[abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread I. Oppenheim
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: Is K:D exp _b _e ^f different from K:D _b _e ^f ? Where does this come from, has it been mentioned before ? As I have always understood the standard, the accidentals following it *modify* the key sig. So K:D _b _e ^f actuall leaves also a c^. The

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Richard Robinson
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:19:44AM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: Is K:D exp _b _e ^f different from K:D _b _e ^f ? Where does this come from, has it been mentioned before ? As I have always understood the standard, the accidentals following it

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread I. Oppenheim
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Richard Robinson wrote: K:D _b _e ^f actuall leaves also a c^. The point of the exp is to *override* the normal key sig of D. [1] The given example actually produces 1 sharp and 2 flats, ie is equivalent to D exp. Nope. As I have explained earlier, K:D _b _e ^f is

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Richard Robinson
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 12:36:17PM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Richard Robinson wrote: K:D _b _e ^f actuall leaves also a c^. The point of the exp is to *override* the normal key sig of D. [1] The given example actually produces 1 sharp and 2 flats, ie is

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Wil Macaulay
I agree with Richard wil Richard Robinson wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:19:44AM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: Is "K:D exp _b _e ^f" different from "K:D _b _e ^f" ? Where does this come from, has it been

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Richard Robinson
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:16:37AM -0400, Wil Macaulay wrote: I agree with Richard wil Richard Robinson wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:19:44AM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote: If I could have a couple of meta-whatsits, for a moment ? All Wil's messages appear in my mailer as above

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Richard Robinson
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 06:54:42PM +0100, Phil Taylor wrote: Richard Robinson wrote: All Wil's messages appear in my mailer as above (though without the quote marks, you pedants) - very spaced out vertically. At least 2 0x0a newlines, sometimes more, sometimes interspersed with 0x20s. Do

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Wil Macaulay
hopefully this fixes the problem (text only, no html in netscape mailer) wil Phil Taylor wrote: Richard Robinson wrote: All Wil's messages appear in my mailer as above (though without the quote marks, you pedants) - very spaced out vertically. At least 2 0x0a newlines, sometimes more,

Re: [abcusers] Let's move on

2003-07-30 Thread Richard Robinson
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:26:03PM -0400, Wil Macaulay wrote: hopefully this fixes the problem (text only, no html in netscape mailer) wil Looks good here. Thanks, you just became a lot easier to read. -- Richard Robinson The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes - S.