Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum How to play Gm/F?

I am looking at a lead sheet in G minor, one Chord indication is Gm/F.

Gm = G- Bb -D => there is no F in the G minor Chord so it can't be an inversion, can it?
Should I play an F together with the Chord with the RH?

Thanks

It's called a slash chord. Gm with an F in the bass. For some odd reason the LH/RH is inverted in slash chords. What's indicated on the left is played with the right hand and what's indicated on the right is played with the left. I'd play Gm/F as LH: F and D RH: G Bb D (or whatever inversion you fancy).

I started with classical training, and learned letter name notation afterward. I first thought that slash chords meant inversions. So I thought that first inversion Gm is written as Gm/B, and second inversion Gm was written as Gm/D. It is true that they are, but the opposite is not true --- the slash chord does not "mean" an inversion. The slash chord simply tells you which note is on the bottom.

So you can have a chord which contains G, Bb, and D, but it has F on the bottom for whatever reason. That's what this is. One reason you might have it is if you have a pedal tone F.

Sometimes meaning of the chord is ambiguous. Especially in jazz notation. Gm could mean Gm7, Gm9, Gm11 and so on. This time Gm/F is third inversion of Gm7 chord. And you are allowed to add 9, 11, do some alterations which doesn't change role of this chord.

I just remembered hearing that if the 7 is in the bass, it's not put in the chord name. Thanks.

Try reading the slash (/) as "over" so it's Gm (right hand) "over" F (left hand) [but how you apportion the notes is up to you].

Ah . . . NO.

While I have seen this as a growing opinion on this, as well as the Non-Classical Pianist Forum, it is not safe to assert that the symbol Gm could mean anything other than the notes G and Bb and D. All the chords you cite have very specific colors, and equally specific circumstances where they will work well.

Here is the confusing part: particularly in jazz improvisation, the player is free to spontaneously “extend” chords, which typically means adding some sort of seventh, or ninth, or eleventh, or thirteenth. Depending upon the jazz player’s skill, sometimes that works brilliantly, and oftentimes not so much. In any event, the spontaneous elaboration does not in any way indicate that the composer’s base chord needs to be altered, or can be freely extended. The extension cannot be done at random, or capriciously, and be successful. It takes advanced skill and experience on the part of the improviser to know when certain flavors of extension or alteration actually work.

So, technically, a Gm/F is, as KeyString originally stated, a G minor triad that happens to have an F in the bass at that point in time. That is what the composer or the arranger intends – plain and simple. It MIGHT also be FUNCTIONING as a Gm7 in third inversion, but that requires an analysis, and depends upon the surrounding harmonies.

Ed

Took the words right out of my mouth. Saying "G minor over F" will help you keep it straight as to which hand is which.

There are 2 types of slash chords. The ones where the bass note is in the chord are called "inversions" which could lead to the confusion. The other type is called a "hybrid" and it's an easier way to explain a complex chord. This is of the second type.

Either way, you play them the same.

Because it is not supposed to be written that way. The slash is supposed to be under the RH chord, like this:

Gm
--
F

Things get screwed up because of typing. And it's a way of saying play a Gm7 chord but inverted. It shows that the F is in the bass.

Typical example:

Gm, Gm/F, Ebmaj7

Thank you!

So if I understood correctly the chord progression should be played like that:
1 Gm G Bb D
2 Gm/F F Bb D
3 Eb Eb G Bb
4 Eb/D D G Bb
5 Cm C Eb G

In Gm/F the "G root" should be replaced by an "F root" and same in Eb/D the "Eb root" should replaced by a "D root"

No. The slash note is in addition to the other notes in the chord, not a replacement for them. You are perhaps confusing "root" with "lowest note played."

To correct what you've written: Add G to your line #2, anywhere higher than the F. Add Eb to your line #4, anywhere higher than the D.

Nope . . . (but Yes to what PianoStudent88 just posted.)

Gm = G Bb D

Gm/F = G Bb D with an F as the lowest note

Eb = Eb G Bb

Eb/D = Eb G Bb with a D as the lowest note

Cm = C Eb G

Cm/D = C Eb G with a D as the lowest note

[Chord Name] / [Note Name] = [All the notes of the triad or chord] sitting above the [Note Name in the bass].

Just conceptually, the sequence you've got is indicating a moving bass line, more than any change in harmony. What you've got is a G minor, moving to Eb major, to C minor, and the composer/arranger wants the bass line to move step wise underneath those chord changes. I I were playing that with a bass player, I'd ignore what's after the slash, but for solo piano, the moving bass line is important. You may not even need to play the whole chord each time. In other words, play G minor, then just an F in the bass, then Eb major, and then just D in the bass. This would bring out what I'm guessing is the intent.

I stuck that progression in as an example of where I would use it.

Showing the same thing, but with a longer progression, assuming Bb as a possible key:

Bb, Bb/A, Gm, Gm/F, Ebmaj7

This is just an example. It is essentially saying Bb, Bbmaj7, Gm, Gm7, Ebmaj7, but the slashes indicate two things.

1) The “7” is in the bass.
2) Most likely we don’t want to also put the “7” elsewhere because the “voicing” is better.


I would do the same thing. Playing those slashed bass notes on piano with a bass player is going to step all over the bass, and it produces mud.

I think you are right on target.

I think you nailed it!





Thanks!!

The piece:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzHiD3FRXQJARmVfcGw3ZXgxTzQ

I probably should have started with that.

You are Albinoni and I claim my £5.

You are a winner :-) Even if apparently the credit should not be entirely given to Albinoni but Giazotto



For some unknown reasons Giazotto who made this piece famous to the world would have initially given the credit to Albinoni when it was in reality mostly his own work.

Anyway, Giazotto or Albinoni (or the arranger) are giving me a tough time right now with their Chords ;-) I found the progression quite difficult.

I am puzzle about the Abm and Adim7. It seems a bit tough to do these two Chords in one mesure.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzHiD3FRXQJARmVfcGw3ZXgxTzQ

Does it makes sense for rest of you? Is it just (much) practice needed on my side.

Thanks!

That's not Abm. It's Amb5, read "A minor, flat 5". It means take an A minor chord (A C E) and flat the fifth (A C Eb). Don't play the Am (that's just a starting point for figuring out the notes). Just play the end result Amb5 (A C Eb). This is a diminished triad. So then for Adim7 you just add the diminished seventh (Gb). So the measure is Amb5 (A C Eb) followed by Adim7 (A C Eb Gb).

- I claim the reward, not for tune recognition, but for outing Albinoni who's posting here as jjo. How else could he have divined Albi's intentions? (I didn't know about Giazotto - interesting. I suppose we'll never know the truth.)

btw, a few corrections are needed in your chart

12: Gm/Bb
19: Gm/Bb to Cm (arguably Cm6)
21: first melody note A natural (not flat)

- just to say, I think you're going about this in exactly the right way. I'm not a teacher but if I were, this is what I would encourage before trying to get to grips with structure and generalities. Your next effort will be that much easier. If possible do some more work on charts in a similar key so that you know how to get to these chords quickly before branching out into other keys.

Finally, or maybe as soon as you feel you're getting a grip, take a closer look at the geometry of chords generally so that you can apply the rules without further reference.



- yes, and that's all that's required!