Re: Choice of pitch input mode

[Paul Morris]

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 6:56 PM, Jeff Olson  wrote:
> 
> And for the limited range of a guitar (3.5 octaves) I can \transpose c c'
> to minimize the number of octave marks in absolute mode (so range is e, to 
> b'').
> Thus I never encounter long high runs of 32nds above c'''.

The latest dev version (LilyPond 2.19.x) also has a \fixed mode that lets you 
set a default octave which saves typing, providing some of the advantages of 
both \relative and \absolute.

For example:

{
  \key a \major
  \time 6/8
  cis''8. d''16 cis''8 e''4 e''8 |
  b'8. cis''16 b'8 d''4 d''8 |
}

\fixed c'' {
  \key a \major
  \time 6/8
  cis8. d16 cis8 e4 e8 |
  b,8. cis16 b,8 d4 d8 |
}

From:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/learning/absolute-note-names.en.html

It looks like \fixed is not mentioned in the changes list yet:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/changes/index.html

Cheers,
-Paul


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Henry Law]

On 30/04/16 17:28, Thomas Morley wrote:

because some (rare) chords will have multiples "adds"s.


Ah, yes; shows how I'd not thought through the problem.  Now if music 
and its notation had been designed by an IEEE committee in the late 
twentieth century (instead of by multiple communities in multiple 
countries over many hundreds of years) it would have been more 
straightforward :-)


I'm impressed with how much of the oddity of music notation lilypond 
does handle.  Far more than any other scoring program I've any 
acquaintance with.


--

Henry LawManchester, England

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Thomas Morley]

2016-04-30 14:59 GMT+02:00 Henry Law :

> The second is that might lilypond be extended to include ":add9" as one of
> the standard chord formulations that is recognised?



We changed additionalPitchPrefix from "add" to "" some time ago,
because some (rare) chords will have multiples "adds"s. See:

m = {
  %% \notemode is not really needed, it's the default
  \notemode {
\set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"

  }
  \chordmode {
c:1.3.5.7.8.9.11+.13
  }
}

<<
  \new Staff \m
  \new ChordNames \m
>>

I don't think we're going to change it back.

Otoh, it would be a pretty trivial patch to put simple chords
(minor/major) with added 9 into the exceptions and let them display
the add9.
Though this will _only_ work for the specified chords, I think.
c:1.5.9 will not have the "add9" unless inserted as well into the
exception and what about all the other chords which may get the
"add9"?
There will be no end...

Sorry to be of not more help,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Choice of pitch input mode

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Joram,

> What I like about relative:
> 2) most mistakes are easily spottet as all the rest of the voice is off
> by one octave. […] In absolute mode, only one note is in the wrong octave.

This is the ONLY thing I miss about relative mode… but it is (was) VERY helpful 
for proof-reading.

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Malte Meyn]

Am 30.04.2016 um 14:53 schrieb ming :

It works in version 2.18.2
Error in version 2.19.40

Sent from Mail for Windows 10


What doesn’t work? Your mail lacks context (In-Reply-To header, quote, 
or code example)



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Malte Meyn]

Am 30.04.2016 um 15:07 schrieb Henry Law:

On 30/04/16 13:49, Henry Law wrote:

\new ChordNames {
   \set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"
   \chordmode { c:5.9 c:m7.5- c:5+.9- }
   
   
}


Another wrinkle I've just found.  If you want a minor chord with an
added ninth (say) you can't code, for instance, d:m.9 as it gives an
error.  You have to write d:5.3-.9


Or d:m9^7 (Dm9 without 7 = Dmadd9).

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Brett Duncan]

On 30/04/2016 9:36 pm, Thomas Morley wrote:

g2:5.9 is not correct. See the putput from the following code listing
some (all?) possibilities to _input_ the correct chord.

tst = {
   \chordmode {
\set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"
c:1.3.5.9
c:3.5.9
c:5.9 %% not correct !
c:9^7
   }
   \notemode {
 
   }
}
<<
   \new Staff \tst
   \new ChordNames \tst
I assume you are using LP 2.19 - I'm using  2.18 and the results are 
different, c:5 still produces a triad. But this is something to note for 
the future.



Well, two problems.
(1) Like yourself I've seen a plethora of requests to write
chord-names in a certain way over the years.
Though, there is no general consense how to do it. Everyone wants it
(a little) different.
True, but unlike most chord naming schemes I've come across in the last 
30 years, I find the Ignatzek defaults to be quite unhelpful in 
producing either the same symbol for different chords (e.g. the G9 and 
Gadd9 case that got this thread started, or have at look at what c:9.11+ 
generates) or else symbols that are well, odd. For example, if a user 
enters c:4 (which was the subject of another thread sometime in the not 
so distant past), they get back  "C4 sus4 3" - whatever that is.



(2) LilyPond provides methods to get the desired output: via
exceptions or the already mentioned pop-chords-snippet
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=750
and derivates from it.
Also true, but it's not obvious you need these methods until you start 
running up against the inadequacies of the Ignatzek defaults.


Brett


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Henry Law]

On 30/04/16 13:49, Henry Law wrote:

\new ChordNames {
   \set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"
   \chordmode { c:5.9 c:m7.5- c:5+.9- }
   
   
}


Another wrinkle I've just found.  If you want a minor chord with an 
added ninth (say) you can't code, for instance, d:m.9 as it gives an 
error.  You have to write d:5.3-.9


--

Henry LawManchester, England

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Henry Law]

On 29/04/16 18:22, Henry Law wrote:

In a lead sheet I want to use the chord which I call an "added ninth".
Using the key of C as an example, I want the chord C-E-G-D: a plain
major triad with the ninth added on top.


I've documented my experiences in the relevant places in the thread 
elsewhere: thanks to all the people who chimed in to help.


Two general points.  The first is that this confusion among "added 
ninth", "ninth" and "suspended second" (and possibly also "added 
second") is common among those who write chord charts for the kind of 
music I play a lot.  The charts I play off often have one symbol written 
above piano music that plainly shows that one of the others is required. 
 Not too serious when you see "Cmaj9" over the notes C-E-G-D, but when 
you end up playing a chord with a dominant seventh when the keyboard 
player has a diatonic one the results aren't pretty ...


The second is that might lilypond be extended to include ":add9" as one 
of the standard chord formulations that is recognised?


--

Henry LawManchester, England

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[ming]

It works in version 2.18.2  
Error in version 2.19.40

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Henry Law]

On 30/04/16 06:24, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:

When you enter a chord with chord
mode, it is immediately translated into a set of notes, and whatever code
you used to enter it is forgotten.


That's a really clear exposition of the subject.  As a sometime systems 
architect I like this kind of thing!


--

Henry LawManchester, England

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Henry Law]

On 29/04/16 18:59, Malte Meyn wrote:

The magic is called additionalPitchPrefix. It can be found f. e. at
section 2.7.2 of the Notation Reference. The following code prints “C9
C9 Cadd9 C9”.

%
\version "2.18.2"

\new ChordNames {
   
   
   \set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"
   
   
}


I had trouble with pop-chords.ly: first I couldn't find it, and then 
when I found something that purported to be it I zigged when I should 
have zagged and couldn't make it work.


But this additionalPitchPrefix thing works beautifully.  And, for those 
who come behind me, it works fine with \chordmode too:


\version "2.18.2"

\new ChordNames {
  \set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"
  \chordmode { c:5.9 c:m7.5- c:5+.9- }
  
  
}

(Gives Cadd9 Cø C#5addb9 Cadd9 C9, exactly as required.)

--

Henry LawManchester, England

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Thomas Morley]

Regrettable, nested quoting is messed up :(
Anyway, maybe of some help though:

2016-04-30 8:56 GMT+02:00 Brett Duncan :
>  On 30/04/2016 3:24 pm, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
>
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2016, Brett Duncan wrote:
>
>   I coded g2:5.9 in chordmode and got G9, which isn't the right
>   chord. I'm pursuing pop-chords.ly.

g2:5.9 is not correct. See the putput from the following code listing
some (all?) possibilities to _input_ the correct chord.

tst = {
  \chordmode {
   \set additionalPitchPrefix = "add"
   c:1.3.5.9
   c:3.5.9
   c:5.9 %% not correct !
   c:9^7
  }
  \notemode {

  }
}
<<
  \new Staff \tst
  \new ChordNames \tst
>>

I often put the chords in a Staff-context to check whether I coded
them correctly. More below.

> As Matthew said, you will need to override how the chord name is displayed,
> but this (or Matthew's suggestion) at least constructs a chord with the
> right notes.
>
> We should probably step back and clarify what seems to be the real issue
> every time someone asks about chord mode:
>
> Chord mode is completely separate from typesetting chord names.

Indeed.
We have different input-modes:
notemode (the default, thus rarely stated explicitely)
chordmode
figuremode
drummode

To illustrate, look at the output of:

\chordmode {
  c4:1 c:1 g:1 g:1
  a:1 a:1 g2:1
  f4:1 f:1 e:1 e:1
  d2:1 c:1
}

Granted, pretty pointless to do it this way, but valid code.

> "Chord mode" is chord *input* mode.  When you enter a chord with chord
> mode, it is immediately translated into a set of notes, and whatever code
> you used to enter it is forgotten.  Then if you are typesetting chord
> names, the chord names are determined by analysing that set of notes, not
> by referring back to the forgotten input code. [*]

Indeed.
It's done this way to gain the possibility to get different output
from the same source.
To illustrate:

mus = {
  \chordmode { c,1 }
  \notemode {  }
}

 <<
  \new ChordNames \mus
  \new FretBoards \mus
  \new Staff { \clef "G_8" \mus }
 >>

> I  agree with you about clarifying what the actual issue is at the outset.
>
>  I not sure that chord mode and the ChordNames context are as completely
> separate as you suggest, but IMO that's not really the issue. The problem
> lies in the fact that the default (Ignatzek) chord names are typically okay
> for only the simplest chords. The moment a user tries to input something
> more "complex" (not that an added ninth is particularly complex), what is
> generated is not what the user is after. I've seen plenty of messages on
> this list over the last decade or so complaining about this very fact.

Well, two problems.
(1) Like yourself I've seen a plethora of requests to write
chord-names in a certain way over the years.
Though, there is no general consense how to do it. Everyone wants it
(a little) different.
(2) LilyPond provides methods to get the desired output: via
exceptions or the already mentioned pop-chords-snippet
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=750
and derivates from it.

Though, if you aim at an entirely different style like Brandt-Römer,
those methods are pretty tedious.

Right now there's at first a selection of pitches worth being
displayed in a chord-name.
To give an trivial example:
A simple major chord with tonic c is displayed: C and ofcourse not C ¹ ³ ⁵

Than a markup is created relying on those pitches, following the rules from
Klaus Ignatzek,  Die Jazzmethode fuer Klavier 1
(At least it's claimed, I don't own the book and can't check)

The problem is that some naming-styles (like Brandt-Römer) would not
only require different rules for creating the markup, but also the
selection of pitches is different.

It's a major task to make LilyPond flexible enough for this.
I already tried it repeatedly, but with no convincing result...

> I suspect many have done the same as me - created my own file of exceptions,
> added to it over time as need, and included it as a matter of routine. Which
> is fine for me and others doing the same, but leaves the unexpected Ignatzek
> defaults as an unhappy surprise for new users.


Well, the ignatzek-style chord-names _are_ a valid possibility.
We also used to have banter-style chord-names, which are really
strange, imho. Though they are broken nowadays and nobody requested
them for a long time.

The main problem is the lack of flexibility...

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Brett Duncan]

On 30/04/2016 6:30 pm, Malte Meyn wrote:



Am 30.04.2016 um 08:56 schrieb Brett Duncan:

Henry, have you had any success with the pop-chords.ly file? (If not, I
have some files I could send to you.)


You don�t need this or chord exceptions in general if you follow my 
much simpler answer that no-one replied to 
(http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-04/msg00823.html)


In dealing with Henry's specific question, yes. To deal with any other 
chord names that are not what the user requires, maybe not.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Replying to posts

[BB]

I have added that subject to my spam filter.
Anyway have fun in blabbermouting ...

On 30.04.2016 10:17, Johan Vromans wrote:

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 17:00:14 +
David Linn  wrote:


1) I am not David Kastrup, I am David Linn.

Hi David, good to hear from you!


5) Personal attacks against a list administrator (such as the ones
launched against me for the work I done on this list and its cousins and
their predecessors) make that administrator unlikely to do more than the
absolute minimum to maintain a list.

I do not recall any personal attacks against you in recent discussions. At
least, I didn't interpret what was said to be attacks.

This mailing list is in good shape, it is always there, responsive, there is
no spam or other big nuisances. For me this means that you do a good job! A
big thanks for that.

-- Johan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Choice of pitch input mode

[Malte Meyn]

Am 30.04.2016 um 05:43 schrieb David Wright:

But it's no surprise that composing directly into LP is only really
possible in absolute mode.


It’s not. I’ve always done it in \relative mode using octave checks, I 
never had any problems.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Malte Meyn]

Am 30.04.2016 um 08:56 schrieb Brett Duncan:

Henry, have you had any success with the pop-chords.ly file? (If not, I
have some files I could send to you.)


You don’t need this or chord exceptions in general if you follow my much 
simpler answer that no-one replied to 
(http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-04/msg00823.html)


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Replying to posts

[Johan Vromans]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 17:00:14 +
David Linn  wrote:

> 1) I am not David Kastrup, I am David Linn.

Hi David, good to hear from you!

> 5) Personal attacks against a list administrator (such as the ones
> launched against me for the work I done on this list and its cousins and
> their predecessors) make that administrator unlikely to do more than the
> absolute minimum to maintain a list.

I do not recall any personal attacks against you in recent discussions. At
least, I didn't interpret what was said to be attacks.

This mailing list is in good shape, it is always there, responsive, there is
no spam or other big nuisances. For me this means that you do a good job! A
big thanks for that.

-- Johan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Choice of pitch input mode

[Noeck]

Hi,

Kieren and his choice for absolute is already mentioned.
What I like about relative:

1) mostly for for vocal scores, very few '/, are needed

2) most mistakes are easily spottet as all the rest of the voice is off
by one octave. While some find this annoying, I think it helps a lot to
find mistakes. In absolute mode, only one note is in the wrong octave.

Cheers,
Joram

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Choice of pitch input mode

[Noeck]

Hi David,

Am 30.04.2016 um 05:43 schrieb David Wright:
> it would be great
> if it could convert into a canonical style, where canonical could be
> defined in ways such as: every note with pitch duration (or
> even pitch) on only the first note of each line (omitted elsewhere);

Frescobaldi offers that in the tools menu (I think it is python-ly in
the background).

Cheers,
Joram

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Added ninth chord (symbol)

[Brett Duncan]

 On 30/04/2016 3:24 pm, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:

On Sat, 30 Apr 2016, Brett Duncan wrote:

   I coded g2:5.9 in chordmode and got G9, which isn't the right
   chord. I'm pursuing pop-chords.ly.

As Matthew said, you will need to override how the chord name is displayed,
but this (or Matthew's suggestion) at least constructs a chord with the
right notes.

We should probably step back and clarify what seems to be the real issue
every time someone asks about chord mode:

Chord mode is completely separate from typesetting chord names.

"Chord mode" is chord *input* mode.  When you enter a chord with chord
mode, it is immediately translated into a set of notes, and whatever code
you used to enter it is forgotten.  Then if you are typesetting chord
names, the chord names are determined by analysing that set of notes, not
by referring back to the forgotten input code. [*]

I  agree with you about clarifying what the actual issue is at the outset.

 I not sure that chord mode and the ChordNames context are as 
completely separate as you suggest, but IMO that's not really the issue. 
The problem lies in the fact that the default (Ignatzek) chord names are 
typically okay for only the simplest chords. The moment a user tries to 
input something more "complex" (not that an added ninth is particularly 
complex), what is generated is***not* what the user is after. I've seen 
plenty of messages on this list over the last decade or so complaining 
about this very fact.


I suspect many have done the same as me - created my own file of 
exceptions, added to it over time as need, and included it as a matter 
of routine. Which is fine for me and others doing the same, but leaves 
the unexpected Ignatzek defaults as an unhappy surprise for new users.



You can do both, and it sounds like that's what Henry actually wants.  His
initial question, which gave a bunch of examples of note sets and seemed
to imply he'd accept any syntax that generated the correct notes, made me
think it was a question primarily about input syntax.

I read it that way as well.

Henry, have you had any success with the pop-chords.ly file? (If not, I 
have some files I could send to you.)


Brett
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user