Chord symbol problem
I tried to remove this post because no one replied and I figured out an answer. I removed it so that others wouldn’t read it and waste their time answering. Then, I got a few replies saying I should not have removed the original text (one with a rather ominous tone implying I would not get future replies because I had been a bad boy).
So, in the interest of community, here it is:
When adding chord symbols in MuseScore it is difficult to differentiate between a chord with an accidental and a chord extension with an accidental. The example in my attachment shows what I’m talking about. Because the font uses the same size accidental in either scenario it’s hard to know if the chord symbol in my example is a Cb chord with an added 9th, or a C chord with an added b9. Yes, you could discern the chord from the actual notes, but the chord symbol should accurately reflect the chord in question. Or, in the case of a lead sheet, when no chord is spelled out, it is absolutely critical to have an unambiguous chord symbol.
There is no way to change this is MuseScore, so I just consulted a text on music engraving norms and the suggestion was to write it as C (b9), or in the case of an actual Cb chord (yes, that is largely theoretical, but it is legit) you would write Cb (9).
I hope this makes sense and satisfies the folks who got upset by my deletion.
Michael
PS, given the verbosity and circuitous inquiry of this post, now do you see why I wanted to remove it so as to not bog down others with it? 🙂
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
Chord.png | 6.61 KB |
Comments
It might be helpful to others to post your solution.
In reply to It would have been more… by Brer Fox
I just re-posted the original text and the solution I found. It is not a MuseScore solution, it is an engraving option.
In reply to It would also have been more… by [DELETED] 87423109
So, if you deleted your text, why don't you delete the attachment?
In reply to So, if you deleted your text… by Pentatonus
@Pentatonus, It wouldn’t let me.
In reply to It would also have been more… by [DELETED] 87423109
@Zarplod: Probably a lot of people, like me, read your post but didn’t know the answer. Most folk who have worked out a solution by themselves are happy to share it - this is a community after all…
In reply to It would also have been more… by [DELETED] 87423109
You edited your earlier posts and now all context has been lost.
In reply to Well, let's see how it goes… by underquark
@Underquark, I find it strange that you imply (almost kind of threaten) that I won’t receive any replies in the future because I removed a post that got no replies!
I removed my post in the hopes that people wouldn’t waste their time answering something I figured out. I was trying to do something helpful, but apparently went against forum protocol.
I put the original text back in the post. Happy now?
Michael
In reply to I find it weird that you… by [DELETED] 87423109
Dunno. I see no such implication nor any hint of threat in underquark's comment (or in any of the preceding comments). He merely says that he hopes people will be able to answer your questions in the future. How is that a threat?
I make it a rule to always assume the best possible interpretation of emotion in any kind of electronic (indeed, any kind of written) communication. Even when it's obviously negative, assuming that they meant it positively (or at least neutrally) makes my life so much more pleasant.
(No, there's no threat here :-)
In reply to It would have been more… by Brer Fox
@Brer Fox, et al., I just put my original text back in the post, case you’re interested. Sorry to violate forum protocol. They really should give an option to remove a post when necessary.
In reply to I just put my original text… by [DELETED] 87423109
Thank you. All these posts are indexed by the search engines, so your solution/work-around may well help someone else in the future.