augmented 2nd??

if E to G is minor 3rd then what's the augmented 2nd??

there is no augmented 2nd . there is only the 2nd,the sus2nd & the minor third, a sus. 2nd would be enharmonic with a (flated2nd.This way we can have a (sus2nd) & a (9th) of course the ninth comes after the seventh. The (sus2nd) is enharmonic with the (9th) only difference is the sus2 comes before the 7th is added. OR an octave appart :) I've been told that I'm wrong ,this maybe true. I made acouple of adjustments. the reason I belive this to be true is that I have seen chords with a (sus2) & chords with a (mi3). soi base my opinion on that . The sataement "there is no aug2" is proably too restrictive.

Originally Posted by: rightturnonlythere is no augmented 2nd . there is only the 2nd,the sus2nd & the minor third, a sus. 2nd would be enharmonic with a (mi3rd ).This way we can have a (sus2nd) & a (#9th) of course the ninth comes after the seventh. The (sus2nd) is enharmonic with the (#9th) only difference is the sus2 comes before the 7th is added. OR an octave appart :)

does this apply to everything??

Originally Posted by: rightturnonlythere is no augmented 2nd . there is only the 2nd,the sus2nd & the minor third, a sus. 2nd would be enharmonic with a (mi3rd ).This way we can have a (sus2nd) & a (#9th) of course the ninth comes after the seventh. The (sus2nd) is enharmonic with the (#9th) only difference is the sus2 comes before the 7th is added. OR an octave appart :)

Ok, that statement is wrong, and I'm seriously considering deleting it. Please don't listen to that assertion.

An augmented second from E is E to F double sharp.

Not this arguement again. :rolleyes: Just so you know yes F## is the same as G but what my friend here is saying is that if you need a minor third from E you NAME it G if you need an Augmented 2nd from E you NAME it F##. It is just for the sake of using the proper terminology when it comes to theory.

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonOk, that statement is wrong, and I'm seriously considering deleting it. Please don't listen to that assertion.

An augmented second from E is E to F double sharp.

Please don't delete me. I was just trying to help maybeyou should have read my eddited answer. After all is'nt F## IN the key of E enharmonic with
G which would be a minor 3. Next time I try to help some one I'll be sure to proof read it before I answer. by the way do we have to be right all the time? and who gives you the power to delete something. the proper thing would be to give some constructive crit. :)

Originally Posted by: magicninjaNot this arguement again. :rolleyes: Just so you know yes F## is the same as G but what my friend here is saying is that if you need a minor third from E you NAME it G if you need an Augmented 2nd from E you NAME it F##. It is just for the sake of using the proper terminology when it comes to theory.

F double sharp is not the same as G, for GOD's sake people. They may sound the same, but the music itself is not the only way to convey one's message in a work. The notation can also be a way of hinting at meaning. Not only that, but in fully diminished 7th chords, the distance between the 7th and the root is an augmented second. Were it written as a minor third, the chord would be completely different and probably voiced in another manner. Notation makes all the difference in the world.

A college music theory teacher would fail you if that was your answer on a test. Jolly is 100% right on this one. It has nothing to do with the note being the same as a G. It has to do with the TERMINOLOGY. Anywhere you read those chord construction were either a. dumbing it down for people who aren't this into theory or b. Dumb themselves or C. lazy. Saying there is no augmented 2nd isn't restrictive it's dead wrong.

Originally Posted by: rightturnonlyPlease don't delete me. I was just trying to help maybeyou should have read my eddited answer. After all is'nt F## IN the key of E enharmonic with
G which would be a minor 3. Next time I try to help some one I'll be sure to proof read it before I answer. by the way do we have to be right all the time? and who gives you the power to delete something. the proper thing would be to give some constructive crit. :)

I didn't mean it as an attack on you, I just meant to convey how strongly incorrect some of your argument was. The reason I stress "being right all the time" is because music theory can seem very daunting to beginners, especially if they're getting two sets of answers to one question, and double especially when those answers have to work to discredit one another. Yes, F double sharp is enharmonic with G, but that isn't the reason I considered deleting it. You said "there's no such thing as an augmented second," which is simply not correct. Then you say that sus2 is an interval. Sus2 stands for "suspended second," it's not a different interval, it's merely the diatonic second of the root suspended over the chord. Sus2 does NOT necessarily mean a minor second.

Edit: thought of another example. Let's use the Ger6 chord in Aminor. F-A-C-D# C to D# is an augmented second.

Originally Posted by: joelardzif E to G is minor 3rd then what's the augmented 2nd??

Please read my corrected post. I wrote the first one at 6am. sorry if I missled you. I only have one semester at Miami Dade of music Theory, It helped me a lot but there are a lot of holes.

Originally Posted by: rightturnonlyPlease read my corrected post. I wrote the first one at 6am. sorry if I missled you. I only have one semester at Miami Dade of music Theory, It helped me a lot but there are a lot of holes.

Just out of curiosity, what book are you using? You're gonna love the course the more semesters you take, trust me.

Edit: also, rightturn, sorry about the harshness of my first response saying I might delete your post. Honestly, I only said that because conflicting answers can cause a lot of confusion in the early stages of theory. (and as far as who gives me the authority to delete posts, the answer is "guitartricks," however I can't just go arbitrarily deleting posts for no reason. With that one I thought it was a bit misleading, obviously not purposefully or anything, though.)

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonEdit: thought of another example. Let's use the Ger6 chord in Aminor. F-A-C-D# C to D# is an augmented second.

Whereas C to Eflat although enharmonic to D# would be considered a minor 3rd right?

Originally Posted by: magicninjaA college music theory teacher would fail you if that was your answer on a test. Jolly is 100% right on this one. It has nothing to do with the note being the same as a G. It has to do with the TERMINOLOGY. Anywhere you read those chord construction were either a. dumbing it down for people who aren't this into theory or b. Dumb themselves or C. lazy. Saying there is no augmented 2nd isn't restrictive it's dead wrong.

I GUESS i am really gonna eat some crow on this. I was thinking of chords not intervals. It seems to me that it al boils down to that. What would we call this E G# D F## or E G D G ..... RTO :)

Depends on the context of how you're applying it I suppose. It's all theory jargon. I'm sure as you go on with your studies yoyu'll see what we mean becuase studying theory is the only time stuff like this comes up. Remember on tests and stuff to always correctly name your intervals even if the notes are enharmonic. :)

Originally Posted by: magicninjaWhereas C to Eflat although enharmonic to D# would be considered a minor 3rd right?

Right, however, since the Ger6 is going to lead to V (albeit through a 6/4 cadence which we're not even going to get into at the moment), the note should be a D# which is the leading tone of V.

So using Eflat in the chord formula would change the name or is just theortically stupid?

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonJust out of curiosity, what book are you using? You're gonna love the course the more semesters you take, trust me.

Edit: also, rightturn, sorry about the harshness of my first response saying I might delete your post. Honestly, I only said that because conflicting answers can cause a lot of confusion in the early stages of theory. (and as far as who gives me the authority to delete posts, the answer is "guitartricks," however I can't just go arbitrarily deleting posts for no reason. With that one I thought it was a bit misleading, obviously not purposefully or anything, though.)

Very Good! when I took theory it was 1973. we were given one book and the staff called it the bible, this book about the size of a bible contained all the theory that we needed to get a masters degree in theory. I have a chord book for guitar written by Jay Arnold = 7,488 chords It shows just about every chord with almost every possible inversion or voicing we used at that time, Of :) course when one can spell all the chords triads to 13th's It still can help to visualise differnt possibilities, and I begin to make my own chords. I reaLLY need a modern book. RTO

Originally Posted by: magicninjaWhereas C to Eflat although enharmonic to D# would be considered a minor 3rd right?

right in the context of building a cmi chord otherwise it would be an interval of a aug2 or an interval of a mi3. It's just theory. To the best of my knowledge Dajango Reinhardt could'nt read a note or verbally discuss music theory, nor did he care.

Originally Posted by: magicninjaSo using Eflat in the chord formula would change the name or is just theortically stupid?

Both if you're trying to construct that chord.

Originally Posted by: joelardzif E to G is minor 3rd then what's the augmented 2nd??

after all the attention paid to this thread . I would advise anyone to go to a site called "Theory Lessons for the experienced guitar player" easly found using a Google search. When you get there click on intervals,and you will soon understand...RTO :)