334353, or possibly xx4353?
Thanks!
According to the Jamplay Guitar Chord Finder, that is a G♭7(♭9, omit 5).
I admit I would have no clue what that means if I was given just the name. It’s definitely a non-standard chord.
G C F# Bb E G
I’m a keyboardist. Context matters, but it looks like C7#11 to me (with a G in the bass.)
Here’s one diagram showing my interpretation of the chord as a valid possibility. But, like I said, context matters. Where are you encountering this chord, and what are the chords around it? If you just take the xx4353 tab, it can also be a Gb7b9 chord (as noted before). But if you add the C on the A string, that throws in a complication to that interpretation. And more so of you double the G (the b9, in that interpretation.)
I’m assuming that the numbers are to be read left to right from lowest to highest string.
Also, due to chord inversions, a chord can be looked at multiple ways. For example, CEG is usually a C major chord, but if there’s another instrument playing an A in the bass, then the same notes will form part of an inverted A minor Seventh chord. Or it could just be an inverted chord with the bass note playing a note other than the tonic. For example GCE would still generally be a C major chord, even though it is using the fifth (G) as the lowest note.
xx4353 is the following notes: 1, b2, 3, b7 and so can be read as a Seventh flat nine chord (listen, although is played in key of C), but lacking its 5th. The lowest note is F#/Gb, so it would be a F#7b9 or a Gb7b9.
334353 is the following notes: 1, m3, 4, 6, 7. It doesn’t easily form a known chord. However, one could treat it as an inversion of another chord. If one considers that the note played on the fifth string is the tonic, instead of the sixth string, then it has the following notes: 1, 3, #4, 5, b7. This fits much better. It could now be understood as an Augmented eleventh chord (listen), but lacking a ninth, or, more accurately, a seventh sharp eleventh chord (listen n/a). Since the tonic would be a C, in this case, it would be a Caug11 or C7aug11.
Notation-wise, it’s inadvisable to use the word “augmented” to indicate what I think you mean as a “sharp 11”, because augmented refers to a raised fifth; a substitution of the raised 5th in place of the perfect 5th in a major triad.
That’s not the case - any note can be augmented.
Maybe I’m not reading tab like I used to but playing 334353 sounds approximately like shit - discordant for sure. However, if I flip it - 353433 - you got your basic G7. That is to say, has the OP misread a tabulature somewhere?
This is not a new argument. I was part of a group of music preparation dudes in the 1970’s in Hollywood, and subjects like this were often discussed, sometimes rather heatedly. Several of us developed, independently, a notation system that we (Roemer, et al) felt was least confusing and un-ambiguous. You can find my system on an estimated 25,000 lead sheets from my copy shop alone filed in the US Copyright Office as well as many orchestrations from the period.
No one is saying that you can’t augment (or raise) a pitch, but the best term to use for notation is “sharp” or “flat” because these terms denote a single pitch raised or lowered, not a chord. While it is possible augment or diminish a pitch, those terms can cause confusion since they are properly and primarily used to refer to chord structure such as an Augmented or Diminished triad.
If I saw “Caug9” on a chord chart, I would play C E G# Bb D, because the 9 implies the dominant 7th (if you don’t want that, you should say “add 9” instead).
If I saw “C(aug9)”, I would assume the “aug” was probably there to raise the 9th, but much better would be “C7(#9)”. There the “7” does double duty, keeping the # from looking like “C#”, but also indicating the dominant 7th. If you wanted to describe C E G D# (no 7th), this would be a C (triad) with an added tone of a sharp 9. Notate this as “C(add #9).”
“Add” implies no other tones than the one(s) described, and avoids ambiguity.
^That is the notational system I am used to, as well.
“Augmented eleventh” is a standard way of describing this chord, such as here on Wikipedia or here. I’d agree that it does lead to the possibility of confusion, though, for the reasons you’ve stated. Caug with an eleventh chord (1, 2, 3, 4, #5, b7) is rather discordant, so it probably doesn’t come up very often.
I might use C(aug11) for a C11 chord (with second and diminished seventh) which has the 11th augmented, Caug(11) for a Caug chord plus an eleventh (with second and diminished seventh), Caug(add 11) for Caug plus an eleventh (without second and diminished seventh), and C(add #11) for a C major chord with added sharpened eleventh (without second and diminished seventh).
Having just played both versions of this chord myself, I’d say I think you’re on to something. It’s got to be backwards in the OP.
Actually, now that I think of it, that’s true, too. In notation, I always see it notated as a #11, but, in conversation, I have heard it referred to as an “augmented 11,” too. My old jazz piano teacher, in one of his first lessons to me, taught me a cliche jazz ending that landed on a C13#11, and referred to it as an augmented 11, but notated it as a #11.
Maybe it’s the jazz inside me, but it sounds fine to my ears. Not a “vanilla” chord, but nothing totally whacked-out, either. That said, because of my jazz teacher, I do love my extended chords with a #11, so I’m used to the sound. You can call it a “lydian dominant” chord if you wanted to.
I’m not necessarily saying the original sounds terrible. It’s just that if you read the notes one way, you get this really strange extended chord that prompts arguments about what it’s called, and if you read it the other way, you get a regular old G7. One way seems more likely to me, that’s all.
Sure. But, on the other hand, I’m wondering if someone would be asking us about a barred G7 chord. That seems like a chord any guitar player would be familiar with.
Furthermore, when the lowest note of a chord is not the chord’s tonic note, then this is also usually indicated with a slash symbol after the chord, followed by the name of the lowest note. A simple example would be C/G, meaning a C major chord with a G as the lowest note. Such chords vastly expand the chord palette, as they don’t necessarily need to be notes that are part of the original chord.
In addition to the name of the lowest note, I usually also write the note number in relation to the chord, as it helps to better understand what’s going on musically. I use Roman numerals to keep it distinct (bII, II, mIII, III etc). So, to use the C/G example again, I would write C/G(V).
I’ve changed my mind on the description of the “334353” chord. Since it doesn’t have a ninth, I think it shouldn’t be considered as akin to an augmented eleventh chord. Instead, I think it’s better seen as a seventh chord with an added sharpened eleventh note, so a C7(add #11).
With the extra information about the lowest note of the chord, I would now notate the “334353” chord as a C7(add #11)/G(V).
It’s ok to voice without the 9th. I’d still call it a C7#11. When playing 11 and 13 chords, all you really need is the 3, 7, and the 11 or 13. It’s rare that I would voice every single extension on the piano. That would be muddy most of the time.
To me, that is a Chord I Don’t Play, Unless I Don’t Realize I am Playing it in Passing During Some Groove I am Trying to Figure Out™. With a flatted 9th, of course 
I tell ya, I know a bunch of those chords
Interesting. It doesn’t sound that bad. And it just ACHES to resolve to F Major.
5 out the 6 notes are in C7. The last note is the tritone of C: F#
So, in the key of F Major we have the dominant seventh chord superimposed on top of the tritone substitution chord*. That’s why it works: the notes E and Bb are the third and flat seventh of C7, at the same time they are the flat seventh and the third of F#7.
*For those that don’t know what Tritone Substitution is, look it up… you’ll learn something very useful.