Here is a link to support my "book"-
http://www.free-online-piano-lessons.com/scale-tone-chords.html

I think it is redundant to lable a II or III scale tone chord as minor.
If someone says a tune is I,VI,II,V I'd say the 6 and 2 are minor unless labled otherwise.
I also think that if a straight D chord pops up in a key of C tune you've changed keys.So in the II,V turn around that was mentioned I'd need to have the II labled M.

Edited: Mark and I posted at the same time. So I posted before I read his link. That link is indeed talking about "scale tone chords;" that is, chords made marching up the degrees of the scale and using only scale notes (which would actually make the degree 7 chord diminished, not minor as I mistakenly said above). This is all well and good, but that link is not discussing any number system of chord notation. I think most number systems do not assume they will be read as "scale tone chords." So they do not leave this to chance, and always specify whether the chord is major, minor, diminished, etc. So again, it's all semantics and we are both right. In speaking of scale tone chords, each one is understood to be major, minor or diminished. But in most standard number system notation, this is not assumed, but is clearly specified somehow.

[This message was edited by David Doggett on 01 December 2006 at 08:22 AM.]

But, when it comes down to it, the old standard ways of music theory and nomenclature are pretty much the way to go. It would be really great to see Music Theory classes popping up in high schools again. In my MT classes, we didn't do much, but I took all the workbooks (something like 12 or 15 of them) and did them all on my own time. Class time was just for hanging out with the under-achievers.

[This message was edited by Mike Neer on 01 December 2006 at 09:33 AM.]

What's The Ventures, ah-ah!?? Just kidding, I know you were referring to that Herb. I wonder if The Ventures had heard Johnny Smith's version instead of Chet's, had they ever recorded it.