On 8 Nov 2013, at 19:10, Keith OHara <k-ohara5...@oco.net> wrote: > On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 01:30:02 -0800, Hans Aberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: > >> On 8 Nov 2013, at 01:47, Keith OHara <k-ohara5...@oco.net> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:26:04 -0800, Hans Aberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 7 Nov 2013, at 21:47, Keith OHara <k-ohara5...@oco.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hans, I am late, but can I persuade you to try this with sharp and flat >>>>> representing 4 tone-steps rather than 5 ? >>>> >> It is not possible to do that with current LilyPond; >> Graham Breed retuned the fifth in his regular.ly, so .... > > Well, neither LilyPond nor Graham will object if we adjust the naming > convention > (as attached and at http://k-ohara.oco.net/Lilypond/). > > With 53 steps, there is an interval very close to how a violinist would play > D F# in traditional notation. If you choose the sharp to represent 4/53 of > an octave, then 53-step notation also shows this interval as D F#. > > Then the glyph to show the fifth B F#' would get an arrow indicating that it > is larger by a comma; the M-m=5 alteration would use the symbol > sharp.uparrow. I find this convention uses fewer arrows to represent real > music.
Graham retunes the LilyPond scale degrees 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 so that they now refer to E53. Then all values refer to these, also when you transpose. So you can choose a different naming if you so like, and then check what happens. Indeed, this is the case with the Turkish Arel-Ezgi-Uzdilek makam notation system, which sets a sharp to 4 E53 commas. When you write the other key signatures, then instead of a sharp, you get a microtonal sharps. It does not matter if you do not transpose. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
