Jeff Henrikson wrote:
> I was debating whether or not to say anything on the issue of jazz chords this time
>around, but I
> will (once) quietly say what I
> have said several times on this list on jazz chords:
(snip)
> the free software community of code hardly ever being thrown away once incorporated
>into a codebase, > I think this is harmful.
>
You're 100% right in every particular. I also mentioned the problem long
ago that it is common to have a situation where you might better and
more rationally have a #11 in a chord name, for example, and the same
tone expressed as a flatted note in the notation. It's simply melody vs.
a very rigid chord naming convention. You have expressed the nature of
this conflict very differently, and more cogently I hope. :-)
The whole idea of chord names is to get instant recognition. The only
thing that distinguishes jazz chords from the wider sheet music world is
a refusal to use minuses and plusses, not to mention triangles, at all.
In the sheet music world, they could afford to do plusses for some
alterations, like 5ths, and not others, because there weren't many
others used, but one cannot argue that it makes *sense* to have both +5
and #9.
I too would rather just type them in, since I know what I want. I guess
I give up too easily. :-)
--
daveA (debian.user) ------------------------------------
%{ ars sine scientia nihil %}
*---------------------------------------------*
_______________________________________________
Gnu-music-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-music-discuss
