....answered by tomorrow. I would only hope Darko knows what I'm talking about.

What are all the inversions of dm? Like for example, the triad of C, would be c-e-g, and the 1st inversion is e-g-c. I can't quite grasp the 2nd and tird inversions. And also I need to know how to write that. Like to write a 1st inversion of the C triad, you would put down a roman numeral V(5) and a little 6 above it.

__________________

I think I know what your question is.

If you confused on how to get the triad you simply do this:
ABCDEFGABCDEFG

Find the note that you want and do a "loopdy-loop". In other words, skip one letter each time untill you've got there. Example: Say I wanted E, I would go E G B.

Dm: Dm Fm Am
First Inversion: Fm Am Dm
Second Inversion: Fm Am Dm
(Don't know what the third inversion would be and are you sure that there is one? Because by logic, if you where to fallow the pattern and move everything down one it would go to the regular triad.

Now about the sign for the inversions, I have no idea what that is so I can't help you there. But I hope this helps. You can remember how to re-arrange it like this:

1 2 3
first inver: 2 3 1
second inver: 3 1 2
So bassically each inversion the numbers are moved one over to the left.

Note: I'm assuming that since its in Dm that all the notes in the triad are also in Dm but I am not 100% sure on this.

__________________

Eh, I'm cool now. I was just confused before going to theory class this morning. My teacher finally explained it in a way I could understand, thanks asnyways.

__________________

Was I correct or way off?

__________________

When it comes to inversions, I thought it only matters what note is in the bass. For example, the first inversion of CEG would have E in the bass, second inversion would have G in the bass. I might be looking at it in to much of a 'classical' view point.

__________________

Exactly, the root is the only note that actually changes (for a first inversion). Say you just a simple chord, root, a third and a perfect fifth. ... ECG ... if you invert it, you move the bass note, E, an octave up and get CGE. The new bass note is C, and the root is still E. A second inversion would be GEC, G being the new bass, E still being the root. A 'third inversion' is just an octave higher.

__________________

Sorry didn't read your whole post. Notating triads is simple.

Major Triads: Capital Romans, I, II, V etc
Minor Triads: lowercase Romands, i, ii, iv, viii etc
Diminished: lowercase with a degrees sign: iº, ivº etc
Augmented: capital /w plus: II+ etc

example: c major scale:

first triad: C E G, forming the chord (other than the root) E and G are respectively, a major third and a perfect fifth, major triad: M.

2nd: D F A, minor third and perfect fifth, minor triad: m

3rd: E G B, minor third and perfect fifth: m

4th: F A C, major third, perfect fifth: M

5th: G B D, major third, perfect fifth: M

6th: A C E, minor third, perfect fifth: m

7th: B D F, minor third, diminished fifth: d

8th: C E G, major third, perfect fifth: M

the first triad was major so we give it a:
I
and so on we label them
I
ii
iii
IV
V
vi
viiº
VIII

it's that simple!

__________________

Thanks for trying rickshaw, but I knew that. And Dead, yes, it's theory class, so obviously it's a "classical viewpoint." The problem I had was with the #s above each roman numeral.

__________________

Well in my theory class we look at things from a Classical perspective and from like a jazz, modern view. It would be blasphamey to move from V to IV, but these days its common.

__________________

I just left 16th century counterpoint... and god damn i hated it, ha. The final in 2 weeks will cover figured bass, and all the types of 7th chords...cadences...4 part part-writing....so on and so forth..it's going to be hell...And I'm starting to understand a little of the figured bass thing.

__________________

Just a personal request also. If you embark on the crusade of songwriting, please, for the love of God, do not be overly technical. Ok, intricate songwriting isn't bad, but guys who pervert it *cough* Angelo, Malmsteen *cough* just make IMO boring music. Write from the inside My personal experience is that music theory provides rules to be broken. The limit of your sonic expression are boundless and theory is just a tool not the means.

__________________

Why learn rules if you WANT to break them?!?! That seems pretty damn pointless to me. And how is Malmsteen "overly" technical? I rarely ever hear his stuff change mood or key 3-4 times in every song...unless it's on an album of his that I don't have. I say theory is the means.

__________________

You are just jealous you can't play like them...

Yes yes, please tell Bach, Mozart, Bethoveen, Pangiani, ect ect that thoes rules are should be broken.

I agree that classical rules should be broken if you are going to a certain modern sound, but if you wnat a to be classical sounding than thoes rules are good.

Wow your teacher is nice, I've been doing figured bass for awhile now. We all did it with only the soprano. We have even had to write our own cadances and had the 4 school band members in the class play them. Right now we are analyzing a pop warm up for a full band with fucking Dm13, F9, F11 chords. FUN.

__________________

Well, music is just a collection of synchornized pitches and sounds so the combinations are limitless. By describing certain patterns in music (say for instance the difference betweewn Phygrian and Dorian modes) and attributing a qauntative quality to them you create a set of boundaries of things that sound 'right'. Embarking on difference combinations of sound create new rules. Yes, classical tends to adhere strictly to that specific template for sound. While there's nothing wrong with that, it's nice to see songwriters pioneering a new direction in music. Just my opinion.



This has to be the most intelligent quote ever

I'm jealous because I can't play like them? Well, since they are some of the most able guitarist ever (in terms of playing and technique) then I guess no one can criticize them. Did I ever say I don't like them? No? Did I say I don't listen to them. Obviously I do or else I couldn't critique them. Did I say I do not respect their artistic integrity and songwriting ability? No. I simply said, after listening to a lot of their material I think it's boring. Not innovative. Yeah, I can't play like them, guess what, neither can you. Does that mean you are jealous of them?

This is on par on telling me "Well, that's just your opinion!" trying to be defensive about somehow my opinion causing jepoardy to your own. That's nonsense.

And don't say you can play like them because anyone who had that ability wouldn't waste time perusing the a message board asking for help about how far to adjust their trussrod or asking if this guitar is cool.

__________________