Re:Chords and what they mean
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:
> However, if you view lilypond as a notation program,
> then the practical question becomes,
> if I want to print a certain chord symbol,
> what to I write for the input
> (and do I need to customize the chord symbol for that note set)?
Excellent point. All this talk of chords on the list inspired me to try
to add chord names to one of my microtonal pieces. There didn't seem much
point feeding the actual music (which is entered as note sets, not chord
names) into \chords , but I figured if I could find the right input to
produce each symbol I wanted, then I could just give \chords a sequence of
those inputs.
That didn't work very well - not only did my changed note names screw
things up, but I even found one case where as far as I can tell, two
identical inputs produced two different chord symbols. This was a Bb7
harmonic chord, which in one case printed as B\flat\super{7 5} and in
another as B\flat\super{7 5 8} with as far as I can tell *identical* note
sets described by identical input. I'll try to come up with a minimum
working example if this is of interest.
What seems like it would be most useful for me would be to forget about
LilyPond's chord-naming translation from note sets to symbols, and just
use markup to add symbols of my choice wherever I want them. So that
raises the question: what's the easiest or cleanest way to place markup
so that it will look like chord symbols, typically appearing above the
staff at the start of a bar, but a little after the barline, not right
above it? Would it work to code it as some modified kind of rehearsal
marks, or maybe lyrics?
> You would "suspend" the third, but then play a 3rd anyway?
> Since the 5 is in every C chord (except augmented or diminished),
> why would "sus" have anything to do with 5?
Bear in mind that the original meaning of "suspend" here was not "remove,"
"raise," or "lower"... it came from classical harmony where a note from
the previous chord would continue into the new one so that it would end up
as the second or fourth of the new chord. Then you'd remove the third of
the new chord so it wouldn't clash with the suspended note. It's really
the *presence* of the second or fourth, and possibly only in the context
where that note was in the previous chord, that makes the chord a
suspended chord. It's not the absence of the third; the third is not the
thing that's being suspended. And so if we're using that definition of
suspension, a chord with just the root and fifth, such as might be written
C5 , is not suspended. I realize this is not necessarily the current
usage of the term.
--
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
Am 21.09.2015 08:14, schrieb msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca: ... It's not the absence of the third; the third is not the thing that's being suspended. You are correct. With removing the third you eliminate the character of the "chord" as major or minor to avoid clashes etc. to suspend ... And it is not a "chord" any longer but a necessary prerequisite for the technique of "suspension" as you described. (And may be one adds an additional tone for suspension...) But it has become synonyme for the technique of removing the third and everybody will interpret any "sus" with this implication irrespective of music theory. And so if we're using that definition of suspension, a chord with just the root and fifth, such as might be written C5 , is not suspended. I realize this is not necessarily the current usage of the term. If c:sus is a simple way to get C5 and I like it better than c^3, why should not one use it? The syntax of Lilypond is "music notation for everyone" and not ( I think it is not planed to be ) a map of music theory. To map music theory you need "rule based programs" or the methods of "artificial intelligence" and do not forget that taste and theory of music will change. And let me add: Why should not a 5 "chord" suspend in your sense or transit to a new tonality? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re:Chords and what they mean
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. The problem would still remain, regardless of what input syntax you use to specify , Lilypond will still not print C5, out of the box. For that, you need to use customized chord exceptions. Or I think I saw someone post something about \powerchords, so perhaps that is the shortest path? My point being, the c:5 interpretation is not the actual hurdle in the task of printing C5 as a chord symbol. Regarding the change so that c:sus means rather than , that seems warranted since I agree that "is anything but a suspended chord." But I also agree that is it no big deal, in that we are talking about the input syntax, not actual chord symbols. Such a change would only negatively affect anyone who used c:sus to indicate a power chord. Regarding the "what chords mean" question, I share everyone's enthusiasm for tackling music theory questions, as well as colourful ways of voicing common chord symbols. However, if you view lilypond as a notation program, then the practical question becomes, if I want to print a certain chord symbol, what to I write for the input (and do I need to customize the chord symbol for that note set)? So, the questions about inversions and complicated sus chords seem to be a bit of a diversion on the topic of how to notate C5. However, I have a few comments about these topics anyway. > 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.) When you say that there is a difference between D7sus and D7sus4, are you saying that you want to be able to notate chords as D7sus, in addition to and distinct from notating chords as D7sus4? If so, that is an actual task since, to do so, you would have to have them defined by different note sets. If is D7sus4, what notes would you want to mean D7sus? > > 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! It is difficult to understand the musical motivation behind this argument. You would "suspend" the third, but then play a 3rd anyway? Since the 5 is in every C chord (except augmented or diminished), why would "sus" have anything to do with 5? My opinion derives only from experience. I have never seen, in classical usage, the term "suspended" chord refer to anything other than a chord where the 3rd is not present in in its place there is either the 2 or 4. The reasons I say that 4 is the default is that, for starters, 4-3 is way more common. It can also be "explained" by common voice-leading rules as to why the motion 4-3 is more compelling than 2-3 in terms of suspension-resolution: 4-3 it is a closer interval, and the motion is downward. Finally, consider the terminology: Do you "suspend" things by lowering them? No, typically, things are suspended by raising them. When things are no longer suspended, they lower back to the ground. Hence, 4-3 as the canonical suspended sound. Regarding higher numbers like Dsus7, that is usually a shorthand for D7sus4. The sus still refers to replacing the 3rd with a neighbor, not replacing the 3rd with the 7th. 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
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.
>
I'm glad it was helpful, despite using the the lilypond english.
> The m7b5 chord (your example) in the jazz slang usually/often is called
> "half diminished" an uses the slashed 0 "?" symbolically "halving" the
> 0.I do not think that m7b5 is better or more worse than "?", 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.
>
Yes, the "empty set" symbol is my preferred symbol, too.
And I think it's the lilypond default.
But lots of folks query the list to ask how to get m7b5, so that's why that
example exists.
> 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?
>
Thanks for the note. That is what happens when you cut and paste ascii
text into a blog and don't escape brackets!
> 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 ...
>
Regarding the c:5.3+, I'm not sure it is motivated by a musical example,
but more of a thought experiment.
But before going any further, it is worth pointing out that I fell into the
trap I was trying to describe:
Just because lilypond prints just "C" for a chord, that doesn't mean that
it thinks the notes are .
Am 19.09.2015 02:30, schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine:
> > 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.
>
So, when I tried out the examples from my post,
I didn't realize that I don't have these various power chords defined
(yet),
so lilypond defaulted to the symbol for major.
I didn't bother to check what the note sets were, I just tested it from
input syntax to printed symbols.
Which was supposed to be the point of my reply:
when the chord name you want isn't being printed, you first have to find
out what note set it is. Then, you can customize that name in the chord
exceptions.
Thanks for checking what actually comes out more thoroughly!
> > Lilypond requires you to explicitly specify an interval to replace the
> > 3rd with.
>
I now believe this to be a false statement, based on your examples.
Lilypond seems to be consistent in its interpretation of sus as omit 3.
> 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.
>
Again, my issue was that I don't have C5 defined in the chord symbol
exceptions.
> > 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 tend to think that the sus implies 4, unless otherwise noted.
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.
> 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#
> }
>
Thanks for actually trying this and clarifying the discussion.
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
