can someone tab out to me, what an inverted C and Dm are?


i am a retard, and dont quite get it.

Inversions are pretty hard to play on guitar, it's just a question of how you voice it and which string you start on. C is one of the few chord shapes that kinda "spells out" the chord, in that the strings (from A to B strings; x 3 2 0 1 x) go: C E G C.

An inversion is when you start the chord on a note other than the tonic (in this example C). So if you strum starting on the D string, it'll go E G C rather than C E G.

I think you could do a Dm inversion like this: (1 x 0 2 3 1), but it's a bit of a stretch. I'm not sure with the other chords, because I always just work to the assumption than I'll have a bass player.

hmmm.. i tried those.
they didn't sound right.

i mean, the regular C and Dm chords sound close, but not exact. and the inversions you gave.. weren't right either. or maybe i'm playing them wrong?

OR this could just be a crappy tab. it's the only tab though.. there's nothing to compare it to.. so i dont know.

It's kinda tricky because usually you're not playing inversions of chords on guitar. Normally the bass guitar does the work for you.

what are they?
the ceg of C would be made to gec?
low to high
?

Nah.

Tonic = C E G
1st inversion = E G C
2nd inversion = G C E

I think...

inversions are confusing on geetars on account of the repetition of notes.

and they're mostly only important when it comes to good voice leading, which is practically a non-existent concept when it comes to geetar chords.

There's exceptions though. If you play a power chord starting on the fifth instead of the tonic, it sounds (and is) completely different.

true.. maybe it's more noticeable with dyads (is that the word?) considering the only thing they have to define them is their interval which gets completely changed.

Probably. But I think there is a clear difference with triads too, maybe not quite as clear, but if you try maybe arpeggiating the chords starting on different notes the difference in effect is more noticeable. It is, however, only really "important" in the context of other chords. Another way you can hear it is by including the 7th. Then it really will sounds different.

you know.. doesn't it boil back to laziness? kinda like with the way figured bass works?

an E minor omitting the fifth adding a minor 6th or C major in 1st inversion. I know what's easier..

Well, Em b6 and Cmaj7 are basically the same notes in a different order. Stick a D in there as well and you've got Em7b6 (Emb13?), Cmaj9, and Gadd11/13. Which I think we all want.

Basically what I'm saying here is that inversions/bass guitars become more important the more ambiguous the chords are.

Also all the best chords are based on fifths or sevenths rather than thirds, IMO.

there's lots of room for ambiguity, i think it is pretty important though to establish tonality by using the tonic position chords on the stronger beats.. however that can be interpretted..

I'm a slut for walking bass though so i love hearing it gliding through the 3rd and 5th of fairly straightup triad based music. but it sounds fucking gross to start or end on either of those notes in the bass..

my fave chords are mostly tone clusters or anything with a minor 2nd in it

which are probably technically 7th chords inverted with whatever note removed so it's some sort of 4th chord with a 2nd or 3rd lurking inbetween.

Well no, the thing about inversions means that a chord has a unique character, so that even if it has the same/very similar notes to another chord, it'll still be different. If you've got the notes A B D E, you can pretty much play any of those notes on the bass, and have a completely different thing going on. Bands like funeral for a friend use this kind of stuff a lot.

I've only started using chords again quite recently, and it's a whole lot more interesting than I remembered.