[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: chord labeling
Re: chord labeling
Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:20:47 +0100 (CET)
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Edward Sanford Sutton, III wrote:
> I know a chord can be labeled as Cm, but is there a way to label them for
> harmonic analysis? I have only figured out how to get so far with stuff like:
> <c e g>_\markup "i"
> The last time I attempted such markings was on a cadential I 6/4 chord. I
> found that using \column in a markup statement was about as far as I was
> getting (which would still need work).
AFAIK (if I am wrong, please tell me!), functional harmonic analysis
always assumes the existence of a tonal basis as reference point. For
example, in c major, <c e g> is annotated as "I", <f a c> is "IV" and <g b
d f> is "V7", since c, f and g are the 1st, 4th and 5th in c major. Some
people also write "T" (tonic), "S" (sub dominant), "D" (dominant) for "I",
IV", "V", respectively; thus <g b d f> is "D7" in c major.
Unfortunately, the key signature of a piece seldomly is useful as a tonal
basis reference point, since (especially for music after 1800) the tonal
basis changes quite often within a peace, but the key signature of the
printed music does not follow these fine-grained tonal changes all the
time. Finding the tonal basis automatically may be feasible for pieces
with very simple harmonics; but for such pieces, harmonic analysis is
probably not very interesting to apply. Figured bass also does not give
any hints for finding the tonal basis, since it uses the bass note as
reference point rather than the tonal basis.
Hence, I currently do not see any way for automating annotation of
harmonic analysis unless you explicitly provide the tonal basis (maybe one
could add kind of fine-grained key signature change feature to lily that
does not affect the key signature engraver, but is used for harmonic
analysis only). So, I guess, using markup is currently the only sensible
way for annotating harmonic analysis.