Sounds kinda like something that articulate.ly might be trained to do with arpeggios.
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023, 5:04 PM Kevin Cole <[email protected]> wrote: > I know there's been previous endless discussion, but... > > While I'm sure it won't satisfy EVERYONE, I think it will be better > than nothing to have some option for MIDI output to simulate a strum > pattern. I don't know any Scheme, and I don't play a chorded > instrument, so it's beyond me, but the relationship between chord > names and fretboard diagrams suggests that it would be possible to use > that information to automatically construct something like: > > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > % See https://linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?t=23660 % > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > > \version "2.22.1" > \language "english" > > melody = \relative c' { > \time 4/4 > \key c \major > \tempo 4=80 > > % Guitar strum (Spanish guitar strum?) > \clef "treble_8" > > % E major chord > \appoggiatura { > e,,32~ [ > <e~ b'~>32 > <e~ b'~ e~>32 > <e~ b'~ e~ gs~>32 > <e~ b'~ e~ gs~ b~>32 ] > } > <e b' e gs b e>2 > > } > > \score { > \new Staff \melody > \midi { } > } > > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > > To my very untrained ear, when the above is played, it sounds "close > enough" to a generic guitar strum. > > Again, it wouldn't be perfect, and there are probably a million and > one exceptions, variations, etc. Is it a downstroke? Is it an > upstroke? Bla-bla-blah. The folks who are that fussy and have need of > such precision wouldn't be forced to use the option. But right now, > there's nothing other than constructing it by hand each time, for > every chord. I think something would be better than nothing. > >
