Re: c:maj inconsistency

[Erlend Aasland]

Hi

On 19. mai. 2008, at 00:31, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
> >
> Right now, :maj adds a major 7th step, even if no number is present.
>
> c:maj is equivalent to c:maj7.  That is the confusion.

Agree

> > IMHO, by making c:maj equal to c, we would make c:maj7 (and
> > friends) less clear. By just disallowing c:maj (without a 7,
> > 9, 11, ...) we get rid of the "problem".
>
> I'm OK with that, too.
>
> In looking through the chord name scheme on Wikipedia (I know, it's  
> not definitive for music, but it's widely available) (see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chord_(music) 
> >), Cmaj is listed as an alternate name for the major triad.  In any  
> guitar music I've ever played, major chords are always indicated  
> without any suffix.

Same here; As a jazz guitarist I've never seen a plain major chord  
notated with any kind of suffix.


E