Re: .scm files

[Atte André Jensen]

On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, James Hammons wrote:

> Ok, I just updated "chord-names.scm" and "american-chords.ly" to incorporate
> Atte's jazz chords (c-n.scm) and supply a missing seventh chord (a-c.ly).
> There's no need to use scheme in your .ly file for jazz chords:  Just use
> \property ChordNames.chordNameStyle = "jazz" where appropriate.

Am I getting this right: a "scheme" is the correct name for the chord-defs
I had in my .ly file and when you transferred them to the .scm-file and
gave them the identifier "jazz" it makes these defs available (if your
chord-names.scm replaced the org chord-names.scm) in any .ly file by
selecting the style "jazz"?? Is that the way it works??? I ask because I
just looked in the files and realized how the defs worked but I would also
like to understand things on a higher level...

> Atte Jensen wrote:
> > The standard chord structure is the 7th chords. Examples:
> >
> > C-E-G-B would be notated as C triangle
> > C-Eb-G-B = Cm triangle
> > C-Eb-Gb-Bbb = Co (no "/7" as in the american chord style)
> > C-Eb-Gb-Bb = C slashed o
> > C-E-G-A = C6 (no "maj" as in the american chord style )
> 
> I did check out your previous post (the one with 'atte-jazz-chords.ly) and I
> saw that I was missing dominant 7th flat 5.  D'oh! 

Well, I tried your chord-names.scm and 7b5 needs b5 to be raised
with "super". But I wasn't able to locate the def of 7b5 in your file -
was this what meant by "I was missing dominant 7th flat 5. D'oh!"?? 

> Cmaj6 spelled as C6 is
> also probably better, 

Well I never say Cmaj6 before, that really surprised me! I would never use
that, so I think C6 is better...

> so that would make only 5 deviations from the american
> style.  I know of the "+" being shorthand for "aug", but I think that comes
> down to a matter of taste (I know more than a few people who hate using "+"
> for "aug", but I couldn't begin to tell you why).
> 
> > So I'll have to try editing chord-names.scm again to see if I can get the
> > changes here to be reflected in the output...
> 
> Look at my chord-names.scm for the appropriate place (after
> 'names-alist-jazz') to make any changes you need to in order to make a
> proper "jazz" style and post it here so it can be incorporated...

I won't have time to look at it before monday, but I think I'm gonna make
a general and thus much complete jazz-chord definition, including common
practice of notating extensions. All this is of course subject to
discussion because it's impossible to find two musicians who would notate
everything exactly the same way. But I'll try hard to make some defs that
are consistent and cover all posibilities.

Below is the parts of your chord-names.scm with a question. Sections
"american" and "jazz" start with the appropiate "define" and
"set!" followed by "american" and "jazz" respectively, but both end with
"chord::names-alist-american". Shouldn't the jazz-def end with
"chord::names-alist-jazz", or is there something going on here that I
don't get???? Here is the code with the same question:

---
<snip>
% [in american]
% since this..
(define chord::names-alist-american '())
(set! chord::names-alist-american
<snip>
% ...and this are the same...
      chord::names-alist-american))
<snip>
[in jazz]
%.. why are this...
(define chord::names-alist-jazz '())
(set! chord::names-alist-jazz
%...and this...
      chord::names-alist-american))
<snip>
% ...and this different
<snip>
---

Maybe this is a strange and unclear way to ask the question, hope you see
what I mean... Couldn't find a better way (besides posting the entire
.scm file again with questions embedded, but wouldn't the be a little too 
big).

-- 
Atte André Jensen