Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > The problem with this approach is that
> > you lose everything that tells you what the chord is--its identifier, its
> > inversion, the additions, and subtractions.
>
> No, the chord is reduced to its essence: a list of pitches. From this
> list it should be possible reconstruct the name. The only thing that
> perhaps should be stored as an extra is the bottom pitch (the
> inversion pitch).
Storing the bass note as an extra when it is not the tonic is an
absolut necessity. Given a number of notes there is no way to guess
what the tonic really is.
Using a number of notes for representing chords might be too limiting
even if the bass note is separately stored. I can't think of a case
where I would really care, but I can imagine that someone would.
> > information doesn't get lost. Ideally, the Simultaneous_music object would
> > have a chord object inside of it so that all of that info doesn't get lost
> > (and would keep the ugliness factor or going through the back door down).
>
> I would disagree on this one: Simultaneous_music per se has nothing to
> do with chords as harmonic devices. I do not want to mix those.
> Remember that Simultaneous_music are used at a lot of places where
> Chords don't make sense.
It seems to me that it is you who are mixing it.
--
David Kågedal
