Chords

I think that may be a "C, flat 9", rather than "C flat, 9".

Regardless, Cb9 is

Cb  Eb  Gb  B  Db

While C - flat 9 would be.

C E G Db.

I'd just transpose the thing to something more reasonable. 

Well, not Eb and F#.  F# and Gb are enharmonically the same.   Within a given key its different.  So it's the same tone, it's just a matter of how you talk about it for a given key.

Typically, if I'm playing in a key where the signature is sharps (G, D, A, E, etc) then I'll use "sharp."  If I'm in a key where the signature is flats (F, Bb, Eb, etc) then I'll refer to it as "flat."

So in Db major I'd say "Play the G flat."  While in G major I'd say "Play the F sharp."  Same note tonically, just by a name consistent with the context in which you find it.

That's why I think it's C, flat 9.

But C flat does exist.  Seven flats on the stave.

It will indeed improve your playing.  It's why I recommend it at every opportunity.

Here's a good starter

http://library.thinkquest.org/15413/theory/theory.htm

And here's one which I think is a little better.

http://www.8notes.com/theory/

Everything is based on scales, so if you want the best understanding of how things will apply to the fretboard, focus on that.

Hi guys 'n girls!
This is probably a question/statement for Jerome about flats/sharps... (don't know if I dare get in to a discussion on theory with the Jerome guru :-)

In my (swedish) book basic theory for guitar the explanation for why you choose to say flat or sharp (ex. F sharp or G flat) is that in a scale there can never be both a "full" note and a sharp/flat with the same name.

If for example the scale contains a standard F, there can't be a F# (or a Fb) in the same scale, it will then be called Gb (or E#) instead (same shit, different name :-).

And now some theory to enlighten you (you already know this Jerome):

If you build a major scale it's composed by stepping through the scale (the full scale is ALL notes A, A#/Bb, B, C, C#/Db, D, D#/Eb, E, F, F#/Gb, G, G#/Ab) by this order:

Root,  full step, full step, half step, full, full, full, half (and you are back to the root 1 octave higher)

If you use that and create for example a D major scale you get the notes:
D (root), E, F#, G, A, B, C#, D (back to root). To see this theory, look at the D string on your guitar, start with an open string (note D) and walk up the neck on that string by the steps above.

In the D major scale you have "jumped" the F and C notes and got F# and C#. There is already a G and a D in the scale so you can't use Gb and Db.

Now build a F major scale the same way and you get:
F (root), G, A, Bb, C, D, E, F

The first half note step goes from A (which you therefore already used) and you get a Bb, of course it's the same as A# BUT you can't use both A and A# in the same scale which instead in the F major scale give you a Bb.

Mostly as a hobby guitarist you don't now (or don't care) what scale the songs are built of, but the creator probably knew the theory and give your brain some problems by using F# in one song and Gb in the next...

If you understood anything of this jidderich you can just as easily build a minor scale. Just learn the note steps: full, half, full, full, half, full, full and use it from your root (the root gives the scale it's name)

Don't now if this confused or explained...

/Missen

I don't know what came first, the guitar as it looks today or the piano (or predecessors like chembalo etc). On a piano it's much easier to see the logics in the scales and progressions knowing that the whites are standards and the blacks are flat/sharp, left is low and right is high.