If only the notes given are taken into account the first chord can only be 
C.
Em6 should have a C# in it.

But I agree, the following chords result in really strange chord names 
although they are just inversions.
If the root (and the root in a chord doesn't need to be the lowest note) 
was clear to LilyPond such errors wouldn't occur.
For example if the first chord in the example by Mats was just a voicing 
for a chord the following chords could be possible: C, Am7, FMaj7, Dm11, 
Bb7/b9/#11/13

Also LilyPond generates some very strange chord names.
The problem is that there is no standard for Chord Symbol notation.
But I have never seen in my life things like Bmb6 or C8, at least not in 
any Jazz score (and believe me, I have seen many) but it can well be that 
this symbols exist in Pop music, I have really no idea.


just my 2¢

regards,

Tao


>             
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:48:48 -0800 (PST)
> Von: "Rick Hansen (aka RickH)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: How to put chords on a score automatically
> 
>             
> 
> 
> Mats Bengtsson-4 wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Rick Hansen (aka RickH) wrote:
> >>
> >> Such a program could not make the assumption that the root of the 
> chord
> >> is
> >> always being sung by the bass or any other voice, or being sung at 
> all. 
> >> But
> >> if the lp syntax allowed "marking" what note is the current chord root 
> at
> >> any point in time, then it could generate possible names for the 
> harmony
> >> at
> >> that point in time.  Otherwise I could see a lot of wrong and weird 
> chord
> >> names being generated by an algorithm that is not being told what is 
> the
> >> root note.  Also the root of the chord may not always appear in the
> >> score,
> >> its common to remove the root or the 5th as they are more "expendable"
> >> than
> >> the 3rd or 7th, because the 3rd and 7th dedermine maj/min or dominant
> >> leading tones, often the root is even more expendable than the 5th for
> >> deletion.  So what this algorithm would really need is an "invisible
> >> staff"
> >> that allows you to just name to root notes and duration thereof, this
> >> staff
> >> is never printed, nor would it participate in midi, etc. it's just 
> there
> >> to
> >> tell the algorithm what the current root is at that pont in time, then
> >> the
> >> real notes in the score are used to come up with a suitable chord 
> name.
> >>
> >> BTW your idea sounds like a very cool idea, as I dont know of any
> >> notation
> >> program that can also do harmony analysis.  It would be a quick way to
> >> generate the names, then go back and correct the "wrong" ones.  Nice.
> >>   
> > LilyPond already does what you describe, see the example in 
> "Introducing 
> > chord names"
> > in the manual. The following example shows how to do the same if you
> > haven't
> > entered the music as chords (i.e. using <...>), but have a separate 
> > identifier for
> > each "voice".
> > 
> > \version "2.10.0"
> > one = \relative c''{g a g c}
> > two = \relative c'{e f d e}
> > three = \relative c'{c c b c}
> > 
> > \score{
> > <<
> > \new ChordNames << \one \two \three >>
> > \new Voice << \one \two \three >>
> >  >>
> > }
> > 
> >     /Mats
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > lilypond-user mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> The ambiguity still remains, is the first chord in this example Em6 or C? 
> Either could be correct.  The second chord is probably Am6 but it could 
> also
> be F or Dm7 (with the root omitted).  On and on, all these are valid 
> names
> for the notes in your example.  IOW an algorithm that is not told the
> correct root cant make any assumption.  In the key of C the third chord 
> in
> the example would obviously be Bm7b5 (the naturally occuring chord of the
> leading tone) but it could also be G (the natural chord of the 5th tone). 
> Too many mistakes are possible and in most music half the chords would be
> wrong, it may work well for nursury rhymes, but not for more complex 
> music.
> 
> Now if each note can simply be marked as the root then the algorithm 
> could
> work correctly, when the root is being omitted of course that mark would
> have to be even more explicit by naming a non-printing note as well.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/How-to-put-chords-on-a-score-automatically-tf4783962.html#a13738521
> Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
        
-- 
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört?
Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Reply via email to