I would have considered it wrong if it had not been written that way. Music is written to be harmonically correct, not for the convenience of the player.
Yes. That convention is taught by ABRSM
Although I think @nigeld is right about that (or else the arranger is slightly less than competent) it actually isn't the answer to your question. There really is a valid reason for using correct enharmonic spellings.
In fact, I believe that is wrong anyway, that the F7#9 should actually be F7♭10 and then it is correct bot melodically and harmonically.
) seem to make the mistake that the stuff written on paper is somehow "music". It isn't. The sounds that people make when they interpret those scribblings is music. The opinion of this old man is that the dots should be written in such a way as to make it easiest to produce the music, not so they conform to what some professor in 1800 thought was "correct". Daft enharmonic changes, double flats and double sharps do not aid the production of music.
The problem is that it can vary depending on who is reading and whether the harmonic context is useful to them.
My best conservatorium lecturer used to make precisely the opposite point, making certain that we understood that music was sound, not dots on paper. But if we are going to notate it, whether in standard form, chord charts or tablature I feel that it should be done in a way that makes understanding what's going on easier, not more difficult. Sometimes you need more "difficult" notation for that. For example if someone wants me to read an E flat minor chord in standard notation I would far rather they write it E flat G flat B flat than E flat F sharp B flat. The first looks like a triad, the second does not.Many folk (possibly classically trained in music
But still there sometimes do need to be compromises. Notwithstanding what I said above that correctness is often useful, for me it may be going too far if the correctness means loads of double sharps.
I'd agree with the last example. And how you approach it might also depend on whether it's to be read more melodically or harmonically. And various other things - eg as a long time choral singer I appreciate a minor sixth looking like one rather than an augmented fifth, which will tend to cause confusion in my aged brain.
Quite, that would be silly. I have absolutely nothing against Gb.
Excellent. So there's no problem with Gb minor being Gb Bbb Db then........
F# minor. Are you sure that you're not really a guitarist?I think you mean F# minor.
As I said my argument is about ease of reading the dots in order to produce the music. The use of double flats and the like certainly slows me down and I've been playing for 50 odd years. It would also slow down anyone I've taught in the last 35 years. You may well be different. I actually don't give a stuff whether it's 'technically correct'. Again, you probably disagree.
My reason for using the double flat in this instance (Gb minor) is that the group of notes, at a glance and without doing any analysis, looks like the "normal" chord that it is. Write it with an A instead and it looks like some crunchy thing.
