Re: Chords and what they mean

[Blöchl Bernhard]

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.

The m7b5 chord (your example) in the jazz slang usually/often is called 
"half diminished" an uses the slashed 0 "ø" symbolically "halving" the 
0.I do not think that m7b5 is better or more worse than "ø", 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.

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?

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 ...


Am 19.09.2015 02:30, schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine:
> 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
....
> My explanation for doing that is available at
> http://flaminghakama.com/flaming-lilypond-chords [1]
>
> 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.

... would expect some knowledge base or composition rules or artificial 
intelligence ... Lilypond user would complain oppression ...

> Lilypond requires you to explicitly specify an interval to replace the
> 3rd with.

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.

> 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.

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#
}

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

> therefore pretends that "sus" is not a well defined chord modification
> by itself.
>
> Hence, if you are using modifications, why you need to say C:sus4
> instead of C:sus
>
> HTH,
>
> David Elaine Alt
>
> 415 . 341
> .4954
>           "_Confusion is highly underrated_"
> address@hidden
> self-immolation.info [2]
>  skype: flaming_hakama
> Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://flaminghakama.com/flaming-lilypond-chords
> [2] http://self-immolation.info