Am 21.09.2015 08:14, schrieb msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca:
... It's not the absence of the third; the third is not the
thing that's being suspended.
You are correct. With removing the third you eliminate the character of
the "chord" as major or minor to avoid clashes etc. to suspend ... And
it is not a "chord" any longer but a necessary prerequisite for the
technique of "suspension" as you described. (And may be one adds an
additional tone for suspension...) But it has become synonyme for the
technique of removing the third and everybody will interpret any "sus"
with this implication irrespective of music theory.
And so if we're using that definition of
suspension, a chord with just the root and fifth, such as might be
written
C5 , is not suspended. I realize this is not necessarily the current
usage of the term.
If c:sus is a simple way to get C5 and I like it better than c^3, why
should not one use it? The syntax of Lilypond is "music notation for
everyone" and not ( I think it is not planed to be ) a map of music
theory. To map music theory you need "rule based programs" or the
methods of "artificial intelligence" and do not forget that taste and
theory of music will change.
And let me add: Why should not a 5 "chord" suspend in your sense or
transit to a new tonality?
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
