[abcusers] Re: Bryan Creer (?)
John Chambers wrote: Maybe we should invite him back. I've always sorta enjoyed thediscussions that he started. And it's been quiet around here lately,too quiet ...I think Phil Taylor's response to Don's original enquiry neatly illustrated one of the reasons I haven't been around for a while. He started slagging me off as soon as he saw my name before I'd even said anything. I felt in the past that I had been demonised and anything I said would come under attack. It's difficult to reason with people who don't seem to have wasted much time actually reading what I have said before launching in, often quite offensively. Laura Conrad once attacked me for something Phil had said and then had another go at me when I pointed that out. Wil Macaulay attacked me for (as far as I could understand) something he had said himself. You, John, seemed to have a go at me for things that that Italian chap whose name escapes me said. Wendy B(?) finally seemed to recognise that she was criticising me for something I hadn't said but spoilt it by promptly looking around for something else to hit me with. I think ABC is a brilliant invention and I would love to be able to participate and make a contribution but banging your head against a brick wall really is great when you stop. Apart from that, I've spent the last year studying for an MSc in Computing in Archaeology which has kept me fairly busy. For an idea of what I've been up to have a look at - http://www.bryancreer.com/Castle.html No musical content whatsoever. I've just got Jeff's email. Thank's. I'm touched. (Don't say it.) We'll see. Can people please promise to READ WHAT I ACUALLY SAY before laying into me? Bryan
[abcusers] Re: Bryan Creer (?)
Don Whitener wrote - So far as I can tell, Bryan Creer has not posted to this group since early August 2003... Has he dropped out for a while? Thanks for asking Don. It's nice to be missed. Phil Taylor wrote - He does rather tend to drop out for long periods of time, then return to start a mighty argument.On the contrary. I make positive, constructive suggestions and then other people start a mighty argument. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
It strikes me that there are three processes to carry out - Remove comments Combine lines Parse abc notation The problem is to decide what order to do them in and to be consistent about it. The above order seems the logical one to me and is what I have already implemented in Abacus. abc def| gab CDE|\ % comments FGA BC| ... would become - abc def| gab CDE|\ FGA BC| ... and then - abc def| gab CDE| FGA BC| ... which parses normally. With - abc def| gab CDE| % comments\ FGA BC| ... The \ would be lost so it would be incorrect. An earlier example - G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ M:4/4 % Measure Change\ K:C % Key Change\ c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| w:gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- is a mess whichever way you do it. You have to start parsing the lines to find out how to combine them and get rid of the comments. Removing the comments first wouldn't be too bad by accident since the backslashes on the imbedded commands are unnecessary. >From the 1.6 standard - To change key, meter, or default note length, simply put in a new line with a K: M: or L: field, e.g. ed|cecA B2ed|cAcA E2ed|cecA B2ed|c2A2 A2:| K:G AB|cdec BcdB|ABAF GFE2|cdec BcdB|c2A2 A2:| To do this without generating a new line of music, put a \ at the end of the first line, i.e. E2E EFE|E2E EFG|\ M:9/8 A2G F2E D2|] It would be much more understandable and straight forward to have - G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ M:4/4 % Measure Change K:C % Key Change c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- Keep it simple and bear in mind what is understandable to a non-programmer. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
John Chambers wrote - Actually, that would be equivalent to %%MIDI no%%ba%%rlines My idea was that, having read "%%MIDI no\", applications that handled pseudocomments would know to ignore leading "%%" until they got to a line that didn't end "\". Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin - Wil (and others), would that be acceptable? Fine by me. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Wil Macaulay wrote - grumble then you've got to figure out how to put the cursor in the right place after you've done all this, if the user made a mistake /grumble Yep. But that's your problem not the user's. If I can do it in Abacus (crosses fingers) then so can anyone. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - Bryans alternative proposal didn't seem unreasonable, if he can clearly indicate how pseudo comments should be parsed. I didn't get that till after my last posting. Have I answered the question? If not, I'm not sure that I see the problem. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - That's also a reasonable approach. But what do you do with pseudo comments? I'm not sure what you mean by pseudo comments. Could you give an example? This example was only given to show how absurd the semantics of the 1.6 standard were. But the 1.6 standard doesn't include the w: command (only the W: command) and does not require continuation slashes for imbedded commands so the example given didn't conform to that standard anyway. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - I'm not sure what you mean by pseudo comments. Could you give an example? %%gchordfont times 14 or %%abc-copyright (C) Copyright John Smith 2003 Well, personally, I don't intend to do anything with them; they are comments and can be ignored. For those who do wish to process them, they are clearly distinguishable from ordinary comments so they can avoid removing them and deal with them whenever they feel it would be appropriate. This might become - 1/ Ignore comments except pseudo comments 2/ Combine lines 3/ Parse the resulting logical line 4/ Parse pseudo comments Wil Macaulay wrote - I'd like to propose 1. continued lines cannot have a trailing comment I still don't see why not. The 1.6 standard says - A % symbol will cause the remainder of any input line to be ignored. which is pretty unequivocal. I don't feel I was breaking any standard when I implemented it and object to having Abacus made retrospectively non-standard without a pretty good reason. 2. pseudocomments cannot be continued Certainly not in the way Wil has illustrated but since anyone processing them will know they are doing so, something like - %%MIDI no\ %%ba\ %%rlines would work without mucking things up for software that ignored them. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: 8.3. Accidental directives
From Irwin's standard - 8.3. Accidental directives %%propagate-accidentals not | octave | pitch When set to not, accidentals apply only to the note they're attached to. When set to octave, accidentals also apply to all the notes of the same pitch in the same octave up to the end of the bar. When set to pitch, accidentals also apply to all the notes of the same pitch in all octaves up to the end of the bar. The default value is pitch. but as Richard Robinson points our elsewhere - All these %%whatever usages are based on the point that the first character makes it a comment, and thus anything behind that will be ignored by any ABC application unless it takes the trouble specifically to look for it. If this one is ignored, it will affect the playback of tunes. It is a necessary function but it should be part of the abc standard not part of the stylesheet specification. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Handout, boot in
AAARRRGGGHHH! Should I track down every copy and have it destroyed? That's actually Bloke sitting beside me which explains why I'm not kicking him in the head. He was being a bloody nuisance. The rest of us were still trying to do things to do with the Rob Harbron/John Dipper workshop when he muscled in. Oh dear, he's probably going to be there this year. I'd settle for bashing out The Roads again if that's all right by you. I need to get them right and you can do your Bob Hope joke. I've found the Adrian Schofield website and he is certainly unusual as much by design as accident. His name seems to crop up with all the establishment figures of the Nortghumbrian Piping scene. Bryan The fiddler on the front of the HoM handout looks rather like Marina.
[abcusers] Sorry
Wrong address. Please ignore anything libellous. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] (no subject)
Richard Robinson wrote - The standard says "It is also possible to specify a complex meter". Bwahaha. jcabc2ps will accept both 4i/4 and 4/4i without complaint, but only displays the 1st of these correctly. Interesting. I think you will find that, with a little rearrangement, 4/4i is equal to -4i/4. Negative Meter? Tricky. "Play this piece backwards from the beginning." Technically, since neither of these has a real component, they are not really complex but completely imaginary. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: ABC Standard 2.0 revision III
K:A_b^f^c shouldn't that have a G# also since you've written K:A? and a lot of other stuff around the same subject. Perhaps it's time to plug my idea of - K:_b^f^c tonic=A mode=whatever Completely unambiguous. Talking of which, are there any plans for a procedure for amendments or extensions to the standard or do we just stick to the implement your favourite idea and argue about it afterwards system we have now? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: ABC Standard 2.0 revision III
John Chambers wrote - Bryan Creer writes: | Talking of which, are there any plans for a procedure for amendments or | extensions to the standard or do we just stick to the implement your favourite idea | and argue about it afterwards system we have now? What a concept! This is a gang of musicians, you know. What are the chances of us ever agreeing to any such thing? That's good because I've implemented tonic= and mode= in Abacus. Next you'll be telling us that Britney Spears is a musician ... Yeah! And she' really is a virgin. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - Hooraah!
Jef Moine wrote - No problem: it is simpler, and it will be in the next release. Sorry for I misunderstood the previous thread... Thanks Jef. It's nice to see a lot of ABCers working in the same direction. I hope Henrik doesn't feel we've slipped past him while he was on holiday. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: About the choice of '!'
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - Using ! and !..! in one and the same tune may lead to disaster if you make a small typo. So, while "!" should definitely be supported, I encourage you to support "*" as well. It just seems to make a messy situation more complicated. You are still going to have to handle ! and !! so it brings no benefit. Whatever clever heuristics you come up with, there is no getting away from the fact that the dual use of ! is very unsatisfactory. Try and think about from the point of view of the ordinary user presented with this stuff. Let's look for the most practical way of solving it. abc2win is only obsolete in the sense that it is not being maintained. There is a large body of abc notation that uses it, it has many users and it is still available and becaues it is easily accessible to non-geeks it will continue to get taken up. As far as I can tell, !...! is much less widely used, the collections that use it and the software that implements it are still maintained. It could be changed. I hear the cry "Why should we?" I reply "For the greater good of abc." This may seem like letting Jim Vint "get away with it" but if I find someone blocking my way on the pavement, I ask them to move; if my way is blocked by a dead dog, I walk round it. That doesn't mean that I respect the dog more than the person, I'm just facing up to practical realities. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Jef Moine wrote - I though from the previous discussion that the length of the chord was the length of the smallest note (and that's what abcm2ps does). Then, if you want a bigger length, you may add invisible rests. In a previous discussion, some people wanted the first note to give the length of the chord. But later, it seems that everybody agreed using the length of the smallest note. Not how I recall it and I certainly did not agree that. Invisible rests were not, at the time, part of the standard. At least it confirms that different length notes in a chord should not be illegal. I have just been trying to look up the original discussion in the archive. It appears under the threads "Abacus 1.0.0 launch" and "suggestions for [A4A2] notation " about a year ago. The archive is not easy to follow. The discussion did not seem to come to any particular conclusion. I had started from "highest note" defines chord length and had been persuaded that this would not work. I suggested "first listed note" and there seemed to be a concensus in that direction. I changed Abacus accordingly. Then someone started insisting that "shortest note" was best without giving very clear reasons. I said that I was not prepared to change Abacus again until given a good reason to do so. After that, the thread rather fizzled out. My case for "first listed note" is that it is unambiguous and independant of the musical content. The question to consider is "What is clearest and easiest to understand for the user?" Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Wil Macaulay wrote - Another historic moment! Phil and Bryan and I all agree on something! Put it in the standard, quick, before we lose it! Oh happy day! Over to you Jef? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: %%ABC 2.0 identifier
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Must? What are you going to do if they don't? Please read carefully what I wrote. Then you will understand, that: 1/ Users are not required to manually add any of these new fields to their ABC files at all. 2/ Programs that import ABC files should not assume that any of these files are present. 3/ The only requirement that I made is that programs that _export_ ABC notation, should add three fields to their output, that make it possible to identify later on which program generated the output, according to which version of ABC. That's all. I have looked through the email I was quoting from and can find nothing corresponding to points 1/ and 2/. In 3/ you have modified "must" to "should"; an improvement. If you read carefully what I wrote, you will understand that the point I was trying to get over was that the principle of a standard is to unify abc regardless of its origin. I don't want to have to use a different set of parsing rules depending on the origin of the file. That is no improvement on the situation we have now. It is up to the developer to make it clear what subset of the standard they do implement then the user can make their choice and pester for the things they want. Nobody disagrees on that. Then why are you saying what applications MUST do? A a further point, you are defining %% commands as mandatory parts of the standard whereas their current usage is application dependant in such a way that they can be safely ignored by other applications. They are thus, by definition, not part of the standard. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: About the choice of '!'
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - line breaking To force a line break at all times, a star (*) can be used. The star can be inserted everywhere, where a note group could. Deprecated line breaking The abc2win program used a `!' character to force line breaks, as is currently supported with the * operator (see section Line breaking). If there is a recognised need for a line break character, then, whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, ! is well established in that role. It seems pointless to waste another character to do the same job. The abc2win usage obviously conflicts with the !...! style notation for musical symbols It would be more accurate to say that !...! conflicts with the abc2win usage and is far less widely used. (I've never come across an example in nature.) Why not use ** for musical symbols? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Nobody is opposing the [abc]2 idea are they? Can we take that as agreed and get onto the far more important business of different note lengths in one chord? Irwin Oppenheim wrote - All the notes within a chord should have the same length. More complicated chords can be transcribed with the operator, see section Voice overlay. This was discussed about a year ago and it was generally accepted that you could have notes of different lengths in the same chord. The issue, as John Chambers has mentioned, was which note represented the time elapsed before the following note - highest, lowest, longest, shortest... I opted for first listed on the grounds that it was independant of the musical content. Some agreed but others did not and (as usual) the dicussion reached no firm conclusion. I went ahead and implemented it in Abacus on this basis. For instance with L:1/4, [GD2] A B c would take four beats and [D2G] A B c would take five. I do put notes of two different length on different stems. I hate to think what would happen with notes of three different lengths. I'm quite happy to implement the (or whatever) notation as well but do not want to see what I've already done outlawed. John Chambers wrote - Similarly, the [ce][Bd] case is very useful, and already works with some abc software. It works with Abacus. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: %%ABC 2.0 identifier
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - Applications which extract separate tunes from a file, must insert the fields of the original file header, into the header of the extracted tune. Software that exports ABC tunes conforming to this standard, must include a version field. Software that exports ABC tunes conforming to this standard, must include a creator field. Must? What are you going to do if they don't? What about the existing abc files? One of the strengths of abc is that you don't need any specialist software at all; you can write it using a simple text editor (or pen and paper for that matter). How are you going to get Microsoft Notepad to conform to this standard? If I Copy and Paste a tune from an abc file into an email how is the operating system supposed to extract data from the file header? Surely an abc standard shouldn't be about software, it should be about abc. It should define what abc is. What software does is up to the developer under pressure from their users. As Guido said a while ago - That said, programs don't necessarily have to comply to 1.7.6 or 2.0.0 or 3.1415. Many users are happy with single-voice ABC, so programs targeting these users may be left untouched. But what about we classical musicians, who need more? What's more important, so-called standards or people's needs? No application is likely to be a complete implementation of any version of the standard. It is up to the developer to make it clear what subset of the standard they do implement then the user can make their choice and pester for the things they want. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: expected abc audience
Jack Campin wrote - the only program that does interchange to any other general-purpose score format in a meaningful way is Bryan's Noteworthy convertor? He probably has figures for how many people use that but I doubt if it's as much as 5% of the ABC community. In my dreams. Rather less than 1% if Arent's figures are to be believed although circumstantial evidence suggests that there may be quite a few unregistered users. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: ©: 1998 Joe Smith ... But some people might have problems figuring out how to type this. On many linux and *BSD systems, you can get the copyright symbol with the ALT-) (or ALT-SHIFT-0) combination, but I don't think this will work on Windoze or Mac systems. >From the Windows Help files - . open Character Map by clicking Start, pointing to Programs, pointing to Accessories, pointing to System Tools, and then clicking Character Map. Character Map works only with Windows-based programs. In Font, click a font. Double-click each character you want to insert. Click Copy. In your document, click where you want the characters to appear. On the Edit menu, click Paste. Just like that. Easy. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: So I tried it. Got the Character Map window, found the copyright char, double clicked on it, went to another window, clicked on it, went to the Edit menu and selected Paste ... and a capital O with an acute accent appeared at the cursor point in the window. There's a step missing in what you say there. After double clicking the character you should click Copy on the Character Map window. Failing that, what application are you pasting in to? It works all right for me. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: I should maybe mention that this is a somewhat old W98 box . And reboot is several times per day. Perhaps it's gone into a sulk because it's heard you being rude about Microsoft. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Abacus 2.1.0 release
Abacus 2.1.0 is available for download. (2.0.0 never made it into the public arena.) I've been tinkering with it for so long that I can't remember all the new things since 1.0.0 but it's got a much whizzier interface and things like selecting print size and transposition. Oh yes, it doesn't fall over under Windows XP any more (probably). It is shareware with a registration fee of £10/$16 but you can play with it for quite a while before you register it. It is available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/ Constructive comments, useful suggestions and even intelligent criticism are welcome. Abuse and carping will be ignored. My response to "It doesn't do..." will probably be "No, not yet." Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: QBasic Play statement
Excellent! abc2mtex was in clear breach of the standard set by QBasic (and I bet that wasn't the first). Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Phil Taylors wrote - Bryan Creer wrote: Phil Taylors extensions to the V: command were largely incompatible with the original and you speak of different syntaxes for BarFly and abc2mps extensions. If precedence is at all important, BarFly handled multivoice abc before abcm2ps started. I think only abc2midi preceded BarFly in that respect. Sorry for the late response; AOL in its wisdom/folly is still blocking your emails. I found your posting in the archive. Yes, multivoice abc originated in abc2midi as far as I know. Both abcm2ps (and others?) and Barfly then extended it in different ways to some extent incompatible with the original and each other. Hardly a satisfactory situation and, to my mind, exactly analogous to what abc2win did back in 1995. He is condemned but now it is considered normal practice. It causes us a lot of trouble. We can't fix it and we can't persuade its author to fix it. We used not to be hostile towards it; in its early days it was widely admired, but then its author stopped contributing to this list, and wouldn't fix even simple things (like the fact that it misinterprets the Q: field and plays everything at the wrong tempo). So the hostility is not due to the problems of the software but because Jim Vint went off in a huff for some reason? (The Q: problem is a bug but not a breach of the standard.) He's left us a messy legacy of files that we have to deal with. Not really irrational, just pointless. Carping at Jim Vint about it is irrational because it will achieve nothing other than to give abc2win users who join this list the message "There is nothing for you here. You aren't welcome." What is also irrational is that the problems arose because of poor communication between developers but the lesson hasn't been learnt. Jim Vint is criticised for doing things his way but many developers still claims the right to do the same. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - Abc2win is significantly incompatible with the standard that was set by abc2mtex, and worse, its deviations have never been documented, up to this day. Taking the second point first, from the Help files for ABC2WIN - The exclamation point will force a new staff line when the tune is drawn- you need not necessarily start a new line in the editing window as well.. Copyright 1996, 1997 jimvintSystems As to the first point, this is standard setting by precedent of one piece of software in the absence of a written standard. You'd better take this up with Frank Nordberg who says, as an example - There is no standard for specifying midi program changes in an ABC file, so any claim that BarFly's way is wrong and abc2midi's is right (or vice versa) simply have no fundation. Syntax like |!: instead of |: is not an extension Nor is it part of abc2win, it is simply bad abc. I've only seen it once in a recent example that someone posted to this list but I've seen | : many times. You did not notice those Abc2win users that complained that their program could not handle lyrics or print their tunebook properly? These are not breaches of the standard. This program is hopelessly broken, something of an exageration archaic, But still adequate for a lot of peoples needs totally unsupported You can understand why Jim Vint may have got a little fed up with the whole business. and not documented. What? Have you looked at its Help files? Forget about it. I can't. It is widely used in the abc files that I am interested in. It is worth considering this from Chris Walshaw's short history of abc - The real explosion in interest came when Jim Vint released his package abc2win in September 1995. The tool was taken up by a large number of the members of IRTRAD-L and abc's of tunes started appearing regularly. abc2win's strength is that it is easily accessible to non-geeks. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Jon wrote - No Brian, it is disregarding the standard. If someone needs to use a symbol, it is much better that it is agreeed by everyone and that it gets written into the standard. If it had been agreed that ! could be used as a line break and that had been documented in the abc standard, I doubt that the ! would have been considered as the symbols for the macros. To some extent I agree but it isn't the way things are done. I doubt if you would get very far if you told current developers that they couldn't use anything that wasn't already in the standard. People have been laying claim to for temporary voices and Z for one bar's rest, neither of which are in the standard but they aren't forbidden either. Frank Nordberg wrote - Sorry Brian, but *that* definitely violates the ABC standard, who explisitly states that a line break in the ABC also means a line break in the standard notation output (except when counteracted by a \ of course). I was merely responding to Irwin's assertion that abc2win's use of ! was not documented. Do you mean the standard that was released 16 months after the first release of abc2win? It's a somewhat different question when we're talking about the application that *set* the standard in the first place, though. Strictly speaking, before a published standard existed, ABC simply was whatever abc2mtex program could read. Realisticly, it is very much a question of how well ABC was decribed in the abc2mtex documentation, and I know nothing about that. I think to elevate a piece of software that was still under rapid development to the status of a written standard is getting a little tenuous. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Frank Nordberg wrote - An important point here is that BarFly has many of the same special features as abc2ps/abcm2ps/midiabc, only it uses different syntaxes. Any programmers here that feel the call to create a nice little conversion program/script for the benefit of the world at large? I'd much rather all abc software used the same syntax. Isn't BarFly doing just what ABC2WIN is criticised for? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Frank Nordberg wrote - No it isn't. ABC2WIN's ! syntax is breaking (no pun intended) the official ABC standard (as Chris Walshaw published it). A) According to the chronology compiled by John Chambers on the abc home page, Chris Walshaw's published standard followed about 16 months after the first release of ABC2WIN. B) There is nothing in that standard that forbids the use of ! as a line break. It is an extension. It is something he saw a need for and his users found useful. The differences between the other major ABC applications are all about *extensions* to the standard: additional features different developers saw the need for and incorporated in their programs independent from each other and in different ways. Which is why it is important for developers to be aware of what others are doing. Phil Taylors extensions to the V: command were largely incompatible with the original and you speak of different syntaxes for BarFly and abc2mps extensions. If the standard follows the software, how is it supposed to cope if different developers lead in different, and possibly incompatible, directions? If the answer is by following one particular piece of software, that puts all the others into retrospective breach of the standards which is what seems to have happened to ABC2WIN. Irwin Oppenheim wrote - The problem with ABC2WIN is C) that is nevertheless advertized on the ABC homepage as being the leading ABC application for the Windows platform! From my experience that would appear to be true. (At the moment.) I'm not trying to defend ABC2WIN; there is a lot wrong with it. I just find the hostility towards it deeply irrational. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
Richard Robinson wrote - abc2win introduced constructs, out of the blue, that the abc-ps family have never _been_ able to read. I really wish I understood this hate campaign against abc2win. On his website, Jim Vint credits a great many people who gave him support some of whom are still active on this list) so he didn't work in isolation. Many developers have introduced their innovations without consultation and continue to do so. In fact, it seems to be the accepted way of doing things since Guido says as a note in his draft standard - features that are not implemented in ABC applications cannot be considered part of the standard. which seems to imply that the standard follows the software, not the other way round. Here again, are some extracts from the chronology on the abc home page - 1995 September Jim Vint's abc2win version ___ announced for Windows 3.?. 1996 February First public version of abc2ps, a program that converts ABC directly to PostScript. 1997 January Version 1.6.1 of abc2mtex. This may have been the version used to write the first ABC syntax standard, 1998 March 3 Jean-Francois Moine's abcm2ps (multi-staff and multi-voice) variant of abc2ps was first announced. Will somebody please explain to me how abc2win was conflicting with abc2ps and the standard when neither existed when it was first released? Since it looks as if Jim introduced ! as a line break long before the introduction of the !! construct, why is this his fault? Was there any attempt at cooperation in those early days or was it enmity at first sight? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: abc2win vs. ABC...
Guido Gonzato wrote - abcm2ps is one of my favourite pieces of software _ever_. In my view, it's so good and well thought-out that the standard should follow it closely. Taken together with his earlier comment that - other applications will have better try and follow the new standard for their own good. I find this rather alarming. His draft standard is an excellent piece of work which I'll read a few more time before commenting on but a standard is meaningless without the cooperation of all those involved. If other developers do not have a fair opportunity to participate why should they take part? However beautifully formed it may be and however benign in it's intentions, an 800lb gorilla is still an 800lb gorilla. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
John Chambers wrote - I've also found the phrase explicit key signature more useful than global accidentals, though I don't suppose that's a real big deal. These seem to me to be two separate things. Whem converted to conventional notation, an explicit key signature is the collection of sharps, naturals and flats you find at the start of the staff; global accidentals are accidentals applied to notes throughout the music. (Does anybody ever use these?) Careful readers might note that I also dropped the old standard's requirement that global accidentals be set off by spaces. Setting off by spaces is the only way to distinguish between these two different things in John's proposed notation. I would like to propose the addition of two new optional parameters to the K: command; tonic= and mode=. Using these, John's K:Amix=g could become - K:^f^c=g tonic=A mode=mixolydian which seems much clearer to me. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
John Chambers wrote - The difference is somewhat minimal, though. The original text had as example K:D =c, which implies a key signature of two sharps but with a natural written before all the c's. The natural reaction to this is If all the c's are natural, why put a c sharp in the signature and then cancel it everywhere? This is indeed rather silly. It's better to just use ^f as the key signature. The difference seems real enough to me. If I specify an explicit key signature, I want it to appear at the beginning of the staff. Someone who wants global accidentals wants them scattered through the music. As far as I can see, global accidentals only make sense if you start from a key of C when they might make things clearer for learners by emphasising what a key signature means. Does anybody actually use them? I'd be happy to see them go. I think you suggested making it a run time option which seems reasonable. OTOH, using K:Dmix=c with ^f=c as the signature can be sensible, because that c natural in the key signature instead of a sharp is an advisory accidental that emphasizes the fact that the c is not sharp. I would have thought that this would confuse people unfamiliar with modes who will think that K:Dmix=c and K:Dmix are something different, especially since you also suggest things like K:Dphr^F where the ^F changes the key given by Dphr and implies that the mode is phrygian. K:_b_e^f tonic=D mode=freygish would be much clearer. If we were designing abc from scratch, I'd agree. This is where I came in three (?) years ago, by using this as an example of how we were stuck with an unsatisfactory system when a little more thought and cooperation could have come up with a better way. ABC is compact and cryptic, but easy to type. but is it easy to understand? There are more people trying to read it than type it. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC examples with bang?
Guido said - I've been unable to find ABC files with the much-talked-about bang (!) for breaking lines. Could any good soul send me some examples? It's for extending abcpp to deal with this beast. Well here's one for a start - X: 1 T:Black Boy. ASH.01 M:2/4 L:1/8 Q:200 S:Harrison Wall MS,Ashover,Derbyshire,1762-75 R:Mixed O:England A:Derbyshire Z:vmp.Chris Partington K:A A2 c/B/A/G/ | Acea | gbed | cA2B |ce^df | eg2e | fa g/f/e/^d/ | e2 E2 :|! :e=g2f | f/e/d/c/ d2 | B d2 f | e/d/c/B/ c2 | A c2 e | d/c/B/ A/ GB | Ed c/B/A/G/ | A2 A,2 :|]! M:6/8 L:1/4 K:D |:A/ |dd/ cd/|e/f/e/ e/f/g/ |dd/ cd/ |e/c/A/ AA/| dd/ cd/ |! e/f/d/ e/f/g/ |a/f/d/ g/e/c/ |dd/ d:|| :e/ |ff/ f/d/f/ |gg/ g/e/g/ |! ff/ f/d/f/ |e/c/A/Ag/| f/a/f/ d/e/f/ |g/b/g/ e/f/g/ |a/f/d/ g/e/c/ |dd/ d:|] For more of the same, go to the Village Music Prolect site at - http://www.performance.salford.ac.uk/research/vmp/Index.htm and click on The Manuscript Room. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: chord lengths
Phil Taylor wrote - I'm told that recent versions of abcm2ps use the operator to set the time point back to the beginning of a bar so that an additional layer of notes can be added. This sounds like a good idea, but I haven't seen any detailed description of how it works. (and Irwin gave him the details.) This sounds like a really neat idea but isn't it the sort of thing that leads to the ! and !! debacle. Did anyone outside the abcm2ps community know about this until now. If another developer had started using for their pet idea we'd have the same sort of conflict. Can developers please let the rest of the world know what they are planning? Bryan Creer P.S. Where does this bang thing come from? ! was always called shriek when I were a lad. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re:Was: Re: ABC examples with bang?
Phil Taylor wrote - That's a classic example of everything we don't like about abc2win. The VMP files contain not only bangs, but every garbage variant of abc you can think of, and consequently are unusable to any other program unless you do a considerable amount of editing first. It's such a pity because the material is excellent. The VMP files are, indeed, a little eccentric. I use them as test files. ABC2NWC handles them without falling over and produces acceptable results. ABACUS takes them as they are and allows you to edit them and see the results immediately. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: chord lengths
Henrik Norbeck wrote - Bryan Creer wrote about the symbol: Did anyone outside the abcm2ps community know about this until now. If another developer had started using for their pet idea we'd have the same sort of conflict. It was discussed on this list before it was implemented in abcm2ps. When was that? I remember well having read about it a couple of months ago. I'm tempted to requote what Phil said. I too have vaguely heard of it but didn't realise it had been implemented. I probably thought It's not in the standard so I don't need to worry about it. Does every new developer have to trawl through the entire abcusers' archive and the documentation of all 83 programmes mentioned on Frank Nordberg's list to find out if a symbol has been used? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: chord lengths
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - This idea was proposed by Taral on this list on Mon, 22 Oct 2001 08:43:51 -0700. It was found to be a good idea, and has been adopted by abcm2ps and maybe some other programs as well. A lot of ideas are proposed on this list and discussed at great length. It is often hard to tell whether they have been taken up or not. That's why Guido is now writing an uptodate standard. Let us hope he has more success than others have had over the last few years. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Abacus Run-Time Error 70
Don wrote - Someone was speaking of errors, and I just found that I can consistently cause a Run-time error by following these steps: 1. Open an existing file. 2. Click the 'Full ABC' button, which opens the Full ABC window and listing. 3. Close the Full ABC window with the Windows 'X' button in the upper right corner (What does Microsoft call those buttons anyway? I've forgotten...) This immediately produces an Abcus error box stating Run-time error '70': Permission denied. 4. Click the 'OK' button in the error box (only choice), and Abacus immediately closes. Fixed in the new release. I'm developing under Windows 98 and didn't find this until a friend reported it on their XP machine. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Phil Taylor wrote - That's the problem with live editing. The parser has to be absolutely bullet-proof, as the user can hit it with absolutely any combination of symbols. There is really no way you can test it enough either. That's one reason why I kept BarFly free for several years while under development - I needed the whole community of users to use it and tell me about the bugs in order to get it to its current state. I must admit that I have thought If I give Abacus away free I don't have to worry so much about how good it is. I'll let other people find the bugs. That's more or less what I did with Abacus 1.0.0. I've done a lot of work on the next release so I think I'm entitled to a little recompense. I'm not saying there will be no errors but we are talking shareware not big software house. Bryan Creer By the way, I don't seem to be getting Phil Taylor's postings direct, just quotes in other people's. Is this happening to anyone else? To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] bloody ! again
I know it is fasionable to slag off abc2win on this list (and, obviously, I'm not too keen on it or I wouldn't be writing Abacus) but can we get a little historical perspective? >From Chris Walshaw's history of ABC on his abc home page - The real explosion in interest came when Jim Vint released his package abc2win in September 1995. The tool was taken up by a large number of the members of IRTRAD-L and abc's of tunes started appearing regularly. More recently (in February 1996) Michael Methfessel released abc2ps... and from ABC Music Notation: History written by a certain John Chambers - 1995 September Jim Vint's abc2win version ___ announced for Windows 3.?. 1997 January Version 1.6.1 of abctmtex This may have been the version used to write the first ABC syntax standard, first as a narrative description, and then in BNF format by Henrik Norbeck. There is no mention that I can find of when the !...! notation was introduced or when standard 1.7.6 was released as a draft but it looks as if abc2win has a prior claim on "!". I don't see how Jim Vint can be accused of "gratuitous violations" of a standard that didn't even exist. The fact is that both "!" as a line break and "!...!" are in use so let's develop a no blame culture and work out how to get round it. More to the point, can we try and work out a system to make sure we all know what others are doing so this sort of thing doesn't happen in the future? Bryan Creer
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Bernard Hill wrote - I hope you are not implying that software sold by shareware methods is not as good as that sold off-the-shelf? It's probably better in some ways. For an analogy, if you buy your vegetables from your neighbour who's grown them in his back garden they are probably better than the ones from the supermarket but you will tolerate the occasional caterpillar and soil on the roots. Really, I was just covering my own backside. I implied that because I would like some payment for my efforts I would be more thorough than if I was giving the software away but I have limited resources and, with the best will in the world, I can't guarrantee that it will be bug free. When I have built my software publishing empire, I'll be able to afford teams of full time testers but while I'm one man in my back bedroom, the odd glitch might slip through. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] abc2win
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - As far as I could check, the source code of abc2win has not been released. So how could we do that? Well, you could try being nice to Jim Vint and inviting him to join in the standards process. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] bloody ! again
John Chambers wrote - BTW, a year or so back, I had my tune finder's search bot count the tunes that seemed to come from abc2win. Maybe I should revive that code and do another count ... Could you count the tunes that use !! ? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Irwin Oppenheim said - On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's exactly what Abacus does. Version 1 is available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/ but hang around, maybe just for a few days, and version 2 will be out. Seems to be a nice idea! Only too bad that when I made a typing mistake, your application crashed with an Error #5 and no option to save my work... Could you send me details? If you can tell me exactly what that typing mistake was, I'll do my best to fix it. and - The same happened when I tried to read the Readme through the Help menu. Worrying. I've changed the way I do this in the next release so perhaps it will go away. (Plze!) and - I take it that there is no support for multiple voices [v:] or lyrics [w:] ? Not yet; w: because that comes under future developments and V: because, like many others, I'm waiting for a single coherent specification of how it should work. I have my preferences, but I'll settle for something else if I know it's going to be generally accepted. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: My point of view on the abc standard
Emerging from a long hibernation to say how glad I am to see that a great deal of sense is being talked about the possibilities for a new standard; especially by some of the newer members of this list. I am not am abcm2ps user but, as far as I understand it, Jean-François is doing brilliant work in that area. I have had a look at Guido's abc manual and, while there are things I am not happy about, I think it is an excellent piece of work although, as he puts it himself, rather abcm2ps-centric. However, (those that know me will have seen that coming) I am rather concerned by the following statement from Guido - In my humble opinion, when we have an ABC typesetting and an ABC player application that are powerful, free, multiplatform, and compatible with each other, we automatically have a 'de facto' standard. At that point, other applications will have better try and follow the new standard for their own good. In similar vein, Ulf recently said - There is no way to isolate a standard from the software that uses it I fundamentally disagree with this. I believe that it is imperative that the standard and the software that uses it should be isolated. A quick glance at Frank Nordberg's abc applications list shows 83 different pieces of software; it seems unfair to expect all the other developers to follow the lead dictated by one development strand for their own good. There is no need for one piece of software to be cross platform nor for it to cater for all users. Specialist Mac software such as BarFly can take advantage of the particular characteristics of their machine. No individual programme needs to implement the whole standard. Programmes aimed at western folk musicians may not need some of the complexities of classical music (or Klezmer or Persian). It is that abstract entity ABC itself that needs to be universal. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Buddha Buck wrote - Based on the first note medody idea that's been bandied around, that would imply that the melody was [d6]2B2B2, which would sound like: V:1 d6 V:2 z2B2B2 which is rather too polyphoneous as a melody for my tastes. Well I'm sorry about that because that's precisely what I was trying to convey when I first posted the example. It represents one bar in 3/4 time. The melody is d6 and the Bs (B flats in fact, since the piece is in F) are harmony. It is a real example from a piece called Holmwood by the great English concertina player Arthur Clements. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: XML music representation
Have a look at this - http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/xmlMusic.html Bryan To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Valid fractions
Henrik Norbeck wrote - Maybe we should have an obfuscated abc competition... I think we've had one for several years now. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Abacus (again) and sound cards.
Eric Forgeot wrote - I have two sound cards on my system and it has revealed that Abacus doesn't follow the sound properties in the MSwindows configuration : I have the second one by default for playing samples / midi but Abacus plays only with the first one. I'm afraid I don't have the technical knowledge to help you there. Abacus generates a simple midi file and sends it to the Device Type Sequencer which is usually the sound card. What Windows does with this is beyond my control. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Abacus (again) and sound cards.
Henrik Norbeck wrote - You must have some sort of preferences dialog to let the user select which midi device to use. There are Windows functions for getting a list of midi devices. You must open the midi device anyway, so just specify the correct device to open according to the user's choice. Please bear in mind that this is the first release of a programme that isn't setting out to be particularly sophisticated and that I am on a learning curve here. I use a multimedia control which allows me to specify a Device Type of Sequencer but not a particular device as far as I can see. A quick look at the VB documentation gives me no clue as to how I could do this. If you have any more specific advice I would be very grateful. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Frankly Laurie I can't be bothered to argue the minutiae To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Ooops! Clicked the wrong button. Starting again - Frankly Laurie, I can't be bothered to argue the minutiae of which way is best. What I consider most important is that we have a concensus. We seemed to have one before you came back from Sidmouth. If you can persuade everybody else that shortest is best then I am quite happy to go along with it. Until then I am not changing my code (having changed it once) just because, in your opinion, first listed is a bad way of doing it. As I said before, wake me up when a decision has been made. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Abacus printing problem
Eric Forgeot wrote - I've reported in the past a print problem for abacus ... Unfortunately, I can only test with the printer I've got. I'll enquire amongst my beta testers, but at the moment, Eric is the only person reporting problems. Anybody else? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Henrik Norbert wrote - So two of the most used* abc programs, Muse and AbcMus, both use the shortest determines length method, which seems to work well. I've had no complaints so far. Have you, Laurie? Do we really have to change it? But a few days ago he wrote - Now that I understand what you mean I agree that first-listed note is the best alternative. BTW, AbcMus currently implements the shortest note alternative, but I could easily change it to first-listed note. I had launched Abacus using highest note and some people raised objections. After some discussion in which the case was put for both shortest and longest I thought we had arrived at a consensus for first-listed note on the grounds that this made no assumptions about the music at all. I changed the development version of Abacus accordingly. If there really is a better case for shortest note, then fair enough but I would like to see a definite agreement before I bother to change it again. Better case, as far as I am concerned, means what is best for the users and for abc as a whole, not what is least trouble for the developers. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Jack Campin wrote - 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? It's a bit difficult to explain without diagrams and waving your arms around. [d6z2]2[B2G2][B2G2] represents one bar of 3/4 time. The d6 is a dotted minim over a crotchet rest. The [B2G2]s are two separate (untied) crotchet length chords. A classic Dum Ching Ching rhythm with the Dum sustained for the whole bar. Your absorptive-tie idea strikes me as a less than intuitive way of representing this. [d6z2][B2G2][B2G2] would work for shortest note. [z2d6][B2G2][B2G2] would work for first listed note and shortest note. None of them make sense for first listed note = melody note. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Starling wrote - ... I had one question. What is a melody note? I have always known melodies as defined by context, and subject to much interpretation, rather than being defined by a specific type of notation. Two different people can call a section of music melody or accompaniment, and both may have valid opinions. I'm curious, what in | your implementation requires certain notes to be selected as melody? | Or am I totally misinterpreting the use of the phrase melody note? Melody note does seem to be an abstract and somewhat subjective concept which is why I think that first-listed note = chord duration is the only practical proposition. John Chambers wrote - In the context of an abc discussion, there's a very practical meaning of melody note. There are a number of abc player programs (that write MIDI or go directly to a sound card) that are monophonic. That is, they can only play one note at a time. When faced with a chord, such a program makes a choice of which note to play. As far as I've heard, all of them make the same choice: the first note. In the current discussion, this is what is meant by the melody note. This is a best guess under the circumstances and is quite likely to be wrong. Jim Vint says he has changed abc2win to remove the requirement for chord notes to be in ascending order but there are a lot of tunes out there that will already have done it that way so, for these, first note will almost certainly not be melody note. In their position, I would have gone for highest note. Since different length notes in a chord are rare, first note gives duration will usually be right for existing abc. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Starling (?) wrote - It might be better to have the duration of the chord equal to the shortest duration within the chord. That way [L:1/4][A4G2E2] is implicitly equal to a half note, just as in keyboard music the shortest note in the chord is considered the length before the next note begins. Whoops! Back to the dawing board. I think the assumption in the earlier part of this discussion was that melody note length = chord length so under the first-listed note rule, this was both the melody note and defined the chord length. Basic rule of data design - don't pack two bits of information into one bit of data. One of them has to go. Since there is already a lot of abc out there that won't be obeying any of these rules, (eg abc2win's ascending order) I don't think first listed note = melody note can be relied on so I'd go for first listed note = chord length. The above example could be written [L:1/4][G2A4E2]. I think it needs to be recognised that the [...] construct isn't going to cover all possibilities. Anything more complex will need separate voices, possibly combined on one staff. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Starling wrote - We should probably establish that there is a difference between [G2A4E2] and [G2A2E2] if we're going to standardize by the rule first listed note = melody note. Something like The melody note in a chord determines the default duration, but durations specified within the chord override this setting. The duration of the melody note determines when the next note begins, but the durations within the chord specify when each note should end. I'm afraid that you have come in part way through this discussion. The proposal is that each individual note should have its specified duration which left the question open as to what defined the overall length of the chord, i.e. time before the start of the next note or chord. In my recently released Abacus (available from www.abacusmusic.co.uk) I had implemented highest note specifies duration. It became apparent that this was unsatisfactory in some cases and after some discussion a consensus was arrived at that first listed note should specify the duration. During this discussion, duration of chord and duration of melody note were taken as synonymous but it now seems that this is not necessarily so. In your own example, [G2A4E2][F2D2] the melody note would appear to be the A with a duration of 4 while the duration of the first chord is 2 and the F in the second chord is not a melody note. What I meant by packing two bits of information into one bit of data was that first listed note = melody note and first listed note = chord length are two different and possibly conflicting bits of information. Er.. did that make sense? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
John Chambers wrote - 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. 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. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Jack Campi wrote - This is a very good idea, but the semantics I'd need in every instance where I've wanted it would be that the *shortest* note counts. So Eric wants longest note counts, Jack wants shortest note counts, I went for highest note counts and suggested first note counts This could be tricky. This is more reliable than hoping you don't get pedal notes above the melody. This sounds more like two voices on the same staff than chords. If you insist on the first note for counting you're probably going to clash with other uses of note order within chords, e.g. the way BarFly uses it to let you specify ties or slurs to and from notes within the chord. Terrifying! But, again, it sounds more like two voices on the same staff. Does any existing software attach any significance to the order of notes in a chord? ABC2Win does too. But there, it's a bug. This doesn't seem to have any musical significance but is just to make his processing easier. I don't see why the progress of abc should be held up for the sake of one piece of software that doesn't appear to be under development anymore. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Phil Taylor wrote - BarFly handles chords with notes of unequal length by padding out the shorter notes with rests when playing, so it's longest note prevails. But Jack Campin (a BarFly user) had said - but the semantics I'd need in every instance where I've wanted it would be that the *shortest* note counts. PT - The chord gets drawn on a single stem though, so if you have an eighth and a sixteenth in the same chord the result looks like two sixteenths, as they're both drawn on a stem with two tails. Not what the writer asked for. The way to deal with this, I suppose, is to draw two separate notes with tails in opposite directions, but then what do you do if there is more than two notes in the chord? That's what Abacus does and having just had a play with it, seems to handle it fairly well. If you have a sandwhich (middle note shorter or longer than top and bottom) and all notes are a quarter or less it gets in a bit of a twist but how often does that get done? (And how would conventional notation deal with it?) On the whole, I'd prefer it if people either used as many voices as necessary to represent the music, but since there's no agreement on how to implement voices or used ties, i.e. [B2D2-]D2 instead of [B2D4]. which would sound the same but look different when converted to notation. Using unequal notes in chords just leads to too many ambiguities. Noteworthy Composer does it and I'm basically cribbing what it does. Does anybody know what other packages do? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Wil Macaulay wrote - BTW, Abacus worked pretty well for me, except that it crashed when I tried to change instruments (WinNT wkstation 4.0) running as a non-admin user. Would this be Runtime error 70? This seems to happen on every version of Windows except 98. I think I've fixed it but I don't have any means to test it until I can get access to a friend's machine in a few days. (Or stop being so tight fisted and go out and get XP.) Also, I found the 'double open' a little confusing at first, I'd rather see 'open' as file open and a different menu selection to pick a tune from an already open file. Yes, a number of people have found it a bit strange. I'm looking at rearranging it along those lines. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Eric Forgeot wrote - Nice program ! I like when there are new abc applications, so I can complete my collection :) Thanks Eric and thanks for the comments, some of which I agree with and others not. ACTION: SystemFile: C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MSVBVM60.DLL (File currently on disk was already up to date) so this *huge* file was not compulsory to download. I would have thought most people wouldn't have it and those with less computer expertise would be put off by lots of technical jargon along the lines of If you've got this file do this but if not do that. Its only 8 or 9 minutes to download. - It's a pity it doesn't support drag n drop - ark, it doesn't support either command like ctrl+A for select all Give us a break! This is only the first release. - it crashes from time to time. (execution error 13. Incompatible type or something like that) There are several reasons, but I find among others I had a tune with X:12b . I know it was a silly idea, Well, Garbage In Garbage Out but, you're right, it shouldn't crash the programme. Fixed in next release. - when you start Abacus, it comes in a sort of full screen mode and hide the MSwindows taskbar and you have to resize Abacus (like for some old windows 3.11 applications) : ok, it's a minor pb, but a bit annoying. Sounds like a bug in Windows to me. - there is not shortcuts for play / pause / stop Be patient. - redraw score is not always active (it becomes active after a print). The fact that Abacus is displaying notes when you type them in in abc implies maybe the drawback the display is quite loose : I mean if you display music, and then an other application is coming in front of the display window, the notes disappear, and you have to redraw them. I type a space in the abc and then the partition come back, but it would be great not to have lost it. I'd taken the policy that Redraw Score was only enabled if the programme needed you to do it so that if it was enabled then you should probably do it. I'll change it to permanently on and issue a prompt. IT SUPPORTS NOTATIONS like [Af2], ... I don't know why it's not in the standard, with for example a rule saying that in such a notation the longest note prevails in the counting of the times, for example I've gone for highest note prevails in the counting of the times so you can do things like - X:1 T:The Cotillion C:Trad (Bosham Band) M:4/4 L:1/8 K:G [G4D4][d4B,4]|[B2D4]AB [G2B,4]AB|[c2E4]B2[A2D4]G2|[FD4]GAF [D3A,3]D| Perhaps it should be by length of the first note in the chord. Does any existing software attach any significance to the order of notes in a chord? - I didn't managed to print scores with my HP DeskJet 520 Printer. It works OK on my Epson Stylus 440. - The few I saw of the printing is that the staff lines are too thick. A bit chunky perhaps. I'll look into it. - I would maybe have prefered the playlist selector on a window more accessible (at the side of the main window, instead of a subwindow) We'll have to agree to disagree. I can't see the point of taking up valuable space on the screen for something you aren't using all the time. - I didn't tested to load and save tunes I have with %midi commands, or special commands for abcm2ps (like !alcoda!), I just hope it won't suppress what it can't display but it doesn't seem to be the case. It shouldn't have any trouble with %midi commands, They are just comments and will be ignored. Things like !alcoda! are not universally accepted (or universally loved) and, in my experience, far less commonly used than abc2win's use of ! as a line break. if any proper standard is decided, I'll give it another look. For example I could be good to have the possibility to switch between a full abc window and the other for the standard editing (even if I like the facilities given by the editing fields for time signature, tempo etc., I'm used to create and manipulate the whole abc text for a tune.) So the field for editing abc could be even larger. I think all you are asking is for Full ABC to be full screen. No problem. The fact that you have to confirm in Abacus that for example you don't want to store the tune, before coming to a subwindow, slow down the process to select quickly a tune. To give warnings is good, but it would be nice if we could turn them off (for example if I'm creating some tunes and I fear to loose data I can turn the warning on, and if I'm just playing with tunes I don't need them) Good idea. I'll do that. Apart for the fact it's heavy to download (a compact program is often more popular), I'll recommend Abacus to newcomers in abc. Thanks. (It's only a few minutes.) In a later posting - I know AbcMus and Abacus are quickly converting the abc to midi before reading the midi file, so there is not this sort of problem. Yes, that's what I do. My understanding is that there is so much operating system in the way that if you send notes one at a time, You'll be lucky if they come out in
[abcusers] Use of .abc extension
Something that has cropped up during the testing of Abacus is the use of the .abc extension. A friend, not unreasonably, double clicked on an abc file expecting it to start my programme. What they actually got was ABC Flowcharter; a programme for drawing flowcharts produced by Micrografx Inc. of Dallas, Texas. This is disgraceful; flowcharts were already considered old fashioned when I started out in IT twenty five years ago. Can Steve Allen sue? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Abacus 1.0.0 is now available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/. Note that this is not my old AOL website. Abacus is an abc editor/player/printer programme - Windows only I'm afraid. Its main claims to fame are that it plays through the soundcard with complete choice of General Midi instruments and displays the score as you edit the abc. The print quality is adequate without being outstanding. The programme is still under development so no guarantees are offered that it is complete or bug free. Constructive (and politely worded) comments are welcome. Destructive, opinonated or downright rude ones will be ignored. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABaCusMusic Web Site?
I just tried it and it seems to be available at the moment. AOL have been causing me a lot of grief and I will be taking my custom elsewhere soon. The new abc editor/player/printer programme is nearly finished and will be available shortly (honestly). Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Now that I've calmed down a bit I'll have another go. I think you are underestimating the cultural sophistication of English farmworkers by a VERY large margin. I'm not sure why saying that traditional singers could get all the information they needed from the music without having to read the label on the jar that says A mixolydian counts as underestimating their cultural sophistication. I would have thought it was more sophisticated. Nearly all of them went to church, and for most of the areas Sharp, Lloyd and Vaughan Williams collected in, that church was the Church of England. With a tradition of choral singing going back to Byrd, Tallis and Dunstable. Any really good singer could expect to be noticed by the church organist and dragooned into the choir, no matter if he spent Monday to Saturday digging ditches. So the *practice* of Renaissance modality was general public knowledge. Are you saying that traditional music derives from the ecclesiastical and art music of the Renaissance? Isn't it just as likely to be the other way round? Couldn't it be that Renaissance scholars were doing exactly the same as twentieth century folklorists and saying How do those ignorant peasants know the classical Greek modes? then imposing them from the outside (and getting it wrong in the process)? A good singer is going to notice when similar phrases recur, even when the contexts are as different as a doxology and a patriotic naval ballad, and the recurrence is going to suggest using a similar intonation for both. Yes! They got that from listening to and performing the music. So even in the absence of a theoretically explicit notion of octave species, the richer notion of mode as comprising a set of cadential formulae, and embracing both folk and liturgical music, would been hard to avoid. The notion of mode may have been there (we do not know how they thought about their music) but if so, it came from within the tune. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Phil Taylor wrote - I think you guys are actually arguing from the same side of the fence. Thanks Phil we needed that and thank you for a posting which I was largely able to agree with. After being reprimanded by a Scotsman for something I hadn't said about English farmworkers I did rather lose the plot for a while. I was beginning to wonder why Jack was trying to prove me wrong by telling me things I agreed with. I will not get drawn any further into whether traditional singers thought in terms of modes before the folklorists discovered them. It is far too big a subject and, I realise, now that I've calmed down even more, totally irelevant to the point I was making. The actual question was Did they use the terminology of the Rennaisance modes in the practice or notation of their music? As far as I am aware they did not. One of the major uses of abc is to preserve and distribute music from old manuscripts (see the Village Music Project). Using the tonic/mode system misrepresents those collections and misleads the user. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Jack Campin wrote - I think you are underestimating the cultural sophistication of English farmworkers by a VERY large margin. Nearly all of them went to church, and for most of the areas Sharp, Lloyd and Vaughan Williams collected in, that church was the Church of England. With a tradition of choral singing going back to Byrd, Tallis and Dunstable. Any really good singer could expect to be noticed by the church organist and dragooned into the choir, no matter if he spent Monday to Saturday digging ditches. So the *practice* of Renaissance modality was general public knowledge. A good singer is going to notice when similar phrases recur, even when the contexts are as different as a doxology and a patriotic naval ballad, and the recurrence is going to suggest using a similar intonation for both. So even in the absence of a theoretically explicit notion of octave species, the richer notion of mode as comprising a set of cadential formulae, and embracing both folk and liturgical music, would been hard to avoid. I'm not sure whether to try and debate this in a calm and rational way or totally lose my rag. I have nothing but respect for the English farmworker. My father was one. I grew up in tied farm cottages. I am a descendant of those ignorant peasants. I do not regard English rustics as a subject for academic scrutiny. That doesn't mean I grew up amongst traditional singers and musicians. That world was fading fast when I was a child, but I am familiar with the environment in which they lived. I know traditional singers. I know people who learnt from traditional singers and musicians. What they have in common is a love of the music. None of them would ever bother to look up what pi-3 meant if they couldn't remember. They don't have a theoretically explicit notion of octave species (whatever that may mean) but they knew a good tune. They knew what sounded right even if they didn't know the Greek word for it. They could sing the song without being told what the mode was. Music is what matters. All any notation system can give you is the notes. Everything else come from the heart not a computer algorithm. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE: Explicit key signatures
Jack Campin wrote - As others have pointed out, the description of a tune purely by key signature isn't complete unless you are using equal temperament; you don't know the exact pitches of the notes unless you know the mode. As I have pointed out, the mode is in the tune and may vary as it goes along. I had always understood that the exact pitch of a note depended on its relationship to other notes and its context within the tune. It is a matter of performance and artistic judgement not simply the result of running a computer algorithm and, as others have pointed out, deviations from even temperament by traditional players do not necessarily follow obvious rules. That is why human performance will always surpass computers. While playing with just temperament might be an interesting programming exercise I hardly think it is a good reason to limit the development of abc. I don't want to go over the rest of his post in detail except to say that it is centred on the academic establishment view of traditional music and has little to do with the real people who left us this heritage. (I'm glad to discover that he doesn't think that ALL classically trained musicians are contemptible.) See Lloyd's preface to the Penguin Book of English Folk Songs OK, not being a singer I missed that one. None of the EFDSS tune collections I have mention modes. Laurie Griffiths wrote - That of course is stretching the phrase knowing anything about to breaking point. They knew the scales and they knew how to harmonise them. They just didn't know the Greek names. Shakespeare's Theorem applies: A mode by any other name will sound as sweet. Precisely the point I am making. They got all the information they needed from the notes of the tune. They could manage perfectly well without being told the Greek name for it. To force their music into the Renaissance modal system runs the risk of misrepresenting them just as much as forcing it into the major/minor system. I can easily imagine some academic saying That's obviously meant to be Lydian but they've got it wrong. The notes they actually sang or played (if we have them) are the only certain truth. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Robert Bley-Vroman wrote - Will major-scale tune with some flatted sevenths be transcribed with the flatted seventh as part of the key signature, or with the flatted sevenths indicated as accidentals within the body of the tune? Whichever you like as long as you specify all the notes unambiguosly. With gapped scales: Will a tune with a missing seventh be called ionian or mixolydian in the key+mode system? Why should it be called either since it's not a heptatonic scale? What is the pitch of a silent note? What is the sound of one hand clapping? How such a tune would be harmonised is the choice of the performer not part of the specification of the tune. The larger point is this: Music notation is primarily something that is used by particular musicians with particular backgrounds in particular contexts. Which is why trying to enforce the tonic/mode system on everybody is wrong. An explicit key signature is much more general and value free. Robert Bley-Vroman did not call anybody a jerk in this posting. John Chambers wrote - Nobody has suggested replacing K:tonic+mode with K:signature. Unfortunately Bruce Olson did say - That's one more reason why I'd like to see the key-mode in K: eliminated; we can cut out ambiguity in notation and put in into interpretation where it belongs so my prediction that nobody would ever say anything of the sort was wrong. While I agree with almost all the bits I understand of what he says I dissent from this. Clearly the tonic/mode format cannot be eliminated now that it has passed into use which is the point I was making when I first raised the subject. If a system to allow the notation of a sharps/flats key signature and tonic and mode information at the same time had been introduced in the first place we would have been saved all this pain. I don't know if it is now possible. John Chambers' proposed system does not allow it. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
John Chambers wrote - But if the software doesn't agree on what pieces of the notation mean, it can sorta interfere with getting the music across. I've been thinking along the same lines myself for quite a while. And abc has a quandary that's common in all other kinds of computer communications: You find something that can't be expressed using the standard language. What do you do? Discuss it with as many interested people as you can. Listen to their ideas and objections. Modify your proposal accordingly. Arrive at a consensus and only then implement your ideas. Isn't that what this list is for? Start with a rule Any notation you don't understand should be ignored (perhaps with a warning but not a fatal error message). Not always possible when different sets of non-standard notation impinge on each other such as the use of ! and the various incompatible versions of the V: command. When a small crowd finds something that seems to solve the problem, they present what they've done to the general population. And a lot of people like it so it gets used and becomes part of the system. Unfortunately it screws things up for other people who may cry Wouldn't it have been better if But it's too late. The damage is done. Eventually most of the new ideas get incorporated into the standard language Not any more they don't. The standard hasn't been updated for several years and there is no mechanism to do so. Alternatively, they don't get incorporated, and you get a collection of dialects or a family of very similar but incompatible languages. Yes, that's what's happening. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Explicit key signatures
Than you Phil Taylor for a sensibly argued case. A welcome change from the this-is-my-opinion-and-I'm-sticking-to-it attitude that has been prevalent lately. Unfortunately I didn't agree with any of it. He wrote - In order to describe a piece of music completely, you need to know any two of the tonic, mode and key signature. The key signature is sufficient alone. Tonic and mode are implicit in the tune. Conventional musical notation gives only the key signature, which is inadequate, and has led to the practice in classical music of including the tonic in the title of the piece. I have been taking classical oboe lessons for three years and have never been given a piece with the tonic in the title. I think this practice died out years if not centuries ago. One of the tests my teacher occasionally springs on me is to put a piece in front of me and ask for the key or give me a key and ask for the key signature. If the law was changed to make IOUs legal tender It was. A long time ago. They're called banknotes. The economy suffers if there are a lot of counterfeits in circulation which, in abc, there are. People are blatantly passing off Edorian tunes as K:D. Please note Bryan, that I'm not objecting to this suggestion on the grounds that it's likely to be popular Perhaps not; it's a subtle distinction. You ARE saying that you think a large number of people are not that concerned about having the tonic and mode and that the explicit key signature format would be widely used. You think that they should be prevented form doing so because you know better. My concern is that they will still find it simpler to say K:D to get two sharps because it's easier than K:^f^c. Perhaps it's tonic alone that should be outlawed (except that we can't of course, because it's too late.) Finally, if we want to make life easier for people transcribing from manuscript by permitting them to use an incomplete description of key, perhaps we should do the same thing for those transcribing by ear, and permit them to specify only the tonic. After all, any competent musician who was familiar with the tradition concerned should easily be able to figure out where to put the necessary accidentals in order to make sense of the tune. But the user might not be familiar with the tradition so you'd have to include a sound file. In that case you wouldn't need a tonic (or the notes for that matter). abc software requires the K: command so the resulting abc would be something like - X:2312841276 T:The Pig and the Parlour Maid C:Trad N:From the playing of Gilbert Hairy Scrotum F:PigMaid.wav K: I don't think I'll be implementing that just yet. (Actually, come to think of it, it wouldn't be that difficult.) Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Explicit key signatures
Phil Taylor wrote - Even a wrong tonic+mode is better than nothing! I don't think I need to comment. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
Wil Macaulay said - Yes, it would be 'better and less misleading' for the abc user community that understands: 1. 2 sharps Good. 2. they are in the 'standard' place Not sure what you mean. 3. E Dorian means E is the tonic. Of course it does but does K:D mean D is the tonic or just that the writer wanted two sharps? Me, personally, just speaking for myself, I can play in (for example) G Dorian without having to remember which flats are there, but I have to puzzle it out if I see a tune written out with one flat and try to figure out which of the possible tonics I should be thinking about. So, presumably, you never use books of conventional music notation which (apart from a few baroque pieces I've come across) never tell you the tonic. Very few of them give the mode either, certainly none of the collections of English traditional music that I have and not many of the Irish collections (Krassen's edition of O'Neill for instance). Those that do give the mode give it AS WELL AS not INSTEAD OF the key signature. If you have trouble working out the tonic from the notes of the tune does that mean we shouldn't rely on the accuracy of any tune you post? Of course, a lot of people know less than you do about modes so their postings will be even less reliable. So therefore my, personal speaking for myself selfish little opinion clearly shouldn't count. Everybody's opinion counts but it would always be nice to know the reasons behind that opinion and that that opinion was open to modification in the face or a reasoned argument. A a positive comment, I don't have any objection to a notation that allows the number of flats or sharps to be explicitly notated without tonic information, Thank you. That's all I've ever asked for. (In this context.) I just have an objection to the statement or implication that that is somehow wrong or misleading to the entire abc user community to allow tonic and modes to be specified as a a first order definition. I wasn't aware that anybody had made such a statement. There are those (fortunately a diminishing number) who do not wish to allow the use of an explicit key signature and feel that the use of the tonic should be compulsory. I have an objection to that. Skink allows Dmaj or Dion as synonyms for D, if you like. You are assuming D means D major which in the case of K:D % E dorian it clearly did not. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
John Chambers wrote - For example, recently I saw a line like: K:D % EDorian It could be that the author was using software that only allowed the tonic as shorthand for the key signature and didn't support modes (such programmes have been known to exist). He should be praised for adding the extra information in the only way available to him. Henrik Norbeck wrote - Getting back to the abc, I would prefer to have the notation K:^f ^c to K:D because it simply means what it says and does not imply anything else. Then you're free to place whatever you like in a comment afterwards K:^f^c % Irish e minor I would just like to say that the summer here in England has been wet, grey and miserable so far but today the sun is shining which is just as well since I'm playing out of doors. I shall do so with a song in my heart. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
Eric Forgeot wrote - I thought it was a good idea to use 2 K: fields to write both the mode and the key, but this solution of K:D % EDorian is maybe better. Will you forgive me if I use it in the future ? :) Wouldn't it be better and less misleading to be able to say K:^f^c % EDorian or better still have separate actual fields rather than a comment to hold the tonic and mode? Just a thought. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] ABC source code license?
John Chambers wrote- There is a problem applying the GPL to music. The way it's phrased, it really does apply mostly to software. Of course, that was what it was designed for. I was recently browsing in a garden centre when I found a lavender with a label saying something to the effect that it was illegal to propagate this plant without a license obtained under the terms of the GNU General Public License. Well, I suppose DNA is coding. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE: Anarchy
John Chambers wrote - Heh. In this case, I was the lead musician.. Hmm. Benevolent dictatorship. Probably the best sort of government if you can find the right dictator. Thank you for the rest of that posting; it was very positive. How about posting the galactic coordinates? And schedules for the jam sessions? Lewes, East Sussex, England. Take a look at http://whatson.brighton.co.uk/folk/. (I would direct you to the Lewes Arms Folk Club website but AOL seem to have trashed it as well as my Abacus Music site. B@$¬4£DS). Brighton is dominated by Irish sessions. There is a strong French dance following. Lewes has two folk clubs and is the centre of an area with several pub tune sessions, some dominated by southern English dance music, others more general. If you want Swedish, Ben Paley lives in Brighton. It's a good place to live if you are into folk music (and for other reasons). Do we shoehorn music into the intersection of all supported features, or do we write it for a subset of tools that have the additional features we want. The point about the explicit key signature idea is that it is widely applicable to all sorts of music and all manner of musicians. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Yawn. Sigh. Groan
Laurie Griffiths wrote - Who ever wrote I want it my way and no other.. Nobody, right? You just made it up, right? Nobody said it. I made it up. It was my ironic precis of John Chambers's assertion that - The opposition was essentially from people who didn't need it and didn't see why abc should be cluttered up with things that only other people need. This is, of course, completely standard human behavior. It was not intended to represent anything that you or anyone else had said. If you think my precis is innacurate, please feel free to say so. If you disagree with John's assessment, take it up with him. we like it that way and reading this thread will reveal who 'we' are. I'm sorry, but I can't see that it matters whe we are. The point is that it includes some people and excludes others. So MY OPINION which is derived from my growing up is that modes matter and I don't want to see them go away. Neither do I, I just want to have the freedom to represent music accurately when the tonic/mode information is unavailable or unreliable or inappropriate. Anyway, the modes will never go away; they are there in the notes of the tune. Of course you are entitled to your opinion Laurie but I would like to know the rationale behind it. The choice is between tonic+mode or tonic+mode+key sig (all parts optional). Why would the latter cause you any problems? Why don't you like it? I suspect that your opinion was influenced by writing a converter to Noteworthy where you didn't have any obvious place to put the mode. The problem comes with converting form Noteworthy, which (like most other music packages in the world) doesn't have mode information, to abc. I was forced to put out bad abc and I didn't like it. And I for one have never written I want it my way and no other. I never said you did but it's interesting that you thought I was referring to you. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Anarchy
John Chambers wrote - Well, actually, last evening at this time I was playing music at a contra dance with some nice people. I'm delighted to hear it. Do all these nice people share the same self-centred I want it my way and no other. that you seem to think is completely standard human behavior? How do you ever agree on what tune to play? I think it was variants of the principle expressed recently here, that key+mode is more useful information than just the signature. It's only useful if it's right. A quick look at a few minor or modal tunes on your Tune Finder will show how often it's wrong. I've asked this question before and it was ignored - Why is it better to have Eminor tunes notated as K:G than as K:^F? Some musicians don't understand keys and modes, and just want to be told what notes to play. And other musicians play music that doesn't fit the classical mode scheme. Both of these types seem to have found abc useful. But wouldn't they find it even more useful if they were able to notate their music accurately in a way they understood without all that mode stuff getting in the way? You could have mentioned musicians who do understand keys and modes and are perfectly capable of working them out from the notes without a (possibly inaccurate) label stuck on the front. And people who are only interested in the notation will just put in whatever is easiest; two sharps? that's K:D. Free agreement of musicians? What planet did you just arrive from? One where the idea of actually agreeing with someone isn't an alien concept and where making compromises to arrive at a mutually beneficial result is considered normal practice. Come and visit sometime; you'll like it. And how about posting some tunes from your planet? Bit busy on the new programme at the moment but have a look at http://members.aol.com/LewesArmsFolk/Lewesfav.html. You've got it on your tune Finder already. I'm afraid since I generated these tunes by converting from Noteworthy Composer with my abc2nwc programme, there is no tonic/mode information. I have had to treat all tunes as if they were major. I didn't want to do it that way, but the abc standard gives me no choice. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Modes (and iabc skink)
Aaron Newman wrote - The modes-as-key-signatures are part of the 1.6 standard, maybe what you're saying is that this originally popped up as part of a tool and was incorporated into the standard out of necessity. That was certainly my understanding. The prevailing culture amongst abc developers seems to be that innovation leads and the standard must follow. My standpoint is that people should sound out other opinions and at least try to arrive at some sort of concensus before releasing anything new to avoid conflicts and anomalies. This idea is not well received. Anyhoo, I don't think anybody is arguing that modes are not important, but they're not the same as key signatures. I guess there's no reason that you couldn't handle both styles of the K: field, its just a few more permutations to test, but it would have been better to keep the two seperate. Just what I've been saying for some time but my suggestion that we introduce an explicit key signature form of K: was met with considerable opposition. Curiously, when John Chambers went ahead and did it, nobody complained at all. Bryan Creer PS (apparently the penalty ... is being pummeled with insults - You'll get used to it.) To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] (no subject)
John Chambers wrote - My perspective was that it wasn't so much opposition as it was Who the hell needs it? There were lots of positive reactions from people who saw a personal use for it. The opposition was essentially from people who didn't need it and didn't see why abc should be cluttered up with things that only other people need. This is, of course, completely standard human behavior. What a sad view of humanity in general and subscribers to the abcusers' list in particular. Try to get out more, John, and meet some nice people. I must say, I got the impression that quite a few people were opposed to the introduction of an explicit key signature on principle although exactly what that principle was I'm still not clear about. Laurie Griffiths wrote - The process is what is properly called Anarchy which means there are no rulers. According to my dictionary anarchy is a theory of government based on the free agreement of individuals. I'd like to see a bit of that. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Modes (and iabc skink)
Wendy wrote - It would have been great if the original standard had had separate fields for key signature and tonic, so that the tonic could be specified by itself and the key signature expressed in pure sharps and flats, like the extension in John Chambers' jcabc2ps allows. It would have been more flexible in allowing users to insert the information needed - and to leave out that which is *not* needed - by their respective traditions. But I think Bryan is right about it being too late; there is no way to change it now without breaking a large number of abc tunes already in circulation. Thank you Wendy. It has taken about two years but that is as neat a summary of what I've been trying to say (in the face of considerable opposition) as I could hope for. It was already too late to change when I first mentioned it. I was only using it as an example of how things could go wrong if developers felt free to intoduce their own innovations without thinking through the consequences or discussing them with the rest of the abc community first. Once something has gone into use, you can't get rid of it. In this case, the situation could be improved a little by the general adoption of John Chambers' explicit key proposal. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: iabc, and features expected in softwares in general
Laura Conrad wrote - Currently, the abc2midi transposer only understands the key signature. So if I have a piece in D dorian, and I transpose it up 3 half notes, the transposed output is in Ab. It should be in F dorian. This is an inevitable consequence of using tonic/mode in the K: command. If the K: command just contained an explicit key signature and the tonic and mode were notated separately (if required but not mandatory) there would be no problem but what's done is done and we're stuck with it. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
gris_sanderson said - HP Hp are scale specific rather than instrument specific. You can play a pipe tune on a fiddle provided you know what the pipe mode is. Fair enough. Can you point me to any documentation and/or examples of their use? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: New Program?
Don Whitener said - Are you *actively* pursuing development of a new program, and, if so, is there a projected release date? Just curious... You do indeed do good work :-) Well, thank you very much. Yes, I am. Unfortunately, these things are never quite as easy as they seem when you start out. I keep getting almost there and finding I have to go back to the beginning and start again. I'm on my second major rewrite. The aim is for an abc text editor with immediate conventional notation display, printing and playback through a soundcard. Nothing very sophisticated in any of those categories and PC only, I'm afraid. (Guess whose market I'm aiming for.) The first release will be a subset of standard 1.6 with a few extras from 1.7 and widely used extensions. No lyrics yet. A couple of weeks. (OK, you've heard that before.) It doesn't help that AOL seem to have trashed my website so I may have to build a new one elsewhere. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: resons for using abc
Laurie Griffiths said - I went to Chipenham Folk Festival last weekend and someone played it in the English Session in the Rose and Crown barn. I asked what it was called (The Dark Girl Dressed in Blue) and I now have about 10 different versions of it. Magic. Yes, great tune and great sessions weren't they? I went to all three. I think this ability to exchange tunes, regardless of hardware/software/operating system/instrument is abc's greatest strength. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
John Walsh - One basis of misunderstanding here may be an assumption that instrument-specific notation must be carved in stone in the language--as u and v for upbow and downbow are now, for instance. It doesn't. (It can't, really, for abc doesn't have the resources. In my own case, I have to invent notation which would be quite useless to almost anyone else, and I certainly don't want to saddle others with it.) I agree wholeheartedly. What I don't want is to be told You can't use character such-and-such in your new abc extension, even though it would be of enormous benefit to all users, because I'm already using it to indicate forked F on the oboe. (It's a slightly different pitch so it is musically relevant.) I think a distinction has to be made between private and public abc. If you are just using abc as an input format for your own typesetting software, then obviously you can do what you like. It doesn't affect anybody else. If you are exchanging tunes with a group of people with the same specialist interest, again, no problem. as long as you've all got access to software that will handle it. The problem comes when you go public and try to distribute tunes to a wider audience. Then I think restrictions should apply. I figured you'd shown that that line of reasoning led to the outlawing of instrument-specific notation in abc. Well, it didn't take much figuring since that is what I stated explicitly but it is the public aspect of abc that I was referring to. I'm not sure why you consider this mislistthropic. I want to be able to exchange tunes with everybody, regardless of what instrument they play or what software they are using. I love you all! Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Strike the concertina's melancholy string! Blow the spirit-stirring harp like anything! W.S.Gilbert Laurie Griffiths said - An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open E string is musically relevant. My concertina doesn't have E or G strings and I'm not playing top E on the G string of my fiddle for anyone. A difference between two pieces of notation is musically relevant if and only if it means they should sound different. This and the example imply that the instrument being played is relevant. Wouldn't it be best to exclude instrument specific notation from abc? It could get very messy if you don't. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Phil Taylor wrote If Laurie wants to write something like ^F9S3e in his music to indicate that the note is to be played at a particular point on the fingerboard I don't see why he shouldn't. Fingerboard of what instrument? Banjo? Lute? Cittern? Balalaika? Guitar tuned DADGAD? Players of all these might want to use the same idea and then you have to specify not just the instrument but the tuning as well. Getting a wee bit specific. OK, pipers have done the same but at least K:HP says loud and clear This is a highland pipe tune right from the start. If they are only interested in exchanging tunes between themselves, that's fine. It doesn't cause problems for anyone else. More to the point, this subject came up a while ago and Laurie gave an example of his notation - i.e. a3;4 means play the a on the 4th string claiming precedence for the use of the semicolon over somebody else's suggested use. The ascii character set is a limited resource so if people start laying claim to characters for narrow usages we could start running out. At the time I suggested using the same notation for English concertina cross fingering and several people were quick to tell me this was a bad idea. For those who didn't realise it at the time, I was joking. I would say the same about u and v for fiddle bowing (and I play fiddle) but it's been done now so it's too late. [chords] may not be relevant to all instruments but they are relevant to a great many, not just one. I can see that such hints could be useful to a program which generated tablature from abc. If you are simply using it as input for a tablature generation programme fine, but if you are using it to distribute tunes to fellow musicians regardless of how they are going to use them they are just more useless clutter. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Laurie Griffiths wrote Well of course you need to specify the tuning for tablature. Obviously. The only interesting question is how much of this, if any, should be encoded in the ABC. None at all, because ABC is not tablature. The recipient could be playing anything from a carillon to a Mongolian nose flute. It applies to not just one instrument but to a fairly large family, including unfretted instruments such as violin. (guitar, 5 string banjo, tenor banjo, mandolin, mandola, bouzouki, balalaika, bass guitar, violin, viola, cello, double bass, viola da gamba, cittern, vihuelha, ud, p'i-p'a, gekkin, sitar, vina, tampura, lute and no doublt many others). and you generate G;4 for G on string 4 for all of these? (Including the balalaika?) Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
John Walsh said Oh, did Bryan mean that statement seriously? Hmm... I thought there was a hint of sarcasm there, just as I've taken this entire thread as an indirect demonstration that the saying abc is for the music alone* (_whatever_ that may mean), is a worthy rule of thumb for overall design, but an unreliable guide for individual decisions. Sorry John, but I was perfectly serious. There was no intention of sarcasm but perhaps my dealings with this list have left me a little bitter and twisted. Laurie said - An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open E string is musically relevant. If you are going to go down to that level of detail for guitars in conventional tuning then you must allow it for any and every instrument in any tuning. It would be just as valid for me to try and notate cross fingering on the English concertina (which you have to do if you want to play a fifth jump legato rather than staccato, so it does make a difference to the sound and hence fits Laurie's criterion for musical relevance). I would consider it absurd to do so. I don't believe that the abc format has the capacity to handle all the variations that this policy would produce so although abc is for the music alone might be a bit absolute, I think it is the direction to go. Matters of performance, including choice of instrument, are for the performer. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: have fun with ties, slurs and triplets
Just for the record, abc2nwc produces identical and, as far as I can tell, correct output from both the legal and illegal versions of Springleik posted by Eric Forgeot. In the latter case it produces an error report saying it has replaced the illegal ties with slurs. Both versions are played the same by Noteworthy Composer. On the other hand, the editor/player/printer programme I am currently working on interprets the first version correctly but treats the ties in the second version as ties. (The result sounds awful.) This was a policy decision based on the idea that a tie does not have to be to the next note but may pass a few notes of different pitch before finding its resolution so something like G- B G is perfectly legitimate. I may have to review this decision since misuse of ties to represent slurs is widespread in the collections. What is technically correct may have to give way in the face of what is actually done by the user. I suppose that must be the decision I made for abc2nwc. Memory fades. Perhaps a less ambiguous version of my example would be G- [BG-] G. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
