1 to 6 or 6 to 1?

Tannin

Let's settle this once and for all. I regularly see people write a chord ... let's say an Am ... as x 0 2 2 1 0 and just as regularly see it written 0 1 2 2 0 x.  Which is correct?

octatonic

Am is x02210

stratman3142

Tannin said:

Let's settle this once and for all. I regularly see people write a chord ... let's say an Am ... as x 0 2 2 1 0 and just as regularly see it written 0 1 2 2 0 x.  Which is correct?

I don't recall ever seeing it written the 2nd way.

Neill

octatonic said:

Am is x02210

I've never seen it written any other way.  Maybe in Australia where they give the cricket scores the wrong way round...

What has always puzzled me about the open Am - or the open A come to that, is why the bottom E string is always shown muted.  

Musicwolf

Neill said:

Maybe in Australia where they give the cricket scores the wrong way round...

Due to the coriolis effect no doubt

Rowby1

Neill said:

What has always puzzled me about the open Am - or the open A come to that, is why the bottom E string is always shown muted.  

Because that’s an Am/E chord, or A/E chord.

merlin

Neill said:

octatonic said:

Am is x02210

I've never seen it written any other way.  Maybe in Australia where they give the cricket scores the wrong way round...

What has always puzzled me about the open Am - or the open A come to that, is why the bottom E string is always shown muted.  

Because you'd be inverting the chord by putting the 5th at the bottom. It would be fine if you have a bass player holding down the tonic below you, but otherwise wouldn't sound like a simple Am but would be Am second inversion.  

Tannin

Thanks Stratman. I'm used to seeing it the first way but lately I've been on an invitation-only Facebook group related to a course I'm doing and several people have been using the second style. I wondered if it was an Americanism. Anyway, it was doing my head in. Thanks for telling me I'm still (approximately) sane.

PS. We Australians do cricket scores the proper way round, and don't you forget it!

EricTheWeary

I don't think I've ever seen it the second way.

stickyfiddle

I assume noting it backwards would stem from people calling the thin E the "1st string". That's something I've never fully understood tbh, as the low E is first from left to right when you look at a chord chart, and first from top to bottom when you look at a guitar. I guess because TAB shows it from the player's perspective? 

Neill

merlin said:

Neill said:

octatonic said:

Am is x02210

I've never seen it written any other way.  Maybe in Australia where they give the cricket scores the wrong way round...

What has always puzzled me about the open Am - or the open A come to that, is why the bottom E string is always shown muted.  

Because you'd be inverting the chord by putting the 5th at the bottom. It would be fine if you have a bass player holding down the tonic below you, but otherwise wouldn't sound like a simple Am but would be Am second inversion.  

Well yes, but I've always considered that open A figure to be inverted, maybe I'm at odds with the community here, but when guitar players are strumming open chords how many make sure that the open (bottom) strings on the A and C chords are always muted or not struck?

Also, I have seen chord charts, and no doubt there are vids, that teach the "easy" way to play first position chords which have the B major played with an F sharp bass - to avoid barring at the second fret.  

Stuckfast

Neill said:

I've always considered that open A figure to be inverted, maybe I'm at odds with the community here, but when guitar players are strumming open chords how many make sure that the open (bottom) strings on the A and C chords are always muted or not struck?

Me! Especially with an A chord. The second inversion is unstable and generally sounds pretty bad. I'd only ever use it usually if I was playing a chord sequence over a pedal note and otherwise would take a lot of care to avoid it unless it was very much in passing.

viz

Stuckfast said:

Neill said:

I've always considered that open A figure to be inverted, maybe I'm at odds with the community here, but when guitar players are strumming open chords how many make sure that the open (bottom) strings on the A and C chords are always muted or not struck?

Me! Especially with an A chord. The second inversion is unstable and generally sounds pretty bad. I'd only ever use it usually if I was playing a chord sequence over a pedal note and otherwise would take a lot of care to avoid it unless it was very much in passing.

And just to embellish your point, if the melody is being held in the bass you can use it to great effect. But I would say that’s an extension of your passing-note comment. 

For example, climbing up the E major scale with this progression:

022100 (E, root)
22444x (B, 2nd inv)
476454 (E, 1st inv)
56444x (B7, 3rd inv)
77999x (E, 2nd inv)
9 12 11 9 10 9 (A, 1st inv)
11 14 13 11 12 11 (B, 1st inv)
12 14 14 13 12 12 (E, root)

yocky

Stuckfast said:

Neill said:

I've always considered that open A figure to be inverted, maybe I'm at odds with the community here, but when guitar players are strumming open chords how many make sure that the open (bottom) strings on the A and C chords are always muted or not struck?

Me! Especially with an A chord. The second inversion is unstable and generally sounds pretty bad. I'd only ever use it usually if I was playing a chord sequence over a pedal note and otherwise would take a lot of care to avoid it unless it was very much in passing.

Presumably slash chords are just inversions?

I've always been confused about why a C/G chord (332010) sounds sweet to my ears but a C/E chord (032010) doesn't. Sounds like the former is a second inversion and the latter is a first inversion. Are second inversions inherently more stable?

However I do always mute the E string when I play an open A because that doesn't sound so good. So why does C/G sound better than A/E? 

Stuckfast

yocky said:Presumably slash chords are just inversions?

I've always been confused about why a C/G chord (332010) sounds sweet to my ears but a C/E chord (032010) doesn't. Sounds like the former is a second inversion and the latter is a first inversion. Are second inversions inherently more stable?

However I do always mute the E string when I play an open A because that doesn't sound so good. So why does C/G sound better than A/E? 

A slash chord would be the same as an inversion if the bass note is in the chord, yes.

In classical music the first inversion is really important and widely used, whereas the second inversion is rarely used and only in very specific circumstances -- it has a fourth between the bass note and the root which is considered a dissonance in that context.

As to why C/G on guitar should sound better than C/E or A/E, my guess is just that the unfretted open E tends to take over and be the loudest thing in a chord and thus makes it sound unbalanced.