Re: 13th chord?

[Thomas Morley]

2017-02-25 23:08 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Rob Torop <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> When I enter a 13th chord like this e:13, it renders with a 9 as well.
>> I know a 13 chord officially contains the 9 and 11, and that lilypond
>> by convention will omit the 11.  But I don't really want to have the 9
>> showing.  Do I inadvertently have some setting on that is giving me
>> this?
>
> Minimal example:
>
>
>
> The default chord printer is Ignatzek.  No idea whether this would count
> as a bug with the Ignatzek naming framework or not, and how the other
> chord printers would behave in comparison.
>
> As a default, the mismatch between input and output seems weird.
>
> --
> David Kastrup


Well, we omit the 11 by purpose,
See the comment in construct-chord-elements from chord-entry.scm and
regtest chord-name-entry-11.ly.

Also quoting "Standardized Chord Symbol Notation" by Brandt/Roemer in
section "Dominant Thirteenths":
"In accepted usage, the 9th is included but the 11th is omitted. Quite
frequently the unaltered 5th is also left out."

So no bug, but a design decision.

To have the 11th included, one needs to explicitely state it:

\chords { e:11.13 }

If this is not done, the printing as E⁹ ¹¹ is ok, imho.

Ofcourse we could do it the other way round. as said: a design decision.


Cheers,
  Harm