On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
> Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>>> <c 3 5>
>>
>> I like this
>>
>>> c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
>>
>> I like this too.
>
> It is not clear to me how this would extend to
>
> \chordmode {
> c1:7+ c:5+.3- c:3-.5-.7-
> }
\relative c' {
c1\chord #'(1 3 5 7+)
c\chord #'(1 3- 5+)
c\chord #'(1 3- 5- 7-)
}
>
> \chordmode {
> c1:sus c:sus2 c:sus4 c:5.4^3
> }
\relative c' {
c1\chord #'(1 4 5)
c\chord #'(1 2 5)
c\chord #'(1 4 5)
c\chord #'(1 4 5)
}
Or, when we define \sus4 to be equivalent to \chord #'(1 4 5), etc.,
\relative c' {
c1\sus4
c1\sus2
c1\sus4
c1\sus4
}
>
> \chordmode {
> c1 c/g c/+g
> }
\relative c' {
c1\chord
c1\chord #'(5 1 3)
c1\chord #'(5 1 3 5)
}
Or one could define \sixFour or \inversionTwo to be \chord #'(3 5 1)
I don't know what shortcut one could do for an added bass, because they can
be any pitch.
>
> c:dim7^5
c\chord #'(1 3 7--)
which could be defined as
c\dimSevenNoFive
>
> and similar. It's nice, but a single mode where the full power of
> voicing _and_ chords is available similarly convenient would be
> preferable to me. Making chordmode and musicmode less compatible by
> extending them in disparate ways is just not good strategy.
>
I understood this proposal as one that would involve eliminating \chordmode,
and replacing it with \chord #'() as part of a regular music stream. That's
what I was responding to. If we're talking about keeping chordmode, with
another syntax for note mode, I wouldn't be in favor of that.
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
