Sus2 doesn't exist?

Question

On this stack post answer: Chord naming conventions: add2 versus add9

And on this website: https://www.brendanpauljacobs.com/spelling.htm

The writers imply that sus2 chords actually do not exist. There is another example on this page (around figure 5.33)

https://www.earmaster.com/music-theory-online/ch05/chapter-5-4.html

that says labelling a sus chord means it replaces the note immediately below it, therefore also making sus2 chords invalid (or at least rare as they no longer mean suspend the 3rd in this definition). The last example even goes on to imply sus9 is a real thing.

Which definition of sus is most accurate?

1. sus2 and sus4 exist but nothing else.

2. sus4 is the only valid sus

3. sus replaces the tone below, so sus9 is valid too

Answer 1

Sus is short for suspended. The 3rd of a chord - major or minor - isn't there any more. It has been replaced (usually temporarily) by either the 2nd or the 4th from the scale using the same root note. Thus - C major = CEG. C minor = CE♭G. Csus2 =CDG and Csus4 = CFG.

There is actually the little-known fact that suspensions resolve downwards, which technically precludes 'sus 2' from being a suspension! It's really a retardation - which should resolve upwards. Thus sus 2 really should be ret 2, but I guess there's little need for that amount of accuracy! At which point, we'd only need sus and ret - the chord would be obvious from that!

Sus 9 is a new one on me. Never played it, or seen it written. Dominant 9, yes - C E G B♭ D. C maj 9, yes - C E G B D. Cm9, yes - C E♭ G B♭ D. C add9, yes - C E G D. But C sus9 seems to be pointless, and doesn't actually describe anything.

So, no.2 is strictly the only true fact. But - given its common usage, C sus2 has weedled its way into our lives to become accepted. I cannot see any other sus being useful or valid.

Answer 2

The chord C-D-G exists and is very common, the only problem is what name to give it.
You can call it anything you like as long as the musicians who read your charts understand what you mean.

• 'Csus2' is normally instantly recognized (even though it's technically not a suspension).
• 'C2' is gaining in popularity (as is its counterpart 'C4').
• 'Csus9' would be likely to confuse people.
• Other contributors here have suggested 'Cret2', but that would really confuse people.

If there's a third in the chord as well, then you need a different notation: 'Cadd2' or 'Cadd9' depending on which you prefer.

Answer 3

There is certainly a thing where the 3rd of a triad-based chord is replaced by the 2nd. In traditional harmony it would be expected to resolve, and distinction was made between a suspension and a retardation. Today it might well not do so.

Some people are insistent it should be named as 'sus9'. They cite a 'rule' that chord names have no business trying to describe voicing, and that the 'pile of 3rds' structure is sacrosanct (though they don't seem to mind 'sus4'). However usage finds 'sus2' useful as well as 'sus9'. (And don't confuse them with 'add2' and 'add9', where the 3rd is added to, not replaced.)

Answer 4

Sus2 does indeed exist. It's actually quite new.

Answer 5

I think you misinterpreted the last example you linked - I don't think there's anything about 9 being a suspension.

sus9 is a very popular chord - it's a suspended chord with a dominant 7th and 9th. Gsus9 would be G C D F A. Since D does not contribute to the sound, it's usually played as G C F A, which is often notated as F/G.

It sounds really nice when you have a cadence and want to finish on a dominant, but "ligher". Andrew Lloyd Webber uses it in half of his songs... it's the repeated chord in "Mr Mistoffelees", for example.

From the practical perspective, the idea of the sus chord can be distilled to "a major or dominant chord constructed so that the natural 4th is not a dissonance". It does not matter whether the third is somewhere in the chord, or whether you add natural 2 or not.

Actually, calling it a suspension or retardation is silly, since in modern music the sound does not resolve... so actually it's neither.

Half of the problems with the question and its answers is that people are mixing historical, prescriptive harmony of the early 19th century and modern-ish chord notation. Both are interesting and worth knowing, but the usual approach of applying the first to explain the latter does not work.

Addendum (after reading other answers and comments)

In the classical theory, suspensions are DEFINED by the fact that they resolve. If a bar begins with a C/G chord and then continues with G and ends with C, then the first chord is not "C" (even though it looks like C), but rather "G with suspended 3 and 5" or "G with C instead of B and E instead of D".

Which is why if someone claims to use "the real, classic music theory" in the context of a single chord, they are just being pretentious.

In modern music on the other hand - sus chords seldom, if ever, resolve. "Resolving" sus to major gives a very distinct "medieval", "church-like" sound (and begs for sus4 -> sus2 -> major). So yes, the name "sus" might come from the original classic idea of "suspending", but nowadays it's just a historical foot note.

So, what's the point of sus chords? Currently, there's no single music theory that works across genres and "explains stuff". It's mostly hand-waving and acting smug. But if you just take the common part of the "modern" theory and practice (on comping instruments, like piano and guitar), you might picture it like this:

Generally when we play a major or a dominant chord, ALL the sounds from the relevant major scale sound will "work well", except for the fourth (eleventh). In practice, when a pianist sees a C major chord and needs to play the chord with the left hand, they use multiple voicings: C-E-G, C-E-B, E-G-A-D (assuming the bassist is playing C), E-A-D, B-D-E-G... they all "work" for modern ears under most circumstances. There's just one note that would not work in the left hand: F.

It's the same for C7: default piano voicings include C-E-Bb, Bb-D-E-A, E-A-Bb-D. There's just one note from the C mixolydian that doesn't quite work with the C7 chord: F, the fourth note of the scale.

This is why you will generally not find 11 chords in the wild. When 11 is mentioned, it is usualy altered (#11 is nice).

A "sus" chord is a chord with the third removed (usually) or placed so that it doesn't clash with the fourth/eleventh (for example - high above). It has the interesting property of working like a dominant ("suspends" the tonic), but it is cononant with every note of the scale.

If you take this perspective, sus2 is not interesting... you can use 2 freely anyway, with any C major chord, including sus4. sus4 means: "we removed the source of dissonance from this chord, feel free to play any note of the scale over it".

Answer 6

Many combinations of tones can be notated in a variety of ways, some of which may be easier or harder to perform, and some of which may be easier or harder to analyze. Ideally, music will be notated in a manner which is both easy to perform and also easy to analyze, but sometimes it's not possible to satisfy both goals at once.

Notations like "sus2" are often used in ways which may impede analysis because they don't fit rules of harmony, but are instead designed to be more easily sightread than other notations which may be more "accurate", but would also be more complicated. If someone at a keyboard is sight-reading a song sheet, and some combination of the notes C-D-G should occur at a certain time, the notation "Csus2" is more likely to result in that happening than many other notations would be. Song sheets in keys with many sharps and flats often have chords which are nonsensical from a theory perspective for this reason, but that doesn't make them "wrong". From a theory perspective, the iv chord of Cb major would be Fb minor (Fb Abb Cb) but someone who encountered Fbm while sight reading a chord sheet would be less likely to play the correct notes, without undue hesitation, than someone who encountered Em.