On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 07:48:38PM +0100, Frank Nordberg wrote:
>
fairly simple rules defining the syntax of the modifier.
>
> If I understand Mike Whitaker's proposal (which I'm not absolutely sure
> I do) correctly, it ought to cover almost everything. Just a few slight
> modifications and it'd be perfect.
>
> -------
>
> I'm not at all familiar with the formal language Mike used, and I
> suppose a few list subscribers would have slight problems with straight
> Norwegian, so I'll try to do my best defining a set of rules in my
> rather clumsy English.
If I spoke Norwegian as well as you do English....
> These 12 rules ought to cover every possible combination of scale and
> non-scale notes an confirms to common chord notation standard as far as
> it's possible to confirm to a standard that strictly speaking doesn't
> exist ;)
This is actually very close to what I propose, although some of teh literals are
different (+/- for #/b)
>
> 1. No chord suffix implies a major triad %step 1, 3 and 5 of the
> major scale.
> 2. m implies a minor triad %step 1, 3 and 5 of the
> minor scale.
> 3. The main series are based oon thirds in the mixolydian/dorian scale
> (with major 6th and minor 7th): 7 - 9 - 11 - 13. Any of these
> numbers implies that
> all the steps up to and including the specified one are added to the chord.
> 4. "6" specifies the (major) 6th to be added to the triad.
> 5. A + (or # if you like) in front of a number specifies that that note is
> raised a semitone.
> 6. A - (or b) in front of a number specifies that that note is lowered
> a semitone.
> %Note: I prefer +/- rather than #/b to avoid any possible confusion
> %with accidentals connected to the root note. I consider the problems
> %of "-" being confused with the old fashioned minor symbol and
> "+" with
> %"add" to be of much less importance.
Two points here:
- the use of + is also a notation for an augmented triad (1 3 #5) in a LOT
of songbooks and other guitar notation: it's actually THREE ways ambiguous.
Similary, some of my German friends use C- to mean Cminor,
- The only ambiguity I can see with sharps/flats is (for example) C#9 being
interpreted as either a C9 with a sharpened 9th or a C# *ninth* chord.
This is resolvable by declaring that ambiguous accidentals belong to
the NOTE, not the scale degree, and allowing for brackets, so that our
two chords become C(#9) and C#9, the LATTER being the C# ninth, which would
be my first reaction when I tried to play it.
> 7. "maj" specifies a major 7th. It is laways followed by a number from
> the main
> series.
> %Note: Ideally, I'd prefer +7/#7 instead, but "maj" is far too common
> %a term to be ignored.
Actually, M is almost as common and fewer characters.
> 8. "sus" before a number implies that that note is to replace the third
> of the
> chord. Only two alternatives are allowed: sus2 and sus4.
> 9. "x" before a number specifies that that note is to be omitted from
> the chord.
> %Note: It seems the most usual term for this is "omit", but I like
> %"x" far better ;)
I'm used to 'no', e.g. C7no3
> 10. "x" not followed by a number specifies root only
> 11. "add" before a number specifies that only that note and no others (unless
> otherwise specified) are added.
> %Note: "add" overrides "x", which means you can cut down to the
> root and
> %then add anything you like (e.g. Cxadd8). This is a kind of a catch-all.
> 12. The following common alternative suffixes are allowed:
> a) dim = m-7-5
Problem here, is that some folks use Ddim to mean Dmb5, and some to mean
Dmb7b5. This latter is also bad, since in that notation. 'b7' actually
means 'bb7', which is confusing. I'm still unsure how to distinguish these.
Some chord charts use o for diminished, but again its ambiguous.
Perhaps we should make a special case for dim (1 b3 5) and dim7
(1 b3 5 bb7), and also allow dimaddb7 for the half-diminished
seventh (1 b3 5 b7) which also pops up from time to time.
> b) 5 = x3 %the root-fifth power chord
> c) 69 = 6add9
Good man. I'd forgotten that one.
> d) 8 = xadd8
> %Note: The list in #12 is definitely open to discussions
I'm not hugely convinced by the x notation: I kinda prefer a lowercase note
letter.
--
Mike Whitaker | Work: +44 1733 766619 | Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System Architext | Fax: +44 1733 348287 | Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CricInfo Ltd | GSM: +44 7971 977375 | Web: http://www.cricinfo.com/
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
