We NEED to talk about triads!

[Sascha Franck]

And fwiw:

unless you’re suggesting that all triads should have all the notes in the same octave

Of course I'm suggesting that - before any drop techniques are applied.
Drop 2 as a common technical description shouldn't be used to describe anything you're doing within whatever CAGED-derived chords.

 

[Eagle]

No, it's not. Regardless of what voice you lift up an octave (reversing the drop 2 process), it never becomes the second voice from the top.

The notes in that particular voicing are (bottom to top): C#-E-A. When you transpose the C# up an octave, the voicing becomes E-A-C#.
Drop 2 voicings never are close voicings, but this one is a close voicing.

I see your point but it’s still easily moved because two of the three notes are the E shape caged and the nearest 3rd in the bass . The same process as altered chords. Caged still works. I use a combination of caged ,3nps and just knowing root 4-5-6 versions of most chords. If you know the notes a chord spelling of the chord you know where they are that way too.

 

[Eagle]

And fwiw:



Of course I'm suggesting that - before any drop techniques are applied.
Drop 2 as a common technical description shouldn't be used to describe anything you're doing within whatever CAGED-derived chords.

Well the E doesn’t for a start.
You’re not seriously saying you only use close voiced correctly stacked intervals for your primary caged starting points . Because literally no one else does.

 

[duzie]

Oh boy

 

[Sascha Franck]

I see your point but it’s still easily moved because two of the three notes are the E shape caged and the nearest 3rd in the bass

Sure. But you know what we call that in German? "Von hinten durch die Brust ins Auge". Apparently it's indeed "shooting from the back through the breast in the eye" in English.

The same process as altered chords.

Uhm - can we please stop this discussion now? You don't seem to have much of an idea of music terminology and I would prefer to not have some nonsense posted in this thread (or having to correct that nonsense). Reach out for Wikipedia or whatever for the common meaning of "altered chords" in a musical context.

You’re not seriously saying you only use close voiced correctly stacked intervals for your primary caged starting points .

No, I'm not saying that at all. Because I'm not dealing with CAGED in this thread. All I'm saying is that there's a very common description of what "drop 2" refers to. A description that you don't seem to be aware of (same thing as with you not knowing what "altered" refers to in a chord context, really), because otherwise you wouldn't have used it for the chord I've shown.

So, please, let it go - for now at least. I don't want to pat myself on the back at all (in fact, I hate that kinda thing), but rest assured: I know pretty damn well what I'm talking about in this thread. And I'd like to keep it structured as good as possible.
I was hoping I could sort of explain the (vast) differences between what I'm trying to go for in this thread and CAGED, but apparently, at least for you it didn't work out. So let's please at least give it a rest.

 

[Eagle]

Sure. But you know what we call that in German? "Von hinten durch die Brust ins Auge". Apparently it's indeed "shooting from the back through the breast in the eye" in English.


Uhm - can we please stop this discussion now? You don't seem to have much of an idea of music terminology and I would prefer to not have some nonsense posted in this thread (or having to correct that nonsense). Reach out for Wikipedia or whatever for the common meaning of "altered chords" in a musical context.



No, I'm not saying that at all. Because I'm not dealing with CAGED in this thread. All I'm saying is that there's a very common description of what "drop 2" refers to. A description that you don't seem to be aware of (same thing as with you not knowing what "altered" refers to in a chord context, really), because otherwise you wouldn't have used it for the chord I've shown.

So, please, let it go - for now at least. I don't want to pat myself on the back at all (in fact, I hate that kinda thing), but rest assured: I know pretty damn well what I'm talking about in this thread. And I'd like to keep it structured as good as possible.
I was hoping I could sort of explain the (vast) differences between what I'm trying to go for in this thread and CAGED, but apparently, at least for you it didn't work out. So let's please at least give it a rest.

You are one serious asshole .
I know exactly what altered means in chords and how to build any chords from its base major shape.
Yes I know exactly what I said is 100% correct.
Your system is just an alternative and offers absolutely nothing different.

 

[Sascha Franck]

You are one serious asshole .

Oh really?

I know exactly what altered means in chords and how to build any chords from its base major shape.

Not one of your previous postings would suggest that.

Yes I know exactly what I said is 100% correct.

Proveably not.

Your system is just an alternative and offers absolutely nothing different.

Just because you don't understand the differences doesn't mean anything. Because you don't have much of an idea about the subject at hand.

 

[Eagle]

As usual you ignore the substance of the questions and fail to describe the reasons for using this method over any other.

 

[duzie]

Maybe a thread on the correlation between triads and the caged system is in order.

 

[Sascha Franck]

As usual you ignore the substance of the questions and fail to describe the reasons for using this method over any other.

No. I described very clearly what this is about. Just that you either didn't read the thread properly or didn't understand it doesn't change one single bit with that.
And even if that wouldn't be necessary (because the differences between the approached are obvious) I also even came up with an example not properly covered by the CAGED model. An example that you called a "drop 2" version, obviously not knowing what exactly is described by that term (which is very well defined).
In a nutshell: You're trying to argue about things that you don't know much about. It'd be the same as me jumping into a discussion about proper fret leveling. But as I have no idea about that, I just don't.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

It’s a drop 2 because that’s literally what you have done with it unless you’re suggesting that all triads should have all the notes in the same octave. That doesn’t work either because the 1 is not the lowest note.That’s just not how a guitar is . We are talking caged which has no relevance to non guitar like instruments . It is what I said it was and there is nothing to be gained by describing it differently.

Well to be pedantic all close voices triads as well as your back 7th chords have the voices within an octave.
That literally is the point of close voicings.

And the term for have been and are root positions, first, second, third (for tetrads) inversion.
End of story

A drop2 voicing drops the second highest note an octave.
Even if we’d run with your example getting a 1st inversion 3-5-1 you can’t get there with a root positions tried by dropping the middle note an octave because that’d give you 3 8 14

 

[PLX]

Maybe a thread on the correlation between triads and the caged system is in order.

 

[duzie]

lol my avatar at TOP

 

[Sascha Franck]

Maybe a thread on the correlation between triads and the caged system is in order.

Tell me when it's due because that's a place I don't want to go to.

 

[PLX]

lol my avatar at TOP

Here's the one I'm using right now..

 

[norminal]

Uhm - can we please stop this discussion now? You don't seem to have much of an idea of music terminology and I would prefer to not have some nonsense posted in this thread (or having to correct that nonsense). Reach out for Wikipedia or whatever for the common meaning of "altered chords" in a musical context.

 

[jay mitchell]

I'm with Sascha so far. Intervals is intervals. Triads is triads. It's a universally valid musical, as opposed to instrument-specific, concept. That's by far the best way to build musical knowledge.

As a practical matter, all sorts of chord extensions and alterations can be created by the addition (or inclusion) of a simple triad. FYI, the diminished triad - erroneously designated earlier as F when it is actually B diminished - is especially useful in this regard. You can't make a simple dominant seventh chord without an included diminished triad.

As for CAGED, I'm old enough to predate the acronym. The first time I saw a guitar player make a "G" shape and use his first finger as a barre was ca. 1968. That was enough to make the light come on for me, and I took off immediately with the whole notion of using "cowboy chord" shapes as movable chords. I never thought about naming the shapes with their open-position names, however; I learned to name them based on the actual chord. For example, a "G" shape built from the sixth fret/sixth string is a Bb, and there is no reason to ever call it anything other than that. It's one position in which to play that chord. Nothing more, nothing less. Even within that one position, you can play three closed-voice and three open-voiced inversions as chords (i.e., all the notes simultaneously). Because there are so many chord shapes that don't fit neatly into the CAGED concept, I'd say it's a relatively primitive way to assist beginning players in learning the fretboard. I don't even bother using the acronym, but that's just me.