Hi Urs, > Perfect example of "context”.
Exactly! > I, as a classical musician, will get confused if presented with namings > that don't follow the harmonic content (given the historical style of > the music). > That would be the same for Em-6 (or however you'd spell it out) as <e g > bis>. Yes. In most of the current chorded music I’m writing (i.e., musical theatre songs), the chord names are there for ease of sight-reading and/or comping by the pianist (e.g., at an audition). So simple trumps function every time. And all the MDs and musical theatre composers/arrangers I know concur. > The four double flats have been replaced by their enharmonically > exchanged pitches, so we're having only three flats left. > While someone might think that's easier to read I strongly oppose > because that totally spoils the structural context (the chord is simply > built through stacked thirds) and also the voice leading. For luxurious study, that’s my preference, too. :) For sight-reading, simple trumps function every time. Cheers, Kieren. ________________________________ Kieren MacMillan, composer ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user