Henrik Norbeck wrote: (about the P: field) >There are some problems involved in the current definition. How >do you for instance handle combinations of |: :| repeats and P: >specifications such as the following: > >T:P test >M:6/8 >P:AABB >K:G >P:A >|: GAB GAB | FGA FGA :| >P:B >dBG dBG | AFD FAc || > >How many times should the sequence GAB GAB | FGA FGA be >played? 2? 4? I vote for the second interpretation
Me too. >And worse still, how would you interpret this: > >T:P test >M:6/8 >P:AABB >K:G >P:A >GAB GAB | FGA FGA | >P:B >dBG dBG :| AFD FAc || > >Should this be played as follows? >GAB GAB | FGA FGA | GAB GAB | FGA FGA | >dBG dBG | dBG dBG | AFD FAc || >dBG dBG | dBG dBG | AFD FAc || > >This interpretation would mean that a P: field in the tune also >implies a begin-repeat. >If this is not the case, how should it be interpreted. > >Or perhaps I have misunderstood the fine details of the P: >definition. I treat each part as if it were a separate tune, to be played in the order specified. So if there is a repeat in it without a begin-repeat it goes back to the start of that part. Another problem arises if you have a key or metre change at the beginning of a part. It is then essential to place the K: or M: field after the P: field, as otherwise the change is at the end of the previous part, which may not be the same thing. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
