They are indeed equivalent input, as shown here:
https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.25/Documentation/notation/writing-pitches#note-names-in-other-languages
It would appear that bf and b-flat are equivalent in English.
I have made some updated examples with the same notes as the chords:
\version "2.25.32"
\language "norsk"
<<
\chords { a4 b c d }
{ a'4 b' c'' d'' }
>>
and
\version "2.25.32"
\language "english"
<<
\chords { a4 bf c d }
{ a'4 bf' c'' d'' }
>>
Danish (and Norwegian) is slowly moving away from the German 'H' to
the English 'B'. To make things even more confusing, Danish has
never used 'B' for a b-flat like the Germans, see below. As B is
becoming more used in Danish, the term 'bes' has appeared in newer
music literature, rather than B♭, which is a Dutch convention,
because
English B B♭
German H B
Danish, trad. H B♭
Danish, newer B Bes
But
that is an entirely different matter!
In any case, the inputs are entirely identical, but the output is
not.
As an American English speaker, I don’t know Norwegian/Germanic
music nomenclature; in English usage there is no H note or chord
as you seem to already know. Therefore in ignorance I have to ask
if you're writing equivalent input in “norsk” and “english": your
first usage after \chords is {
a4 b c d } and your second usage is { a4 b-flat c d }. In
English at least those are not equivalent. When \language
“english” is used, (as I understand it and I could be wrong, as I
learned the default input language in Lilypond more than 15 years
ago and have never changed) a Bb is written “bf" not "b-flat”.
Greetings, wise music coders!
Why does
\version "2.25.32"
\language "norsk"
<<
\chords { a4 b c d }
{ a'4 g' f' e' }
>>
and
\version "2.25.32"
\language "english"
<<
\chords { a4 b-flat c d }
{ a'4 g' f' e' }
>>
not produce identical results?
The Norwegian input creates the chord H♭, yet why
doesn't it create a B♭ chord when the chords should
be showing per the default naming system. Does any
language even use the term H♭ for notes and chords?
Best wishes,
Jakob
