Le 9 juin 09 à 18:25, Carl D. Sorensen a écrit :
On 6/9/09 9:16 AM, "Jean-Alexis Montignies" <j...@sente.ch> wrote:
You can find an example of a chord notated as 'phrygian' (well it's
more a
modal indication, but that's what the composer Gary Peacock
intended) in the
lead sheet for Vignette.
More arguments for using names: Alt is much more easy to write and
read, less
error prone than: 7.3-.5-.9-.11-.13-
So if Alt is always (or primarily) 7.3-.5-.9-.11-.13- we should add
an alt
modifier to LilyPond. Then, we could say c:alt, and get just what the
composer intends. And then we should have the ChordNames context
generate
CAlt.
If it's expandable as for the chord exceptions, why not.
I'm not arguing that the list of modifiers is currently complete or
sufficient. Certainly we could add modifiers to make things
easier. I
haven't pursued that idea yet, because I haven't needed it for my
work.
But as I said before, if anybody wants to create a chordname input
mode that
takes a root, and arbitrary name string, and an optional added bass,
they're
welcome to do so.
Yes, may be it would be good to have two ways of entering the chords.
One would be the current one where lilypond finds the chord markup
from intervals from the chord root .
The other would be where lilypond finds the markup from a chord name
(coming from a extendable dictionary?) (and possibly a realization as
notes).
For my current needs, I can use the first system, but the second is
closer to the way I think and easier to use.
I could help to implement that this summer, I have however currently
no knowledge of scheme nor lilypond internals yet. My feeling is that
the two are not so different and some code could be common to the two
systems.
Carl
Jean-Alexis
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
