[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: polychords: what's the current state-of-the-art?

From: Kieren MacMillan
Subject: Re: polychords: what's the current state-of-the-art?
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:44:57 -0400

Hi Carl!

Do you remember off-hand how polychords were handled in the GSoC code?
What was the syntax? Could it handle more than two in the stack? etc.


> On Aug 9, 2022, at 11:14 AM, Kieren MacMillan <> 
> wrote:
> Hi Valentin,
>> In my opinion the main issue here is that the chord naming strategy
>> of first transforming theoretical respesentation of a chord into
>> a bunch of notes to then have some function try to make sense
>> of that and turn in again into a theoretical representation of a chord
>> is absolute madness if we do actually already know how this chord should 
>> look.
>> Suppose we had a different way of specifying chords not as a bunch of notes, 
>> but in a representation that preserves the theoretical meaning of such a  
>> chord.
> The GSoC chord work was moving in exactly that direction!
>> This way we could have a transposable syntax to say e.g. des|c
> Well, we wouldn't want to overload the bar-check feature, of course!  ;)
> Maybe you're interested in picking up the GSoC chord ball and taking it 
> across the goal line? In mid-September, I might have a little more bandwidth 
> to sit down with Carl again and try it myself… but given my track record, I'd 
> be more optimistic about the outcome if there were multiple developers 
> working with me.
> Cheers,
> Kieren.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]