Is there an alternative notation for polychords that won't be confused with slash notation?

Question

We have a terrific guide on slash notation, a notational practice in which, for example, Gm/D means a G-minor triad with a D in the bass (i.e., in second inversion). A polychord, though, is indicated by a horizontal slash (as opposed to the vertical slash of slash notation) to show a G-minor triad above a D-major triad.

But this distinction is tricky to typeset clearly, and sometimes it's downright unclear if the slash is vertical or horizontal.

Are there alternative methods for indicating polychords, especially in typed environments where the horizontal slash can be tricky to input?

Unfortunately I’m not aware of an alternate which is too bad because like you say typesetting a fraction is tricky at best. The shame is that a regular slash would work for all polychords with the exception of those that have a major triad on the bottom: A/C7 Cmaj7/Dm Bb/Gm are all understandable but G/C is just a bass note below instead of a triad. Maybe an alternate way to name a triad is the solution, C(tr) or Cmaj or C35. Any other ideas? — John Belzaguy, Jul 28 '22 at 23:16
@JohnBelzaguy The Cmaj or CM idea does seem most straightforward, since those are already in use for triads. — Aaron, Jul 29 '22 at 02:57
@Aaron I like CM since Cm is minor. Who do we speak to about implementing this? — John Belzaguy, Jul 29 '22 at 07:09
Using John's idea, but a backwards rather than forwards slash would nail it. But it wouldn't be known world-wide. Although it would be pretty well self-explanatory - as in *this isn't a bog-standard slash chord*. A\C7, C\Dm for examples. Gotta start somewhere! — Tim, Jul 29 '22 at 08:02
Something that might prove helpful here is the convention to use capital letters for chord symbols and minuscles for single note. So Gm over a D in the bass could be notated Gm/d, while Gm over a D major triad would be Gm/D. — Lazy, Jul 29 '22 at 10:59
I've only ever seen polychords notated with a perfectly horizontal line between the chords. I don't find it hard or ambiguous to separate between that and slash notation https://musictheory.pugetsound.edu/mt21c/images/unit12/polychord-rite-chord.svg — modenv, Jul 31 '22 at 21:04
You could try employing roman numerals partially to distinguish polychords from inversion notation. But that's functional-harmonic notation, which may or may not suit your case. — Ate Somebits, Sep 02 '22 at 21:35
Some other ideas: As long as you're not using "+" to indicate raised (sharp) chord tones, you could have **Gm+D**. Or, you could borrow the "union" symbol from set theory and use **Gm∪D**. — Theodore, Oct 17 '22 at 20:21
What do you mean with typed environments? Are you using an old typewriter or do you have access to unicode or markup? (Side note, I think ampersand & is more common to find on keyboard than the union symbol and pretty close in meaning, or maybe | if you think of logical or) — Emil, Oct 17 '22 at 22:26
@Emil as long as we don't get too hung up on the strict mathematical meanings, the **&** is probably a better option than **|** because it's more distinct from **/**. — Theodore, Oct 18 '22 at 13:35

score 1 · Answer 1 · answered Sep 17 '22 at 13:14

1

You could try to encapsulate the chord with brakets. [G/B] . I personally use standard notation sheet music instead of slash notation. I've never ran into a situation where the player was still learning how to strum. Mostly because an arpeggio sounds better than a strum. And strums are indistinguishable to the audience unless it's supported by the drums.

answered Sep 17 '22 at 13:14

Christopher Allen

11
1

With "[G/B]" written, I'd play an inversion, not polychord. Unusual notations have to be explicitly described, something like "[G/B] means a polychord with G and B". – piiperi Reinstate Monica Sep 17 '22 at 13:23
O.I.C. so Maybe something like GpB. Or G chord / B chord. No easy standard that I know of exists. Thank God for written music. – Christopher Allen Sep 19 '22 at 12:24

score 1 · Answer 2 · answered Sep 17 '22 at 13:45

Some of the notation programs do offer options for slash/bass notation that are confusingly close to the polychord 'fraction'. It behoves the engraver to choose styles that AREN'T ambiguous. Sibelius, for one, makes a distinction that is perfectly clear, and easy to achieve.

You could concoct your own notation for scores where slash chords are mixed with polychords, perhaps put a box around the polychords? As I've done (unnecessarily) in the example below.

But this WOULD be your own private system, and would require explanation. As far as I know there's no generally understood convention other than slash or fraction.

The whole polychord concept is so rarely used, it requires explanation, regardless of how it's notated, IMO. :) — piiperi Reinstate Monica, Sep 17 '22 at 14:58

score 0 · Answer 3 · answered Oct 28 '22 at 16:56

Here (jazzpianosite) are a few approaches, perceiving or interpreting the polychord as an extended chord and/or change of scale:

garciamusic.com shows a few more alternative notations, following the same idea, for some more complex situations, still conveying, how the chord is built:

Is there an alternative notation for polychords that won't be confused with slash notation?

3 Answers3