\version "2.18.0"
chExceptionMusic = {
%<c g>1-\markup { \super "5" }
%<c g>1-\markup { \super "5" }
%<c g>1-\markup { "5" }
<c g>1-\markup { "5" }
}
chExceptions = #(append
(sequential-music-to-chord-exceptions
chExceptionMusic #t)
ignatzekExceptions)
harmonies = \chordmode {
\set chordNameExceptions = #chExceptions
c1 c1^3 g^3 c:m c:sus4 c1:/f
}
<<
\new ChordNames {
\set chordChanges = ##t
\harmonies
}
\new Staff {
\relative c' { \harmonies }
\break
}
>>
On 17.09.2015 09:27, 70147pers...@telia.com wrote:
First I will declare, that I am not 100 percent sure this is a bug,
but friends of mine, musicians, say it probably is. Also, as I am not
an expert, I have tried to learn by searching on among others Wikipedia.
It is about chords, a few of them. It started when I should clean
write a score from a manuscript. In one measure there were noted two
chords, C5 and C. Obviously not the same, as they stood just beside of
each other. A search on Wikipedia also told me, and this was also
confirmed, the author's intention, that C5 means C(no 3), hence <c g>,
while the chord C means <c e g>. But LilyPond treats these two the
same and produces the same notes. This is also clearly said e.g. in
Appendices A.1 and A.2 of Notation Reference, as well as in the text
part. However even if possibly a correct procedure, is it a correct
practise?
Another such discrepancy is about Csus, which Wikipedia (and my
friends) says is equivalent to Csus4, hence <c f g>. But LilyPond
produces <c g>, hence what should come from the notation C5 as in the
previous paragraph.
So, what is the truth?
Kaj
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user