Re: Chord names broken since 2.16

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi all,

>> you might be true in this special case, but I (in my personal view)
>> consider this to be inconsistent. And that is why:
>> Csus2 = <c d g>
>> Cadd9 = <c e g d>
>> Csus4 = <c f g>
>> Cadd11 = <c e g f>

> I think you misread Kieren's comment.
> He was suggesting add2 as a clearer alternative to add9.
> Not sus2, but add2.

Yes.

> For starters, the 2nd and 9th are synonymous, so there is no lack of clarity 
> about which notes are in the chord in either case.
> And with a 2, you don't introduce the concept of "but what about the 7th?" 
> that naturally pops into one's head when you see a chord with a 9th.

Correct. The 9 is always reserved for a chord with a 7 in it; the 2 is reserved 
for chords without the 7th. This makes for quick differentiation at sight.

By the way: while I agree 100% with the notation

   <c d g> = Csus2 / Cadd2

in the musical theatre world, that has now (thankfully!) been short-handed to 
just C2, because it is oh-so-very-common (far more than in the jazz world, in 
my experience). Another common short-hand is C5, which would otherwise be 
written as C(no3); again, the compactness and sight-readability is appreciated 
by those of us “in the trenches”.

Cheers,
Kieren.

_______________________

Kieren MacMillan, composer
www:  <http://www.kierenmacmillan.info>
email:  address@hidden