Phil Taylor wrote:
> (I have a deep suspicion of the ambiguities inherent in text-based
> guitar chord symbols. I'd really rather write them out in abc.)
And quite right you are, too. Not all chords can be played on the guitar
as they should be. There's only six strings and four fingers. ;-) Chords
are approximated by dropping some notes (e.g. the 5th, 9th and 11th in a
13 chord) and I believe sometimes notes are replaced with their
counterparts of the higher or lower octave.
In another mail, Laurie Griffiths wrote:
> There is no way to indicate root+fifth only
Aren't `5' chords root+fifth?
> 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").
About the definition of 11 and 13 chords, see one of my previous mails.
I agree with the KISS thing, though. If you want to be able to parse
every possible chord, the <modifier> part in your regular language will
become too complicated to be good. If you have a way of defining
uncommon chords, I really see no need to make the parser handle stuff
like `mmaj13+11' (I'd like to see the definition of this one...). What I
_would_ like in that case is a way to define it, e.g. at the start of
the file or song, e.g.
[insert unassigned letter here]:m13 = [1 b3 5 b7 9 11 13]
Hence, Dm13 = D F A c e g b; Gm13 = G Bb d f a c' e'; etc.
The last line in the chord regular language then becomes
<modifier> = m|m7||maj7|dim|aug|!|4|5|6|7|9|<predefined chord>
<predefined chord> = string
I don't think that [CGceg_b] is enough: It will be written as notes, not
as a guitar chord above the staff. I realise my proposal gives rise to
some problems, but I hope discussing them can clear things up.
And then, Frank Nordberg wrote:
> Laurie Griffiths wrote:
> [...] for instance minmaj is crazy
>
> Do you mean the name is crazy or that nobody would ever use such a
> chord? I can agree to the former, but a minor chord with a major 7th
> added isn't unusual.
The name is crazy, TMHO. I'd call such a chord `madd7'. `minmaj'
suggests that the notes of both the maj and the min chords are part of
it. 1, 3b, 3, 5, 7? I think this one may sound a little odd ;-)
Frank Nordberg also wrote:
> Laurie Griffiths wrote:
>> what "sus" would add to "sus7".
>
> Shouldn't that be "sus4" rather than "sus7". The sus7 chord is a
> different thing altogether - and definitely *very* common:
> Gsus7: G-C-D-F
I never encountered this notation: only sus = sus4 and sus2. The chord
you cite here is G7sus4. Remark that a sus chord doesn't add a note to a
chord, it only _replaces_ one (the 2nd or the 4th). Ergo, sus4 has
three notes, 7sus4 four.
> But the difference between "sus" and "sus4" - I'd say "sus" is either
> sloppy writing or a short form of "sus4".
sus is definitely a short notation for sus4.
In yet another mail, Mike Whitaker wrote:
<Frank's Woodchopper ball arrangement snipped>
> There are ambiguities here. Does G+11 mean G with added 11, G aug 11, or
> G11 with the 11th sharpened?
From the chord faq <http://guitarnotes.com/notes/noteget.cgi?chord_faq>:
There are a few different ways to write these chords.
'-' and '+' signs are sometimes used to mean 'flat' and
'sharp' respectively, but 'b' and '#' are used as well.
You might even see 'dim' and 'aug' (diminished and augmented)
used too for the same thing.
So E7#9 could be written as E7+9 or E7aug9
and E7b9 could be written as E7-9 or E7dim9
So, G+11 would be a synonym of Gaug11.
--
bert van vreckem
echo bexryt.vzaxnvrexckyemqxadvyaxlvasz.bxe|sed -e "s/[x-z]//g;s/q/@/"
If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
