Re: Chords in LilyPond

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Simon (et al.),

>>    C4/3  / Db
> Corresponding to <des g bes c' e’>?

Correct.

> Adhering to standards would result in C7/Db, wouldn’t it?

*Which* standards?

1. In my musical theatre and jazz charts, you are correct: I would want C7/Db 
to be written to the chord symbol line.

2. In my new “classical”/“art” music, it’s a different story. To great relief 
from [at least some] new-music colleagues, I’ve begun including chord symbols 
in my scores — either in the score only (for conductor study) or in parts only 
(for pianists, marimba players, etc.) or both. In those contexts, I would want 
the chord symbol line to contain C4/3 / Db (where the 4/3 is written “4 over 
3”, like figured bass).

> Nor can it be output, as far as I know. What you mention, is a specific 
> voicing of a C7/E, and doesn’t chord notation by design leave exact voicings 
> unspecified?

Yes — that’s precisely my point. In a perfect world, we would be able to 
(though not forced to) indicate a voicing in the input — be that chordmode or 
<> or something entirely new — and then choose at output time what to do with 
that [extra] information: in a jazz chord chart, output the standard jazz chord 
symbol; in a musical theatre P/C score, output the standard MT chord symbol in 
the symbols, *but write out the voicing explicitly in the piano staff*; etc.

I have no idea whether this is possible, or if anyone else is trying (and 
hoping) to use chord input/throughput/output in the same way(s) as me. I’m just 
throwing my thoughts into the discussion, because Charles wants input.

Thanks,
Kieren.
________________________________

Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: address@hidden