I know this is an old topic and various folks have discussed this at length on this list. Nonetheless, I'd like to throw in a few more remarks on the subject.
It's true that the jazz chord names printed by lilypond are weird from a jazz perspective and it is also true that there is a mechanism via chordNameExceptions to tweak the output or one could always use text markup to do it exactly as one wishes. However, some observations: (1) Text markup for chords don't allow you to transpose chords. So, when I am writing out parts, the chordmode has a clear advantage since you can transpose the chord names via \tranpose. (2) \chordmode actually tries to build chords from its input. So, when you produce MIDI output, you will actually hear the chords played. (3) Chords on jazz charts are really indications. The actual voicing of a chord is left to the player. It seems to me that based on these observations, what Lilypond needs is a context for creating chord names that (1) does not try to actually build chords, ie, the MIDI output produces nothing. This way you avoid all the problems associated with trying to describe a voicing which a jazz player is free to change anyway. (2) treats only the chord root (and duration) as significant, thus allowing one to transpose the chord names. (3) leaves the chord alterations as pure text markup. Most chord alterations are pitch indepedent anyway. That is, you say m7 for a minor 7th chord, 5- to flat the fifth, and so on. Comments? _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
