In some contexts I'd agree. In this one (G/A v Em7/A), the E helps support the A root, acoustically, so it makes that much difference - noticeable, but no difference to the overall functional sound of the chord. I'd think of the difference as comparable to including the 5th in a maj9 chord, or a dom9. Makes the chord a little more stable, fills it out a bit; doesn't change its identity. That's an academic argument really . Classically, a "suspension" is a note held over from a previous chord, creating a tension on the following chord, and a delayed resolution. AFAIK, if the note is either (a) not in the previous chord, or (b) doesn't resolve, then in that strict technical sense it's not a suspension (only one of those conditions needs to apply). It's a "non-chord tone", and there are various kinds of those in classical theory. In modern music of course, we use "sus" as shorthand for any chord which has a 2nd or 4th instead of the 3rd, regardless of either of those conditions. That's "common practice" in modern music and well understood. Sometimes it sounds fine unresolved, sometimes we feel it should resolve and it doesn't. Well, only if you feel inadequate . I'd also prefer to see "F/Bb" to "Bbmaj9sus2" - in fact I think you mean Bbmaj7sus2, seeing as 9 and 2 refer to the same note . Either way, F/Bb is better, because - assuming it's denoting Bb-F-A-C - it's clearer and shorter. Likewise "G/A" - absolutely fine. As for "A9sus4" and "Em7/A" - both equally good IMO; one is no shorter or neater than the other, and both specify the same notes. For some readers (I agree), Em7/A might be easier to make sense of.