|
From: | BB |
Subject: | Re: Chords and what they mean |
Date: | Sun, 20 Sep 2015 09:58:18 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 |
On 20.09.2015 03:30, Flaming Hakama by
Elaine wrote:
c:sus is working correctly getting root and 5, but indeed is an "unconventional" _expression_ to get a C5 ...
Why? Why not 2 or 3 or 5 or 6 or 7? I disagree!
Rereading the chord example I found the shown line to be wrong, as you first suspend the 3 with sus but add a 3 afterwards and so you will really get a C chord. The line with c:1.4.2 is wrong as well. I add a reversed and extended test version - please check yourself \version "2.19.25" #(set-global-staff-size 30) chordtest = \chordmode { c:sus %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C c:sus3 % power chord Lilypond calls it correctly as C c:sus5 %power chord Lilypond calls it wrong as C c:1.4.5 % equal to: c:sus4 c:1.5.2 % 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# c:sus6 c:sus7 :sus }
<< \context ChordNames \chordtest \context Voice \chordtest >>
:sus will intelligently be ignored. From a standpoint of logic Lilypond works perfect with c:sus7and c:7 sus, even as this is not a conventional handling of chord extension. Check youself if you would call one or another wrong ...
That was only just my statement to and a check of to the naming convention of Liypond. In a process of software development one would call it "debugging" ... I get Lilypond as ist is and have to use it as it is. Using software means smart handling the chaos and I loved it in my professional career. |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |