Need pointers on reading music

[Palestr1na]

As per suggestion from members of this forum, I'm taking music theory lessons to improve my music and playing. While I may still have a lot of work to do on my reading skills, the way/algoritm I've used to read chords is first to read the top part of the chord which contains a triad (with or without a seventh) to identify the root of the chord (in the example, a partial chord as a first inversion), and next read the bass to complete the chord and give it its identity (in the example, the chord as a first inversion becomes a second inversion, when completed).

64 Chord.jpeg

However, this way poses a huge dilemma for reading parts which don't contain triads. Example from Jamie Cullum's Just One of Those Things for piano, vocal and guitar. In the following example, the first chord is a G sharp minor dominant 7, as can inferred from the guitar. However, as a pianist, this poses issues. Lacking both a root and fith, is the chord identifiable as a G sharp minor 7 from reading only the first two beats? Should the pianist be able to read and identify this chord if he didn't have access to the guitar part? Thanks in advance.

Jamie Cullum - Just One of Those Things.gif

[jancivil]

the first depiction shows C chord with an F bass. The note you must have meant there is G.


the way [] I've used to read chords is first to read the top part of the chord which contains a triad (with or without a seventh) to identify the root of the chord (in the example, a partial chord as a first inversion), and next read the bass

Note well, the I6 is in no way incomplete. Putting another part of the chord below changes the bass of the chord, it doesn't complete it.

C major first inversion is E G C. Its full figure is 6/3. The bass to its root is the 6; the bass to its other member, the 5th, is the 3. "6" for the figure is always sufficient, but it's an abbreviation.
C major second inversion is G C E. 6/4, the 6 is from the bass to its third E, the 4 is from the bass to its root.
...
So it looks like your next question is of a four-note harmony, tertially a seventh chord.

In the following example, the first chord is a G sharp minor dominant 7

It's a G# minor with a minor 7th. This is not a dominant 7; a dominant 7 structure is that of a major/minor 7; this is a minor/minor 7. Additionally the term refers to a specific function, dominant of a tonic in some fashion. A minor triad never functions as dominant. A dominant to tonic is a rising 4th move.

Lacking both a root and fith, is the chord identifiable as a G sharp minor 7 from...

G# is its root. The fifth in both of those is omitted from the piano part. It's still recognizable as G#m7 C#7 (9).
you have 3/4ths of the harmony written there. Jazz practice - note the guitar fingering on the chord of the 9th - frequently omits perfect fifths as the least crucial identifying feature of a harmony. 9th chords typically omit P5 on guitar.
It's recognizable by the quality of the triad first - B and E# are the 3rds, and now the 7ths, F# and B. Yes, recognizable by sight, immediately. No classical sheet music has chord pictures and chord labels.

[Palestr1na]

the first depiction shows C chord with an F bass. The note you must have meant there is G.

Yeah, I stand corrected. (I updated the image.)

the way [] I've used to read chords is first to read the top part of the chord which contains a triad (with or without a seventh) to identify the root of the chord (in the example, a partial chord as a first inversion), and next read the bass

Note well, the I6 is in no way incomplete. Putting another part of the chord below changes the bass of the chord, it doesn't complete it.

The bass does define the notated identity of the chord; we need to know the bass to notate which inversion it is. Moreover, some chords would be misread without knowing the bass. Example with image: A non-inverted seventh chord where the root does not appear elsewhere than in the bass (in such a case, without knowing the bass the third would be misinterpreted as the root), So my method of reading chords "from top down" is really not usable for advanced musicicians; it's just my way to aid visualization.

v7.png

C major first inversion is E G C. Its full figure is 6/3. The bass to its root is the 6; the bass to its other member, the 5th, is the 3. "6" for the figure is always sufficient, but it's an abbreviation.
C major second inversion is G C E. 6/4, the 6 is from the bass to its third E, the 4 is from the bass to its root.

Yeah, we've learned these in class for two months. (A triad with the third in the bass is a 6 (ie. 6/3), a triad with the fifth in the bass is a 6/4, a seventh chord with the third in the bass is a 5/6, with the fifth in the bass it's a 4/3 and with the seventh in the bass it's a 2, also known as 4/2.)

...
So it looks like your next question is of a four-note harmony, tertially a seventh chord.

In the following example, the first chord is a G sharp minor dominant 7

It's a G# minor with a minor 7th. This is not a dominant 7; a dominant 7 structure is that of a major/minor 7; this is a minor/minor 7. Additionally the term refers to a specific function, dominant of a tonic in some fashion. A minor triad never functions as dominant. A dominant to tonic is a rising 4th move.

Ok, we'll use the term minor 7th. (the "dominant 7th" stuck on me from "C-A-G-E-D" guitar theory, where it's commonly used as a movable shape, although a misnomer, for all chords with minor 7ths.)

Lacking both a root and fith, is the chord identifiable as a G sharp minor 7 from...

G# is its root. The fifth in both of those is omitted from the piano part. It's still recognizable as G#m7 C#7 (9).
you have 3/4ths of the harmony written there. Jazz practice - note the guitar fingering on the chord of the 9th - frequently omits perfect fifths as the least crucial identifying feature of a harmony. 9th chords typically omit P5 on guitar.
It's recognizable by the quality of the triad first - B and E# are the 3rds, and now the 7ths, F# and B. Yes, recognizable by sight, immediately. No classical sheet music has chord pictures and chord labels.

Yeah, I forgot about the emphasized importance of thirds and sevenths over perfect fifths. (The perfect fifth rarely acts as a building block for tritones and is therefore of lesser importance.) That's a really good reminder, perhaps which can be applied to more quickly reading all sorts of harmonies.

[jancivil]

The first thing I caught in the G#m7 C#9 picture was the 7ths. I missed the second one in haste, the C# harmony is missing its third not its fifth. I wouldn't know its quality but conventionally probably is ii-V of F#. IE: I saw consecutive 7ths hence 'jazz practice', contextually prob. ii7-V7

[shawshawraw]

IMO you're trying to mix two 'algorithms' - as a performer and as an analyzer.

Thinking in right hand-left hand pattern really helps with actual playing. But be careful when trying to analyze this way, as you'd get really confused when seeing Bb/G, Em7b5/C, A/B, AbmM7/G, etc. seemingly randomly floating around all the time.

For the excerpt of Just One of Those Things, apart from what Jan said, the sheet music you found is for "piano, vocal and guitar", so the guitarist playing the major 3rd note will fully define the chord.

[Palestr1na]

IMO you're trying to mix two 'algorithms' - as a performer and as an analyzer.

Thinking in right hand-left hand pattern really helps with actual playing. But be careful when trying to analyze this way, as you'd get really confused when seeing Bb/G, Em7b5/C, A/B, AbmM7/G, etc. seemingly randomly floating around all the time.

For the excerpt of Just One of Those Things, apart from what Jan said, the sheet music you found is for "piano, vocal and guitar", so the guitarist playing the major 3rd note will fully define the chord.

More concerned with to what extent, and at which point, the chord is defineable or identifiable (Ie. what can be known about the piano chord before you read the guitar part). I'm practicing silent reading (not so much playing) and the goal should be to identifying the root as effortlessly as possible, not in a heterodox manner as I might have been taught in music class.

[shawshawraw]

More concerned with to what extent, and at which point, the chord is defineable or identifiable (Ie. what can be known about the piano chord before you read the guitar part). I'm practicing silent reading (not so much playing) and the goal should be to identifying the root as effortlessly as possible, not in a heterodox manner as I might have been taught in music class.

Hmm, with that goal in mind, how about reading from bottom to top, so that if you get the root first (which happens many of the times), you build everything upwards by 3rd, 5th, 7th etc. without re-calculating; and if you don't get root first, you figure out the inversion afterwards?

I guess you might be thinking that the right hand usually includes all the notes of a chord so that if you read top to bottom you'll get the chord faster. But it's not... for example, the root note is often omitted in right hand when the left hand carries it. If the root/function is more important, recognize that first.

[jancivil]

The obvious part of this was two consecutive sevenths in the bass clef, almost surely you can take the bass for root (unless this is something abstruse, not a pop song as lyrics suggest). I saw two sevenths; and these [five] sharps so experience and convention shows 'ii7-V7' in F#.
Sometimes arrangers distribute a chord like that; the piano part by itself ain't it.

[Palestr1na]

Hmm, with that goal in mind, how about reading from bottom to top, so that if you get the root first (which happens many of the times), you build everything upwards by 3rd, 5th, 7th etc. without re-calculating; and if you don't get root first, you figure out the inversion afterwards?

I guess you might be thinking that the right hand usually includes all the notes of a chord so that if you read top to bottom you'll get the chord faster. But it's not... for example, the root note is often omitted in right hand when the left hand carries it. If the root/function is more important, recognize that first.

Students are basically told to imagine the notes in close position, but I don't think professional composers need to do so if you asked them, they probably recognize the chords from direction of movement (compared to the previous chord) and/or can regonize symmetries/asymmetries. When reading "from top to bottom" like in my example, I don't have to imagine the notes in close position, however, it's foolproof only for triads, not seventh chords.

[shawshawraw]

Students are basically told to imagine the notes in close position, but I don't think professional composers need to do so if you asked them, they probably recognize the chords from direction of movement (compared to the previous chord) and/or can regonize symmetries/asymmetries. When reading "from top to bottom" like in my example, I don't have to imagine the notes in close position, however, it's foolproof only for triads, not seventh chords.

You'll get there! The more you fight with sight reading, the better you'll be. And once you can spell out everything in a matter of seconds, the sequence suddenly won't matter anymore.

Personally, I'm faster locating all the notes on keys, playing them aloud, and listening to what's going on, than reading from the score alone. I feel super stoked when imagining legendary composers jotting down all the notes for a whole orchestra out of thin air

[Dasheesh]

you dont need to read anything anymore. the computer does it for you.

[Palestr1na]

you dont need to read anything anymore. the computer does it for you.

I say snuff the middleman.

Btw I think I have cracked the code. Watch this:
No even intervals = root position
No odd intervals = last inversion (6/4 ie. second inversion and 4/2 ie. third inversion for seventh chords)
Mixture of even and odd intervals: 6 (triad), 6/5 and 4/3 (seventh chord, start counting from the second to see which one it is).

(Suspended chords and add6 chords can be thought of as two superimposed chords. (Two dyads = sus. Two triads = add6.) Okay, see jancivil's following comment why this might not be a good idea.)

[jancivil]

it's not going to be any good to consider 4-note harmonies as two dyads, a pure abstraction which ignores what the idea is.

[jancivil]

you dont need to read anything anymore. the computer does it for you.

In reality there are plenty of people with honest and genuine interest that actually get what reading music is for