Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 18:48 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote: The main problem for me with “x7sus4” as a chord name is its length; when there are four chord names in a bar, every character counts in terms of legibility. There is a patch LilyPond that typesets chord symbols in a compact way. http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4154 this would enable LilyPond to compete with proprietary programs in this area. Richard ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
From: Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net This has perhaps become off-topic and I don?t wish to prolong that; however, I have to take issue with the idea that ?sus? could somehow apply to the 7th. It can?t. Suspensions specifically apply to replacing the 3rd with either the 4th or the 2nd (the latter being rare except in folk music played on guitar in the first position, and even then only a few chords lend themselves to this). The 7th cannot be suspended; it can be flatted or natural, in which case this is by convention denoted as a 7th or major 7th; the term ?sus? is never applied to the 7th. There should be no possible ambiguity when ?sus? and ?7? are used in the same chord. Thanks to everyone so interested in the appellation of half-baked chords. On the whole, I agree with Tim that the alleged ambiguity of the sus7 symbol in a Jazz chart is baseless. Except he said it in about 75% fewer words that I would have. I've read what everyone has to say, but no one has yet presented a reasonable alternative interpretation for what this symbol could possibly mean, in the context of a Jazz chart. If the context were something other than a Jazz chart, I would agree that the other possibilities discussed are very reasonable and preferable. I agree that we've (I've) gotten way off topic for lilypond proper. Athough it is useful to hear what other people's experiences are, in terms of what symbols their musicans are and are not familiar with, and the various interpretations for these chord symbols. From: Richard Shann rich...@rshann.plus.com The main problem for me with ?x7sus4? as a chord name is its length; when there are four chord names in a bar, every character counts in terms of legibility. There is a patch LilyPond that typesets chord symbols in a compact way. http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4154 Tim, if this still doesn't get you what you need, let me know and I can try to help. Thanks, David Elaine Alt 415 . 341 .4954 *Confusion is highly underrated* ela...@flaminghakama.com self-immolation.info skype: flaming_hakama Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 07:18:52PM -0600, Tim McNamara wrote:
I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render
sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4
3??? and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple ???Gsus7??? to
print? I???ve tried every combination I can think of.
(By the way, I am also using the pop-chords exception list as I don???t like
the Ignatzek standard that is the default in Lilypond).
Are you asking for the \chordmode input syntax, or the
markup syntax to use in your chord exceptions list?
I can't vouch for whether pop-chords Does The Right Thing (tm) or
not, but
c:sus4.7
is the syntax that works for Lilypond proper.
Jim
\score {
\new ChordNames \chordmode { c1:sus4.7 }
c'
}
x.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Johan, To not answer your question: I would not use Gsus7 since it is ambiguous. Gsus4 (or Gsus) has a suspended 4th, Gsus2 has a suspended 2nd, so Gsus7 makes you think that the 7th is suspended -- which is not the case. G7sus (or G7sus4) is the unambiguous way to express this chord. +1 It seems “sus7” is almost exclusively a guitar notation — I’ve certainly never seen it in any jazz chart or musical theatre score I’ve played from. Cheers, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Jan 26, 2015, at 1:32 AM, Johan Vromans jvrom...@squirrel.nl wrote: On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 19:18:52 -0600 Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net wrote: I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4 3” and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to print? To not answer your question: I would not use Gsus7 since it is ambiguous. Gsus4 (or Gsus) has a suspended 4th, Gsus2 has a suspended 2nd, so Gsus7 makes you think that the 7th is suspended -- which is not the case. G7sus (or G7sus4) is the unambiguous way to express this chord. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_chord . Chapter 8 of Standardized Chord Symbol Notation by Carl Brandt Clinton Roemer. I have the Roemer-Brandt book and will double check that, thanks for pointing it out. I have been modifying the pop-chords.ly http://pop-chords.ly/ file for my own use to use the Roemer-Brandt terminology and will make that available once I have completed it. My recollection- without checking, of course- was that R-B used “sus” for plain suspended 4th chords and “sus7” for suspended 4th dominant chords. My memory may well be faulty on this (again, as it has been so often as my wife reminds me). If they use “7sus” or “7sus4” I will go with that. Tim ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
From: Johan Vromans jvrom...@squirrel.nl Subject: Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode To not answer your question: I would not use Gsus7 since it is ambiguous. Gsus4 (or Gsus) has a suspended 4th, Gsus2 has a suspended 2nd, so Gsus7 makes you think that the 7th is suspended -- which is not the case. Well, this chord does have a 7th, so I'm not sure what your concern is. To play devil's advocate, how do you know if it is a major or minor 7th? Simply by convention: all 7ths are minor unless you explicitly say that it is major. This is just another convention: all susses are 4ths unless you explicitly say that it is something else. This has nothing more or less to recommend it than the convention we use for 7ths. G7sus (or G7sus4) is the unambiguous way to express this chord. I think that part of the issue here is categorical, based on context. Analysis: writing a chord symbol to describe a specific set of notes Laziness: writing a chord symbol instead of writing a specific set of notes Improvisation: writing a chord symbol to give direction as to the musical context For starters, I think it is fair to say that these are different musical contexts and we should not expect that conventions should be the same. For the purposes of analysis and laziness, there can be no denying that the more specific versions you recommend are better. But for improvisation, it tends to be irrelevant at best, and writing sus7 can even avoid some problems. As I'm sure you're aware, In terms of improvising chords in Jazz, chordal players tend to play some, but not all, of the actual notes in the chord, and then add more colorful, related notes, that are not explicitly within the chord. When chord symbols are used by melodic instruments, of course there are no chords whatsoever being played by the person interpreting the chord symbol. The chord symbol is mainly used to interpret what scale is appropriate to play (as well as its musical function.) In this usage (the context of the OP) there are rarely cases where adding a 2 to a sus4 or a 4 to a sus2 chord would sound wrong. The underlying scales are arguably identical, so there is no musical difference among these chords (in this context). You are making a distinction without a difference. Furthermore, I just did a quick check at a dozen or so real books to see if I was crazy (turns out, I am). But enough about me. My point being, while I did notice a wide variety notations for sus chords (with 7sus4 being the most common, and more so among the more professional books) not a single chord I ran across used any suspension other than a 4! Which is to say, this alleged need to distinguish sus2 from sus4 chords in the context in which the OP is interested, is basically a non-issue, and it is easy enough to add the 2 if that's what you need. The more constructive thing I would add about why I personally prefer the sus7 notation (besides economy with no lack of clarity) is that it describes the notes from left to right in the correct order. It always seems weird to me to see notations like C7#5, since as you parse the chord, you start by specifying a dominant chord, then change one of the notes that you already implicitly specified. Why not just specify what it actually is from the get-go? There are some cases where I haven't figured out a better approach, like C7b5. But in general I think it is best to specify chords more directly by chord type, rather than indirectly, by specifying the wrong chord type and then patching it up at the end. In this sense, the notation 7sus4 contains a little bit of a notational dissonance. Is it a dominant chord or not? Since it is a sus chord, not a dominant chord, I think it makes more sense to put the sus next to the root name, rather than the 7. In terms of practicality, my belief is that you will hear fewer thirds in your chords, due to reading mistakes, if you use sus7 notation than 7sus4, since some people will inevitably see the G7... and play a dominant variety voicing, including the one note you really don't want. David Elaine Alt 415 . 341 .4954 *Confusion is highly underrated* ela...@flaminghakama.com self-immolation.info skype: flaming_hakama Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On 27/01/15 6:15 AM, Tim McNamara wrote: On Jan 26, 2015, at 1:32 AM, Johan Vromans jvrom...@squirrel.nl mailto:jvrom...@squirrel.nl wrote: On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 19:18:52 -0600 Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net mailto:tim...@bitstream.net wrote: I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4 3” and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to print? To not answer your question: I would not use Gsus7 since it is ambiguous. Gsus4 (or Gsus) has a suspended 4th, Gsus2 has a suspended 2nd, so Gsus7 makes you think that the 7th is suspended -- which is not the case. G7sus (or G7sus4) is the unambiguous way to express this chord. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_chord . Chapter 8 of Standardized Chord Symbol Notation by Carl Brandt Clinton Roemer. I have the Roemer-Brandt book and will double check that, thanks for pointing it out. I have been modifying the pop-chords.ly http://pop-chords.ly file for my own use to use the Roemer-Brandt terminology and will make that available once I have completed it. My recollection- without checking, of course- was that R-B used “sus” for plain suspended 4th chords and “sus7” for suspended 4th dominant chords. My memory may well be faulty on this (again, as it has been so often as my wife reminds me). If they use “7sus” or “7sus4” I will go with that. Tim You're not mistaken - I have also seen sus and sus7 used in the same way on rock and RB charts. It's not a notation I would use myself, and I agree with Johan that G7sus4 is the unambiguous way to express the chord. But as has been pointed out before, there is no agreed standard for chord notation. It's worth noting that G7sus can be interpreted differently in a jazz context - the wikipedia article Johan linked to mentions this, though the analysis is not entirely accurate IMO. With regard to Roemer Brandt, I think it's an interesting reference and a useful discussion starter, but it seems to me to be somewhat at odds with contemporary practice. Brett ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi all, On Jan 26, 2015, at 3:12 PM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine ela...@flaminghakama.com wrote: why I personally prefer the sus7 notation (besides economy with no lack of clarity) I disagree about the lack of clarity: From C7sus4, I infer that we have a C7 chord (i.e., dominant 7th) with a suspension at the 4th (which suggests a resolution to the 3rd, if it resolves at all). From C7sus, I infer that we have a C7 chord (i.e., dominant 7th) with a suspension somewhere — since it is not otherwise specified, I assume it's at the 4th (which suggests a resolution to the 3rd, if it resolves at all). From Csus7, I infer that we have a C chord (i.e., triad) with a suspension at the 7th (which suggests a resolution to the 6rd, if it resolves at all). So to my eye, the first two options are equivalent modulo standard assumptions, whereas the third option introduces ambiguity. it describes the notes from left to right in the correct order. It always seems weird to me to see notations like C7#5, since as you parse the chord, you start by specifying a dominant chord, then change one of the notes that you already implicitly specified. Why not just specify what it actually is from the get-go? There are some cases where I haven't figured out a better approach, like C7b5. But in general I think it is best to specify chords more directly by chord type, rather than indirectly, by specifying the wrong chord type and then patching it up at the end. Although Gould (frustratingly!) has essentially nothing to say about chords, I think her philosophy regarding subito dynamics (use “p sub.” and not “sub p.”) applies well: since the vast majority of us read music (including chord symbols) from left to right, and it’s more important to play (e.g.,) an unaltered C7 than a C sus triad without the 7th, it’s better to describe the full shape of the chord first, and then describe afterwards those alterations which are ultimately optional. And the effect likely becomes increasingly pronounced as the number of alterations increases. All the best, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Elaine, what is wrong with interpreting that the 7th resolve to a 6th? That seems pretty coherent. Agreed! I see absolutely nothing wrong with that, and didn’t intend to imply otherwise. I was just pointing out that applying consistent assumptions about voice-leading and traditional suspension resolutions highlights the ambiguity in the notation “Csus7”: it could mean c e g + b, suggesting a [fixed-root] resolution to c e g + a (i.e., 7-6 sus) or c g bf + f, suggesting a [fixed-root] resolution to c g bf + e (i.e., 4-3 sus) That’s why I strongly prefer the notation “Csus7” (or even something like the awkward “Csus+7”) only if you mean the [relatively rare] first example, and “C7sus4” if you mean the [far more common] second example. Cheers, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Elaine, IMHO, it is far, far, *far* Three “fars”… that’s pretty far. =) worse to play a C major triad when a C7sus4 is specified than to play a Csus4 and omit the 7th. Did you even read what I wrote before replying? This is what I actually wrote: it’s more important to play (e.g.,) an unaltered C7 than a C sus triad without the 7th Exactly where in there did I suggest that one should play a “C major triad”? playing the 3rd instead of the 4th changes it from a dominant function to more like a subdominant function Wait… what? Playing c f g bf makes it a dominant function, and playing c e g bf (i.e., playing the 3rd instead of the 4th) makes it subdominant? When c e g bf is the actual definition of a dominant 7th? I’m seriously confused… Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Kevin, it is possible for the 7th to be a suspension, for example the inganno interruption (found in fugues and the like) produces a suspended seventh that usually resolves to a 6th. Indeed, most [classical] music theory texts include entire sections of chapters devoted to this suspension, which arose (if I recall correctly) in species counterpoint and was used extensively through the Renaissance and Baroque and well into to the Classical period. Cheers, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On 27/01/15 11:48 AM, Tim McNamara wrote: The main problem for me with “x7sus4” as a chord name is its length; when there are four chord names in a bar, every character counts in terms of legibility. Things can get crowded fast. (This came up in preparing a chart for the Vince Guaraldi song “Cast Your Fate To The Wind” in which all the chords in the soloing section are suspended dominants. Lots and lots of them, actually sounds pretty terrible on guitar; works somewhat better on piano which was Guaraldi’s instrument, but IMHO seriously overdone on this song). Ah, this puts a slightly different spin on things. In a jazz piece like this, the idea of suspension is often interpreted a little differently - as Mark Levine explains it in the Jazz Piano Book, the notation x7sus refers to playing a major triad one tone lower than the root over the given root, e.g. G7sus would be an F triad over a G bass. The resulting chord contains the 7th, 4th and 9th. (Whether the 5th and 3rd are included is determined by the performer.) So in this particular context, x7sus better reflects the composer's intentions than x7sus4. Brett ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine ela...@flaminghakama.com wrote: (Also, what is wrong with interpreting that the 7th resolve to a 6th? That seems pretty coherent.) This allows for two possible interpretations of the same symbol, which is why it is preferable to specify the chord (C7) and the suspension (sus or sus4) separately: putting the `sus' in between `C' and `7' makes it unclear whether it applies to the seventh or to the fourth. The absence or presence of the seventh does not affect the chord quality (it does not affect its function) I have to disagree with this: there are plenty of situations where adding a seventh does indeed change the chord's function. Of course, getting any of the notes wrong is regrettable, which is why unambiguity (i.e. C7sus4 IMO) is so desirable. Kevin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
This has perhaps become off-topic and I don’t wish to prolong that; however, I have to take issue with the idea that “sus” could somehow apply to the 7th. It can’t. Suspensions specifically apply to replacing the 3rd with either the 4th or the 2nd (the latter being rare except in folk music played on guitar in the first position, and even then only a few chords lend themselves to this). The 7th cannot be suspended; it can be flatted or natural, in which case this is by convention denoted as a 7th or major 7th; the term “sus” is never applied to the 7th. There should be no possible ambiguity when “sus” and “7” are used in the same chord. The main problem for me with “x7sus4” as a chord name is its length; when there are four chord names in a bar, every character counts in terms of legibility. Things can get crowded fast. (This came up in preparing a chart for the Vince Guaraldi song “Cast Your Fate To The Wind” in which all the chords in the soloing section are suspended dominants. Lots and lots of them, actually sounds pretty terrible on guitar; works somewhat better on piano which was Guaraldi’s instrument, but IMHO seriously overdone on this song). However, I find that when I give musicians lead sheets done by the Roemer-Brandt standards I never get any question about what any chord means. It may not be especially modern but it is certainly effective. Tim On Jan 26, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Kevin Barry barr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine ela...@flaminghakama.com mailto:ela...@flaminghakama.com wrote: (Also, what is wrong with interpreting that the 7th resolve to a 6th? That seems pretty coherent.) This allows for two possible interpretations of the same symbol, which is why it is preferable to specify the chord (C7) and the suspension (sus or sus4) separately: putting the `sus' in between `C' and `7' makes it unclear whether it applies to the seventh or to the fourth. The absence or presence of the seventh does not affect the chord quality (it does not affect its function) I have to disagree with this: there are plenty of situations where adding a seventh does indeed change the chord's function. Of course, getting any of the notes wrong is regrettable, which is why unambiguity (i.e. C7sus4 IMO) is so desirable. Kevin ___ 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: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net wrote: I have to take issue with the idea that “sus” could somehow apply to the 7th. It can’t. Suspensions specifically apply to replacing the 3rd with either the 4th or the 2nd (the latter being rare except in folk music played on guitar in the first position, and even then only a few chords lend themselves to this). The 7th cannot be suspended; I am not an expert on guitar chord notation, but more generally it is possible for the 7th to be a suspension, for example the inganno interruption (found in fugues and the like) produces a suspended seventh that usually resolves to a 6th. As to the second part of your post I would say you are probably better off not removing items from chord symbols to save space unless you are absolutely sure it will not create ambiguity (which responses here suggest it might). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Tim, I find that when I give musicians lead sheets done by the Roemer-Brandt standards I never get any question about what any chord means. I used to use the triangle — which I personally love for its compactness and clarity — but I got so many questions about what it meant that I finally gave up on it. Cheers, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Elaine, Precisely my point: we DON'T have a dominant chord here. The starting assumption is wrong. To every player I’ve ever played with — and that’s a lot, in both jazz and musical theatre bands — the chord c f g bf is a dominant 7th with alteration. Yet, when this symbol is sus, you want to say that the sus modifies what comes after it. Why the discrepancy? There is no discrepancy at all: “Amin” implies “a triad, built on A, in the minor mode”; “Asus4” implies “a triad, built on A, with a suspended 4th”; “A7sus4” implies “a dominant seventh chord, built on A, with a suspended 4th” — completely consistent. In the latter two cases, “sus” modifies the chord that comes before it (i.e., the major or minor triad, or dominant 7), just like the “min” modifies the chord that comes before it in the first case. Cheers, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
Hi Kevin, This allows for two possible interpretations of the same symbol, which is why it is preferable to specify the chord (C7) and the suspension (sus or sus4) separately: putting the `sus' in between `C' and `7' makes it unclear whether it applies to the seventh or to the fourth. […] I have to disagree with this: there are plenty of situations where adding a seventh does indeed change the chord's function. Of course, getting any of the notes wrong is regrettable, which is why unambiguity (i.e. C7sus4 IMO) is so desirable. +1 Best, Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi all, On Jan 26, 2015, at 3:12 PM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine ela...@flaminghakama.com wrote: why I personally prefer the sus7 notation (besides economy with no lack of clarity) I disagree about the lack of clarity: From C7sus4, I infer that we have a C7 chord (i.e., dominant 7th) Precisely my point: we DON'T have a dominant chord here. The starting assumption is wrong. Sus chords do not function as dominant chords. Neither in terms of their character of having a tritone that wants to resolve (which is why you can say that chords like aug7 and 7b5 are still dominant, even though they are likewise not identical) nor in terms of their function. Which is to say, sus chords traditionally prepare a dominant chord, making them serve a subdominant function. From Csus7, I infer that we have a C chord (i.e., triad) with a suspension at the 7th (which suggests a resolution to the 6rd, if it resolves at all). In this sense, the only ambiguity is that you imagine sus to be a modifier of what comes after it, rather than as a description of a chord type. Consider every other chord type: maj, min, aug, dim, half-dim. In all cases, syntactically the chord type symbol modifies the root, which comes before it, not the extensions/alterations that come after. Yet, when this symbol is sus, you want to say that the sus modifies what comes after it. Why the discrepancy? I suppose this highlights why I advocate for a lexical difference between the chord type and extensions. The default format of putting both the chord type and the extensions in a single string of superscript confuses what should be two distinct sets of information. (Also, what is wrong with interpreting that the 7th resolve to a 6th? That seems pretty coherent.) Although Gould (frustratingly!) has essentially nothing to say about chords, I think her philosophy regarding subito dynamics (use “p sub.” and not “sub p.”) applies well: since the vast majority of us read music (including chord symbols) from left to right, and it’s more important to play (e.g.,) an unaltered C7 than a C sus triad without the 7th, it’s better to describe the full shape of the chord first Well, we'll have to agree to disagree about this. IMHO, it is far, far, *far* worse to play a C major triad when a C7sus4 is specified than to play a Csus4 and omit the 7th. The absence or presence of the seventh does not affect the chord quality (it does not affect its function) whereas playing the 3rd instead of the 4th changes it from a dominant function to more like a subdominant function. I agree with the analogy, but interpret it the other way: the equivalent of p (the type of dynamic) is the chord type, which in this case is sus, and the modifier sub. has an equivalent to the extensions (in this case 7). All the best, David Elaine Alt 415 . 341 .4954 *Confusion is highly underrated* ela...@flaminghakama.com self-immolation.info skype: flaming_hakama Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 19:18:52 -0600 Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net wrote: I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4 3” and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to print? To not answer your question: I would not use Gsus7 since it is ambiguous. Gsus4 (or Gsus) has a suspended 4th, Gsus2 has a suspended 2nd, so Gsus7 makes you think that the 7th is suspended -- which is not the case. G7sus (or G7sus4) is the unambiguous way to express this chord. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_chord . Chapter 8 of Standardized Chord Symbol Notation by Carl Brandt Clinton Roemer. Of course, as other contributors have pointed out you can have it the way you want. -- Johan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
\version 2.18.0
\include english.ly
%{
I will try to be careful here since last time I offered help with chords I
got mercilessly flamed.
There are two stages of lilypond chords: input and formatting.
o If either one is incorrect, you won't get what you want.
o If one of them is correct, you need to fix the other one.
o Fiddling with the one that is correct will not get you any closer,
and may get you farther away.
As you are probably aware, the input syntax is defined at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/common-chord-modifiers
One sure-fire way to debug chord issues is to use the chordmode to print
the notes that lilypond interpreted from your input syntax.
%}
whereOhWhereIsMySusChord = \chordmode {
g1:4.7 g:7.4 g:sus g:4 g:sus4.7
}
\new ChordNames { \whereOhWhereIsMySusChord }
{
\whereOhWhereIsMySusChord
}
%{
Once you have found an input syntax which gives you the notes you want in
your chord,
(in this case, it is g1:sus4.7) then you can fiddle with the formatting
library.
In case you want a library that agrees with your notion of a sus7 chord,
you are welcome to use mine:
http://flaminghakama.com/flaming-lilypond-chords
Or, you can add the sus7 chord definition as Brett suggested:
%}
myChordExceptions = {
c f g bf-\markup { \super sus7 }
}
chExceptions = #(append (sequential-music-to-chord-exceptions
myChordExceptions #t) ignatzekExceptions)
hereIsMySusChord = \chordmode {
\set chordChanges = ##t
\set chordNameExceptions = #chExceptions
g:sus4.7
}
\score {
\new StaffGroup
\new ChordNames \hereIsMySusChord
\new Staff {
% NOTE: you do not need to include the chords here as notes.
% This is just a demonstration that the notes in the chord are the
ones you want.
\hereIsMySusChord
}
}
%{
Side note: I would not refer to the syntax of the chord formatting library
(or most any musical entry) as scheme.
Lilypond is interpreted by scheme, but it is really a custom syntax unique
to lilypond.
Even if you understood scheme, it would not help you one bit in
understanding this syntax.
%}
HTH,
David Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954 *Confusion is
highly underrated*
ela...@flaminghakama.com
self-immolation.info
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
sus7 chords in \chordmode
I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4 3” and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to print? I’ve tried every combination I can think of. (By the way, I am also using the pop-chords exception list as I don’t like the Ignatzek standard that is the default in Lilypond). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
2015-01-26 2:18 GMT+01:00 Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net:
I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render
sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4
3” and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to
print? I’ve tried every combination I can think of.
(By the way, I am also using the pop-chords exception list as I don’t like
the Ignatzek standard that is the default in Lilypond).
Because different people understand different things under the same
chord-symbol, please give us a minimal example. Also I'm not aware of
the 'pop-chords exception list'.
Which notes does a Gsus7 contain, the following ones?
\notemode { g c d f }
Cheers,
Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On Jan 25, 2015, at 7:44 PM, Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@gmail.com wrote:
2015-01-26 2:18 GMT+01:00 Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net:
I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render
sus7 chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4
3” and the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to
print? I’ve tried every combination I can think of.
(By the way, I am also using the pop-chords exception list as I don’t like
the Ignatzek standard that is the default in Lilypond).
Because different people understand different things under the same
chord-symbol, please give us a minimal example. Also I'm not aware of
the 'pop-chords exception list’.
pop-chords.ly is available in the snippet repository to provide more readable
chord names than are provided by the default Ignatzek chord names. I’ve never
understood how those got to be the default because they are not very
attractive. I can make no pretense of understanding the Scheme code used in
pop-chords.ly as my knowledge of coding is virtually nil; the definitions of
the chords themselves within that file are pretty straightforward.
Which notes does a Gsus7 contain, the following ones?
\notemode { g c d f }
Yes, G C D F The 3rd is replaced with the 4th and the flat 7th is added.
That is the standard definition of a sus7 chord (there are sus2 chords as well,
but those are usually specified as sus2 whereas sus chords are understood to
replace the 3rd with the 4th).
g1:4.7 and g1.7.4 both give a result of G7 sus4 3” which is suboptimal.
g1:sus results in “G5” which makes no sense.
g1:4 results in G4 sus4 3” which again is suboptimal.
With a bit more experimenting, I find that g1:7sus4 results in “G7sus4” which
is a big improvement but I’d like to trim that down to “sus7” if possible.
I am puzzled by this- I cannot imagine that I am the first person attempting to
get Lilypond to print a sus7 chord in \chordmode. There must be a correct
syntax but I can’t figure it out. There is a reason I am not a coder! :-P
Thanks!
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: sus7 chords in \chordmode
On 26/01/15 1:16 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Jan 25, 2015, at 7:44 PM, Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@gmail.com wrote:
2015-01-26 2:18 GMT+01:00 Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net:
I have repeatedly run into difficulties getting Lilypond to properly render sus7
chord names in \chordmode. It comes up with silly things like G7sus4 3” and
the like. What is the correct syntax to get a simple “Gsus7” to print? I’ve tried
every combination I can think of.
(By the way, I am also using the pop-chords exception list as I don’t like the
Ignatzek standard that is the default in Lilypond).
Because different people understand different things under the same
chord-symbol, please give us a minimal example. Also I'm not aware of
the 'pop-chords exception list’.
pop-chords.ly is available in the snippet repository to provide more readable
chord names than are provided by the default Ignatzek chord names. I’ve never
understood how those got to be the default because they are not very
attractive. I can make no pretense of understanding the Scheme code used in
pop-chords.ly as my knowledge of coding is virtually nil; the definitions of
the chords themselves within that file are pretty straightforward.
Which notes does a Gsus7 contain, the following ones?
\notemode { g c d f }
Yes, G C D F The 3rd is replaced with the 4th and the flat 7th is added.
That is the standard definition of a sus7 chord (there are sus2 chords as well,
but those are usually specified as sus2 whereas sus chords are understood to
replace the 3rd with the 4th).
g1:4.7 and g1.7.4 both give a result of G7 sus4 3” which is suboptimal.
g1:sus results in “G5” which makes no sense.
g1:4 results in G4 sus4 3” which again is suboptimal.
With a bit more experimenting, I find that g1:7sus4 results in “G7sus4” which
is a big improvement but I’d like to trim that down to “sus7” if possible.
I am puzzled by this- I cannot imagine that I am the first person attempting to
get Lilypond to print a sus7 chord in \chordmode. There must be a correct
syntax but I can’t figure it out. There is a reason I am not a coder! :-P
Thanks!
g1:7sus4 would create the chord you want, but the display is another
matter. You can add to pop-chords.ly (which I couldn't find in the LSR,
for some reason) a line like
c f g bf-\markup { \super sus7 }
to get the chord displayed as you want.
HTH,
Brett
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
