On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 19:08, Forgeot Eric wrote: > >> Iabc doesn't understand the K:Am > > >That's completely unacceptable; the program should never have > been > >released in that state. > > It's not very kind for the author. I think it have to : it's good > to see a new application.
No comment on that as I hadn't been following the previous thread too closely but... And as far as I'm concerned, I've never > used modes in the K: fields but only the key definition (K: is for > key isn't it ?). For me C indicate there is no flat or sharp in > the tune, F indicate there is a B flat etc. If in addition the > tune is in the Am or Dm mode it doesn't change the way it is > played or displayed. > It's good if an application can understand modes, but why bother > with them ? Modes are highly significant in some traditions. In the Cape Breton tradition, a tune set are usually centers around a tonic note, but the mode often changes from one tune to the next. So a given set may start with a tune in A minor, work through A Dorian and A Mixolydian in the middle of the set, and end on a tune in A Major. A practical understanding of modes is fundamental to playing traditional Cape Breton music. So for example, if I'm putting together a set on E, it may include various different modes around the tonic E, and it is extremely helpful and will save me a great deal of extra searching, if the mode information is included. Since a Cape Breton "E set" will probably include several Em tunes I know some of them might have one sharp in the key signature, but the difference is that I won't likely search G tunes to find them, for a couple of reasons. First, I know from experience that most Cape Breton musicians do understand modes, and will notate them properly if they have the means. Secondly, as relative Major/minor keys, G Major and Em share the one-sharp key signature but they are definitely *not* the same; the G Major tune resolves on G and the Em tune resolves on E, they use different chord structures (important for accompanists), and due to those things they *sound* different. I'm sure someone with a solid music theory background can explain it better. The abc draft gives : > > "K - key; the key signature should be specified with a capital > letter which may be followed by a # or b for sharp or flat > respectively. In addition, different scales or modes can be > specified and, for example, K:F lydian, K:C, K:C major, K:C > ionian, K:G mixolydian, K:D dorian, K:A minor, K:Am" > > It says : *In addition*, so it's not compulsory. Hmm... I've never interpreted that "In addition," phrase to mean modes support is optional, primarily because I don't see how "different scales or modes can be specified" (I'm interpreting that to mean "specified by the user") without being supported. :-) So I understand the intent of the second sentence in the draft in the simplest manner possible: it is a list of additional K: field parameters which should be supported by software interpreting abc. Is there any time in abc's history where mode support was *not* specifically included in the K: field? Just wondering - I don't have the entire history laid out in front of me, but my impression is that mode support has already been there, or at least was introduced *very* early. Anyway... most > tunes written for a relative mode don't take care of the seventh > and then it is written in the K: field a Bm instead of D, just > because the tunes begin with B, but there is no ^A in it (as > expected in the Bm mode (in minor harmonic)) > I didn't say modes are useless (it's maybe because I don't master > them I don't think I need to write them down), but they should be > an option only. Bryan Creer talked about the idea of having the > mode in a separated field, but as he said it's too late now. 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. Wendy To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
