Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes:
> What effect would this have on the parser?
I have only taken a cursory look so far. When entering chordmode,
something records the chord names and the pitch names, and some grouping
is involved.
> I think that I like this idea, even though I didn't at first thought.
> As long as it can work with the parser, I can't see any downside.
I am thinking of accordion notation, and the usual accordion
accompaniment goes something like
c, <c e g> g,, <c e g>
It is a complete nuisance to have to figure out individual note names
for the chords (since you just have fixed chord buttons on the accordion
anyway), and it is a nuisance not being able to mix bass notes and
chords, and you often have things like
<< { <c e g>4 r <c f a>8 r } \\ c,2. >>
or so, too.
Chord mode is just too limited, and I think it makes much more sense
abandoning it rather than duplicating all other functionality into it.
The one thing that requires some thought will likely be the
"non-relativable" character of chords. Either they should be
independent from note entry, or not. If they are independent, then one
would likely want to allow
\relative c: c' { ... }
and
\transpose c: c, { ... }
to relativize/transpose just chords. But I think it might be saner to
make c: perfectly equivalent to <c e g> all around so that people need
not think about the implications of using either.
>> To make this slightly prettier, one can reserve the modifier M
>> (uppercase) for "major", then c:M can be written for a major chord,
>> looking slightly better than just c: would.
>
> I would NOT be in favor of this. I don't like having two different
> meanings depending solely on the case of a letter.
Well, suit yourself. But that's actually standard for Italian, I think
also French, and certainly American accordion notation: bass notes in
the octave below middle c indicate chords (the single bass notes are
notated another octave lower), and a letter above them spells out what
kind of chord: M is major, m is minor, 7 is seventh, d is diminuished.
So since one kind of engraver would actually output those letters, being
able to input them in that manner would feel natural.
> If we really don't want to have c: stand for a major triad,
I think it is fine, just a bit obtuse.
> then I think we should have c:maj stand for a major triad, and need
> the 7 to be maj7.
No, that is going to confuse the heck out of guitarists and pretty much
everybody else as well.
> Have you been working on a patch for this?
Not yet. Just mulling over it till now. I am again working out with
accordion notation, and wrapping "natural" user interfaces around the
existing chord mode would be a major pain in the neck right now.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
