Re: Mixed chord/note mode
Am 13.08.22 um 22:04 schrieb David Kastrup: We had this discussion a longer time ago, with chords and notes conflicting in that : is used for tremolo notation, too. For context: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00160.html [GLISS] Unifying \chordmode and \notemode https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-04/msg00390.html Why don't we get rid of \chordmode? Probably there were other discussions after that, but these were the first I found. Chord modifiers are a bit of a puzzlement to figure out later, but something like would (I think) be a major chord, a minor chord and so on. Just for confirmation: This does _not_ mean that \chordmode would be abandoned, does it? (I probably got confused by some of the ideas in those old threads.) As someone who uses \figuremode on a daily basis, I learned to loathe the necessary < > signs around each and every element I enter (of course I get that it would be hard to get rid of them in figure mode). I think it would be a considerable gain in heavy-handedness if I would have to do 1*2 1 1 instead of f1*2:maj7 g:7 g1:m7 ges1:7 f1:maj7 ges1:7 Lukas
Re: Mixed chord/note mode
> Le 22 août 2022 à 15:16, Lukas-Fabian Moser a écrit : > > >> Am 13.08.22 um 22:04 schrieb David Kastrup: >> We had this discussion a longer time ago, with chords and notes >> conflicting in that : is used for tremolo notation, too. > > For context: > > https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00160.html > [GLISS] Unifying \chordmode and \notemode > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-04/msg00390.html Why > don't we get rid of \chordmode? > > Probably there were other discussions after that, but these were the first I > found. > >> Chord modifiers are a bit of a puzzlement to figure out later, but >> something like would (I think) be a major chord, a minor >> chord and so on. > > Just for confirmation: This does _not_ mean that \chordmode would be > abandoned, does it? (I probably got confused by some of the ideas in those > old threads.) > > As someone who uses \figuremode on a daily basis, I learned to loathe the > necessary < > signs around each and every element I enter (of course I get > that it would be hard to get rid of them in figure mode). I think it would be > a considerable gain in heavy-handedness if I would have to do > > 1*2 1 1 > > instead of > > f1*2:maj7 g:7 g1:m7 ges1:7 f1:maj7 ges1:7 And what do you think about f1*2:maj7 g:M7 g1:m7 ges1:M7 f1:maj7 ges1:M7 I’m not sure if native English speakers will find it weird to require “M” for a plain major chord (in France I have mostly seen “Do M” and not “Do” when it was meant as a chord and not a note, but in English “M” tends to be omitted). On the threads you link to, there is also the idea by Janek to write chords with a capital letter at the beginning. I actually find it pretty attractive, even if it doesn’t make room for supporting tremolo syntax on a chord entered in “chord mode style”.
Re: Mixed chord/note mode
On 2022-08-22 6:12 am, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote: I think it would be a considerable gain in heavy-handedness if I would have to do 1*2 1 1 instead of f1*2:maj7 g:7 g1:m7 ges1:7 f1:maj7 ges1:7 Not to sound contrarian, but I would very much welcome the former syntax. While I have used LilyPond since 2.10.33 and am quite used to the existing chord-mode form, I am nevertheless irked by the need to sandwich the duration between the chord root and its modifiers. I have to make a strong mental effort to pronounce the chord in my head as "D, for a half note, minor seventh" in order to successfully type "d2:m7". If we borrowed the chord syntax from note-mode, it would mean when typing "2" I could think "D minor seventh, for a half note" which feels much more natural. -- Aaron Hill
Re: Mixed chord/note mode
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 12:59 PM Jean Abou Samra wrote: > > > > Le 22 août 2022 à 15:16, Lukas-Fabian Moser a écrit : > > > > > >> Am 13.08.22 um 22:04 schrieb David Kastrup: > >> We had this discussion a longer time ago, with chords and notes > >> conflicting in that : is used for tremolo notation, too. > > > > For context: > > > > https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00160.html > [GLISS] Unifying \chordmode and \notemode > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-04/msg00390.html > Why don't we get rid of \chordmode? > > > > Probably there were other discussions after that, but these were the > first I found. > > > >> Chord modifiers are a bit of a puzzlement to figure out later, but > >> something like would (I think) be a major chord, a minor > >> chord and so on. > > > > Just for confirmation: This does _not_ mean that \chordmode would be > abandoned, does it? (I probably got confused by some of the ideas in those > old threads.) > > > > As someone who uses \figuremode on a daily basis, I learned to loathe > the necessary < > signs around each and every element I enter (of course I > get that it would be hard to get rid of them in figure mode). I think it > would be a considerable gain in heavy-handedness if I would have to do > > > > 1*2 1 1 > > > > instead of > > > > f1*2:maj7 g:7 g1:m7 ges1:7 f1:maj7 ges1:7 > > > > And what do you think about > > f1*2:maj7 g:M7 g1:m7 ges1:M7 f1:maj7 ges1:M7 > I do not like it. I don't like Do to indicate a major chord. I think that one of the strengths in LilyPond is its consistency. Whether in note mode or in chord mod, the notename is a pitch. And the pitch is all lower-case . g:7 is not a major chord, as I understand it . It's a dominant 7 chord. So even if we were to use the M and m convention (that you are proposing), I don't think g:7 should change to g:M7. I don't think we should change the syntax arbitrarily. The new proposal makes it nicer for French speakers and less nice for English speakers. We already have the syntax published, and out in the wild for many years. Changing it, in my mind, is arbitrary. Thanks, Carl
Re: Mixed chord/note mode
Le 22/08/2022 à 21:43, Carl Sorensen a écrit :
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 12:59 PM Jean Abou Samra
wrote:
> Le 22 août 2022 à 15:16, Lukas-Fabian Moser a écrit :
>
>
>> Am 13.08.22 um 22:04 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> We had this discussion a longer time ago, with chords and notes
>> conflicting in that : is used for tremolo notation, too.
>
> For context:
>
>
https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00160.html
[GLISS] Unifying \chordmode and \notemode
>
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-04/msg00390.html
Why don't we get rid of \chordmode?
>
> Probably there were other discussions after that, but these were
the first I found.
>
>> Chord modifiers are a bit of a puzzlement to figure out later, but
>> something like would (I think) be a major chord, a minor
>> chord and so on.
>
> Just for confirmation: This does _not_ mean that \chordmode
would be abandoned, does it? (I probably got confused by some of
the ideas in those old threads.)
>
> As someone who uses \figuremode on a daily basis, I learned to
loathe the necessary < > signs around each and every element I
enter (of course I get that it would be hard to get rid of them in
figure mode). I think it would be a considerable gain in
heavy-handedness if I would have to do
>
> 1*2 1 1
>
> instead of
>
> f1*2:maj7 g:7 g1:m7 ges1:7 f1:maj7 ges1:7
And what do you think about
f1*2:maj7 g:M7 g1:m7 ges1:M7 f1:maj7 ges1:M7
I do not like it. I don't like Do to indicate a major chord. I
think that one of the strengths in LilyPond is its consistency.
Whether in note mode or in chord mod, the notename is a pitch. And
the pitch is all lower-case.
g:7 is not a major chord, as I understand it . It's a dominant 7
chord. So even if we were to use the M and m convention (that you are
proposing), I don't think g:7 should change to g:M7.
Right, that's a weakness.
I don't think we should change the syntax arbitrarily. The new
proposal makes it nicer for French speakers and less nice for English
speakers. We already have the syntax published, and out in the wild
for many years. Changing it, in my mind, is arbitrary.
Sorry if I have expressed myself in an unclear way, but you seem to
have misunderstood my post. I am not talking about breaking existing
syntax at all. This thread is about how to make normal note mode
include some way to write chords just with their root and "qualifiers"
(major/minor, seventh, etc.) instead of in full with all of their
notes in <...>. This is already what chord mode does. The problem is
that c:8 means a chord with octave in chord mode but a C with tremolo
in note mode. We can't make c:8 mean a chord with octave in note mode
without breaking the existing *tremolo* syntax. So we need to find a
variant of the existing chord mode syntax that could work in note mode.
And several variants are being considered:
a. Make the colon trigger chordmode-like syntax if inside chord brackets
<...>. Looks like
{ 2 2 }
(note: no \chordmode)
b. Make the colon trigger chordmode-like input if followed by a chord
modifier, but keep it as tremolo if followed by a number.
Because in the existing chord mode many chords are written without
a modifier (like “c:7”), this requires adding a “no-op” modifier, “M”,
that just signals that a chord is being written instead of a tremolo.
Looks like
{ c2:M8 c2:m8 }
c. Use capital letters to start a chord.
{ C2:8 C2:m8 }
Again, there is no breakage of existing input syntax in any of this.
Thanks,
Jean
Re: Mixed chord/note mode
Aaron Hill writes: > On 2022-08-22 6:12 am, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote: >> I think it would be a considerable gain in heavy-handedness if I would >> have to do >> 1*2 1 1 >> instead of >> f1*2:maj7 g:7 g1:m7 ges1:7 f1:maj7 ges1:7 > > Not to sound contrarian, but I would very much welcome the former > syntax. > > While I have used LilyPond since 2.10.33 and am quite used to the > existing chord-mode form, I am nevertheless irked by the need to > sandwich the duration between the chord root and its modifiers. I > have to make a strong mental effort to pronounce the chord in my head > as "D, for a half note, minor seventh" in order to successfully type > "d2:m7". > > If we borrowed the chord syntax from note-mode, it would mean when > typing "2" I could think "D minor seventh, for a half note" > which feels much more natural. Well, since <...> allows to group/stack chords and single notes, I'd rather want it more octave-preserving than chordmode in order to provide reasonably consistent and predictable behavior. Also it would appear like a bad idea to mix chordmode's absolute behavior with \relative notation for single notes. So the two forms would end up not quite interchangeable. At the same time, it is noteworthy that <...> already has a meaning in \chordmode, namely allowing to create chords explicitly (more often than not containing a single note, I'd guess). It would make some sense to make <...> exhibit the same behavior in chordmode and in notemode, but I am somewhat fuzzy about that. -- David Kastrup
PATCHES - Countdown to August 24
Here is the current countdown report. The next countdown will begin on August 24th. A list of all merge requests can be found here: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests?sort=label_priority Push: !1568 Minor fixes - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1568 !1562 Check arguments to LY_DEFINE etc. - Dan Eble https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1562 !1554 Fix 2.23.11 build failure on Cygwin 'out/lilypond.1' and '-std=gnu++14' - Masamichi Hosoda https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1554 Countdown: !1566 Give \markup \rhythm a private setting for system-count and ragged-right - Lukas-Fabian Moser https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1566 Review: !1571 Fix arithmetic for ring key stencils - Mark Knoop https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1571 !1570 Draft: Allow forcing display of repeated ChordName in chordChanges mode - Lukas-Fabian Moser https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1570 !1569 snippets formatting update - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1569 !1564 Caesura_engraver - Dan Eble https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1564 New: No patches in New at this time. Waiting: No patches in Waiting at this time. Cheers, Colin
