expert but... I think it is a Bmaj13. If you are familiar with the Brian Setzer tune "Sleepwalk" that is the same chord structure that he plays as he ends the song except he plays it one fret up and it becomes a Cmaj13. He also adds in the root bass note C or in the case of the Bmaj13 the 'B'. Anyway it a cool and unusual chord to know.

[Offshore Angler]

We can easily see an F# inverted triad, so I woud be inclined to call it a slash chord such as F#/G#.

In the context of E, it is missing the root but would be E6b5add2 (or add9 if the root is implied an octave below the F# by the bass player.) Sometimes taking the chord out of context of the ensemble makes its nomencalture ambiguous.

[Kap'n]

Doesn't the "real" name of the chord depend directly upon the name and voicing of the one preceding it?

To me, keys are transitory. In music, as well as in speech, something is only interesting in and of itself it the preceding phrase is.

[boobtube21]

Sometimes taking the chord out of context of the ensemble makes its nomencalture ambiguous.

I agree. I'm the last one to ask about the name of a chord anyway, but I can't wrap my head around that chord resolving to E. I'd like to know where it's coming from.

[Cogs]

Well, I busted out ALL my chord & jazz books, & that includes Mickey Baker's Jazz Guitar Book #1, John Pearse's Picture Chord Encyclopedia, Ronny Lee's Chord Dictionary For Guitar, & Ted Greene's Chord Chemistry.
I finally found it in Ted's book. DUH. I think that book has every chord in the universe in it. He calls it a G#11. That's good enough for me.
But now I want to know WHY it's a G#11, lol.

[Cogs]

I agree. I'm the last one to ask about the name of a chord anyway, but I can't wrap my head around that chord resolving to E. I'd like to know where it's coming from.

The progression is as follows (4/4):
E
1 2 3 4 / 1 2 3 4
C#m7
1 2 3 4 / 1 2 3 4
F#m7
1 2 3 4 / 1 2 3 4
E
1 2 3 4 / 1 2
G#11
3 4
I really don't know how to write this stuff out in a post~

[Offshore Angler]

Well, I busted out ALL my chord & jazz books, & that includes Mickey Baker's Jazz Guitar Book #1, John Pearse's Picture Chord Encyclopedia, Ronny Lee's Chord Dictionary For Guitar, & Ted Greene's Chord Chemistry.
I finally found it in Ted's book. DUH. I think that book has every chord in the universe in it. He calls it a G#11. That's good enough for me.
But now I want to know WHY it's a G#11, lol.

I don't know ho he gets an 11th off a G# root. He's obviously calling the C# the 11th which is incorrect in the context of the chord show, it is a 4th. Also, he has a b7 with the F#. If I'm looking at it right, in G# he has a chord of the form 1,2,4,b7 .

Truth be told, I think it's just an F# with a passing tone on the root and everything else is academic.

[Mikey]

I think I'd just call it "That MOFO chord at the end" and be done with it.

[Offshore Angler]

Doesn't the "real" name of the chord depend directly upon the name and voicing of the one preceding it?

Kap'n, it depends on the key. Think of chord scales. In an E chord scale the F# chord would be a minor. Now, if this chord above had a minor third all would be well in the world and we could bet pretty confidently that the major 5 was coming next. But since it's a second and a major triad, we should just assume a passing tone. At least IMHO.

[Doc W]

I know I am coming to this late, but I think I might have an answer.

As some of you have suggested, a chord by itself is rather meaningless and you really have to understand it in the context of a sequence. I would add that you have to try to hear it in terms of how it functions in the sequence.

Play only the highest three strings and slide the shape down two frets to resolve to E:

xxx676

xxx454

This is clearly and F# triad to an E triad (both second inversion). Now if we add the 4th string and resolve it to E, we get:

xx6676 and

xx6454

which would be F#with a suspended 2 in the bass resolving to E, 1st inversion.

F# sus2/G# to E/G#

Just to check if this is really the function of the chord, play an F# barre chord on the 2nd fret, but leave the bass E string open, and follow this with an E chord (open position). It has a similar effect, I think, but without the G# bass..

We could change this just a tad and fill it out some:

076676

076454

which would be - wait for this mess - F# sus 2/E to E.

It is a lovely little change, I think, but one of those things that is easier to hear than to spell. I hope I got all the numbers right. It is after 1 AM and I have had a few.

[Jonnda]

okay now what's this chord?

F, B, D# and G#

[tggs]

I'd call it a (no root) G7#5b9, though I am no expert, I recognize it from a B. Setzer tune " Jumpin' East of Java.

[Jonnda]

I asked to see what people would come up with. It's known as the "Tristan Chord"

"it can be any chord that consists of these same intervals: augmented fourth, augmented sixth, and augmented second above a root. It is so named as it is the very first chord heard in Richard Wagner's opera Tristan und Isolde."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tristan_chord


I was basically told by a music theory prof that it was an identifiable sound, but not a identifiable chord in roman numeral harmonic analysis.

Thanks for the guess!

[Doc W]

Jonnda, a chord is only identifiable in context and the context of the Tristan chord is the very chromatic harmony of Wagner (in this case, Tristan and Isolde). Your music teacher is half-right. It IS an identifiable chord but it's name does depend on who you ask. Although I don't like Wikipedea, just take a quick look there for a brief summary of the debates over that. The point is that Wagner really pushed the limits of western harmonic structure (and when you do that, the usual naming conventions are hard to apply).

[Jonnda]

Jonnda, a chord is only identifiable in context and the context of the Tristan chord is the very chromatic harmony of Wagner (in this case, Tristan and Isolde). Your music teacher is half-right. It IS an identifiable chord but it's name does depend on who you ask. Although I don't like Wikipedea, just take a quick look there for a brief summary of the debates over that. The point is that Wagner really pushed the limits of western harmonic structure (and when you do that, the usual naming conventions are hard to apply).

Oh I know. I posted it to see what kind of opinions i'd get from it. I understand that it is debated, and that is why I posted it. When I was introduced to it, it was during the introduction to roman numeral analysis in music theory one about three years ago. I would doubt my ability to recall what exactly she said before thinkin what I was originally given was misinformation.