> There is no ambiguity in abc---the example ^f- | f has a tie, not > a slur---so that the second f has to be an f sharp. Which means that > playback and midi programs should play ^f, but printing programs don't > print the accidental (because they don't need to--the convention takes > care of it.) > It would seem to follow---but I don't remember if there was > agreement here---that if one wrote ^f- | ^f that the accidental on the > second f is there for emphasis, and a printing program should print it; > but it should be equivalent to ^f- | f for any midi or playback program, > or for that matter, to a musician reading the tune.
And another equivalent is ^f-|_g . I mentioned that possibility on this list a couple of years ago, and somebody else mentioned some actual examples from Chopin - with the kind of subtle effects he was often after, the distinction between the above and doing it as a slur would matter. Test case: software ought to accept ^f-|f-|f-|_g-|g-|^^e-|e-|^f (assuming default note length is one bar long), play it with only one attack, and print four accidentals. : It's really the ABC representation that's misleading, implying that : ties and slurs are different things. It would be better for ABC to : officially go along with the usual musical convention, and just say : that the "tie" notation is shorthand for a two-note "slur", and for : identical notes, causes them to merge into a single long note. Fiddle music often uses a convention that distinguishes the two - a slur on two notes of the same pitch means that they are taken with the bowing in the same direction, but still with two separate attacks. If you want the tie effect you write a single double-length note. How much sense would this make with the B's tied across the bar?... X:1 T:Shuffle and Cut S:McFarlan MS, 1740 Z:Jack Campin 1998 M:9/8 L:1/8 K:D dBG AGF G2(B |B)GE E2(B A)FD |\ dBG AGF G2(B |A)FD D2(B A)FD:| afd edc d2(B |B)GE E2(B A)FD |\ afd edc d2(B |A)FD D2(B A)FD:| (E/F/G)E (D/E/F)D (E/F/G)(B|B)GE E2(B A)FD |\ (E/F/G)E (D/E/F)D (E/F/G)(B|A)FD D2(B A)FD:| (d/e/f)d (c/d/e)c (B/c/d)(B|B)GE E2(B A)FD |\ (d/e/f)d (c/d/e)c (B/c/d)(B|A)FD D2(B A)FD:| B,2E (E/F/G)E E2(B |B)GE E2(B A)FD |\ B,2E (E/F/G)E E2(B |A)FD D2(B A)FD:| G2d F2d E2(d |B)GE E2(B A)FD |\ G2d F2d E2(d |A)FD D2(B A)FD:| Tangentially, that's got such a regular structure that it seem natural to write it in a more analytical way - the following is equivalent, and should give player programs an interesting time checking it. BarFly plays all the notes in the right order but gets in a complete fankle over what slurs are supposed to match up... X:2 T:Shuffle and Cut S:McFarlan MS, 1740 Z:Jack Campin 2002 M:9/8 L:1/8 P:(ABAC)2 (DBDC)2 (EBEC)2 (FBFC)2 (GBGC)2 (HBHC)2 K:D [P:A] dBG AGF G2(B | [P:B] B)GE E2(B A)FD | [P:C] A)FD D2(B A)FD | [P:D] afd edc d2(B | [P:E] (E/F/G)E (D/E/F)D (E/F/G)(B| [P:F] (d/e/f)d (c/d/e)c (B/c/d)(B| [P:G] B,2E (E/F/G)E E2(B | [P:H] G2d F2d E2(d | Note that if the slurs in the above had been ties, software would have an even more exciting time trying to figure out if they were correct or not. In the following the two f's have the same pitch: X:3 T:test M:none P:ACB K:C [P:A] ^f-| [P:B] g | [P:C] f | If you were writing something like that for real, you might be well advised to put in advisory accidentals for human readers, but software shouldn't depend on them to get it right. Software ought also to be capable of telling that the following is wrong: X:4 T:test M:none P:ACB K:C [P:A] ^f-| [P:B] f | [P:C] g | =================== <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> =================== To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
