Re: Chords in LilyPond

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/29/17 5:58 AM, "Peter Gentry" <address@hidden> wrote:

>I have been intrigued by the highly technical correspondence on this
>topic.  However I have struggled to understand what is being discussed.
<snip>

>Other links such as
>http://motools.sourceforge.net/chord_draft_1/chord.html describe in some
>detail the structure of chords beyond the simple C G7 etc descriptions
>including where a strong note outside the ³normal² chord members is
>employed often by a solo instrument.
>All this is way outside by musical knowledge whilst interesting it is
>difficult to understand.

This proposal for a chord ontology is one possible choice for assigning
semantics, although I don't like it at all.  As you say, it is very
technical, and doesn't really help with meaning, in my opinion.

> 
>Am I correct in seeing ³semantics² in this way ?

"Semantics" is a discussion of meaning.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semantics

"the meaning or relationship of meanings of a sign
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sign#h1> or set of signs;
especially : connotative
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/connotative> meaning"

When we talk of "semantics", we talk of the meaning of the notes in the
chord.  At its most basic, a chord is a group of notes played
simultaneously.  In the context of western music, the notes in the chord
are selected to achieve a particular kind of harmonic progression.  We can
look at music theory and see that each chord has a particular reason for
being part of the music in relation to the preceding and succeeding
chords.  So for example see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chord_progression


The aim of the Chords GSOC project is to try to capture the harmonic
meaning intended by the music, not just the notes.  And that's what is
meant by "semantics" in the context of this project.

HTH,

Carl






> 
>