Irwin Oppenheim wrote:
| On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, John Chambers wrote:
|
| > This really just means that '+' would be added to the
| > list of ornament symbols, and the default display
| > form is merely a '+' above the note.
|
| Something like:
| U: X = "^+" ?
No, more like:
... | fe +d2 | c4 |]
where the d has a '+' drawn above the note head. Of course, for the
benefit of people who want to make the music a bit more specific,
they could add
U: + = trill
to the headers, and then they'd get the "Tr" ligature above the note
head. That would satisfy Romantic-era musicians, who mostly don't
know this notation. But Baroque musicians would of course sneer at
that, and prefer the plain '+' that doesn't presume to tell them how
to ornament the note.
(Then they'd complain about ABC's lack of all those overly-intricate
ornaments that some Baroque composers liked to use. ;-)
I just thought that we could get '+' added to the list of official
ornament symbols before it gets gobbled up for some other use. And
then, if you don't see the point in that notation, you can use a U
line to use it for something else. There are lots of potential uses
of '+' in musical notation. Maybe you'd like it for a quarter-tone
sharp sign. (I've seen people use '+' this way. It makes sense, since
visually '+' is half of a '#'. But this visual metaphor doesn't
extend to quarter-tone flats.)
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
