>>Well, I can think of a simple example of how one might use this: >> [A4G2E2]2[F2D2] >>This would have a 4-count melody note above the [G2E2][F2D2] chord >>change. With L:1/8, the first chord could be drawn on a single stem, >>with an open oval for the A4 note and filled ovals for the G2 and E2 >>notes. This sort of notation isn't at all unusual in keyboard music. >>The abc seems quite readable to me.
Using my absorptive-tie proposal: [A2--G2E2] [A2F2D2] Surely that's more readable? > OK, I'm with you and it's growing on me. It would be necessary for > something I saw the other day which would need to be written > [d6z2]2[B2G2][B2G2] although there would still need to be intelligence > within the programme to recognise that the two Bs were not melody notes. Do you mean the B's are tied or printed as one note? If the latter, using the absorptive tie notation: [d2-] [d2--B2--G2] [d2B2G2] the d is a crotchet tied to a minim, the B is a minim. Or did I get the semantics wrong? I'd expect [d6z2]2 to mean the same as [d12z4] (whatever *that* meant) - there are obvious reasons for extending chord notation to allow for postfixed length factors (i.e. just about everybody assumes they *are* allowed when first using the notation) so no proposed extension ought to preclude that. =================== <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> =================== To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
