Re:Chords and what they mean

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

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 <c f g>."
But <c f g> 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 <c e g>.

 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 mind about what you want, exactly.

By adding power chords to the chord symbol exceptions, then I would expect any chord that evaluates to 1 5, would show up as C5.  So, c:sus5, c:sus and c:1.5  would show up as C5.

(In terms of "logical" consistency, I'm not sure that I care about what c:sus3 does.)

Even exotic chords as c:7sus work correctly in the note pattern, but
will be called C7 omitting the sus ...

As long as you add the note sets to your chord symbol exceptions,

you can get the symbols you want.

 

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

More rubbish.  Sorry about that.

 

> 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.

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"

address@hidden
self-immolation.info
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-