Since we are trying to get a new standard out:
Are we happy with the existing draft?
> The chord has the format <note><accidental><type>/<bass>, where <note>
> can be A-G, the optional <accidental> can be b, #, the optional <type>
> is one or more of
> m or min minor
> maj major
> dim diminished
> aug or + augmented
> sus sustained
> 7, 9 ... 7th, 9th, etc.
> and /<bass> is an optional bass note.
I am not.
I am not happy with the ambiguity of "one or more of" when in fact there are
strong context conditions, for instance minmaj is crazy and I don't know
what "sus" would add to "sus7".
There is no way to indicate a single note alone. There is no way to
indicate root+fifth only (important to heavy metal - if you feed into a
heavily distorting amp, then root+fifth is OK, but not much else! I think
they call them "power chords").
I offered an alternative a few posts back. The discussion has rambled and
various points made. Let's get concrete.
If you are not happy with mine, then propose an alternative. To recap, I
suggested:
<guitar chord> = <silence>|<chord>
<silence> = X
<chord> = <root>[<modifier>][/<bass>]
<root> = <note>
<bass> = <note>
<note> = <note letter>[<accid>]
<note letter> = A|B|C|D|E|F|G
<accid> = #|b
<modifier> = m|m7||maj7|dim|aug|!|4|5|6|7|9
I'm prepared to add |11|13 if someone would like to define what these mean
(but one rapidly gets to the chord which has every note in it. There is
after all already a way in ABC to write explicit chords [CGceg_b] for
instance and I would like to "KISS").
Laurie
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
