Having some trouble deciphering these chords..

They sound pretty straight forward but nothing seems to mesh perfectly..
so far I think it is C#m(i) d#m(ii) e(III) C#m(i) but I am pretty certain I am completely wrong..
the part I am sampling is from 1:50 to 2:00


---------- Post added at 12:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 AM ----------

I think the chord progression I took is just the 2nd half of the main progression. If someone could transcribe both parts it would be awesome.

---------- Post added at 11:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 AM ----------

help a bruva out
 
1) c#minor
2) d#minor (bare in mind the guitarry thing is still playing the c#minor arpeggio)
3) AMajor7 (A, C#, E, F# and G#, notice the A in the bass)
4) f#minor

Then at 2:01

1) c#minor
2) BMajor
3) AMajor7 (held)

I was a bit confused about what you meant by "the main progression", but hopefully I answered what you wanted. If not, just let me know.
 
thank you so much.. What about at 3:08 when that choir kicks in?

---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:19 PM ----------

Also, for that AMaj7 (A, C#, E, F# and G#) Where does that G# come from? I dont see how that is a 7 chord
 
Sorry, it's a major 7 chord. It's like a regular 7 chord but the 7th interval of the scale is sharpened (g becomes g#).

As for 3:08...

1) c#minor (the main melodic notes are e and g#, which are held in the next chord)
2) Technically this chord is a second inversion EMajor chord (as music teachers would adamantly suggest), but its practically a c#minor chord WITH B IN THE BASS. I'm hesitant at calling this a BMajor chord, because I can't hear a d# or f#. Used tastefully, those notes could add some nice crunchy harmony to the music, but it's largely just B, E, then G#.
3) AMajor. I can't hear any additional notes here until:
4) The bass is F#, but I'd say it's just an AMajor chord with F# in the bass.

I clicked on the YT video and saw some breaking bad spoilers which is annoying cos I only just started watching it haha.

If that's all you need, then glad I could help. If not, I'm still around.
 
1) c#minor
2) d#minor (bare in mind the guitarry thing is still playing the c#minor arpeggio)
3) AMajor7 (A, C#, E, F# and G#, notice the A in the bass)
4) f#minor

Then at 2:01

1) c#minor
2) BMajor
3) AMajor7 (held)

I was a bit confused about what you meant by "the main progression", but hopefully I answered what you wanted. If not, just let me know.

I do so hate correcting people who have "perfect pitch" because they argue about what they don't or won't hear.......

It starts as C[sup]#[/sup]m - G[sup]#[/sup]m[sub]/D[sup]#[/sup][/sub] - E - A[sup]Maj7[/sup]

then continues as C[sup]#[/sup]m - G[sup]#[/sup]m[sub]/B[/sub] - A[sup]Maj7[/sup]

The second part follows because of the repeated G[sup]#[/sup] at the top of the chord voicings, i.e. there is a purpose behind the chords, namely to keep that G[sup]#[/sup] firmly in our ears....

Maj 7th for two reasons:
  1. The base chord is a major chord A-C[sup]#[/sup]-E
  2. The G[sup]#[/sup] is 11 semitones above the root of the chord - this makes it a major or large 7th

so when we name it, we say A(major is implicit in this naming)[sup]Maj7[/sup](the quality of the 7th above the root)

as for 3:08

C[sup]#[/sup]m - G[sup]#[/sup]m[sub]/B[/sub] - A[sup]Maj7[/sup] - F[sup]#[/sup]m[sup]7[/sup]

ChordNotes
C[sup]#[/sup]mC[sup]#[/sup]-E-G[sup]#[/sup]
G[sup]#[/sup]m[sub]/D[sup]#[/sup][/sub]G[sup]#[/sup]-B-D[sup]#[/sup] with a D[sup]#[/sup] bass
EE-G[sup]#[/sup]-B
A[sup]Maj7[/sup]A-C[sup]#[/sup]-E-G[sup]#[/sup]
G[sup]#[/sup]m[sub]/B[/sub]G[sup]#[/sup]-B-D[sup]#[/sup]-with a B bass
F[sup]#[/sup]m[sup]7[sup]F[sup]#[/sup]-A-C[sup]#[/sup]-E
 
Last edited:
Yeah there is a g# in the second chord (was listening on a train lol), but everything else I said was right. Also, a more predictable standardised theory-style answer isn't "correcting" me. Aside from the second chord's g#, I was right.
 
whatever makes you feel good..... you got it wrong and yet you proclaim your perfect pitch for all to see as a badge of trust
 
Last edited:
Wow. Sorry bandcoach but you are just an arrogant douche. I missed one thing now you make it seem like I'm not to be trusted. Ever. I hope you have a great personal life cos no one will like you talking to people like that.
 
Actually, I thought you were the arrogant douche given what you said earlier when I tried to help you, and what you wrote above about music teachers giving by the book descriptions - those by the book descriptions actually stop the kind of mis-information you were peddling... - I ignored it but hey, I won't now,
 
Sorry for saying that to you man, but your posts replying to me in recent days haven't just been helpful; they've been passive aggressive and that pisses me off, no matter how good a musician you may or may not be. Whether or not theory-style answers are helpful (which they can be), saying that you're "correcting" me when my answer was also right (except the g# in the second chord) is downright rude. I'd rather not have this bickering over semantics spanning over threads, so I just hope that you'll accept my apology for calling you a douche, and also accept that there is always more than one right answer when it comes to creative problems, such as in music.
 
4,000+ post>>> 81 post. Sages who freely give there advice should not be argued with. Respect the coach (not saying you can't disagree, but his respect has been earned around these parts).
 
4,000+ post>>> 81 post. Sages who freely give there advice should not be argued with. Respect the coach (not saying you can't disagree, but his respect has been earned around these parts).

Yeah, I've already apologised for being rude, but that sort of elitist logic means nothing to me.

EDIT: By that I mean the logic that someone deserves respect just because they post a lot, regardless of any other factors. I don't mean bandcoach's logic.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I've already apologised for being rude, but that sort of elitist logic means nothing to me.

EDIT: By that I mean the logic that someone deserves respect just because they post a lot, regardless of any other factors. I don't mean bandcoach's logic.
Good enough. There's nothing elite about. There are many people around who have a lot of post, but one's level of respect is not derived from the number of post they have, to be clear, but the knowledge and information they provide. Some cats may not have a lot of posts but its clear that they are very knowledgeable about music, engineering, and/or the industry. In the case of BC his posts are reenforced by the knowledge he has been willing to share, and I'm sure u know this.
 
Back
Top