5

Is it always necessary to include the root in a slash chord?

I see slash chords sometimes that do not contain the root note. Is it conventional to do that in certain contexts? Here is an example.

chord progression Bm7 - Em7 - Em7/A - Dmaj7

As you can see, the Em7/A has no E. Is this okay because the previous chord is Em7 and does contains the note E? Does that make it sound like an Em7/A chord despite containing no E? Is this sort of pattern common?

How about this one?

chord progression Bm7 - C#m7 - Dmaj7 - Bm7/E - A - C#m

The Bm7/E has no B. Unlike the first example, the previous chord also has no B. Is this chord still likely to be perceived by the listener as Bm7/E? If so, is there an explanation for it? Is this sort of pattern common?

(The piano is the only instrument here, so the root isn't played by another instrument.)

Aaron
  • 70,616
  • 10
  • 97
  • 243
Sean
  • 215
  • 1
  • 3
  • 1
    The top one seems more like A7sus2, sus4 (sort of A11) to me - and the sequence would indicate that - rising 4ths. Seems about the same idea for the 2nd also - E11(no 3rd). – Tim Aug 15 '21 at 11:01
  • 1
    All of these look like accompaniment parts. Are you *really* sure a different instrument isn't playing the root in both cases? So we can check more easily, what pieces are the examples from (or are they just examples you made up, possibly in simulation of other sheet music)? – Dekkadeci Aug 15 '21 at 14:16
  • 1
    It's never neccessary to include the root in *any* chord, it can be implied. – PiedPiper Aug 15 '21 at 19:48

4 Answers4

5

Yes, this is often done.

Should it be? Maybe. If you want THAT voicing - a G major triad over first an E then an A bass note - you could convey more useful information by calling them G/E and G/A. (And you could convey even MORE useful information by using notation.)

Some will say that chord symbols SHOULDN'T try to include voicing information. Others consider them merely a guide for improvisation. But if they are intended as assistance in playing THAT arrangement, and if you hear the different flavour of including E in the upper chord (I certainly do), I think using G/E and G/A adds value.

Laurence
  • 84,790
  • 5
  • 59
  • 178
  • Strongly agree. A different "root" creates interesting complications/ambiguities that I think have no other convenient standard notation. Vaguely akin to "sus" chords, but perhaps opposite... :) – paul garrett Aug 15 '21 at 21:20
3

Chord symbols are open to interpretation regardless of how specific one tries to be about naming them. It is fairly common for players and arrangers to take liberties like omitting a root or 5th, adding a 9th, etc.

Both chords in your examples are essentially V9sus4 chords. I think that will be the perception in either case, regardless of the notes in the previous chord. Some people like writing them like this, as a ii7 with V in the bass. There may be an expectation by the composer or arranger that it will be played literally, Em7/A = A E G B D, and some may do exactly that but that won’t always be the case.

Bottom line, what is written doesn’t exactly match the chord symbols like you say but does capture the basic intention. You can’t count on something being played exactly the way you write it as a chord symbol so if you want something very specific write out the voicing instead.

John Belzaguy
  • 21,797
  • 1
  • 26
  • 78
  • No, the OP means that he sees cases where the slash chord he sees has no notes that match the root of the top chord in the notation. For example, he sees a D/Eb chord made of only Eb, F#, and A. – Dekkadeci Aug 15 '21 at 14:24
  • @Dekkadeci Oh, I guess I misread the question, it is more of a voicing issue. I’ll withdraw my answer for now and maybe take another crack at it after my first cup of coffee :) – John Belzaguy Aug 15 '21 at 14:36
  • @Dekkadeci I overhauled my answer after having my coffee… – John Belzaguy Aug 16 '21 at 16:11
1

My assumption is - like Dekkadeci says in her comment - that these chords are accompaniments and the root tone will be in the melody.

That‘s why your first example is Em/A and not G/A. I can‘t see another explanation.

Thus, normally the root note should be contained in the slash chord, otherwise it doesn‘t make sense to me.

Albrecht Hügli
  • 25,410
  • 1
  • 21
  • 58
0

Ideally you want to root somewhere. Even with rootless chord voicings it's generally assumed somewhere in an ensemble the root will be played.

As you can see, the Em7/A has no E. Is this okay because the previous chord is Em7 and does contains the note E?

Yes, this is what I hear, a continuation of the Em7, because all the right hand tones are held through the second measure.

But, if you are relying on that effect, and if you already have notation, what is the purpose of the jazz chord symbols?

That isn't a rhetorical question. From the chord symbols about the only thing you might count on is the bass tones will be E then A. What happens above is a mixed bag. If a guitarist or pianist play from those symbols you could get very different results. Is that OK?

I imagine an important question is: do you specifically not want a full close voiced Em7 in both bars? If so, G/E and G/A closer to what you want played, even if it isn't necessarily the right harmonic analysis.

When I see piano score with jazz chord symbols, or guitar chord diagrams, above staff, I think Hal Leonard arrangements of pop/rock songs. Usually, I find those arrangements unsatisfying, often loosing the importance of the original arrangements. Are arrangement and voicing particulars essential for your music?

I think the question isn't whether it's necessary to include the root in a slash chord, but whether something like "omit the root in RH" or "play the same voicing for two measures" is what you really want.

Michael Curtis
  • 53,281
  • 2
  • 42
  • 147