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
