mn
发帖数: 46 | 1 谁愿意给我讲讲 F/C# 这种和弦是怎么回事?
F 就是 F，C# 就是 C#，两个合起来是什么?
谢谢。。。 |
g*******a
发帖数: 1383 | 2 C# chord but use F as root instead
【在 mn 的大作中提到】
: 谁愿意给我讲讲 F/C# 这种和弦是怎么回事?
: F 就是 F，C# 就是 C#，两个合起来是什么?
: 谢谢。。。
|
a*t
发帖数: 2596 | 3 参考和弦的转位.
【在 g*******a 的大作中提到】
: C# chord but use F as root instead
|
c**e
发帖数: 3760 | 4 ah??我一直以为是the other way around. F和弦，C#根音。赫赫
【在 g*******a 的大作中提到】
: C# chord but use F as root instead
|
a*t
发帖数: 2596 | 5 ft,那你也得想想F和弦里有C#这个音吗?
【在 c**e 的大作中提到】
: ah??我一直以为是the other way around. F和弦，C#根音。赫赫
|
c**e
发帖数: 3760 | 6 偶不懂乐理的说。才知道这叫和弦转换，我以为就是换个根音就是了。
那么说这种形式的和弦变换的根音一定要是和弦里面本身有的一个音？
【在 a*t 的大作中提到】
: ft,那你也得想想F和弦里有C#这个音吗?
|
a*******l
发帖数: 2353 | 7 ???
typo error.
should be 1, 3, 5 for triads. no 4, should be sus chords.
There is no F# in C major scale.
F# first appear in G major. then happens at D,A,whatever.
be |
a*******l
发帖数: 2353 | 8 I think this song could be in D major.
and the F/C# could be G/C#
I iii I7 IV
D7 is the dominant chord of G.
and that C# could be a nice chromatic bass line.
make sure the chords are right though.
【在 mn 的大作中提到】
: 谁愿意给我讲讲 F/C# 这种和弦是怎么回事?
: F 就是 F，C# 就是 C#，两个合起来是什么?
: 谢谢。。。
|
c**e
发帖数: 3760 | 9 至少lennon的原唱肯定不是d调的。beatles后来混音的那个版本我就不知道了。
好像调子不太一样。可是要是不一样的话又是怎么和列农原来的声音何上的我就不懂了。
【在 a*******l 的大作中提到】
: I think this song could be in D major.
: and the F/C# could be G/C#
: I iii I7 IV
: D7 is the dominant chord of G.
: and that C# could be a nice chromatic bass line.
: make sure the chords are right though.
|
s****y
发帖数: 180 | 10 no, F/C# is F chord added bassnote C#.
【在 a*t 的大作中提到】
: 参考和弦的转位.
|
|
|
a*t
发帖数: 2596 | 11 Whoops?!I checked again, you are right.
but if my memory serves me well, this kind
of chord is the alternative way to inverse chord.
the music theory behind shuold be chord inverse,
but I can not figure out how it works now.
【在 s****y 的大作中提到】
: no, F/C# is F chord added bassnote C#.
|
a*t
发帖数: 2596 | 12 X43211
similar to F, but have a C# root |
a*t
发帖数: 2596 | 13 as I remembered, it is a simplified way for
inverse chord or no-traid chord. it is
not the offical way.
but I can not figure out how it works now. |
g*******a
发帖数: 1383 | 14 whoops 2
【在 a*t 的大作中提到】
: Whoops?!I checked again, you are right.
: but if my memory serves me well, this kind
: of chord is the alternative way to inverse chord.
: the music theory behind shuold be chord inverse,
: but I can not figure out how it works now.
|
s****y
发帖数: 180 | 15 I think usually slash chord is kind of an inverse chord, but not necessarily.
by the way, there is no rule for any chord, if depends how it sounds.
sometime, normally in jazz, the bass note only played by bass player. So for
F/C#, guitar player plays F chord, bass player plays C#, and it is supposed to
resolute later.
【在 a*t 的大作中提到】
: as I remembered, it is a simplified way for
: inverse chord or no-traid chord. it is
: not the offical way.
: but I can not figure out how it works now.
|
a*t
发帖数: 2596 | 16
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I don't think so, any chord
must be formed based on some rules.
slash chord just a simplified way to express the chord and mess up
the theories behind.
【在 s****y 的大作中提到】
: I think usually slash chord is kind of an inverse chord, but not necessarily.
: by the way, there is no rule for any chord, if depends how it sounds.
: sometime, normally in jazz, the bass note only played by bass player. So for
: F/C#, guitar player plays F chord, bass player plays C#, and it is supposed to
: resolute later.
|
s****y
发帖数: 180 | 17 in fact, I should say there is no limit for any chord, not"no rule".
any combination of notes have one or more chord name.
also, if a chord progression sounds good, it must be reasonable.
necessarily.
for
supposed to
【在 a*t 的大作中提到】
:
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I don't think so, any chord
: must be formed based on some rules.
: slash chord just a simplified way to express the chord and mess up
: the theories behind.
|
