![]() For example, you might have a chord c♭ for fingering One fixed markup for each chord naming style and assign that to theĪlso it then becomes easy to put chord names into a TextScript: it'sĬommon for Jazz accordion scores using standard bass to name chords andīass notes in textscript style in the bass staff according to the chordīutton(s) to use, and to name them in ChordNames style according to Like German chord names, or a markup list with Then have several markup commands producing output based on those Those properties are made part of text-interface. Properties with the basic analysis results (like fundamental pitch and Here's my take on how to do this more transparently: first have anĮngraver that does the basic chord analysis and writes one or several Tweak, apart from doing exceptions as Kieren already demonstrated. The main problem is that current LilyPond-default is very hard to Though, there are so many opinions about that topic. True, if one is focusing on writing out functional harmony the use of polychords can obscure that to a degree. Even so, look at what they have done and simply mimick the behaviour. But as you said, predefined is not the way to go. And by the looks of it Sibelius at least have by and large been inspired by B&R. I'm not talking about code, i'm talking about style. Ideally Lilypond should be able to use a variety of chord rendering formats, but given that it is developed largely by unpaid volunteers it may take a while to get there. Indeed, given the expectations of the academic and publishing worlds it would probably be required that you submit the piece as a Finale or Sibelius file in any event. Their code is proprietary, unlike Lilypond, and it may be that one of those applications would be more suitable for your needs. Kieren is thankfully working on this and i hope the brains that code for lilypond can bash heads together and at least give us a *working* solution and stop bickering over personal preferences that only hinder the development. The way to notate jazz/pop chords are established thoroughly through the "real book" series and others. To sum up: Stacked chords are useful for in some musical settings but it is not the future as of yet as they do not display function.Īlthough the ever singing chorus here on lilypond-user is that there is no agreed apon conventions in chords, i disagree both as a musician and a scholar. But you are talking about changing a whole culture of thinking. While i agree on this way of thinking *practically* makes a lot of sense. 13b9 chords are common enough in jazz, though, although practically speaking in improvisation it is often more fruitful to think of them as a polychord- C7 with A major triad superimposed in this case- as this offers more options. Musicality and practicality often seem secondary in academic pursuits as it is the idea that seems primary, not the resultant. Perhaps it is possible to look what have already been done? Sibelius perhaps even more so regarding chords. The people of Sib and Fin have done theire homework. Cmaj7 #5 b9 #11/F# is stealing a whole system! That is insane (in the membrane!) and i stand by my statement that the default output of lilypond is undesirable.īoth Sibelius and Finale have a comprehensive libraries of chords and while not to everybodys taste, it does pave the way for a good default. What the composer/arranger chooses to do, is a different case than the needs of the academic (and specific composer/arranger).Ģ) There is also the matter of spacing. But consider the following: A C7, a dominant, might tell a performing musician lots but when dealing with academic and analysis it is quite thin if the actual sounding timbre is a C13(b9), also a dominant, but allowed for when performing certain styles. \version "2.18.While i might agree with you to some extent this is also a practial matter:ġ) Whether or not you call it maj or *triangle*, m or MI is indeed a matter of culture and personal taste. This makes it easy to combine staff notation and chord names. ![]() I split the guitar voice into two logical voices: ExplicitNotes for explicit notes and NamedChords for chords.ĮxplicitNotes contains silence, when the music happens in NamedChords and vice versa. This is the output I want to achieve (corresponding MWE given below): Using Lilypond, I am trying to notate explicit notes in staff notation and named chords with an indication of rhythm, both in a single staff. ![]() On the guitar it is common, both, to follow staff notation, as well as to strum chords given by their names.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |