On Oct 28, 2004, at 12:27 AM, David Bobroff wrote:
I'm not a developer, but this looks right to me. In your example you
have a chord which is a diminished step above the tonic of the key.
When you transpose this down one whole step it remains the same relative
to the key.
Thanks for explaining this logic. My music theory is not overly sound, so I'm perfectly willing to accept that there is a sound theoretical justification for this. Nevertheless, I'd still argue that on a practical level, "E" might be preferable here.
f ges
es fes
If you were to do:
\transpose f' dis'
You would likely get 'e' instead of 'fes' and this would be consistent with the above logic.
Sure, but Jazz pianists tend to take a dim view of singers showing up with a lead sheet transposed into D sharp major :-)
However, I could (and probably will) transpose the song into D or E instead.
Likewise, if you had written a fis chord, it would have come out as an e
chord after your transposition.
Yes, but it seems somewhat counterintuitive that in order to avoid "weird" chord names in chords with flats, I have to transpose into a key with sharps, and vice versa.
Matthias
_______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
