Bruce Olsen wrote: >I also respectfully disagree with Phil Taylor's rationalle. > >I pointed out my objections to the K:key-mode specification, instead of >a direct key signature sharp or flat specification, in a communication >here on Jan 25, 2001. Here is a slightly revised version of it. > >The first line of the Introduction on Chris Walshaw's ABC >homepage says "abc is a language to notate tunes in an ascii >format." It says nothing about describing, or in any way >characterizing tunes. That, at present, seems to be beyond >the stated purpose of ABC. Notation can be unambiguously satisfied >by giving the number of sharps or flats on the key signature; It >doesn't require any interpretation of keynote or mode to do that. >As many as 3 different 'descriptions' in terms of key and mode are >supplied for some of the tunes given in 'Sources of Irish Traditional >Music', 1998. Who decides which one to use? Keys and modes are >subject to interpretation, an interpretation that is sometimes not >unique. The tune is the tune; it doesn't need a 'description' in terms >of key and mode.
Chris invented abc as a quick and dirty way of writing down tunes, and later wrote the first version of abc2mtex in order to simplify the task of translating his hand-written notes into conventional notation. The abc standard which we still use is part of the documentation for abc2mtex. abc2mtex is solely concerned with notation, and indeed could have used a simple collection of sharps or flats as its key information. However, the language has since developed into a storage medium and a notation system in its own right, independant of the programs which are used to interpret it. Chris was prescient enough to create a key description which is more useful than the conventional key signature, and which in turn makes the data available for purposes other than conversion to staff notation. >Circular modes, ones that don't end on the keynote, (which are 4% >of the 6601 tunes coded in file COMBCODE.TXT on my website) can >sometimes be difficult to figure out as far as key and mode go, >and not all interpreters will come out with the same key-mode >combination for a given tune. Whatever system of key representation you choose, there will always be a small number of tunes which prove difficult to represent correctly. When you enter a conventional key signature, in some cases you have to decide whether a particular note should carry an accidental, or whether that accidental should be part of the key signature. In order to answer that question correctly you have to figure out where the tonic is, and what mode the majority of the tune is in. Hard cases make for bad law, and I don't think that the difficult tunes make a case either way. Of course, if abc were _only_ to be used for copying music from printed sources, and those sources were always unimpeachably correct, that problem wouldn't arise. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
