The main problem for me with “x7sus4” as a chord name is its length; when there are four chord names in a bar, every character counts in terms of legibility. Things can get crowded fast. (This came up in preparing a chart for the Vince Guaraldi song “Cast Your Fate To The Wind” in which all the chords in the soloing section are suspended dominants. Lots and lots of them, actually sounds pretty terrible on guitar; works somewhat better on piano which was Guaraldi’s instrument, but IMHO seriously overdone on this song).
However, I find that when I give musicians lead sheets done by the Roemer-Brandt standards I never get any question about what any chord means. It may not be especially modern but it is certainly effective.
Tim
The absence or presence of the seventh does not affect the chord quality (it does not affect its function)
I have to disagree with this: there are plenty of situations where adding a seventh does indeed change the chord's function.
Of course, getting any of the notes wrong is regrettable, which is why unambiguity (i.e. C7sus4 IMO) is so desirable.
Kevin
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hiddenhttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user