subject:"Re\: Chords and what they mean"

Marc Hohl  writes:

> Am 20.09.2015 um 09:58 schrieb BB:
> [...]
>>> The question is more like:  if you saw Csus, would you know how to
>>> interpret it musically?
>>> Or would you be stuck in your tracks wondering, "is this a sus2, sus4,
>>> both?  something else?"
>>
>> c:sus is working correctly getting root and 5, but indeed is an
>> "unconventional" expression to get a C5 ...
>
> In my experience, some musicians are not aware that there is something
> like sus2. Moreover (at least in the sheets I work with) the sus4 is
> much more common, so writing sus instead of sus4 is more often than
> not a mixture of lazyness ("I omit the 4 as anyone knows that I mean
> sus4")
> and a lack of knowledge.
>
> Interpreting c:sus as root and 5 feels strange IMHO.

The rule I am using in my current patch (just writing up the
documentation) is that c:sus will add a 4 if no step 2 or step 4 is
added afterwards (step 2 can be 2+ or 2- as well as just 2).

An unrelated issue is c:5 behavior.  The changes in that will mean that
c:5.30 now has to be written as c:3.5.30.  I lean towards admitting the
A.A.A. (American Accordionists' Association)'s convention of using M as
a shorthand for plain "major" so that c:M.30 would be the same as
c:3.5.30 (cf
,
scroll down to scanned page from the A.A.A.).

Naturally, introducing the chord modifiers Б, М and У would also be a
possibility not likely to cause confusion (well, М almost looks like M
which makes it a bit difficult to interpret in juxtaposition with the
A.A.A. major indication, but then the rest of the chord symbols is also
going to be in Cyrillic letters in any music employing М).

But most of that is not currently an issue.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

On 20.09.2015 03:30, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:

 ...

> I suppose that this is because some people (and Lilypond) think that
> C:sus2 is equally as valid or usual interpretation of "sus", and

May be I misundertand this? c:sus2 works with Lilypond and IS a valid
chord often used in pop/rock, not so frequently used in jazz? May be I
am wrong.

Of course sus2 is used.

The question is more like:  if you saw Csus, would you know how to 
interpret it musically?
Or would you be stuck in your tracks wondering, "is this a sus2, sus4, 
both?  something else?"

c:sus is working correctly getting root and 5, but indeed is an 
"unconventional" expression to get a C5 ...

I tend to think that the sus implies 4, unless otherwise noted.

Why? Why not 2 or 3 or 5 or 6 or 7? I disagree!

But, now that I understand it a little better, I don't have any issue 
with the way lilypond is organized regarding sus and the input syntax.
Although adding the powerchords to the chord symbol exceptions seems 
like it might unconfuse many people who are trying to write these 
chord symbols.

Rereading the chord example I found the shown line to be wrong, as you 
first suspend the 3 with sus but add a 3 afterwards and so you will 
really get a C chord.
The line with c:1.4.2 is wrong as well. I add a reversed and extended 
test version - please check yourself

\version "2.19.25"

#(set-global-staff-size 30)

chordtest = \chordmode {

c:sus %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C

c:sus3 % power chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C

c:sus5 %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C

c:1.4.5 % equal to:

c:sus4

c:1.5.2 % equal to:

c:sus2

c:sus3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C

c:5.3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C

c:5.3+ % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C, 3+ is 
written as e# c:sus6

c:sus7

:sus

}

<< \context ChordNames \chordtest

\context Voice \chordtest

>>

:sus will intelligently be ignored. From a standpoint of logic Lilypond 
works perfect with c:sus7and c:7 sus, even as this is not a conventional 
handling of chord extension. Check youself if you would call one or 
another wrong ...

The only problem I see is naming the chords with the sus
correctly. This
happens with c:sus5, c:sus3 and c:sus as Lilypond calls it C
instead of
C5.

There is a little confusion in my mind about what you want, exactly.

That was only just my statement to and a check of to the naming 
convention of Liypond. In a process of software development one would 
call it "debugging" ...

I get Lilypond as ist is and have to use it as it is.

Using software means smart handling the chaos and I loved it in my 
professional career.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Frauke Jurgensen

Speaking as a theorist here: while there are automatic chord analysis
functions in many notation programs, in my experience, they are all not yet
sufficiently aware of context (upon which a harmonic analysis is heavily
dependent) and analysis style. It's quite easy to label chords as to the
pure vertical content, but such labeling is going to be meaningless without
the context. Others have gone into the problem of assuming enharmonic
equivalence and labeling  as Em#5, so I won't, but I'll add that if
the G is the bottom note, then in much of the music I deal with, you can
safely assume that the C and E do not have harmonic function and are
ornamental notes, or that the entire simultaneity is of a decorative rather
than functional nature. Explaining functional harmony to a computer is a
bit more difficult than labeling the content of a simultaneity. There are
various approaches in computational musicology, and I'd be happy to find
some links if people are sufficiently interested.

As for the 15th century, while chordal analysis in the post-Rameau,
functional sense is a bit silly, there's quite a lot of mileage to be found
in examining successions of simultaneities. It's my special field, as a
matter of fact...the usual software to help with analysis of this sort is
Humdrum or music21. I don't know how many of the other people involved with
those are in this group, but since a bunch of them use LilyPond, they may
yet wander into this thread!

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:39 PM, BB  wrote:

> Can you really feed some notes to Lilypond and it tells you the name of
> the chord? A kind of reverse chord finder? I have not found in the manual.
>
> Is'nt the composer the person to define the desired sound in defining
> notes and chord colours?
>
> Again: There is not just one single name for an essamble of more than
> three notes. And even with three notes there are inversions possible. A c
> chord usually is , with c the lowest note and g the highest. What's
> with ? It is  Em#5 or C/E - you have the choice. And  is C/G
> or Em#5/G. Now do the same with 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ... note chords.
>
>
> On 18.09.2015 09:10, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:
>
> I tried to make clear that there is not just a single correct name for a
> chord. That is only true for the simplest chords of our simple original folk
>
> When someone enters a set of notes and asks LilyPond to print the chord
> name, there's such a thing as a wrong answer, even if there may also be
> more than one answer you would call correct.  LilyPond has to print
> something and it would be preferable that it prints one of the correct
> answers.  What rules should LilyPond follow to determine what it prints?
>
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing 
> listlilypond-user@gnu.orghttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: Chords and what they mean

Blöchl Bernhard  writes:

> I think the proper way for reaching your proposed Lilypond redesign is
> to pay a developer ...

Shrug.  Indirectly.  I'll be submitting a patch to our issue tracker
today, so this change of input syntax will likely appear in a week or
two in development versions.

But the amount of people supporting me regularly for working on LilyPond
has gone down significantly in the last two years so I am no longer able
to live from it.  As a consequence, it's quite likely that I'll try
finding a more regularly paying job within the next half year and stop
working on LilyPond altogether.

There are still a number of other developers active in their spare time,
so it's not like development will stop.  But response time for simple
changes will likely go up, response rate will go down, and there will be
less focus on long-term developments.

And it's not like a "pay-per-feature" scheme would be really tenable:
the last years I averaged about a commit per day corresponding to a
lower number of actual issues in the tracker.  Simple changes like this
one take less work.  Getting rid of long-standing and recurring
inconsistencies and problems takes a lot more work (removing the
interference of grace timing with context settings, good for about half
a dozen issues in the tracker and with very inscrutable results, getting
rid of timing inconsistencies in \lyricsto, making setting and reverting
of grob subproperties reliable) and there is no "money in it" at all
since it's mostly a variety of strange things one can work around in
some manner or other, so nobody is going to fork over cash for that
stuff in particular.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Marc Hohl


Am 20.09.2015 um 09:58 schrieb BB:
[...]

The question is more like:  if you saw Csus, would you know how to
interpret it musically?
Or would you be stuck in your tracks wondering, "is this a sus2, sus4,
both?  something else?"


c:sus is working correctly getting root and 5, but indeed is an
"unconventional" expression to get a C5 ...


In my experience, some musicians are not aware that there is something 
like sus2. Moreover (at least in the sheets I work with) the sus4 is 
much more common, so writing sus instead of sus4 is more often than not 
a mixture of lazyness ("I omit the 4 as anyone knows that I mean sus4")

and a lack of knowledge.

Interpreting c:sus as root and 5 feels strange IMHO.

Just my 2cts

Marc


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

On 20.09.2015 03:30, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:

> Just to be clear, in Hancock's piece and other jazz standards, D7sus is
> not simply a 7th chord with the third omitted. As Mark Levine explained
> in the "The Jazz Piano Book" (Sher Music Co. 1989), for D7sus (or simply
> "Dsus" as it appears in some arrangements) Herbie played a C major triad
> (with the G doubled) over the root and fifth on the left hand. The
> effect of this was that the right hand was playing the 7th, 9th and 11th
> (or if you prefer, 7th, 2nd and 4th). Hence Levine's description of a
> sus chord: the " major triad in the right hand [is] a whole step down
> from the root".

> Brett

Yes, but it is worth pointing out that that is a "voicing" of D7sus.
It is not the "definition" of D7sus.

That is my interpretation as well. Instead of "voicing" I usually call 
it "couloring".

But I did not want to fight for that. There are many different and 
acceptable ways to analyse jazz from different perspectives. As I only 
play some stringed instruments I necessarily have another point of view 
(and playing technique) as a pianist.

For comparison, I'd enjoy hearing how Mr. Levine suggests to voice a C 
major chord.

(If I recall correctly, it doesn't have C or G in it.)

Thanks,

David Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954 "/Confusion is highly underrated/"
ela...@flaminghakama.com 
self-immolation.info 
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Brett Duncan

On 21/09/15 7:48 AM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:

> Well, in his explanation of sus chords, Levine indicates that that
> he does not interpret "sus" to be exactly synonymous with "sus4". At
> one point, he wrote "A persistent myth about sus chords is that 'the
> fouth takes the place of the third.' Jazz pianists, however, often
> voice the third with a sus chord" (The Jazz Piano Book, p.24).

However, if you look at the Real Book for Hancock's charts,
they use the notation like D7sus4 for all those chords.

(The last time I participated in such a discussion on this list,
I was also convinced that there were lots of pure Dsus or Dsus7 or D7sus
examples out there.  But what I found after looking through a
dozen real books is that almost everyone uses D7sus4, in all
cases.  There may be a conceptual difference such as Levine is
arguing, but I would contend that it is not reflected in actual practice
in terms of chord symbol notation.)

I have a good many charts at hand, mostly arrangements for my jazz 
ensemble from a wide range of publishers. There is no consistency in how 
chords are written in these charts, between publishers or even in 
different pieces from the same publisher. I can find plenty of examples 
of chords like G9sus, C13sus, simply Dsus, and so on.

I've also seen four different published arrangements for Maiden Voyage, 
with four different notations for the same suspended chord (e.g. D7sus4, 
D7sus, Dsus, Am7/D).

So my conclusions are a little different.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Brett Duncan


On 21/09/15 7:48 AM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:

Modifying the input syntax such that c:5 means  seems ill-advised.


I was thinking much the same, until I read something that David Kastrup 
wrote:

I think it is not an outlandish expectation, once you see how a:maj and
a:dim and a:min work, to have c:sus turn out a recognizable suspended
chord rather than a power chord (which is anything but a suspended
chord).  It's not hard to learn c:sus4 for sure.  But anything that
works according to naive expectations without causing other problems
leaves more time to learn more important things.


Given that sus and power chords are fairly commonly used, removing a 
potential stumbling block for the 'naive' user does not seem unreasonable.


This does raise the question of other "naive" constructions. I have seen 
on some contemporary music charts notations like C2 and C4, which 
apparently meant Cadd2 and Cadd4 respectively (except in one case, where 
Cadd4 did not sound right, and only after hearing a recording did it 
become clear that the chord was a Csus4).


Currently, LP's \chordmode interprets c:2 to be the chord , and 
outputs a chord name of Csus2. It interprets c:4 as  and outputs 
a chord name of C4 sus4 3 (!)


But to what extent should the the "naive" user be catered for?

Brett

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Kieren MacMillan

Hi Brett,

> This does raise the question of other "naive" constructions. I have seen on 
> some contemporary music charts notations like C2 and C4, which apparently 
> meant Cadd2 and Cadd4 respectively (except in one case, where Cadd4 did not 
> sound right, and only after hearing a recording did it become clear that the 
> chord was a Csus4).

In my world (musical theatre), Cadd2 means , and C2 means  
(i.e., no 3); I suppose you’d call this a “Csus2”?
And, consistently, C4 means , which most of us will agree is a “Csus4”.

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

Re: Chords and what they mean

Noeck  writes:

> Hi LilyPond experts,
>
> this is a basic question that I have when I read this thread:
> How are chords stored and translated internally?
>
> From using LP, I know I can write in chordmode and in musicmode and I
> can get notes and chordnames:
> \chordmode  -> \new Staff
> \chordmode  -> \new ChordNames
> { } -> \new Staff
> { } -> \new ChordNames
>
> But I wonder: Does it always go through the music espression?

Yes.

> (1) \chordmode { c }  -> (2)  {  }  -> (3) ChordNames C
> It seems to be different as I can write:
>
> \version "2.19.21"
> music = {  \chordmode { g:/b } }
> \new ChordNames \music  % different names
> \new Staff \music   % same notes

The reason is that there are additional properties on the individual
notes in the chord expression recording some of their functional
relation to the \chordmode entry.  Try \displayMusic \music to see them.

> The core of my question is: Can the translation chordmode -> ChordName
> be defined independently of other translations. Must translations be
> bijective?

The translations are defined independently.  There is no convincing
amount of user-accessible documentation about how to trigger different
interpretations in a \ChordNames context when entering the music
manually, however.  So forcing particular interpretations of root note
and inversions factually requires entry using \chordmode.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

David Kastrup  writes:

> Noeck  writes:
>
> The reason is that there are additional properties on the individual
> notes in the chord expression recording some of their functional
> relation to the \chordmode entry.  Try \displayMusic \music to see them.
>
>> The core of my question is: Can the translation chordmode -> ChordName
>> be defined independently of other translations. Must translations be
>> bijective?
>
> The translations are defined independently.  There is no convincing
> amount of user-accessible documentation about how to trigger different
> interpretations in a \ChordNames context when entering the music
> manually, however.  So forcing particular interpretations of root note
> and inversions factually requires entry using \chordmode.

Maybe when the chord namer cannot find such properties, it should
instead trying to take the fifth whenever possible, so rather choose to
interpret  as \chordmode { c:/g } rather than
\chordmode { g:4.6 } .

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

David Kastrup  writes:

> Marc Hohl  writes:
>
>> Am 20.09.2015 um 09:58 schrieb BB:
>> [...]
 The question is more like:  if you saw Csus, would you know how to
 interpret it musically?
 Or would you be stuck in your tracks wondering, "is this a sus2, sus4,
 both?  something else?"
>>>
>>> c:sus is working correctly getting root and 5, but indeed is an
>>> "unconventional" expression to get a C5 ...
>>
>> In my experience, some musicians are not aware that there is something
>> like sus2. Moreover (at least in the sheets I work with) the sus4 is
>> much more common, so writing sus instead of sus4 is more often than
>> not a mixture of lazyness ("I omit the 4 as anyone knows that I mean
>> sus4")
>> and a lack of knowledge.
>>
>> Interpreting c:sus as root and 5 feels strange IMHO.
>
> The rule I am using in my current patch (just writing up the
> documentation) is that c:sus will add a 4 if no step 2 or step 4 is
> added afterwards (step 2 can be 2+ or 2- as well as just 2).
>
> An unrelated issue is c:5 behavior.  The changes in that will mean that
> c:5.30 now has to be written as c:3.5.30.  I lean towards admitting the
> A.A.A. (American Accordionists' Association)'s convention of using M as
> a shorthand for plain "major" so that c:M.30 would be the same as
> c:3.5.30 (cf
> ,
> scroll down to scanned page from the A.A.A.).

Except that c:m.30 is not valid and c:m30 apparently is the same as
< c' ees' g' bes' d'' f'' a'' >

c:m5 now is indistinguishable from c:5, so even c:M5.30 (once available)
would not work because of the missing e'.  But that's consistent with
c:dim5 being  while c:dim7 is .

In other words: this is a can of worms that will likely affect a few
chords already existing in scores.  I'm not sure whether a convert-ly
rule amounting to s/:\(5[.^]\)/:3.\1/g will not trigger on unrelated
stuff as well.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Johan Vromans

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:02:06 +0200
David Kastrup  wrote:

> > On paper, we all write Am to designate an A-minor chord. However, in
> > LilyPond we write a:min.

> Probably because it is usually written as a:m instead.  "m" and "min"
> are aliases.

True, although that was not what I intended to state. See below.

> > So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate
> > your flavour of Csus?
> 
> Well, your premise is faulty, so it's not really relevant for the c:sus
> interpretation.

The point that I wanted to make was that you need to write chords
differently in LilyPond anyway, using colons and periods. So translating
c:sus into c:sus4 would hardly make sense.

OTOH, a full translation of Am into a:m (and so on) would be interesting.

-- Johan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean


Have fun with testing!

\version "2.19.25"

#(set-global-staff-size 30)

chordtest = \chordmode {

c:sus %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C

c:sus3 % power chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C

c:sus5 %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C

c:1.4.5 % equal to:

c:sus4

c:1.5.2 % equal to:

c:sus2

c:sus3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C

c:5.3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C

c:5.3+ % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C,

%3+ is written as e#

c:sus6

c:sus7

:sus

c:7sus

c:7

c:3.5.30

c:5.30

c:m30

c:m

c:min

c^3

c:5

}

<< \context ChordNames \chordtest

\context Voice \chordtest

>>



On 20.09.2015 14:31, Thomas Morley wrote:

2015-09-20 14:14 GMT+02:00 BB :

I absolutely agree! I did not understand as I read that Lilypond now
supports misbehavour of some lazy people with reduced harmonic skills.

There are a bunch of "coloured" sus chords, not just sus4 for every sus
sign.

No idea if anyone tested my recent proposal, seems not.

 From the user's point of view it simply aliases
c:sus to c:sus4
and
c:5 to c:1.5 or c^3

no other sus is changed or impossible to use, c:5 will only work if
the 5 is the one and only modifier, hence no other stuff is concerned.
If it turns out that my low tested proposal doesn't warrant this, it
needs more work, ofc.

Though, I really don't understand why people don't test and give feedback.
Instead more and more mails cumulate.

-Harm

P.S.
David announced an own patch. I'm quite confident he will do better
work than me.


On 20.09.2015 13:38, Johan Vromans wrote:

So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate your
flavour of Csus?



___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Noeck

Hi LilyPond experts,

this is a basic question that I have when I read this thread:
How are chords stored and translated internally?

>From using LP, I know I can write in chordmode and in musicmode and I
can get notes and chordnames:
\chordmode  -> \new Staff
\chordmode  -> \new ChordNames
{ } -> \new Staff
{ } -> \new ChordNames

But I wonder: Does it always go through the music espression?
(1) \chordmode { c }  -> (2)  {  }  -> (3) ChordNames C
It seems to be different as I can write:

\version "2.19.21"
music = {  \chordmode { g:/b } }
\new ChordNames \music  % different names
\new Staff \music   % same notes

The core of my question is: Can the translation chordmode -> ChordName
be defined independently of other translations. Must translations be
bijective?

Cheers,
Joram

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Johan Vromans  writes:

> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:52:14 +0200
> 70147pers...@telia.com wrote:
>
>> You are certainly completely right. The transformation is quite simple, 
>> so a script in perl or awk or any similar program can easily solve the 
>> task. But can you use it in an integrated environment, like 
>> Frescobaldi-LilyPond, which I have come to appreciate a lot.
>
> Sure, no problem. I my workflow the lilypond command that Frescobaldi uses
> is a script that does some things before passing control to the 'real'
> lilypond program.
>
> But I could ask a different question.
>
> On paper, we all write Am to designate an A-minor chord. However, in
> LilyPond we write a:min.

We can but don't need to.

> I haven't heard much complaints about this lately.

Probably because it is usually written as a:m instead.  "m" and "min"
are aliases.

> So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate
> your flavour of Csus?

Well, your premise is faulty, so it's not really relevant for the c:sus
interpretation.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Thomas Morley

2015-09-20 14:14 GMT+02:00 BB :
> I absolutely agree! I did not understand as I read that Lilypond now
> supports misbehavour of some lazy people with reduced harmonic skills.
>
> There are a bunch of "coloured" sus chords, not just sus4 for every sus
> sign.

No idea if anyone tested my recent proposal, seems not.

>From the user's point of view it simply aliases
c:sus to c:sus4
and
c:5 to c:1.5 or c^3

no other sus is changed or impossible to use, c:5 will only work if
the 5 is the one and only modifier, hence no other stuff is concerned.
If it turns out that my low tested proposal doesn't warrant this, it
needs more work, ofc.

Though, I really don't understand why people don't test and give feedback.
Instead more and more mails cumulate.

-Harm

P.S.
David announced an own patch. I'm quite confident he will do better
work than me.

>
> On 20.09.2015 13:38, Johan Vromans wrote:
>>
>> So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate your
>> flavour of Csus?
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Johan Vromans

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:52:14 +0200
70147pers...@telia.com wrote:

> You are certainly completely right. The transformation is quite simple, 
> so a script in perl or awk or any similar program can easily solve the 
> task. But can you use it in an integrated environment, like 
> Frescobaldi-LilyPond, which I have come to appreciate a lot.

Sure, no problem. I my workflow the lilypond command that Frescobaldi uses
is a script that does some things before passing control to the 'real'
lilypond program.

But I could ask a different question.

On paper, we all write Am to designate an A-minor chord. However, in
LilyPond we write a:min. I haven't heard much complaints about this lately.

So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate your
flavour of Csus?

-- Johan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Johan Vromans  writes:

> On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:02:06 +0200
> David Kastrup  wrote:
>
>> > On paper, we all write Am to designate an A-minor chord. However, in
>> > LilyPond we write a:min.
>
>> Probably because it is usually written as a:m instead.  "m" and "min"
>> are aliases.
>
> True, although that was not what I intended to state. See below.
>
>> > So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate
>> > your flavour of Csus?
>> 
>> Well, your premise is faulty, so it's not really relevant for the c:sus
>> interpretation.
>
> The point that I wanted to make was that you need to write chords
> differently in LilyPond anyway, using colons and periods. So translating
> c:sus into c:sus4 would hardly make sense.

I think it is not an outlandish expectation, once you see how a:maj and
a:dim and a:min work, to have c:sus turn out a recognizable suspended
chord rather than a power chord (which is anything but a suspended
chord).  It's not hard to learn c:sus4 for sure.  But anything that
works according to naive expectations without causing other problems
leaves more time to learn more important things.

> OTOH, a full translation of Am into a:m (and so on) would be interesting.

That's not really much of an option because it's far outside of the
lexical entities otherwise composing LilyPond input.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Thomas Morley

2015-09-20 14:38 GMT+02:00 BB :
> Have fun with testing!
>
> \version "2.19.25"
>
> #(set-global-staff-size 30)
>
> chordtest = \chordmode {
>
> c:sus %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C
>
> c:sus3 % power chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C
>
> c:sus5 %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C
>
> c:1.4.5 % equal to:
>
> c:sus4
>
> c:1.5.2 % equal to:
>
> c:sus2
>
> c:sus3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C
>
> c:5.3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C
>
> c:5.3+ % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C,
>
> %3+ is written as e#
>
> c:sus6
>
> c:sus7
>
> :sus
>
> c:7sus
>
> c:7
>
> c:3.5.30
>
> c:5.30
>
> c:m30
>
> c:m
>
> c:min
>
> c^3
>
> c:5
>
> }
>
> << \context ChordNames \chordtest
>
> \context Voice \chordtest
>
>>>

No clue what you want to tell me.
I suggest you write your own 'construct-chord-elements'
I'm going to fix my OS now. It's no unlikely I break it completely at
first attempt.
Then you have to -- or be happy with whatever you get.

>
>
>
> On 20.09.2015 14:31, Thomas Morley wrote:
>
> 2015-09-20 14:14 GMT+02:00 BB :
>
> I absolutely agree! I did not understand as I read that Lilypond now
> supports misbehavour of some lazy people with reduced harmonic skills.
>
> There are a bunch of "coloured" sus chords, not just sus4 for every sus
> sign.
>
> No idea if anyone tested my recent proposal, seems not.
>
> From the user's point of view it simply aliases
> c:sus to c:sus4
> and
> c:5 to c:1.5 or c^3
>
> no other sus is changed or impossible to use, c:5 will only work if
> the 5 is the one and only modifier, hence no other stuff is concerned.
> If it turns out that my low tested proposal doesn't warrant this, it
> needs more work, ofc.
>
> Though, I really don't understand why people don't test and give feedback.
> Instead more and more mails cumulate.
>
> -Harm
>
> P.S.
> David announced an own patch. I'm quite confident he will do better
> work than me.
>
> On 20.09.2015 13:38, Johan Vromans wrote:
>
> So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate your
> flavour of Csus?
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: Chords and what they mean

David Kastrup  writes:

>> David announced an own patch. I'm quite confident he will do better
>> work than me.
>
> Depends on what one wants to call "better".  The code may be marginally
> nicer.

Phooey.  The actual code might be marginally nicer or not, but the main
work was convert-ly rules anyway.

Rietveld issue: 263280043 (https://codereview.appspot.com/263280043)

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

I absolutely agree! I did not understand as I read that Lilypond now 
supports misbehavour of some lazy people with reduced harmonic skills.


There are a bunch of "coloured" sus chords, not just sus4 for every sus 
sign.


On 20.09.2015 13:38, Johan Vromans wrote:

So what is the big deal to write c:sus4 when you want to designate your
flavour of Csus?



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Thomas Morley  writes:

> 2015-09-20 14:14 GMT+02:00 BB :
>> I absolutely agree! I did not understand as I read that Lilypond now
>> supports misbehavour of some lazy people with reduced harmonic skills.
>>
>> There are a bunch of "coloured" sus chords, not just sus4 for every sus
>> sign.
>
> No idea if anyone tested my recent proposal, seems not.
>
> From the user's point of view it simply aliases
> c:sus to c:sus4
> and
> c:5 to c:1.5 or c^3
>
> no other sus is changed or impossible to use, c:5 will only work if
> the 5 is the one and only modifier, hence no other stuff is concerned.
> If it turns out that my low tested proposal doesn't warrant this, it
> needs more work, ofc.
>
> Though, I really don't understand why people don't test and give feedback.
> Instead more and more mails cumulate.
>
> -Harm
>
> P.S.
> David announced an own patch. I'm quite confident he will do better
> work than me.

Depends on what one wants to call "better".  The code may be marginally
nicer.  I think that my commit regarding "sus" is pretty uncontentious.
I'm not terribly convinced about the "5" part of my patch though.  The
main difference to your approach seems to be that you only change "c:5"
whereas I change "c:5*", so to say, with * being anything.  That's more
consistent with the general idea that the first digit sets up the basic
chord configuration and everything after it is a modification.  But it
also affects actually existing chords in the docs.  So I have to throw a
convert-ly rule into the mix.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Tim McNamara

> On Sep 20, 2015, at 2:58 AM, BB  wrote:
> 
> On 20.09.2015 03:30, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:
>>  ...
>>  
>> > I suppose that this is because some people (and Lilypond) think that
>> > C:sus2 is equally as valid or usual interpretation of "sus", and
>> 
>> May be I misundertand this? c:sus2 works with Lilypond and IS a valid
>> chord often used in pop/rock, not so frequently used in jazz? May be I
>> am wrong.
>> 
>> Of course sus2 is used.
>> 
>> The question is more like:  if you saw Csus, would you know how to interpret 
>> it musically?
>> Or would you be stuck in your tracks wondering, "is this a sus2, sus4, both? 
>>  something else?”

I would not be bothered by that.  The suspended 4th is the conventional meaning 
of a sus chord (a triad of root, 4th and 5th- Levine notwithstanding.  With the 
3rd in the chord, it’s really not a sus chord IMHO).  There are sus2 chords, 
IME these occur rarely in jazz except momentarily as voice leading- the melody 
note would be the obvious guide there.  In pop music what is often written as a 
“sus2” is really a triad plus 9 (root/3rd/5th/9th) without a 7th.

> c:sus is working correctly getting root and 5, but indeed is an 
> "unconventional" expression to get a C5 …

That is not working correctly IMO.  c:sus should not produce the chordname C5.

>> I tend to think that the sus implies 4, unless otherwise noted.
> 
> Why? Why not 2 or 3 or 5 or 6 or 7? I disagree!

Because as mentioned above the suspended 4th is the convention in Western music 
for a “sus” chord.  Also, you can’t have a sus3 or sus5 (or a sus root) by 
definition because those notes are already included- the terminology of 
suspension refers to the note above (typically) or below (occasionally) 
replacing the 3rd.  The use of the other notes such as the 6th, 7th and the 
extensions already has its own specific terminology.  Chord names should 
conform to standard nomenclature to avoid confusion the musicians in 
performance.  Disagreeing would put you outside of the normal language of 
chords and would be counterproductive.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Blöchl Bernhard

Thank you for the pointer to the two programs I never have heard of 
before. Off Topic but very interesting.


As you mentioned Rameau I will add, that the idea of "chord inversion" 
goes back to Lippius from Leipzig in Germany "trias harmonica" from 1609 
and is not original to Rameau as often stated. Possibly there were 
connections? Bit I never found any evidence for a connection 
Bach-Rameau?


I think jazz with chords providing a sense of closure, are closer to 
Rameau than to Bach. (The later has a more tonal than chordal approach - 
my personal interpretation.)


One of my idea is, that the modal jazz using musical modes rather than 
chord progressions as a harmonic framework is closer to Renaissance. As 
the jazz prior to the modal overtaking was based on the Barock tonality. 
But my theoretical basis and my patience is not sufficient to work this 
out.



Am 20.09.2015 13:11, schrieb Frauke Jurgensen:

...
As for the 15th century, while chordal analysis in the post-Rameau,
functional sense is a bit silly, there's quite a lot of mileage to be
found in examining successions of simultaneities. It's my special
field, as a matter of fact...the usual software to help with analysis
of this sort is Humdrum or music21. I don't know how many of the other
people involved with those are in this group, but since a bunch of
them use LilyPond, they may yet wander into this thread!


___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean

Flaming Hakama by Elaine  writes:

> Mixing responses from several posters here...
>
>
>
> FWIW, my two cents on the design questions:
>
> Modifying the input syntax such that c:5 means  seems ill-advised.
>
> That would be inconsistent with the rest of the input syntax,
>  where the first number represents the complete chord up to that
>  point.

It's exactly the same as happens already with c:13 (which removes the
11), and c:5 is arguably more important.

> The problem would still remain, regardless of what input syntax you
> use to specify , Lilypond will still not print C5, out of the
> box.

Which is a separate misfeature/bug.  I don't see the point in the
separate \powerChords command to turn on recognition of C5.

> My point being, the c:5 interpretation is not the actual hurdle in the
> task of printing C5 as a chord symbol.

Red herring.

> Such a change would only negatively affect anyone who used c:sus to
> indicate a power chord.

He now has the more aptly named c:5 available.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-20 Thread Marc Hohl


Am 20.09.2015 um 11:10 schrieb David Kastrup:
[...]


Interpreting c:sus as root and 5 feels strange IMHO.


The rule I am using in my current patch (just writing up the
documentation) is that c:sus will add a 4 if no step 2 or step 4 is
added afterwards (step 2 can be 2+ or 2- as well as just 2).


Sounds reasonable, thanks for your work!

Marc


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: Chords and what they mean

I think the proper way for reaching your proposed Lilypond redesign is 
to pay a developer ...


Am 19.09.2015 23:52, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:

On 2015-09-19 13:52, Johan Vromans wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 01:05:12 +0200
70147pers...@telia.com wrote:


This should, by means of a translation table, take my input and
translate it into LP code. So when I write c:sus this will be changed 
to
e.g. c:sus4 (or perhaps c:1.4.5) before it is dealt with by LP, and 
when

I write c:5 it is translated into c:1.5.

This can easily be done with small Perl script. Even a one-liner like

   perl -pe 's/:sus(?!4)/:sus4/g;' -e 's/:5(?![.\/])/:5.1/g;' 
myfile.ly | lilypond -o myout -


A table-driven solution would require a couple of more lines.

If you give me the exact transformations I'll write it for you.

-- Johan


You are certainly completely right. The transformation is quite
simple, so a script in perl or awk or any similar program can easily
solve the task. But can you use it in an integrated environment, like
Frescobaldi-LilyPond, which I have come to appreciate a lot. I can
think you have to write my (version of) LP code, run it through the
filter (the script) then import this new file into Frescobaldi to run
it in LP, or possibly put it directly into LP. Well possibly you can
use a pipe, but I do not see how.

My dream is to have all this integrated in the environment, so, to
make it flexible, you feed some database or table or something with
your transforms, preferable only once, and then you can forget it.
Thereafter you write your code, and on its way into LP it is
transformed according to the content in the table. So from LP you get
the correct printout and midi and so on despite the code is written
"my" way.

Thomas Morley  has written a procedure in scheme, which therefore has
the better opportunities for integration, but I have not yet had the
time to test it.
/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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-19 Thread Brett Duncan

On 20/09/15 11:30 AM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:

> Just to be clear, in Hancock's piece and other jazz standards, D7sus is
> not simply a 7th chord with the third omitted. As Mark Levine explained
> in the "The Jazz Piano Book" (Sher Music Co. 1989), for D7sus (or simply
> "Dsus" as it appears in some arrangements) Herbie played a C major triad
> (with the G doubled) over the root and fifth on the left hand. The
> effect of this was that the right hand was playing the 7th, 9th and 11th
> (or if you prefer, 7th, 2nd and 4th). Hence Levine's description of a
> sus chord: the " major triad in the right hand [is] a whole step down
> from the root".

> Brett

Yes, but it is worth pointing out that that is a "voicing" of D7sus.
It is not the "definition" of D7sus.
Well, in his explanation of sus chords, Levine indicates that that he 
does not interpret "sus" to be exactly synonymous with "sus4". At one 
point, he wrote "A persistent myth about sus chords is that 'the fouth 
takes the place of the third.' Jazz pianists, however, often voice the 
third with a sus chord" (The Jazz Piano Book, p.24).

My point was that it would be incorrect in a jazz context to rigidly 
interpret D7sus as simply a D7 chord with the third omitted or with the 
4th in place of the third.
For comparison, I'd enjoy hearing how Mr. Levine suggests to voice a C 
major chord.

(If I recall correctly, it doesn't have C or G in it.)
The short answer is, he doesn't. But if we are discussing definitions 
rather than voicings, is this relevant?

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-19 Thread 70147persson


On 2015-09-19 13:52, Johan Vromans wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 01:05:12 +0200
70147pers...@telia.com wrote:


This should, by means of a translation table, take my input and
translate it into LP code. So when I write c:sus this will be changed to
e.g. c:sus4 (or perhaps c:1.4.5) before it is dealt with by LP, and when
I write c:5 it is translated into c:1.5.

This can easily be done with small Perl script. Even a one-liner like

   perl -pe 's/:sus(?!4)/:sus4/g;' -e 's/:5(?![.\/])/:5.1/g;' myfile.ly | 
lilypond -o myout -

A table-driven solution would require a couple of more lines.

If you give me the exact transformations I'll write it for you.

-- Johan

You are certainly completely right. The transformation is quite simple, 
so a script in perl or awk or any similar program can easily solve the 
task. But can you use it in an integrated environment, like 
Frescobaldi-LilyPond, which I have come to appreciate a lot. I can think 
you have to write my (version of) LP code, run it through the filter 
(the script) then import this new file into Frescobaldi to run it in LP, 
or possibly put it directly into LP. Well possibly you can use a pipe, 
but I do not see how.


My dream is to have all this integrated in the environment, so, to make 
it flexible, you feed some database or table or something with your 
transforms, preferable only once, and then you can forget it. Thereafter 
you write your code, and on its way into LP it is transformed according 
to the content in the table. So from LP you get the correct printout and 
midi and so on despite the code is written "my" way.


Thomas Morley  has written a procedure in scheme, which therefore has 
the better opportunities for integration, but I have not yet had the 
time to test it.

/Kaj

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-19 Thread Kaj Persson


On 2015-09-19 05:06, Brett Duncan wrote:

On 19/09/15 8:49 AM, Kaj Persson wrote:
As you wrote Csus ought to mean that the first third is removed, and 
nothing else. Among professional musicians, which I am not, but I 
have friends who are, this is not the whole truth, there exists a de 
facto standard which does not exactly coincide with the pure logical.
Not exactly - there are several conventions used by musicians, with a 
wide range of similarities and differences, but there is no one 
standard, de facto or otherwise.


Csus is one example, C5 another. So when I work with these people i 
will use their methods and system, not trying to introduce something 
else (more "clever"). Therefore it would be fine if one could adapt 
LP to the current situation.
Well, in this instance that might seem reasonable, where we are only 
talking about simple chords, but where the chords are more complex or 
follow some other convention, adapting LP might prove a lot more 
difficult. For example, a lot of jazz charts follow a widely used 
convention where minor chords are denoted with a minus sign and 
augmented chords are denoted with a plus sign, i.e.  F-7, G+. But LP 
uses these symbols in \chordmode for alterations.


But this all just points to the fact that there is a distinction 
between how chords are entered and how they are displayed. And given 
that the same chord can be displayed several different ways, that 
distinction cannot really be avoided. For my own purposes, the default 
chord names generated by LP are far from ideal, so like many I have a 
separate file of chord exceptions that I include when I need it. So 
long as the input method allows me to create the chords I need in a 
reasonably way and I can get the output to appear as I need it to, 
there is no need to make the input take the same form as the output.


Brett


Yes, you are completely right, Brett and David. Also, I myself was 
wrong, when I used the term de facto standard. I should have developed 
my discussion a wee more. You might say that the world of music and 
musicians is like an archipelago, with a lot islands. On every of these 
islands they speak their own language, or at least dialect, and 
everybody there understands everyting, as they have common way of 
talking. You might say there is a de facto standard of how to 
communicate. But if you come to another of the islands, you will find 
another vocabulary, which everybody on that island understands. They too 
have a de facto standard, but another one. The standard is not global, 
so some of you would say there is no standard. But such is life 
elsewhere too. Do not tell an American that he/she does not follow a 
standard because he/she measures in inches while most of we others use 
meters. So there are de facto standards in the music world too, and as 
long as you are in one of these islands, which some of us call contexts, 
it is practical to use adapted tools. That makes life easier.


On the other hand, when you are skilled enough, you can use the global 
standard, almost as quickly as the local one, and you make the 
transformations in your head, like American scientists who hardly use 
inches and gallons in their job, but instead the established SI-units.


As you might understand, I here consider the LP way of interpreting the 
symbols the "global" standard (we forget Sibelius and the others), while 
many of us live on our own island, where it might being an aid to use an 
adapted tool. However skilled people like Brett do not need them, they 
fix that in their brains.


Much of my thoughts came from the happiness I felt, and this is not a 
very long time ago, when I first discovered that I can put chord symbols 
direct into LP in chordmode, but also the disappointment I felt when I 
found the deviations. I guess that once in the future, with even more 
experience, I can talk like Brett, and say: I do not need the adaptions 
any more.

/Kaj

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-19 Thread Johan Vromans

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 01:05:12 +0200
70147pers...@telia.com wrote:

> This should, by means of a translation table, take my input and 
> translate it into LP code. So when I write c:sus this will be changed to 
> e.g. c:sus4 (or perhaps c:1.4.5) before it is dealt with by LP, and when 
> I write c:5 it is translated into c:1.5.

This can easily be done with small Perl script. Even a one-liner like

  perl -pe 's/:sus(?!4)/:sus4/g;' -e 's/:5(?![.\/])/:5.1/g;' myfile.ly | 
lilypond -o myout -

A table-driven solution would require a couple of more lines.

If you give me the exact transformations I'll write it for you.

-- Johan




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean


A bit OT:

For anybody having doubts if sus chords are of any use, I found a nice 
example in jazz. In Herbie Hancock’s jazz piece Maiden Voyage one can 
recognize examples of sus chords covering D7sus, F7sus, Eb7sus, and 
F#7sus (C#-13). Lilipond unhappily omits the sus in this combinations.


https://youtu.be/hwmRQ0PBtXU
not working in Germany, but in case simply use a proxy ...

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Thank you for the interesting analysis and the links. With the flats and 
sharps instead of "-es" and "-is" in your code, it is a bit strange.


The m7b5 chord (your example) in the jazz slang usually/often is called 
"half diminished" an uses the slashed 0 "ø" symbolically "halving" the 
0.I do not think that m7b5 is better or more worse than "ø", but it 
depends on the taste of the user and the social music context he is 
working in. Another point in naming is, that b5 is often used (freedom 
of interpretation) and written as #11 on top that then is Cm7#11.


On the given internet page there is written under the head line "Note 
sets"
"So, once you have your input syntax, lilypond converts that into note 
sets.

So, “C:1.4.5″ becomes ."
Obviously it is meant
"So, “C:1.4.5″ becomes ."
But  is missing on the page. May be you want to add this?

You wrote
"An exception to this is sus. Logically, I might expect this to work, 
but

doesn’t:
C:sus4 <==> C:5.3+"

It is a bit more complicated, as c:5.3+ does work but with an unusual 
e#, enharmonically this is an f ...



Am 19.09.2015 02:30, schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine:

The most important thing to understand about the way Lilypond does
chords, is that there are three completely different parts.

1) Input syntax
2) Note sets
3) Chord symbols





My explanation for doing that is available at
http://flaminghakama.com/flaming-lilypond-chords [1]

The final comment I have is related to your statement:
"For me it is logic to understand, that c:sus will suspend the 3."

That is a correct *musical* interpretation of Csus. (In my opinion.)



I agree.


Unfortunately, lilypond does not have a musical interpretation of
sus.


... would expect some knowledge base or composition rules or artificial 
intelligence ... Lilypond user would complain oppression ...



Lilypond requires you to explicitly specify an interval to replace the
3rd with.



Does Lilypond require a substitute for the suspended 3? c:sus is 
compiling without error and any specified substituton note and shows 
root and 5 - exactly the result I am expecting.



I suppose that this is because some people (and Lilypond) think that
C:sus2 is equally as valid or usual interpretation of "sus", and


May be I misundertand this? c:sus2 works with Lilypond and IS a valid 
chord often used in pop/rock, not so frequently used in jazz? May be I 
am wrong.


One can simply verify this by experiment:

\version "2.19.25"
#(set-global-staff-size 30)
\chordmode {
  c:sus %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C
  c:sus3 % power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C
  c:sus5 %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C
  c:1.4.5 % equal to:
  c:sus4
  c:1.4.2 % equal to:
  c:sus2
  c:sus3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C
  c:5.3 % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C
  c:5.3+ % normal c major chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C, 3+ 
is written as e#

}

The only problem I see is naming the chords with the sus correctly. This 
happens with c:sus5, c:sus3 and c:sus as Lilypond calls it C instead of 
C5.
Even exotic chords as c:7sus work correctly in the note pattern, but 
will be called C7 omitting the sus ...



therefore pretends that "sus" is not a well defined chord modification
by itself.

Hence, if you are using modifications, why you need to say C:sus4
instead of C:sus

HTH,

David Elaine Alt

415 . 341
.4954
  "_Confusion is highly underrated_"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
self-immolation.info [2]
 skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



Links:
--
[1] http://flaminghakama.com/flaming-lilypond-chords
[2] http://self-immolation.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean


There was a long thread "Lilypond and Jazz chords" in 2009
https://www.mail-archive.com/lilypond-user@gnu.org/msg48254.html

I have not read it completely, but may be one might find it interesting?
I think one might find many repetitions and may be some additional 
aspects?


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-19 Thread Brett Duncan


On 19/09/15 7:52 PM, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:

A bit OT:

For anybody having doubts if sus chords are of any use, I found a nice 
example in jazz. In Herbie Hancock’s jazz piece Maiden Voyage one can 
recognize examples of sus chords covering D7sus, F7sus, Eb7sus, and 
F#7sus (C#-13). Lilipond unhappily omits the sus in this combinations.


Just to be clear, in Hancock's piece and other jazz standards, D7sus is 
not simply a 7th chord with the third omitted. As Mark Levine explained 
in the "The Jazz Piano Book" (Sher Music Co. 1989), for D7sus (or simply 
"Dsus" as it appears in some arrangements) Herbie played a C major triad 
(with the G doubled) over the root and fifth on the left hand. The 
effect of this was that the right hand was playing the 7th, 9th and 11th 
(or if you prefer, 7th, 2nd and 4th). Hence Levine's description of a 
sus chord: the " major triad in the right hand [is] a whole step down 
from the root".


Brett


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

For sure Hancock is giving the sus some specific "colour". I just 
listend Maiden Voyage and I am sure he always play a powerchord root 
doubled and a 5 with his left hand, not a complete triad. Nothing 
strange for modal jazz. And a 7sus chord with the right hand. Not shure, 
but it sounds like 7sus2 or more likely 7sus9? Anyway, the unresolved 
sus is the key of that Hancock sound.



Am 19.09.2015 12:34, schrieb Brett Duncan:

On 19/09/15 7:52 PM, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:

A bit OT:

For anybody having doubts if sus chords are of any use, I found a nice 
example in jazz. In Herbie Hancock’s jazz piece Maiden Voyage one can 
recognize examples of sus chords covering D7sus, F7sus, Eb7sus, and 
F#7sus (C#-13). Lilipond unhappily omits the sus in this combinations.


Just to be clear, in Hancock's piece and other jazz standards, D7sus
is not simply a 7th chord with the third omitted. As Mark Levine
explained in the "The Jazz Piano Book" (Sher Music Co. 1989), for
D7sus (or simply "Dsus" as it appears in some arrangements) Herbie
played a C major triad (with the G doubled) over the root and fifth on
the left hand. The effect of this was that the right hand was playing
the 7th, 9th and 11th (or if you prefer, 7th, 2nd and 4th). Hence
Levine's description of a sus chord: the " major triad in the right
hand [is] a whole step down from the root".

Brett


___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean


Am 18.09.2015 04:10, schrieb msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca:

On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:
 I would call (always depending on the context) Cmadd4, 
F7sus2/C,

D#6no5add2/C.



Always consider the harmonic context!!!


What exactly does the "harmonic context" mean?  What would be specific
examples of contexts where it could make sense to call this set of 
notes
Cmadd4, and contexts where it would be better to call it F7sus2/C, 
etc.?




If you look for examples for harmonic context read i. e. the Real Book 
or some other books about harmonisation. That is music theory and is 
somewhat beyond Lilpond. Such written harmonies most often try to 
describe the skills of a jazz soloist (or a great composer) and map it 
to a sheet of paper. In "classical" music harmonies are not so present 
in the names but more or less hidden in the notes of the orchestral core 
- may be I am wrong?.



If we are hoping to teach a computer program, i.e. LilyPond, to assign
correct names to chords, then we have to really say what the
considerations are that lead one name to be correct over another.



I tried to make clear that there is not just a single correct name for a 
chord. That is only true for the simplest chords of our simple original 
folk music. If one "colours" that up you get the bright colourful 
variety of skilled music that began with the development of orchestral 
events outside the churches and cathedrals and in the brothels of New 
Orleans.



I'd like to think it could be as simple as looking at the current key
signature for a clue, but I realize that's only likely to actually give
the right results in limited cases, and to highlight whatever errors
remain.  Maybe a smarter solution could involve a language model 
(hidden
Markov, context-free grammar, etc.) that could assign a likelihood to 
each
chord name for a set of notes depending on the ones before and after it 
-
like the standard techniques for determining which words in a sentence 
are
nouns and verbs and so on, even though any single word may be 
ambiguous.




AFAK there are some programs that make/support compositions. In my 
opinion that's the field of artificial intelligence and beyond just have 
a nice sheet of music.



It sure would be useful if there were a system of descriptive names for
sonorities *in isolation* that could be understood as giving a single 
name
to the set of notes not commenting on anything else except which notes 
are

and are not present, but I realize that's not the information
conventional chord names are intended to convey.

___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Orm Finnendahl

Am Freitag, den 18. September 2015 um 08:05:03 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Blöchl 
Bernhard:
> If one "colours" that up you get the bright colourful variety of
> skilled music that began with the development of orchestral events outside
> the churches and cathedrals and in the brothels of New Orleans.

 hmm, and what about the colours of Medieval and Renaissance music and
the skills of people like Dufay, Ockeghem or Josquin? I'm really no
church person, but Josquin was singing in the sistine chapel ;-)

--
Orm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Flaming Hakama by Elaine

The most important thing to understand about the way Lilypond does chords,
is that there are three completely different parts.

1) Input syntax
2) Note sets
3) Chord symbols


1) Input syntax

To ask why writing "Csus" does not produce "Csus"?
Is to ask the wrong question.

Because the Input syntax for Lilypond is *not* the same as writing chord
changes.
It is its own special format.

You might complain, why invent another format?  Well, this input format
happens to be very well-defined:  there is only one valid interpretation of
*what notes are in the specified chord*.   Which is the entire point of
this syntax, to offer a shorthand for entering *sets of notes*.

(This is *not* the same thing as specifying the *type* of chord, since--as
many folks have opined--characterizing chords is not well-defined in many
cases.)


The input format is basically like:
[ root ][ duration ] : [ standard modification ] [ highest interval in
chord ] . [ additions and modifications ]

(I am not paying attention to deletions now because I am not familiar
enough with using them to generalize, and they are not part of common usage
of chord symbols.  Plus, anything that can be done with deletions can be
written explicitly in some other constructive way.)

So, "Csus" does not conform to the input syntax.   If you need anything
besides a major triad, you need to have the colon, and then the appropriate
additions and modifications.


Regarding using the syntax, the first thing to ask is, "what is the highest
interval in this chord"?  Which is to say, the highest interval that is
built on thirds.

The reason "C:5" is identical to a major chord is that the "5" is
specifying that the highest interval in the chord is the 5th.  So, you get
1 3 5.

In both of your examples, Csus and C5, there are *no* stacked thirds in the
"chord", so the first number you need to specify after the colon is "1".
Otherwise, you will get a 3rd.


Then, for every other note you need to add, you add a period and the
number, and optional +/- if it is an altered notes.

For the C5 chord, you would add the 5:  "C:1.5"
For the Csus chord, you would add the 4 and 5: "C:1.4.5"


The other approach  is to use modifications rather than additions.

The "standard modification" refers to things that lilypond recognized like
min, aug, dim, susX, which have well-known interpretations ( aug => raise
5th, min => lowered 3rd, , susX => replace 3rd with X, etc.)

Most modifications can also be notated by speciyfing the highest interval,
then modifying the elements afterword:
C:aug7 <==> C:7.5+
C:min <==> C:5.3-

An exception to this is sus.  Logically, I might expect this to work, but
doesn't:
C:sus4 <==> C:5.3+



2) Note sets

So, once you have your input syntax, lilypond converts that into note sets.
So, "C:1.4.5" becomes .

This is why you can have lilypond determine chord symbols from explicitly
written chords:  because the chordal input syntax transforms to this same
format, as an intermediate format.

So, if you already have the note sets, you can transform them into chord
symbols.

>From the point of view of fiddling with chord symbols, however, you won't
have to deal with this intermediate format.

But it is important to realize that this format is the lingua franca of
Lilypond chords.  Your input syntax gets transformed to note sets first,
and then the note sets are what are used to define the chord symbols.


3) Chord symbols

The identification of what chord symbols to print is done as a mapping from
the note sets to markup.

This is a mapping from the note sets (like ) to markup (both symbols
as well as formatting, for things like superscript)

If you don't like the markup Lilypond uses, you need to write custom chord
exceptions.

My explanation for doing that is available at
http://flaminghakama.com/flaming-lilypond-chords



The final comment I have is related to your statement:
"For me it is logic to understand, that c:sus will suspend the 3."

That is a correct *musical* interpretation of Csus. (In my opinion.)

Unfortunately, lilypond does not have a musical interpretation of sus.
Lilypond requires you to explicitly specify an interval to replace the 3rd
with.

I suppose that this is because some people (and Lilypond) think that C:sus2
is equally as valid or usual interpretation of "sus", and therefore
pretends that "sus" is not a well defined chord modification by itself.

Hence, if you are using modifications, why you need to say C:sus4 instead
of C:sus



HTH,


David Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954   "*Confusion is
highly underrated*"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
self-immolation.info
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Thomas Morley

2015-09-19 1:39 GMT+02:00 Thomas Morley :
> 2015-09-19 1:05 GMT+02:00  <70147pers...@telia.com>:
>> On 2015-09-19 00:13, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>
>>> Noeck  writes:
>>>
 Having different *input* syntax for different people according to their
 taste is more complicated and it's doubtable that this is a good aim for
 LilyPond. Exchanging code gets more complicated and small snippets are
 not necessarily self-consistent. You always would have to specify the
 definitions. One example where it is possible is the input language of
 notes (e.g. \language english): In my German (\language deutsch) code >>> e g b> is a C7 chord not a Cmaj7. For note names I like that.
 What I am trying to say: Adjustable input syntax also makes life more
 complicated in other circumstances.
>>>
>>> \language is usually a closed set, so editors like Frescobaldi can be
>>> taught to convert from one to another.  Conversions of freely
>>> user-defined syntaxes is something entirely else, though.
>>>
>> My imagination of the procedure is, as I wrote before, not to change
>> anything internal of LilyPond, but to use some kind of pre processor. This
>> should, by means of a translation table, take my input and translate it into
>> LP code. So when I write c:sus this will be changed to e.g. c:sus4 (or
>> perhaps c:1.4.5) before it is dealt with by LP, and when I write c:5 it is
>> translated into c:1.5.
>>
>> However because of the discussion which has followed my question, I begin to
>> believe that the answer is no. Such a pre processor does not exist today.
>> /Kaj
>
> Such a preprocessor does not exist yet.
> Ofc someone could write a script to transform your input _before_
> LilyPond will see it, but why?
>
> Instead I tackled 'construct-chord-elements' from chord-entry.scm to
> do what you want.
>
> Making equivalent:
>
> \transpose c cis'
> \chordmode {
> \powerChords
> c:sus
> c:5
> c:5-
> c:5+
> }
>
> \transpose c cis'
> \chordmode {
> \powerChords
> c:sus4
> c^3
> c:5-
> c:5+
> }
>
> png attached
>
> Limitation:
> c:sus will not accept any additional argument after sus, c:7sus will
> work, though.
>
> I tried to make it available from inside a user-file, juggling around
> module-this-and-that. It needs to be known in lily-imports.cc. But
> without success.
> Honestly, even if possible, it's beyond my skills.
>
> Thus, you have to put it in chord-entry.scm. Best for now: rename the
> current 'construct-chord-elements' to something else and paste the
> attached code in there then.

Please delete:

  (display-scheme-music
(if (ly:pitch? (car flat-mods))
(ly:pitch-alteration (car flat-mods))
)
  )

It's some forgotten debugging-code.

>
> Please note, it's not really tested.
>
> Actually my OS is heavily broken, likely I'll need to do a complete
> new set up, which I will not tackle before having done a thorough
> back-up.
> But up to now I have not found the time to buy a backup-disk ...
>
> More, I'm not able to use git sufficiently atm, thus, if someone wants
> to turn the code into a patch, please do.
>
> HTH,
>  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean



Sorry - I forgot the M! So once again:


I love all LP users and I do not want to be unpolite - but 
R-T-F-M




Am 18.09.2015 21:20, schrieb Blöchl Bernhard:

Am 18.09.2015 19:53, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:

...

Csus means  it would be fine, if I
could define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering
the music, instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5,


Do you use a different program?
I checked c:1.4.5 and get  and not  as you claim!
Are you really working with lilypond or are you trolling?


to not get  which LP says is the definition.


Where did you find this definition??? Please simply check anything
yourself before encumbering!

\version "2.19.25"

theMusic = \chordmode {
  c:1.4.5
  c:sus4
}

\layout {
  ragged-right = ##t
}

<< \context ChordNames \theMusic
   \context Voice \theMusic




I love all LP users and I do not want to be unpolite - but
R-T-F



So if anyone knows of such a feature in LP, I would be glad to hear
it. So far at least I have not stumbled over it in my reading the
documentation.
/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


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean


Sorry, I am heavily confused and severely irritated.

Csus4 or c:1.4.5 DOES deliver , say Lilypod is meaning  
for c:1.4.5 and csus.

Here my example again:

\version "2.19.25"

theMusic = \chordmode {
  c:1.4.5
  c:sus4
}

<< \context ChordNames \theMusic
   \context Voice \theMusic


So, please explain me, why should one need to tell Lilypond that c:1.4.5 
and c:sus4 should mean  and not  ???


That is to much for my todays evening! I think I should get some hard 
drinks in the Berlin night live - NOW.





Am 18.09.2015 21:25, schrieb Br. Samuel Springuel:

On 2015-09-18 3:20 PM, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:
I believe that you've misread the original poster.  He said that he
knows he can enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5 to get  but he'd like to
know how he can tell Lilypond that Csus should mean  and not .


✝
Br. Samuel, OSB
(R. Padraic Springuel)

PAX ☧ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ

___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Vaughan McAlley

On 19 September 2015 at 07:30, David Kastrup  wrote:
>
> We have an exception for c:13 already (it leaves off the 11).

It would be great if that actually displayed C13. When a 13th is the
most complicated chord you’re using, you have to trawl the docs and do
a whole lot of experimentation just to get a simple C13 displayed.

I did, at least.

Vaughan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Thomas Morley

2015-09-19 1:05 GMT+02:00  <70147pers...@telia.com>:
> On 2015-09-19 00:13, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Noeck  writes:
>>
>>> Having different *input* syntax for different people according to their
>>> taste is more complicated and it's doubtable that this is a good aim for
>>> LilyPond. Exchanging code gets more complicated and small snippets are
>>> not necessarily self-consistent. You always would have to specify the
>>> definitions. One example where it is possible is the input language of
>>> notes (e.g. \language english): In my German (\language deutsch) code >> e g b> is a C7 chord not a Cmaj7. For note names I like that.
>>> What I am trying to say: Adjustable input syntax also makes life more
>>> complicated in other circumstances.
>>
>> \language is usually a closed set, so editors like Frescobaldi can be
>> taught to convert from one to another.  Conversions of freely
>> user-defined syntaxes is something entirely else, though.
>>
> My imagination of the procedure is, as I wrote before, not to change
> anything internal of LilyPond, but to use some kind of pre processor. This
> should, by means of a translation table, take my input and translate it into
> LP code. So when I write c:sus this will be changed to e.g. c:sus4 (or
> perhaps c:1.4.5) before it is dealt with by LP, and when I write c:5 it is
> translated into c:1.5.
>
> However because of the discussion which has followed my question, I begin to
> believe that the answer is no. Such a pre processor does not exist today.
> /Kaj

Such a preprocessor does not exist yet.
Ofc someone could write a script to transform your input _before_
LilyPond will see it, but why?

Instead I tackled 'construct-chord-elements' from chord-entry.scm to
do what you want.

Making equivalent:

\transpose c cis'
\chordmode {
\powerChords
c:sus
c:5
c:5-
c:5+
}

\transpose c cis'
\chordmode {
\powerChords
c:sus4
c^3
c:5-
c:5+
}

png attached

Limitation:
c:sus will not accept any additional argument after sus, c:7sus will
work, though.

I tried to make it available from inside a user-file, juggling around
module-this-and-that. It needs to be known in lily-imports.cc. But
without success.
Honestly, even if possible, it's beyond my skills.

Thus, you have to put it in chord-entry.scm. Best for now: rename the
current 'construct-chord-elements' to something else and paste the
attached code in there then.

Please note, it's not really tested.

Actually my OS is heavily broken, likely I'll need to do a complete
new set up, which I will not tackle before having done a thorough
back-up.
But up to now I have not found the time to buy a backup-disk ...

More, I'm not able to use git sufficiently atm, thus, if someone wants
to turn the code into a patch, please do.

HTH,
 Harm
(define-public (construct-chord-elements root duration modifications)
  "Build a chord on root using modifiers in @var{modifications}.
@code{NoteEvents} have duration @var{duration}.

Notes: Natural 11 is left from chord if not explicitly specified.

Entry point for the parser."
  (let* (
 changed:

  	 (modifications 
  	   (if (and (member sus-modifier modifications)
  	   	(null? (cdr (member sus-modifier modifications
  	   (append
  	   	   modifications
  	   	   (list (ly:make-pitch 0 3)))
  	   modifications))

  	 (flat-mods (flatten-list modifications))
 (base-chord (stack-thirds (ly:make-pitch 0 4 0) the-canonical-chord))
 (complete-chord '())
 (bass #f)
 (inversion #f)
 (lead-mod #f)
 (explicit-11 #f)
 changed:

 (explicit-5 #f)

 (start-additions #t))

(define (interpret-inversion chord mods)
  "Read /FOO part.  Side effect: INVERSION is set."
  (if (and (> (length mods) 1) (eq? (car mods) 'chord-slash))
  (begin
(set! inversion (cadr mods))
(set! mods (cddr mods
  (interpret-bass chord mods))

(define (interpret-bass chord mods)
  "Read /+FOO part.  Side effect: BASS is set."
  (if (and (> (length mods) 1) (eq? (car mods) 'chord-bass))
  (begin
(set! bass (cadr mods))
(set! mods (cddr mods
  (if (pair? mods)
  (ly:warning (_ "Spurious garbage following chord: ~A") mods))
  chord)

(define (interpret-removals  chord mods)
  (define (inner-interpret chord mods)
(if (and (pair? mods) (ly:pitch? (car mods)))
(inner-interpret (remove-step (+ 1  (ly:pitch-steps (car mods))) chord)
 (cdr mods))
(interpret-inversion chord mods)))
  (if (and (pair? mods) (eq? (car mods) 'chord-caret))
  (inner-interpret chord (cdr mods))
  (interpret-inversion chord mods)))

Re: Chords and what they mean



I am just getting off but read your actual posting and your different 
interpretation.


For me it is logic to understand, that c:sus will suspend the 3. What 
should happen with a chord without a 3? A powerchord. Usually one would 
define a substitute for 3, that is not the case with c:sus. Why should 
one wonder about  the result - simply a power chord. What else?


The question why c:5 only just gets a "normal" c chord instead of a 
power chord is not meaningless (at lest for me - as you see). And why to 
use c^3 instead of c:5. Why c:5 does not work ... Lilypond developers 
might rethink?


I worked in computer science whole my life and know that syntax is not 
always logic in a "logical" sense in that so logical science as it is 
called. I think many contradictions are just a question of habituation 
(internalisation of TFM).







Well, (re-)reading docs is always good advice, but I'm pretty sure
from his other posts, he did already.
More thoroughly than others.

Though, yes, Kay could have provided some more code example(s).

But, did you (re-)read his posts, trying to understand?






Anyway, I understood him as follows:

He tried
% 1
\chordmode {
c:sus
c:5
}
and was surprised by the printed output.

Which actually can be achieved by entering
% 2
\chordmode {
c:sus4
c^3
}

And now he asks whether inputting % 1 can be made to return what % 2 
does.



And now I'm thinking about it ...

-Harm

___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Br. Samuel Springuel


On 2015-09-18 3:20 PM, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:

Am 18.09.2015 19:53, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:

...

Csus means  it would be fine, if I
could define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering
the music, instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5,


Do you use a different program?
I checked c:1.4.5 and get  and not  as you claim!
Are you really working with lilypond or are you trolling?


to not get  which LP says is the definition.


Where did you find this definition??? Please simply check anything
yourself before encumbering!


I believe that you've misread the original poster.  He said that he 
knows he can enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5 to get  but he'd like to know 
how he can tell Lilypond that Csus should mean  and not .



✝
Br. Samuel, OSB
(R. Padraic Springuel)

PAX ☧ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread 70147persson


Hi all!

This thread has evolved in a very interesting direction, and although 
the discussion is often, I have to admit, much over my head, as being a, 
however interested, but none the less, musical amateur. I will not break 
this discussion, so I step into the thread via a  side path.


Now I would ask those of you who know LilyPond better than me: is there 
some kind of "pre processor" where I can define the chords the way I 
understand them. You might call it a context, possibly "my" context. 
This may also vary with different music, so maybe you could call it from 
some kind of library via an include command in LP.


At the start of this thread I was learned how to modify the output, 
printing, of my entered chords (via chordNameExceptions etc.), but it 
would be nice, if I also could enter them according to my "context". So 
if I think that e.g. Csus means  it would be fine, if I could 
define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering the music, 
instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5, to not get g> which LP says is the definition.


So if anyone knows of such a feature in LP, I would be glad to hear it. 
So far at least I have not stumbled over it in my reading the documentation.

/Kaj

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Thomas Morley

2015-09-18 21:20 GMT+02:00 Blöchl Bernhard :
>
>
>
>
>
> Am 18.09.2015 19:53, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Csus means  it would be fine, if I
>> could define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering
>> the music, instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5,
>
>
> Do you use a different program?
> I checked c:1.4.5 and get  and not  as you claim!
> Are you really working with lilypond or are you trolling?
>
>> to not get  which LP says is the definition.
>
>
> Where did you find this definition??? Please simply check anything yourself
> before encumbering!
>
> \version "2.19.25"
>
> theMusic = \chordmode {
>   c:1.4.5
>   c:sus4
> }
>
> \layout {
>   ragged-right = ##t
> }
>
> << \context ChordNames \theMusic
>\context Voice \theMusic
>>>
>>>
>
> I love all LP users and I do not want to be unpolite - but
> R-T-F



Well, (re-)reading docs is always good advice, but I'm pretty sure
from his other posts, he did already.
More thoroughly than others.

Though, yes, Kay could have provided some more code example(s).

But, did you (re-)read his posts, trying to understand?



Anyway, I understood him as follows:

He tried
% 1
\chordmode {
c:sus
c:5
}
and was surprised by the printed output.

Which actually can be achieved by entering
% 2
\chordmode {
c:sus4
c^3
}

And now he asks whether inputting % 1 can be made to return what % 2 does.


And now I'm thinking about it ...

-Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Hi Blöchl (et al.),

I agree that it would be interesting to know whether/how one can redefine the 
input such that (e.g.) c:5 gives  (or  or whatever one wants) rather 
than  (current implementation).

However, modulo a language/communication barrier, I’d like to answer your other 
impliciit questions:

> What should happen with a chord without a 3? A powerchord. […] What else?

I would expect c:sus to give , equivalent to c:sus4.

> The question why c:5 only just gets a "normal" c chord instead of a power 
> chord

It’s a good question.
Certainly, composers (like me) who work in musical theatre write C5 to mean … so it would be nice to enter the same in Lilypond.

> And why to use c^3 instead of c:5. Why c:5 does not work

Analogously, c:6 would be ??
Hmmm… I don’t think that’s quite right…

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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Brett Duncan


On 19/09/15 8:49 AM, Kaj Persson wrote:
As you wrote Csus ought to mean that the first third is removed, and 
nothing else. Among professional musicians, which I am not, but I have 
friends who are, this is not the whole truth, there exists a de facto 
standard which does not exactly coincide with the pure logical.
Not exactly - there are several conventions used by musicians, with a 
wide range of similarities and differences, but there is no one 
standard, de facto or otherwise.


Csus is one example, C5 another. So when I work with these people i 
will use their methods and system, not trying to introduce something 
else (more "clever"). Therefore it would be fine if one could adapt LP 
to the current situation.
Well, in this instance that might seem reasonable, where we are only 
talking about simple chords, but where the chords are more complex or 
follow some other convention, adapting LP might prove a lot more 
difficult. For example, a lot of jazz charts follow a widely used 
convention where minor chords are denoted with a minus sign and 
augmented chords are denoted with a plus sign, i.e.  F-7, G+. But LP 
uses these symbols in \chordmode for alterations.


But this all just points to the fact that there is a distinction between 
how chords are entered and how they are displayed. And given that the 
same chord can be displayed several different ways, that distinction 
cannot really be avoided. For my own purposes, the default chord names 
generated by LP are far from ideal, so like many I have a separate file 
of chord exceptions that I include when I need it. So long as the input 
method allows me to create the chords I need in a reasonably way and I 
can get the output to appear as I need it to, there is no need to make 
the input take the same form as the output.


Brett

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread 70147persson

On 2015-09-19 00:13, David Kastrup wrote:

Noeck writes:

Having different *input* syntax for different people according to their
taste is more complicated and it's doubtable that this is a good aim for
LilyPond. Exchanging code gets more complicated and small snippets are
not necessarily self-consistent. You always would have to specify the
definitions. One example where it is possible is the input language of
notes (e.g. \language english): In my German (\language deutsch) code is a C7 chord not a Cmaj7. For note names I like that.
What I am trying to say: Adjustable input syntax also makes life more
complicated in other circumstances.

\language is usually a closed set, so editors like Frescobaldi can be
taught to convert from one to another. Conversions of freely
user-defined syntaxes is something entirely else, though.

My imagination of the procedure is, as I wrote before, not to change
anything internal of LilyPond, but to use some kind of pre processor.
This should, by means of a translation table, take my input and
translate it into LP code. So when I write c:sus this will be changed to
e.g. c:sus4 (or perhaps c:1.4.5) before it is dealt with by LP, and when
I write c:5 it is translated into c:1.5.

However because of the discussion which has followed my question, I
begin to believe that the answer is no. Such a pre processor does not
exist today.

/Kaj

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread David Kastrup

Noeck  writes:

> Having different *input* syntax for different people according to their
> taste is more complicated and it's doubtable that this is a good aim for
> LilyPond. Exchanging code gets more complicated and small snippets are
> not necessarily self-consistent. You always would have to specify the
> definitions. One example where it is possible is the input language of
> notes (e.g. \language english): In my German (\language deutsch) code  e g b> is a C7 chord not a Cmaj7. For note names I like that.
> What I am trying to say: Adjustable input syntax also makes life more
> complicated in other circumstances.

\language is usually a closed set, so editors like Frescobaldi can be
taught to convert from one to another.  Conversions of freely
user-defined syntaxes is something entirely else, though.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Kaj Persson


On 2015-09-18 21:39, Thomas Morley wrote:

2015-09-18 21:20 GMT+02:00 Blöchl Bernhard :





Am 18.09.2015 19:53, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:

...

Csus means  it would be fine, if I
could define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering
the music, instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5,


Do you use a different program?
I checked c:1.4.5 and get  and not  as you claim!
Are you really working with lilypond or are you trolling?


to not get  which LP says is the definition.


Where did you find this definition??? Please simply check anything yourself
before encumbering!

\version "2.19.25"

theMusic =chordmode {
   c:1.4.5
   c:sus4
}

\layout {
   ragged-right =#t
}

<< \context ChordNames \theMusic
\context Voice \theMusic



I love all LP users and I do not want to be unpolite - but
R-T-F



Well, (re-)reading docs is always good advice, but I'm pretty sure
from his other posts, he did already.
More thoroughly than others.

Though, yes, Kay could have provided some more code example(s).

But, did you (re-)read his posts, trying to understand?



Anyway, I understood him as follows:

He tried
% 1
\chordmode {
 c:sus
 c:5
}
and was surprised by the printed output.

Which actually can be achieved by entering
% 2
\chordmode {
 c:sus4
 c^3
}

And now he asks whether inputting % 1 can be made to return what % 2 does.


And now I'm thinking about it ...

-Harm


Yes, one should never take things for granted. Now I tried to be 
concise, not using too many words, but obviously it was too short and 
brief. But Samuel and Harm did exactly express what I meant and should 
have written. So thank you Bernhard for trying to understand my thoughts 
even if expressed so dimly.


By the way, as I said before, I am not that clever, and familiar with 
all these advanced ways of expressing oneself, so your shorthand message 
is a first time experience for me. A try to use my imagination could 
maybe be something like Read-The-???-Manual, but this is just a guess. 
If so, I can really tell that I have read it, but there are so many 
possibilities with LilyPond, that the more special ones are often hiding.


I was late, so i did not see that you, Bernhard, had already sent 
another post, but Kieren has very clearly answered exactly the way I 
would have done. Being a computer engineer (correct?) (so am I), you are 
perhaps used to compilers, which by necessity must be very strict in 
dealing with the code, and you might think this naming of chords is a 
non consistent way of writing. As you wrote Csus ought to mean that the 
first third is removed, and nothing else. Among professional musicians, 
which I am not, but I have friends who are, this is not the whole truth, 
there exists a de facto standard which does not exactly coincide with 
the pure logical. Csus is one example, C5 another. So when I work with 
these people i will use their methods and system, not trying to 
introduce something else (more "clever"). Therefore it would be fine if 
one could adapt LP to the current situation.

/Kaj

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Noeck

Hi Kaj, Kieren,

Am 18.09.2015 um 22:47 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
>> The question why c:5 only just gets a "normal" c chord instead of a power 
>> chord
> It’s a good question.
> Certainly, composers (like me) who work in musical theatre write C5 to mean 
> … so it would be nice to enter the same in Lilypond.

Answering why is easy: The number indicates the step up to which thirds
are added [1] and between c and g you can put the usual 2 thirds.
The question is more whether that is a desirable logic, because this
standard C chord is already entered as c and – as posted several times –
C5 usually/often indicates  in scores. So this could qualify for an
exception.

Back to the question by Kaj whether the input language could be
adaptable: I would say, flexible ways of specifying the *output* is a
design goal of LilyPond and you can tweak almost everything to your
liking in the output on paper. Like the chord exceptions others posted.

Having different *input* syntax for different people according to their
taste is more complicated and it's doubtable that this is a good aim for
LilyPond. Exchanging code gets more complicated and small snippets are
not necessarily self-consistent. You always would have to specify the
definitions. One example where it is possible is the input language of
notes (e.g. \language english): In my German (\language deutsch) code  is a C7 chord not a Cmaj7. For note names I like that.
What I am trying to say: Adjustable input syntax also makes life more
complicated in other circumstances.

Cheers,
Joram

[1]:
http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/chord-mode.html#extended-and-altered-chords

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean


I just was rereading your post as Charm (in a later post) recommended.

If I interpret you correctly, you would like a personal chord library 
yourself? A library you can maintain/care yourself? Good idea! Harm was 
sending me a piece of code for arabic scales (many thanks!!! Great! 
Works perfect). With this I had the idea to segment Lilypond to some 
"special interest segments" overlaying a general Lilypond basis. 
(Finding appropriate segments is an art!) I am sure some people use jazz 
harmonics other never will. Or arabic quarte tone scales ... etc.


Special interest groups? That should not necessarily mean a segmentation 
of the blog.


Regards


Am 18.09.2015 19:53, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:

Hi all!

This thread has evolved in a very interesting direction, and although
the discussion is often, I have to admit, much over my head, as being
a, however interested, but none the less, musical amateur. I will not
break this discussion, so I step into the thread via a  side path.

Now I would ask those of you who know LilyPond better than me: is
there some kind of "pre processor" where I can define the chords the
way I understand them. You might call it a context, possibly "my"
context. This may also vary with different music, so maybe you could
call it from some kind of library via an include command in LP.

At the start of this thread I was learned how to modify the output,
printing, of my entered chords (via chordNameExceptions etc.), but it
would be nice, if I also could enter them according to my "context".
So if I think that e.g. Csus means  it would be fine, if I
could define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering
the music, instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5,
to not get  which LP says is the definition.

So if anyone knows of such a feature in LP, I would be glad to hear
it. So far at least I have not stumbled over it in my reading the
documentation.
/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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread David Kastrup

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> Hi Blöchl (et al.),
>
> I agree that it would be interesting to know whether/how one can
> redefine the input such that (e.g.) c:5 gives  (or  or
> whatever one wants) rather than  (current implementation).
>
> However, modulo a language/communication barrier, I’d like to answer
> your other impliciit questions:
>
>> What should happen with a chord without a 3? A powerchord. […] What else?
>
> I would expect c:sus to give , equivalent to c:sus4.
>
>> The question why c:5 only just gets a "normal" c chord instead of a
>> power chord
>
> It’s a good question.
> Certainly, composers (like me) who work in musical theatre write C5 to
> mean … so it would be nice to enter the same in Lilypond.
>
>> And why to use c^3 instead of c:5. Why c:5 does not work
>
> Analogously, c:6 would be ??
> Hmmm… I don’t think that’s quite right…

We have an exception for c:13 already (it leaves off the 11).  For me
the main question is if c:5 is , what should c:5- and c:5+ be?  If
we find a satisfactory answer for that (I'm pretty much convinced that
they should stay  and  respectively and that basically
anything not starting with 5 should also stay the same, like c:m5 or
c:dim5 or c:sus5), it should not be hard to implement this input
exception.

I also don't see a point in needing a \powerchords command or similar in
order to have  be output as C5 rather than C.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread mskala

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:
> I tried to make clear that there is not just a single correct name for a
> chord. That is only true for the simplest chords of our simple original folk

When someone enters a set of notes and asks LilyPond to print the chord
name, there's such a thing as a wrong answer, even if there may also be
more than one answer you would call correct.  LilyPond has to print
something and it would be preferable that it prints one of the correct
answers.  What rules should LilyPond follow to determine what it prints?

-- 
Matthew Skala
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before principles.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread mskala

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, BB wrote:
> Can you really feed some notes to Lilypond and it tells you the name of the
> chord? A kind of reverse chord finder? I have not found in the manual.

I thought that was the point under discussion.  It's in the manual here:
   
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/displaying-chords#printing-chord-names

In the second chunk of example code, there's music entered like 2
and LilyPond assigning chord names to it.

If that's not what was being discussed, I'd better go back to lurking.
-- 
Matthew Skala
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before principles.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Hi Matthew,

>> Can you really feed some notes to Lilypond and it tells you the name of the
>> chord? A kind of reverse chord finder? I have not found in the manual.
> 
> I thought that was the point under discussion.  It's in the manual here:
>   
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/displaying-chords#printing-chord-names

The difference between _labelling_ a chord and _analyzing_ a chord is immense, 
especially in terms of the programming/processing required.
(Of course those functions overlap in the hands of an arranger/engraver…)

> If that's not what was being discussed, I'd better go back to lurking.

Don’t! It’s a good discussion (IMO).

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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Urs Liska



Am 18.09.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
> Hi Urs,
>
>>> What's with ? It is  Em#5 or C/E 
>> While we're at being picky, that would have to be Em with a flattened 6 …
> While _technically_ correct, you’d definitely want to write Em#5 for any 
> musical theatre performers/MDs, or most of the jazzers I know.
>
> And changing it to B# isn’t necessarily the right answer either.  ;)

Perfect example of "context".
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 .

Or some composers (mainly around the first half of the 20th century)
that think it's a good idea to "disguise" simple things without any real
harmonic need/consistency, e.g. chords like





I've seen all these and usually get confused by them because often it
really acts as blurring simplicity instead of indicating actual
alteration situations.

Another "real-world" example:
Have a look at the chord in the middle of measure 7 of this Schubert song:
http://imslp.org/wiki/File:SchubertD744_Schwanengesang.pdf
That chord has eleven flats on its seven notes (two c flats aren't
re-printed)!
Well, structurally it's simply a minor 7th chord which just happens to
be in the "distant" key of f flat minor ...

Going to the extreme that way is completely in line with the textual
interpretation of the song and the words (the feeling of dying that runs
"dissolvingly" through our body) - as it's dissolving the boundaries of
common tonality.

I suppose (but can't check right now) that the Mandyczewski edition goes
back to the manuscript, but someone (actually it must have been at least
approved by Schubert) thought it would be a good idea to "simplify" that
chord in the first edition:
http://petrucci.mus.auth.gr/imglnks/usimg/9/91/IMSLP370538-PMLP39282-LOEB_12363625_3.pdf
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.

Urs

>
> 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

Re: Chords and what they mean

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  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

Re: Chords and what they mean

Hi Urs,

>> What's with ? It is  Em#5 or C/E 
> While we're at being picky, that would have to be Em with a flattened 6 …

While _technically_ correct, you’d definitely want to write Em#5 for any 
musical theatre performers/MDs, or most of the jazzers I know.

And changing it to B# isn’t necessarily the right answer either.  ;)

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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread BB

Can you really feed some notes to Lilypond and it tells you the name of 
the chord? A kind of reverse chord finder? I have not found in the manual.


Is'nt the composer the person to define the desired sound in defining 
notes and chord colours?


Again: There is not just one single name for an essamble of more than 
three notes. And even with three notes there are inversions possible. A 
c chord usually is , with c the lowest note and g the highest. 
What's with ? It is  Em#5 or C/E - you have the choice. And e> is C/G or Em#5/G. Now do the same with 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ... note chords.



On 18.09.2015 09:10, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, Blöchl Bernhard wrote:

I tried to make clear that there is not just a single correct name for a
chord. That is only true for the simplest chords of our simple original folk

When someone enters a set of notes and asks LilyPond to print the chord
name, there's such a thing as a wrong answer, even if there may also be
more than one answer you would call correct.  LilyPond has to print
something and it would be preferable that it prints one of the correct
answers.  What rules should LilyPond follow to determine what it prints?



___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Urs Liska



Am 18.09.2015 um 15:39 schrieb BB:
> What's with ? It is  Em#5 or C/E 
While we're at being picky, that would have to be Em with a flattened 6 ...

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Chords and what they mean

Hi all,

On Sep 17, 2015, at 10:10 PM, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
> If we are hoping to teach a computer program, i.e. LilyPond, to assign
> correct names to chords, then we have to really say what the
> considerations are that lead one name to be correct over another.

I don’t think anyone here is really hoping to teach Lily to assign correct 
names to chords. And since there are, between human musicians and theorists, 
significant disagreements about “correct”/“best" naming conventions — not to 
mention that a single arranger might have difficulty choosing between two (or 
more) names for the same chord — I think the artificial intelligence required 
is far beyond the scope of what Lilypond will ever have.***

What __is__ being done, as far as I can tell, is providing a mechanism for 
__users__ to tell Lilypond what to __print__ (not “assign”) when faced with a 
given vertical intervallic structure (a.k.a. “chord”), and supplying reasonable 
__defaults__ (so the user mustn’t start from zero).

Hope this helps!
Kieren.

*** Then again, some intrepid person with a lot of time on their hands and 
excellent coding skills might want to tackle such a Herculean task. There might 
be a “beauty score” that could be calculated in light of the harmonic movement 
before and after the chord in question — much like the way Lily decides between 
multiple slur options, the “best” chord name __might__ be calculable with, for 
some users, an acceptable failure rate.

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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread BB

Does Medivial and Renaissance music, Dufay, Ockeghem or Josquin really 
use chords in their sheets?

The subject of that thread is "Chords and what they mean".


On 18.09.2015 08:41, Orm Finnendahl wrote:

Am Freitag, den 18. September 2015 um 08:05:03 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Blöchl 
Bernhard:

If one "colours" that up you get the bright colourful variety of
skilled music that began with the development of orchestral events outside
the churches and cathedrals and in the brothels of New Orleans.

  hmm, and what about the colours of Medieval and Renaissance music and
the skills of people like Dufay, Ockeghem or Josquin? I'm really no
church person, but Josquin was singing in the sistine chapel ;-)

--
Orm

___
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

Re: Chords and what they mean







Am 18.09.2015 19:53, schrieb 70147pers...@telia.com:

...

Csus means  it would be fine, if I
could define this once, and then use my definition(s) when entering
the music, instead of, like today, having to enter Csus4 or c:1.4.5,


Do you use a different program?
I checked c:1.4.5 and get  and not  as you claim!
Are you really working with lilypond or are you trolling?


to not get  which LP says is the definition.


Where did you find this definition??? Please simply check anything 
yourself before encumbering!


\version "2.19.25"

theMusic = \chordmode {
  c:1.4.5
  c:sus4
}

\layout {
  ragged-right = ##t
}

<< \context ChordNames \theMusic
   \context Voice \theMusic




I love all LP users and I do not want to be unpolite - but 
R-T-F




So if anyone knows of such a feature in LP, I would be glad to hear
it. So far at least I have not stumbled over it in my reading the
documentation.
/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

Re: Chords and what they mean

2015-09-18 Thread Urs Liska



Am 18.09.2015 um 17:06 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
> 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 > 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.

Yes, but reading the chord from the later edition (i.e. the harmonically
"correct" spelling) is much simpler because it allows me to "grasp" its
function as a seventh of a minor sub dominant from how the noteheads are
laid out on the page.
The seemingly simpler chord in the original edition doesn't "speak" to
me at all, and I'm forced to go through it note by note. That is I have
to find the correct place for each finger and only then will be able to
understand what it "is".

So the question of "simpler" is a question of context (i.e. background
on the reader's part).

Urs

>
> 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

Re: Chords and what they mean