[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > 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. > Sorry I stated that sloppily. I most certainly don't want to abandon all (or even any) existing ABCs. > 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
Cheers. It shouldn't be to hard to change software to recognize K:spec with signature, key and mode. With the first alone given we get 'classical standard notation'. With key added we recognize that the 'final' of a tune isn't the keynote, and we thus supplement standard notation (as a byproduct we thus get the correct scoring mode). If the sharp/flat signature is missing then we revert to the present system of key-mode. Bruce Olson PS: Comments on just intonation defered. That's another whole can of worms, and in the system I use scale frequencies depend on keynote, not mode, and Mixolydian 7(b)# frequency is Ionian 7th frequency. Also I've tried, but can't, by dropping one note at a time, go from some 10 note modes through observed 9, then 8 to a basis 7 note 'Greek' mode. > To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: >http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html Roots of Folk: Old British Isles popular and folk songs, tunes, broadside ballads at my website <A href="http://www.erols.com/olsonw";> Click </a> Motto: Keep at it; muddling through always works. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
