Re: Chords and what they mean

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Urs,

> Perfect example of "context”.

Exactly!

> I, as a classical musician, will get confused if presented with namings
> that don't follow the harmonic content (given the historical style of
> the music).
> That would be the same for Em-6 (or however you'd spell it out) as <e g
> bis>.

Yes. In most of the current chorded music I’m writing (i.e., musical theatre 
songs), the chord names are there for ease of sight-reading and/or comping by 
the pianist (e.g., at an audition). So simple trumps function every time. And 
all the MDs and musical theatre composers/arrangers I know concur.

> The four double flats have been replaced by their enharmonically
> exchanged pitches, so we're having only three flats left.
> While someone might think that's easier to read I strongly oppose
> because that totally spoils the structural context (the chord is simply
> built through stacked thirds) and also the voice leading.

For luxurious study, that’s my preference, too.  :)
For sight-reading, simple trumps function every time.

Cheers,
Kieren.
________________________________

Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: address@hidden