Re: Chords and what they mean

[Brett Duncan]

On 21/09/15 7:48 AM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:
> Modifying the input syntax such that c:5 means <c g> seems ill-advised.

I was thinking much the same, until I read something that David Kastrup 
wrote:
> I think it is not an outlandish expectation, once you see how a:maj and
> a:dim and a:min work, to have c:sus turn out a recognizable suspended
> chord rather than a power chord (which is anything but a suspended
> chord).  It's not hard to learn c:sus4 for sure.  But anything that
> works according to naive expectations without causing other problems
> leaves more time to learn more important things.

Given that sus and power chords are fairly commonly used, removing a 
potential stumbling block for the 'naive' user does not seem unreasonable.

This does raise the question of other "naive" constructions. I have seen 
on some contemporary music charts notations like C2 and C4, which 
apparently meant Cadd2 and Cadd4 respectively (except in one case, where 
Cadd4 did not sound right, and only after hearing a recording did it 
become clear that the chord was a Csus4).

Currently, LP's \chordmode interprets c:2 to be the chord <c d>, and 
outputs a chord name of Csus2. It interprets c:4 as <c e f> and outputs 
a chord name of C4 sus4 3 (!)

But to what extent should the the "naive" user be catered for?

Brett