11 chords versus sus 4 versus sus 2

Kingpatzer said:

"Neither Dsus2 nor Asus4 says anything about the voicing of the chord."

OK, I'm just getting to grips with musical theory, and I am absolutely miles behind you guys in terms of knowledge......

But if I see Dsus2 in a tab, I automatically think xx0230......whereas if I see Asus4, I automatically think x02230.....both chords use the same notes, for the Dsus2 xxDADE, for the A sus4 xAEADE - but if you alternate between the two chords, or should that be voicings, they sound different......anyone care to explain why? I know Noteboat insists there's no such thing as a sus2, but to my mind it's a handy reference point - I think, if memory serves me correctly, David Hodge used a Dsus2 in his lesson for "Needle And The Damage Done"......

(I realise there are two D's, one A and an E in the Dsus2, and two A's, two E's and only one D in the Asus4 - is that what causes the difference?)

Personally, I think the sus2 chord is handy to have around.....whilst it may not technically exist, it's handy when reading tab, as all tabbers - or at least all those I've come across - tend to use it this way.....

And I think it's likely to stay around - like a new word being entered into the language, it's too handy to ignore.....

Just my twopenn'orth.......

:D :D :D

Vic

Well, all voicings sound different. When you see an A major chord, what do you play?

-0-x-5-5-5-0-9
-2-2-2-5-5-5-10
-2-2-2-6-6-6-9
-2-2-2-7-7-7-11
-0-4-x-x-7-7-x
-x-x-x-x-5-x-x


or many others - those are just a few off the top of my head. Ted Greene's "Chord Chemistry", has 19 illustrations of A major voicings... each of which has 2-4 optional notes marked, so you can get well over 100 unique voicings from his charts.

Each voicing has its place, and the more ways you can play a chord, the more you can do with voice leading. Guitarists that only know E and A barre forms can play A major in only a couple of places. Guitarists who know a few more can play a half dozen choruses of a song and make each one sound different!

I looked at David's lessons, and he does call it Dsus2. In the classical sense, the E note is an anticipation - the third in D (F#) becomes the third in C (E) before the rest of the chord catches up... so in terms of analysis, it's the exact opposite of a harmonic suspension.

But as I've said, guitarists tend to associate fingerings with chord names, whether or not it's an actual 'chord' being played. If the label works for you, great - just be aware that it's not something your keyboard player, sax, bassist, etc. has heard of.

Since there are millions of guitarists, the name might spread to other instruments by brute force (the way 'power chords' have gained some wider acceptance over the past 35 years or so). But there's no theoretical reasoning for it - and 'guitar theory' that's separate from music theory is one reason musicians on other instruments don't consider most guitarists musicians!

As David says in the article, the theory of how the tune is put together can be argued in several ways... here's another view of it:

I look at the entire measure as a D chord, and the chord right after the C as an Em7 voicing (there's no E note in it at first, but then it gets played on the first string). That goes to Eº, which serves as a pivot to the C run - Eº makes up the top three notes of a C7 chord, and there's that Bb at the top of the run... so Eº is serving as the pivot to get to a dominant chord that will resolve to F.

Another quirk of that tune is the constant use of the D note, regardless of the chord. Classical theory calls that a "pedal point" (from the use of organ pedals to add a sustained bass). Although pedals are usually in the bass, they can be on top (as in the Allman Brothers' "Melissa") or on an inside voice, as in this tune. When you're analyzing something with a pedal, you can simplify the piece by ignoring the pedal tone - that makes the progression D-C-Em-Eº-C7 easier to see.

Lots of ways to skin a cat, I guess.