It doesn't count as a regression for us, since it's too old: it would only be a
regression if it was working in 2.16 or 2.18.
Please do post to bugs. Images could be helpful.
--
Phil Holmes
----- Original Message -----
From: Knute Snortum
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: Displaying add9
The latest version I could find that displayed "add9" for 9^7 is 2.14.2.
Somewhere between that and 2.16.2 we lost the ability.
I tend to think of this as a regression bug, although an old one. c:9^7 is
not the same as c:9. As I use "add9" a lot I would like to see this function
restored. Should I post to bugs?
\version "2.14.2"
\score {
\new ChordNames \chordmode {
c1:9^7 % Cadd9
c1:9 % C9
}
\layout {
}
}
Knute Snortum
(via Gmail)
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Jan Kohnert <nospam001-li...@jankoh.mooo.com>
wrote:
Hi there,
thanks again, I'll give it a try. :)
Am Freitag, 5. Dezember 2014, 13:36:57 schrieben Sie:
> I think you are confusing the printed chord names with the lilypond chord
> representations.
And no, I'm not confusing the two, I just don't give a <CENSORED> on the
Lilypond internal chord representation. And there's reason for that:
I think, nearly noone ever uses \chordmode input for really printing chords
with notes, but nearly everyone uses it to just print chord-names, for
example
in leadsheets. And we surely agree, Lilyponds main purpose is to generate
beautiful looking sheets of music.
With Lily 2.18 "c1:9" and "c1:9^7" are printed the same way, noone of the
readers of my leadsheet knows of my input. That's why I said, the two chord
are "made the same". Up until 2.16 (and I think from version 1.4, with
which I
started using the tool), the chords were printed differently.
I also know, one of Lilypond's great advantages is to let the user quite
easily change defaults, so if I don't like "C9"/"Cadd9", but rather
"C7/9"/"C9", or whatever else, I'm able to change that to whatever I want.
But
it is a bug (or regression) to print different chords the same way by
default,
there should be a difference.
The proposed solution is, to change the defaults to get at least different
chord names printed, and that one is a workaround: I have a lot of sheets
using those "jazzish" chords (augmented, diminished, half-diminished, 9, 11,
13, whatever), and I don't want to change every of my input files (and in
there every chord not beeing "normal" like, C, G, etc.) just to get the same
behavior in the output-pdf as with Lilypond 2.16 (or a least different chord
names for different chords).
I hope I could make myself clearer now.
PS: Could you please stop sending me a copy? I do not get the list mails in
that case, so the thread is destroyed now. And I'm reading the list. Thanks!
--
MfG Jan
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
