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 a
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
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 necessaril
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 ess
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
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 he
Here I come, 50's :)
Instruments: keyboards and acoustic guitar.
Started using Lilypond in combination with Sublime Text 2 in 2013 to typeset
my own music, after getting frustrated with Sibelius. I have learned about
Lilypond through Steinberg's blog on their new notation software.
Currently con
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/Documenta
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
Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse
oculis meis vidi in ampulle pendere, et cum
illi pueri dicerent: Σίβυλλα τί θέλεις;
respondebat illa: άποθανεΐν θέλω.
[I saw myself with my own eyes the Cumaean Sibyl hanging in a bottle,
and when the boys said to her "Sibyl, what's your desire?"
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/nota
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 mo
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 f
Hi Urs,
> the question of "simpler" is a question of context (i.e. background on the
> reader's part).
Agreed.
“Simpler” is also a question of practicality: for most pianists I know or have
worked with, Bb7/D is significantly easier to parse at sight than A#7/Cx,
regardless of what comes befo
Pardon my ignorance RE: string notation.
An 1800's typeset I'm transcribing uses different fonts for what I figured
were all fingering indications.
Is there a significance for the use of unique fonts for notes having both
upper and lower number indications?
I wondered if the lower digit may poin
Hi, I've looked at your score and I fall into the Simon Albrecht camp,
but I'll reply privately with questions of preference.
I have a copy of OUP's Rutter 1893 version, only the vocal, not the
full score. It's in the OUP's larger format (inconvenient for folders)
and I've never sung from it (my w
"Javier Ruiz-Alma" writes:
> Pardon my ignorance RE: string notation.
>
> An 1800's typeset I'm transcribing uses different fonts for what I figured
> were all fingering indications.
>
> Is there a significance for the use of unique fonts for notes having both
> upper and lower number indications
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 w
> No, both are fingerings. The upper fingering is the recommended version
> for best phrasing and distribution across strings, the lower fingering
> is the simpler version mainly in first position (not sure whether the I
> is supposed to indicate position or the E string, I think the latter),
> on
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 a
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 o
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 diffe
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.
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
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
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 quest
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
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
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 i
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 s
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 t
Hi,
Alright! This should do it...
You can:
--Adapt this for versions < 2.19.27 with a loss of overriding power (style,
dash-fraction, etc.)--see comments beginning in line 435
--Use/mix markups and strings.
--Specify any number of texts >= 2 for your spanner.
--Break it across an arbitrary n
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-c
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
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 tha
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
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
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
I noticed some erroneous alto lyrics invading recent CPDL editions of
Farmer's Fair Phyllis. I think the cause was some overenthusiastic
factoring of the lyrics using tagging. So I thought I'd run up a copy
myself, producing folded/unfolded scores from one source file.
However I found, like others
Am 18.09.2015 um 08:40 schrieb bart deruyter:
Hi all,
[...]
For inversions one might choose a number based on the n'th note of a
chord, for example 2 as the second note from the root note, which in the
case of c:m would result in a ees as the lowest note and display a
fretboard diagram accordin
40 matches
Mail list logo