Re: [abcusers] modes (again)
Laurie (ukonline) wrote: > > Laurie>Sure, but I've seen quite a few tunes with K:D and then every > single C in the piece naturalised. In those cases invariably the > description > is half right - the tonic D is right, but the mode is wrong. > > Eric> so does it means the right notation was to write K:Dm ? > > Probably K:Ddor > > Dm tends to acquire ^C as a leading note. > > Laurie > > To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: >http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html The scoring mode is ionian/major. The tune mode is mixolydian. Scoring and tune modes are often the same, but not by any means always the same. In some works scoring modes are either ionian/major or aeolian/minor, and 'accidentals' are used in the tune to correct to proper tune mode (as in the case here where the naturals on all of the Cs corrects ionian to mixolydian). If there were only the one sharp on the key signature (no sharp on C), then the mode would be straightforward mixolydian to start with. There's a graph of the key - signature - scoring mode relationship on my website which you can download or print out from your browser. >From it slowpokes can find the proper key - signature- scoring mode combination on it in about 5 seconds. Bruce Olson Roots of Folk: Old British Isles popular and folk songs, tunes, broadside ballads at my no-spam website - www.erols.com/olsonw or just http://www.erols.com/olsonw";> Click Motto: Keep at it; muddling through always works. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Anarchy
Yawn. Sigh. Look. If you think you are the only fellow allowed an opinion then you are crazy, so I'll presume that you don't think that and you agree that others can have theirs. That includes me. You are for ever (and it has got boring) quoting people out of context and misquoting people. Who ever wrote "I want it my way and no other.". Nobody, right? You just made it up, right? I am right? You did just make that up?? Because at the moment I think *you* are the only person on the list who thinks that way. I hope to discover that I'm wrong and you don't. Now if I remember correctly (feel free to dig it up in the archives) my original quote was (from memory) close to "we like it that way and reading this thread will reveal who 'we' are". You always leave that last part off. What I was saying (yawn) a long time ago was that this business of modes can be argued both ways, there are two sides to it and ultimately it comes down to a matter of opinion. I had (and still have) a particular opinion, and reading through the thread it was clear that several others had the same opinion. Some may like it this way, some may like it that way. Me, I like it *this* way. OK? It's an opinion? Am I entitled to it? YES I AM. Part of my musical upbringing was flamenco guitar where there are essentially three modes and about 4 keys. The keys are E, A, D and C and the modes are major, minor and Phrygian (OK tarantas is played in F# phrygian and, with a capo on fret 2 that's G#Phr - that's why I said "about"). To describe a phrygian piece as either minor or major is a travesty. It's not just wrong, it's ludicrous. You hear classical composers who write "Spanish" pieces that go Am G7 F E and should stop there (EPhry) but the poor fellow is clearly in a panic and desperately rushes back to the thing he knows, and glues a minor ending on. E7 Am (phew that was a close one!) The result is like a Vaughan Williams "folk song". "Song" yes, "folk", no. So I grew up thinking modes are important. Then I came across Irish music in Dorian and it's obviously a sort of minor but it obviously has its own character. Then there are those pieces in G with all the Fs naturals. And I could go on. So MY OPINION which is derived from my growing up is that modes matter and I don't want to see them go away. I'd rather see things notated as tonic+mode or even tonic and a bunch of accidentals than as a collection of sharps and flats. It's just my opinion. But I'm entitled to it. That is the way I like it. That is my opinion. It is in fact just that, a matter of opinion. I've read John Chambers arguments, but I'm still not convinced. (By the way I am convinced about multiple endings - those will happen in Muse when I get around to it. The abc support will probably come in even later, but I'm not arguing about what's wanted). The history of Muse was that I got fed up with trying to use some other packages and decided to write my own. The urgent need was the music (mainly English) that we played in the Spike Island Band. A lot of things were more important than modes so they weren't the first thing I did, but when they did get on to the wish-list they quickly made it to the top. I appreciate that you don't like it that way. You've said so often. That's your opinion. I suspect that your opinion was influenced by writing a converter to Noteworthy where you didn't have any obvious place to put the mode. (Did you stick it in as an annotation [I hope] or did you throw it away). No matter. I recall suggesting you got on to the Noteworthy guys and ask them to put them in. Maybe they are not that flexible. Well if so that's their problem or your problem, but not mine. But no matter whatever the reason for your opinion you are entitled to it. But understand that I, too am entitled to mine. I am actually allowed to like things a particular way, even if you don't. And I for one have never written "I want it my way and no other." Laurie - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 6:58 PM Subject: [abcusers] Anarchy John Chambers wrote - >Well, actually, last evening at this time I was playing music at a >contra dance with some nice people. I'm delighted to hear it. Do all these nice people share the same self-centred "I want it my way and no other." that you seem to think is completely standard human behavior? How do you ever agree on what tune to play? >I think it was variants of the principle expressed recently here, >that key+mode is more useful information than just the signature. It's only useful if it's right. A quick look at a few minor or modal tunes on your Tune Finder will show how often it's wrong. I've asked this question before and it was ignored - Why is it better to have Eminor tunes notated as K:G than as K:^F? >Some musicians don't understand keys and modes, and >just want to be told what notes to play. An
Re: [abcusers] Muse
Thanks. Muse2 (hopefully out in another month or so) has prettier notes. The restriction on different notes starting at the same time has gone away. that probably blows away some of your tab problems too. The options for setting up tab generation are probably going to be fixed in the release after. In the ABC area it will have w: and W: support. I'll probably rework the V: stuff a little - it already supports multi voice, just a question of trying to keep the syntax as generous as possible. For instance at the moment V:3 Ace is OK but [V:3]Dead is not. So trivial changes like that will probably get done while I'm at it. Laurie - Original Message - From: "Forgeot Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:01 PM Subject: [abcusers] Muse >And incidentally, was Muse one of the programs that you tried? Yes, the first programs I tried when I first heard of abc (when I discovered internet as well) were Muse and Abc2win. To be honest, I was first reluctant to Muse because of the drawing of the notes. But I tried it anyway and find there was several useful options / editing facilities. It can many features, including transposing (good idea the "transpose, play different look the same" and conversely) and several more I didn't catch yet. And it's really efficient to enter notes with it. But I made a separation between pure abc applications and programs such as Muse, MusEdit, TablEdit, MusicEase, Stringwalker etc. which can a bit abc but are not dedicated to it (the fact that none of the above can edit the abc "source code" denote that, and they even not have multivoice support, and advanced abc features). Muse seems to be tablature-oriented and it seems to do that well. Someone asked one day for a guitar tablature application and I recommended to try TablEdit and Muse. Generally speaking, I think the main drawback of Muse is the display, can't you use true type fonts, like Abc2Win ? There is certainly domain public musical fonts you could use. It's true the apparence is not primordial for working on music, but it could be an advantage to look nicer. The way of changing options, only in the menu bar, is a bit frustrating because if you want to configure the guitar tab for example, you have to go to > options > muse settings > tablature generation settings > [option to change] several times : if there was a "pop up" window with all the "tablature generation settings", you could change this quicker. To be able to select with the mouse would be better than to select with < and > (or to have the choise of the two) About tablatures, I'm using to generate ascii tab a freeware called PowerTab. It has an efficient feature called Shifter tool and can "shift string-wise" or "fret-wise", so it's quite quick and easy to configure several notes as wanted. Muse goes a bit further in configuration, but it's longer to configure. There is also something strange. I've guitar partitions (no tab, only partitions) in abc and I use two voices (or more) because it's not possible to write chords with different note lengths in abc (like [E2A2c2e/] and unfortunately nobody seems to complain about this limitation), so it doesn't work well in Muse if I import the abc, but it's not the problem if I use a converted midi file. The problem is the tab should look like this : Gavotte 1 (R. de Visée) 2/2 ||--0---0-|-0-|--5---3-|-1-3-0---0---0-|-0-|| ||o-1-|-1--0-3-10-|-1--|-0-|-0o|| ||--2-|-2--2--1---|-2--2-0-|-2-0-1-|-1-|| ||--2-|---|-2--3---2---|-2---3---2-|-2-|| ||o---|---||---|--o|| |||---||---|---|| and it can display well in Muse, but after exportation to .tab ascii file, the chords are now arppegio : E---0-|---=---0-|-0-=---| B-1---|-=---=---|---1-0---3---1---=---0-| G---2-|---=---=-|-2-=---2---1---=---| D-2---|-=---=---|---| A-|-|---| E-|-|---| 5---=---3-|---1---3---0---=---0---0-| --1---|-0---| 2---2-0---|-2---0-1-| --2-3-=---2---=---|-2---=---3---2---| --|-| --|-| Maybe I missed an option ? The = for tied notes are not really relevant in an ascii tab. To have only the bare tab could be better (or to have the choice to get rid of the =). In fact it's still possible to replace with a text editor the = by - o so it's not a re
Re: [abcusers] modes (again)
Laurie>Sure, but I've seen quite a few tunes with K:D and then every single C in the piece naturalised. In those cases invariably the description is half right - the tonic D is right, but the mode is wrong. Eric> so does it means the right notation was to write K:Dm ? Probably K:Ddor Dm tends to acquire ^C as a leading note. Laurie To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] modes (again)
On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 17:59, Forgeot Eric wrote:
> >| ... It was already too late to change when I first mentioned
> it.
>
> Since it's not possible to add a new field dedicated to mode, I
> thought it was possible to write 2 K: fields in a tune, if
> necessary : the first one for the signature, and the second one to
> *precise* the mode used, so clever applications or users could
> find out what is mode and what is the signature (and the others
> will have at least something to find the right key from and play
> the right accidentals). So that way I guess no application would
> be fooled by a "new standard".
Is it possible to duplicate the K: field this way to accommodate two
values? I think I've seen it done with the T: field, when a tune has
more than one title, but don't recall seeing any of the other header
fields used that way (and for obvious reasons you wouldn't do it with
X:.)
> 1)
> >Sure, but I've seen quite a few tunes with K:D and then every
> single C in
> >the piece naturalised. In those cases invariably the description
> is half
> >right - the tonic D is right, but the mode is wrong. If the key
> signature
>
> so does it means the right notation was to write K:Dm ?
>
I'd use K:Dmix for that.
>
> 2)
> >It could be worse. There are a number of tunes that are played
> in
> >both major and minor. I've seen several cases where one of them
> was
> >written with a major key signature and then accidentals
> written
> >throughout to put it into minor. One can get a certain
> perverse
> >thrill from seeing something so idiotic actually make it into
> print.
>
> for 1) and 2) : is it this kind of thing you're thinking about ?
>
> X:11
> T:Yester House
> R:Reel
> C:Niel Gow
> O:Scotland
> A:Inver (Perth)
> B:(n°233) Gow Collection of Scottish Dance Music - Oak
> Publications
> Z:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> M:C
> L:1/8
> Q:1/4=130
> K:A
> a | ec d=GB=g | ec ef=g(b|\
> a)>f=g>e d=GBd | ~e>d=g>B {B}A2 A :|
> B | Aaa>f =gGBd | Aaa>g aAab |\
> =gd=g>B {B}A2 AB |
>Aaa>f =gGBd | Aa~a>g aAab |\
> =gd=g>B {B}A2 A |]
>
> I've transcribed it as it was written in the book I own. All the G
> are written with a natural in front of them, and the signature is
> A. I've made a second version of it, which seems more logical to
> me (and unlike the above it sounds good in AbcMus).
>
> X:12
> T:Yester House (2)
> R:Reel
> C:Niel Gow
> O:Scotland
> A:Inver (Perth)
> B:(n°233) Gow Collection of Scottish Dance Music - Oak
> Publications
> Z:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> M:C
> L:1/8
> Q:1/4=130
> K:D %% or AMix ?
> a | ec dGBg | ec efg(b|\
> a)>fg>e dGBd | ~e>dg>B {B}A2 A :|
> B | Aaa>f gGBd | Aaa>g aAab |\
> gdg>B {B}A2 AB |
>Aaa>f gGBd | Aa~a>g aAab |\
> gdg>B {B}A2 A |]
>
>
> Was the A key written in the original version to make understand
> it's in a A mode ? Can we write then it's in AMixolydian ?
Yes, I'd do it the way you rewrote it, as A Mixolydian, both because
it's easier to read and because I'd then have the the mode information
in the header where I could use it to more accurately search my
collection, when I specifically want an A Mixolydian tune for a set.
> Was it a bad choice in the original book ?
I don't know if I'd say "bad", just fairly typical of many of the old
Scottish collections. For example King George IV and The King's Reel are
both A Mixolydian, because the f's and c's are sharp (or rather, the c's
are *somewhat* sharped, but that's another discussion entirely), but in
the Athole Collection they're both given Am key signatures and then the
notation has #'s sprinkled throughout the tunes. There are examples of
the same sort of compromise throughout both the Athole and Skye
collections.
Some newer publications do address this more cleanly. Cranford
Publications in particular does a good job; the key signatures not only
correctly reflect the notes to be played, but the tunes are arranged by
tonic, with Major keys in their own sections, and minor, dorian and
mixolydian for each tonic grouped together. The setup of those books is
really tailored to Cape Breton-style sets, because it makes it very
easy, for example to build an "A" set without having to search through
100's of tunes that don't even remotely fit the criteria, to find those
that do.. back to some playing now. :-)
Wendy
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Muse
>And incidentally, was Muse one of the programs that you tried? Yes, the first programs I tried when I first heard of abc (when I discovered internet as well) were Muse and Abc2win. To be honest, I was first reluctant to Muse because of the drawing of the notes. But I tried it anyway and find there was several useful options / editing facilities. It can many features, including transposing (good idea the "transpose, play different look the same" and conversely) and several more I didn't catch yet. And it's really efficient to enter notes with it. But I made a separation between pure abc applications and programs such as Muse, MusEdit, TablEdit, MusicEase, Stringwalker etc. which can a bit abc but are not dedicated to it (the fact that none of the above can edit the abc "source code" denote that, and they even not have multivoice support, and advanced abc features). Muse seems to be tablature-oriented and it seems to do that well. Someone asked one day for a guitar tablature application and I recommended to try TablEdit and Muse. Generally speaking, I think the main drawback of Muse is the display, can't you use true type fonts, like Abc2Win ? There is certainly domain public musical fonts you could use. It's true the apparence is not primordial for working on music, but it could be an advantage to look nicer. The way of changing options, only in the menu bar, is a bit frustrating because if you want to configure the guitar tab for example, you have to go to > options > muse settings > tablature generation settings > [option to change] several times : if there was a "pop up" window with all the "tablature generation settings", you could change this quicker. To be able to select with the mouse would be better than to select with < and > (or to have the choise of the two) About tablatures, I'm using to generate ascii tab a freeware called PowerTab. It has an efficient feature called Shifter tool and can "shift string-wise" or "fret-wise", so it's quite quick and easy to configure several notes as wanted. Muse goes a bit further in configuration, but it's longer to configure. There is also something strange. I've guitar partitions (no tab, only partitions) in abc and I use two voices (or more) because it's not possible to write chords with different note lengths in abc (like [E2A2c2e/] and unfortunately nobody seems to complain about this limitation), so it doesn't work well in Muse if I import the abc, but it's not the problem if I use a converted midi file. The problem is the tab should look like this : Gavotte 1 (R. de Visée) 2/2 ||--0---0-|-0-|--5---3-|-1-3-0---0---0-|-0-|| ||o-1-|-1--0-3-10-|-1--|-0-|-0o|| ||--2-|-2--2--1---|-2--2-0-|-2-0-1-|-1-|| ||--2-|---|-2--3---2---|-2---3---2-|-2-|| ||o---|---||---|--o|| |||---||---|---|| and it can display well in Muse, but after exportation to .tab ascii file, the chords are now arppegio : E---0-|---=---0-|-0-=---| B-1---|-=---=---|---1-0---3---1---=---0-| G---2-|---=---=-|-2-=---2---1---=---| D-2---|-=---=---|---| A-|-|---| E-|-|---| 5---=---3-|---1---3---0---=---0---0-| --1---|-0---| 2---2-0---|-2---0-1-| --2-3-=---2---=---|-2---=---3---2---| --|-| --|-| Maybe I missed an option ? The = for tied notes are not really relevant in an ascii tab. To have only the bare tab could be better (or to have the choice to get rid of the =). In fact it's still possible to replace with a text editor the = by - o so it's not a real problem. PowerTab is worse and write the tied notes by repeating the note with the same in brackets so it's not possible to get rid of them (unless write a little macro in perl maybe) >I think I counted that Muse has about 70 shortcuts defined (so there's heavy >use of Ctrl+this and Shift+that). It would be a very expert user that knew >them all. It's not a pb is those users know the commands they use most. To be able to redefine the shortcuts is also a nice feature (for example I like to use space bar to play / pause if I play fiddle with the computer, it's easier to strike than the 'p') There is also no multiple undo (usefull in music editing) You talked about trying to maintain a download size file cl
[abcusers] modes (again)
>| ... It was already too late to change when I first mentioned
it.
Since it's not possible to add a new field dedicated to mode, I
thought it was possible to write 2 K: fields in a tune, if
necessary : the first one for the signature, and the second one to
*precise* the mode used, so clever applications or users could
find out what is mode and what is the signature (and the others
will have at least something to find the right key from and play
the right accidentals). So that way I guess no application would
be fooled by a "new standard".
>chance of getting the tonic or the mode right. The people running
the
>project will make the reasonable rule that if the key isn't
obvious,
>just type the major key that gives the same signature. In such
cases,
>it would be better if the transcriber could type only the
signature.
that's just what I do so I'm always sure to give the right key,
the way it should be displayed and not how it should be understant
- though the experts whould find themselves the right mode.
1)
>Sure, but I've seen quite a few tunes with K:D and then every
single C in
>the piece naturalised. In those cases invariably the description
is half
>right - the tonic D is right, but the mode is wrong. If the key
signature
so does it means the right notation was to write K:Dm ?
2)
>It could be worse. There are a number of tunes that are played
in
>both major and minor. I've seen several cases where one of them
was
>written with a major key signature and then accidentals
written
>throughout to put it into minor. One can get a certain
perverse
>thrill from seeing something so idiotic actually make it into
print.
for 1) and 2) : is it this kind of thing you're thinking about ?
X:11
T:Yester House
R:Reel
C:Niel Gow
O:Scotland
A:Inver (Perth)
B:(n°233) Gow Collection of Scottish Dance Music - Oak
Publications
Z:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
M:C
L:1/8
Q:1/4=130
K:A
a | ec d=GB=g | ec ef=g(b|\
a)>f=g>e d=GBd | ~e>d=g>B {B}A2 A :|
B | Aaa>f =gGBd | Aaa>g aAab |\
=gd=g>B {B}A2 AB |
Aaa>f =gGBd | Aa~a>g aAab |\
=gd=g>B {B}A2 A |]
I've transcribed it as it was written in the book I own. All the G
are written with a natural in front of them, and the signature is
A. I've made a second version of it, which seems more logical to
me (and unlike the above it sounds good in AbcMus).
X:12
T:Yester House (2)
R:Reel
C:Niel Gow
O:Scotland
A:Inver (Perth)
B:(n°233) Gow Collection of Scottish Dance Music - Oak
Publications
Z:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
M:C
L:1/8
Q:1/4=130
K:D %% or AMix ?
a | ec dGBg | ec efg(b|\
a)>fg>e dGBd | ~e>dg>B {B}A2 A :|
B | Aaa>f gGBd | Aaa>g aAab |\
gdg>B {B}A2 AB |
Aaa>f gGBd | Aa~a>g aAab |\
gdg>B {B}A2 A |]
Was the A key written in the original version to make understand
it's in a A mode ? Can we write then it's in AMixolydian ?
Was it a bad choice in the original book ?
___
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: OT: [abcusers] Announce: new ABC manual
> You never cease to amaze me, Ulf! Exactly *how* many languages do you > speak fluently? I know of four by now :-) I don't speak Italian. But I do understand that manual with only an occasional glance in the dictionnary. You will too, I'm sure, because it is really well written. Hoe zegt man dat op nederlands: Dat is heel leuk... :-) Ulf To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Zouki?
H. Wiechern wrote: >shortly Zouki (?) announced his website with abc tunes. I lost his >address? Can somebody help me please? >> I don't recall seeing it posted here on [abcusers], only on Itrad-l, but it was moved to: http://www.qmcorp.net/zouki/webabc/abc_index.html John *** John McChesney-Young ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Berkeley, California, USA To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Anarchy
Bryan Creer wrote: | John Chambers wrote - | >Well, actually, last evening at this time I was playing music at a | >contra dance with some nice people. | | I'm delighted to hear it. Do all these nice people share the same | self-centred "I want it my way and no other." that you seem to think is | completely standard human behavior? How do you ever agree on what tune to | play? Heh. In this case, I was the lead musician. What I do is keep asking people if they have any tunes they'd like to play. Most often there's a pause during which time it's obvious that nobody has a strong opinion, and I jump in and make a suggestion. Sometimes someone makes a suggestion, and I ask the others if they know it, while checking to see if I have the printed music along. Since I'm the leader, I can easily veto a tune, though I try to do that only if it seems we might not do it well. It all works ok. What I was more thinking of is that in the previous several evenings, I played at events with groups that played different music. In the case of the contra, we had at least 5 experience klezmer musicians, and the caller explicitly asked us to include some klez tunes in the mix. This gives a conflict already, since klezmer musicians play in "funny" scales a lot, and those who read music tend to prefer the correct (non-classical) key signature to the kludgery of using a classical mode and lots of accidentals to get the notes in the right scale. So they appreciate the idea of explicit key signatures. Most contra-dance musicians wouldn't agree, since the traditional music for New England contras doesn't need "funny" scales. Meanwhile, at two events this weekend, the musicians all play trad Scandinavian music. Their beef with abc is the software that doesn't accept 3rd and 4th endings. "How can you not support that? Doesn't everyone us it?" Well, everyone in that tradition does, so they'd consider it a high-priority feature. | >I think it was variants of the principle expressed recently here, | >that key+mode is more useful information than just the signature. | | It's only useful if it's right. A quick look at a few minor or modal tunes | on your Tune Finder will show how often it's wrong. I've asked this question | before and it was ignored - Why is it better to have Eminor tunes notated as | K:G than as K:^F? Yeah; I'd agree. That's why I list this as one of the several motives for wanting explicit key signatures in abc. The only argument against it seems to be that it's not in abc 1.6. To people who don't care if the key is right (as long as the key sig is right), there's no reason to waste time implementing it. But there do seem to be a number of musicians who think like we do, that it's better to be correct than incorrect, even if it means giving less information. (BTW, it should be K:^f rather than K:^F. It turns out there are good reasons to make the case significant. There are some kinds of music that like to use different accidentals in different octaves. I've only run into this in passing, but I it's easy enough to support this right from the start, so I did.) | But wouldn't they find it even more useful if they were able to notate their | music accurately in a way they understood without all that mode stuff getting | in the way? Yeah, probably. I think one of the barriers here is getting over the idea that if we can only enforce the tonic+mode notation, people will learn, and we'll be better off. But the fact is, it only results in a lot of incorrect K lines from people who can't be bothered. | >Free agreement of musicians? What planet did you just arrive from? | | One where the idea of actually agreeing with someone isn't an alien concept | and where making compromises to arrive at a mutually beneficial result is | considered normal practice. Come and visit sometime; you'll like it. How about posting the galactic coordinates? And schedules for the jam sessions? | >And how about posting some tunes from your planet? | | Bit busy on the new programme at the moment but have a look at | http://members.aol.com/LewesArmsFolk/Lewesfav.html. You've got it on your | tune Finder already. I'm afraid since I generated these tunes by converting | from Noteworthy Composer with my abc2nwc programme, there is no tonic/mode | information. I have had to treat all tunes as if they were major. I didn't | want to do it that way, but the abc standard gives me no choice. Well, it's only a start, but if you use notation like K:^f, my tune finder will return correct staff notation. I've verified that there is a crowd Out There that hasn't bothered installing abc tools on their own machines. They just fetch GIF (ugh!) or PS or PDF from the tune finder and print it. Those people would be happy. There is the problem that people who fetch your abc might find that their software doesn't accept it. But that's similar to fetching abc files that use thin
OT: [abcusers] Announce: new ABC manual
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Ulf wrote: > > I have nearly finished a new manual: "Typesetting Music with ABC", > > preliminary version available in PDF format from > > http://abcplus.sourceforge.net. > > Excellent work !!! Congratulations! > > I'll stick to the Italian version. It is extremely easy to understand. > You are a most skilful teacher. You never cease to amaze me, Ulf! Exactly *how* many languages do you speak fluently? I know of four by now :-) -- love, peace & harmony Atte To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Anarchy
John Chambers wrote - >Well, actually, last evening at this time I was playing music at a >contra dance with some nice people. I'm delighted to hear it. Do all these nice people share the same self-centred "I want it my way and no other." that you seem to think is completely standard human behavior? How do you ever agree on what tune to play? >I think it was variants of the principle expressed recently here, >that key+mode is more useful information than just the signature. It's only useful if it's right. A quick look at a few minor or modal tunes on your Tune Finder will show how often it's wrong. I've asked this question before and it was ignored - Why is it better to have Eminor tunes notated as K:G than as K:^F? >Some musicians don't understand keys and modes, and >just want to be told what notes to play. And other musicians play >music that doesn't fit the classical mode scheme. Both of these types >seem to have found abc useful. But wouldn't they find it even more useful if they were able to notate their music accurately in a way they understood without all that mode stuff getting in the way? You could have mentioned musicians who do understand keys and modes and are perfectly capable of working them out from the notes without a (possibly inaccurate) label stuck on the front. And people who are only interested in the notation will just put in whatever is easiest; two sharps? that's K:D. >Free agreement of musicians? What planet did you just arrive from? One where the idea of actually agreeing with someone isn't an alien concept and where making compromises to arrive at a mutually beneficial result is considered normal practice. Come and visit sometime; you'll like it. >And how about posting some tunes from your planet? Bit busy on the new programme at the moment but have a look at http://members.aol.com/LewesArmsFolk/Lewesfav.html. You've got it on your tune Finder already. I'm afraid since I generated these tunes by converting from Noteworthy Composer with my abc2nwc programme, there is no tonic/mode information. I have had to treat all tunes as if they were major. I didn't want to do it that way, but the abc standard gives me no choice. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Zouki?
Hello, shortly Zouki (?) announced his wbesite with abc tunes. I lost his address? Cann somebody help me please? H. Wiechern To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Announce: new ABC manual
> I have nearly finished a new manual: "Typesetting Music with ABC", > preliminary version available in PDF format from > http://abcplus.sourceforge.net. Excellent work !!! Congratulations! I'll stick to the Italian version. It is extremely easy to understand. You are a most skilful teacher. Ulf To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Announce: new ABC manual
Hello, I have nearly finished a new manual: "Typesetting Music with ABC", preliminary version available in PDF format from http://abcplus.sourceforge.net. I usually write my stuff in English, but this guide is written in Italian. Therefore, it won't be much useful to English speakers; however, an English version is in the works. If anyone can help me translate the guide into English, please contact me. Later, Guido =8-) -- Guido Gonzato, Ph.D. - Linux System Manager Universita' di Verona (Italy), Facolta' di Scienze MM. FF. NN. Ca' Vignal II, Strada Le Grazie 15, 37134 Verona (Italy) Tel. +39 045 8027990; Fax +39 045 8027928 --- Timeas hominem unius libri To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
