when under a bass note there is a number, does it mean that if in the same measure, this note repeat itself, the chord will be in the same way the one before was? or it is back to root inversion?
That is non-conforming musical notation. People who are self taught and have never been to school make things up in their own code. This seldom happens because in classical.In popular music it happens all the time with people talking in code. Standard figured bass uses roman numerals for the chord with little numbers to indicate the inversion.
hello,I have a basic question about figured bass.when under a bass note there is a number, does it mean that if in the same measure, this note repeat itself, the chord will be in the same way the one before was? or it is back to root inversion?For example is the second "G" also in second inversion?
It is not true that standard figured bass uses Roman numerals etc. and that the above is "non-conforming" notation made up by "people who are self-taught". Nor is it someone's personally made up code. Roman numerals is one way it is taught or done, and frequently so.
While a student may be asked to use Roman numerals along with bass figures for analysis of harmony, I don't think the Roman numerals are meant to be part of the figured bass? Figured bass as a practical notation is very much an idea of the baroque era, but as far as I know the Roman numeral analysis started later. I don't have any text books to quote, but I've seen a number of lessons on figured bass without any Roman numerals used. The Roman numerals would also be redundant information, while bass figures seem to be designed as concisely as possible (shortening 63 to 6 and so forth).
The fact that a university uses a particular text, or even many universities, does not mean that the other conventions are wrong, or that it's something "made up" by someone. The example is perfectly valid.