[MU4 Issue] Problem with Chord Symbol for minor chord with major seven

[oMrSmith]

Of the following three symbols (for the same chord) only the first one will play the chord correctly:

[MarcSabatella]

The second is pretty meaningless, #7 isn't something that really makes sense. The third doesn't work for the same reason plain triangle doesn't work for major seventh - the original meaning of the triangle was really to just mean "major" without necessarily implying a seventh. Although it's true that over time, some writers have used it that way. Eventually, there should be a customization feature where you can specify more playback details for non-standard notations etc. But for now, best to stick to standard notations, like maj7, ma7, triangle7, even M7 (although I strongly recommend against relying on capitalization alone to indicate the different between major and minor).

[oMrSmith]

the original meaning of the triangle was really to just mean "major"

I think that is pretty meaningless too, because the basis of every chord symbol is a plain major chord. There is no need to add a triangle. Or do you mean, you have to write t7? I think sharps and flats should simply be interpreted as halfton alterations, which they already are for most cases. If "7" means minor seven, then "#7" means major seven.

[MarcSabatella]

No one ever said that chord symbol nomenclature was entirely logical. I'm just saying, #7 doesn't really make sense, would be ambiguous to most musicians who saw it, and no publisher I am aware of uses it. I would never ever recommend anyone use such a notation. If you have some special reason to need to disp[lay that, you can, and then if you also have a specific idea about how you'd want it played, you can enter a second invisible chord. Same as if you wanted to enter any other meaningless notation.

I can't defend why the people who first started using triangle for major did so, I'm just reporting the facts. Use of the triangle should always be accompanied by 7 to be unambiguous, same with the half-diminished symbol. Doesn't matter what might seem "logical", if we were inventing a new system for chord symbol notation. I'm just taking what actual publishers do, what actual published style guidelines call for, what actual textbooks teach, etc.

[oMrSmith]

Use of the triangle should always be accompanied by 7 to be unambiguous

You're probably right. I thought the triangle was a stand-alone for major 7 and remember to have seen it as such.

[oMrSmith]

@oktophonie actually I found the case:

This is from the New Realbook.

The term "MA", which could have been replaced by the triangle, stands alone and does in fact refere to the seven, which is not written out. That's why I still believe the triangle alone should better play back as a major 7.

Here it does here it doesn't

[MarcSabatella]

Like I said, it's not necessarily logical. But, it is pretty consistent: "ma" or similar abbreviations for major by themselves don't imply a 7. But, in conjunction with any number greater than or equal to 7, it does affect the quality of the seventh in the stack of thirds. So, ma7 means the seventh in the stack is major, and ma9 also means the seventh in the stack is major (it doesn't mean the ninth is major; that's already the case by default), but ma on its own just means a major triad. It's crazy but that's how it developed over the decades.

The triangle is indeed unique in that some people have chosen to use it as a shorthand to imply the seventh, but others use it the same as ma/maj to simply mean major.

[oMrSmith]

"ma" or similar abbreviations for major by themselves don't imply a 7. But, in conjunction with any number greater than or equal to 7, it does affect the quality of the seventh in the stack of thirds.

This explenation of yours gives some peace to my mind ;).