On 2019/02/02 20:37:16, dan_faithful.be wrote:
Isn’t the salient property of an inversion simply which note is lowest
in pitch?

I think the point of inversions is not to rearrange pitches inside a
chord, but to change the limits of the chord by changing *both* the
highest and the lowest note. (I’m siding with Lukas’s #1 definition.)

Which could also be said of so-called `voicings’, in a way: the point of

\dropNote 2 <c' e' g' b' d'' fis''>

would hardly be to get

<c' d' e' g' b' fis''>

in return, but rather

<d c' e' g' b' fis''>

much like a suspended chord (the whole point of `drop n’ transformations
being to change the bass note).

Hence my latest proposal, that does exactly that (and therefore comes
back to the UP/DOWN direction arg that David wanted to do away with).

Cheers,
V.

https://codereview.appspot.com/365840043/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Reply via email to