Re: define-note-names.scm: Wrong German beh definition???

[David Kastrup]

Torsten Hämmerle <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello all,
>
> Working on a complete set of note names for all languages (including quarter
> tones the new triple flat/sharp accidentals), I've stumbled over an
> erroneous German note name definition of "beh".
>
> In German (and most Scandinavian languages), B is called h, and there is the
> exception of using "b" for B flat.
> All the other alterations of h should not use the letter b:
> h, heh, b (!), heseh, heses, heseseh, heseses.
>
>
> In colloquial German, sometimes "bes" is used for "heses" (Bbb), because the
> b (Bb) is being lowered by another half-tone, thus yielding a double-flat.
> Following this logic, however, "beh" should lower a b (Bb) by another
> quarter-tone step, but the 
> *current definition of beh is SEMI-FLAT instead of THREE-Q-FLAT!*

So SEMI_FLAT would rather be heh?  Heh.

> I'm somehow reluctant to change definitions that have been around for
> a long time, but "beh" is utterly wrong.

THREE-Q-FLAT regularly would be heseh?

> Question:
>
> Should we keep the current definition of beh, even if it's wrong?
> Should we change the current definition of beh to mean THREE-Q-FLAT?
> Should we just dump it?

Well, my first priority would be that we get the correct behavior for
correct note names.  IIRC, the implementation for "german" notename
language focused on correctness rather than convenience (as opposed to
the default "netherlands") and/or regularity.

So I'd lean towards dropping beh.

> PS: the German chord name function produces a sloppy "bes" when it really
> should be a "heses":
> \chords { \germanChords es1:dim/beses }

Certainly worth an issue.

-- 
David Kastrup