Neil, Thanks for your very careful review. I will fix each of these issues. But I do have a bit of discussion on the headword below.
I especially appreciate your careful review of style. I find that after a certain number of iterations on my work, I become blind to style issues and spelling errors. Thanks! Carl On 8/16/08 3:17 PM, "Neil Puttock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Carl, > > You've done a great job with this. > > There are a few details which I'd like to mention: > > - chords-headword.ly: > > Further to Andrew's comments about the G flat (it should be an F > sharp), the chord names seem to be a bit off. For example, in the > second bar, the first chord has a 'C' above it; it's actually a first > inversion G chord. I really hesitate to say anything here, because I'm a real novice at music. However, I think that the chord is a first inversion Gm chord, rather than a first inversion G chord, due to the key signature (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). In guitar accompaniments for music, it's not uncommon for chords that have very short durations to be left out, and replaced with the chord that it will resolve to. I'm not claiming that this guitar accompaniment wouldn't be better if it had a Gm chord on the first beat of the second and fourth measures. I'm not a qualified arranger. I think that this arrangement of the accompaniment was simplified to eliminate the Gm chord. I can certainly put it in if it will make the arrangement better. Do you think I should add the Gm for the first beat, then the C for the second? Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
