One question about dissonance in chords / chord progressions

Just by the way, 9th (and 7th) chords are very definitely dissonant.

They just happen to be rather pleasing to the ear.

Yes, and that's a good point and a great oxymoron (semantically)! Anyway, they are dissonant from a classical viewpoint, I think (cultural/historical differences regarding consonance and dissonance). Maj7 chords are still considered dissonant by a lot of people. The same couldn't be said about b7 and 9 chords. One encounters all the time tensions such as the major ninth without a resolution and without a dissonant sound. ;)

Without a resolution, but definitely with the dissonant sound.... that's why they're used - for their unique "flavour".

I use a simple way to remember consonant/dissonant, and it also happens to be the definition used in the harmony book I "go by".

Intervals (from lower note to higher):

Consonants:

Major 3rd

Minor 3rd

Perfect 5th

Major 6th

Minor 6th

Octive or Unison

All others are dissonant to greater or less degree.

One dissonance will make the chord dissonant, lessor, or greater.

For example: C7

C-E-G (all consonant intervals, C-E, E-G,C-G)

Add Bb for the 7th...

C-Bb (dissonant)

E-Bb (dissonant)

G-Bb (consonant)

CMaj7

C-B(greater dissonance)

E-B (consonant)

G-B(consonant)

Also of note that consonant chords in certain inversions become dissonant:

Eg: C major chord in 2nd inversion (6/4 chord in figured bass)

G-C-E

G-C (dissonant)

*The interval of the Perfect 4th (to the lowest, or bass note) is not included in the definition of consonant above, and is therefore a dissonant(albeit lesser)*

G-E (consonant)

C-E (consonant)

Without a resolution, but definitely with the dissonant sound.... that's why they're used - for their unique "flavour".

It used to sound (and it used to be used) that way 300 years ago. In modern (i.e. not classically restricted) ears, properly used tensions are far from being dissonant (but, maybe it's only me, I even enjoy cluster chords)! :D

What constitutes a "proper" chord tone or a "non proper" is for a specific cultural-historical background to consider. No book can give you that, because our ears are evolving. And my belief is that they need to evolve. :thumbsup:

It used to sound (and it used to be used) that way 300 years ago. In modern (i.e. not classically restricted) ears, properly used tensions are far from being dissonant (but, maybe it's only me, I even enjoy cluster chords)! :thumbsup:

"Properly used tensions" are still dissonant but that isn't really the point. People seem to want to avoid labeling music "dissonant" as if it's a dirty word. I love dissonance - it gives spice to consonance. But dissonance that's never resolved serves to seperate me from the music. That's a personal taste.

Anyway, if the word "dissonant" becomes merely a taste or opinion, then it's lost all it's meaning as a description of intervals. And without concrete definitions it's hard to communicate in a language everyone understands. Like staff and notes and musical indications on the page, labels serve to define so as to communicate in language.

Dissonant refers to the agreed term. I don't want to go into semantics, but I strongly disagree with the term. We are talking the same thing here.

You can do anything you want with music. Dissonances are not bad at all bud. :thumbsup: Dissonant is a harsh word I think 1235 chords are way nicer than 135 chords. Don't limit yourself.

Let's be clear with this:

A major chord with a ^2 suspension is spelled ^1^2^3^5 - must talk scale degrees.

Just to put 1235 implies pitch class notation - which means 1235 is C#, D, Eb, and F. Which is pretty cool. As is 135 (C#, D#, F). But it's not a major triad.

Just a reminder. . . . It took hundreds of years for the third to be considered consonant.