[abcusers] Re: Bryan Creer (?)
John Chambers wrote: >Maybe we should invite him back. I've always sorta enjoyed the>discussions that he started. And it's been quiet around here lately,>too quiet ...I think Phil Taylor's response to Don's original enquiry neatly illustrated one of the reasons I haven't been around for a while. He started slagging me off as soon as he saw my name before I'd even said anything. I felt in the past that I had been demonised and anything I said would come under attack. It's difficult to reason with people who don't seem to have wasted much time actually reading what I have said before launching in, often quite offensively. Laura Conrad once attacked me for something Phil had said and then had another go at me when I pointed that out. Wil Macaulay attacked me for (as far as I could understand) something he had said himself. You, John, seemed to have a go at me for things that that Italian chap whose name escapes me said. Wendy B(?) finally seemed to recognise that she was criticising me for something I hadn't said but spoilt it by promptly looking around for something else to hit me with. I think ABC is a brilliant invention and I would love to be able to participate and make a contribution but banging your head against a brick wall really is great when you stop. Apart from that, I've spent the last year studying for an MSc in Computing in Archaeology which has kept me fairly busy. For an idea of what I've been up to have a look at - http://www.bryancreer.com/Castle.html No musical content whatsoever. I've just got Jeff's email. Thank's. I'm touched. (Don't say it.) We'll see. Can people please promise to READ WHAT I ACUALLY SAY before laying into me? Bryan
[abcusers] Re: Bryan Creer (?)
Don Whitener wrote - >So far as I can tell, Bryan Creer has > not posted to this group since early August 2003... Has he dropped out > for a while? Thanks for asking Don. It's nice to be missed. Phil Taylor wrote - >He does rather tend to drop out for long periods of time, then return >to start a mighty argument.On the contrary. I make positive, constructive suggestions and then other people start a mighty argument. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >Bryans alternative proposal didn't seem unreasonable, >if he can clearly indicate how pseudo comments should >be parsed. I didn't get that till after my last posting. Have I answered the question? If not, I'm not sure that I see the problem. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Wil Macaulay wrote - then you've got to figure out how to put the cursor in the right place after you've done all this, if the user made a mistake Yep. But that's your problem not the user's. If I can do it in Abacus (crosses fingers) then so can anyone. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin - >Wil (and others), would that be acceptable? Fine by me. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
John Chambers wrote - >Actually, that would be equivalent to > >%%MIDI no%%ba%%rlines My idea was that, having read "%%MIDI no\", applications that handled pseudocomments would know to ignore leading "%%" until they got to a line that didn't end "\". Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
It strikes me that there are three processes to carry out - Remove comments Combine lines Parse abc notation The problem is to decide what order to do them in and to be consistent about it. The above order seems the logical one to me and is what I have already implemented in Abacus. > abc def| gab CDE|\ % comments > FGA BC| ... would become - > abc def| gab CDE|\ > FGA BC| ... and then - > abc def| gab CDE| FGA BC| ... which parses normally. With - > abc def| gab CDE| % comments\ > FGA BC| ... The \ would be lost so it would be incorrect. An earlier example - > G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ > w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ > M:4/4 % Measure Change\ > K:C % Key Change\ > c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| > w:gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- is a mess whichever way you do it. You have to start parsing the lines to find out how to combine them and get rid of the comments. Removing the comments first wouldn't be too bad by accident since the backslashes on the imbedded commands are unnecessary. >From the 1.6 standard - >To change key, meter, or default note length, simply put in a new >line with a K: M: or L: field, e.g. > ed|cecA B2ed|cAcA E2ed|cecA B2ed|c2A2 A2:| > K:G > AB|cdec BcdB|ABAF GFE2|cdec BcdB|c2A2 A2:| > >To do this without generating a new line of music, put a \ at the >end of the first line, i.e. > E2E EFE|E2E EFG|\ > M:9/8 > A2G F2E D2|] It would be much more understandable and straight forward to have - > G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ > M:4/4 % Measure Change > K:C % Key Change > c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| > w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ > gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- Keep it simple and bear in mind what is understandable to a non-programmer. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >That's also a reasonable approach. But what do you do >with pseudo comments? I'm not sure what you mean by pseudo comments. Could you give an example? >This example was only given to show how absurd the >semantics of the 1.6 standard were. But the 1.6 standard doesn't include the w: command (only the W: command) and does not require continuation slashes for imbedded commands so the example given didn't conform to that standard anyway. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: backslashes
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >> I'm not sure what you mean by pseudo comments. Could you give an example? > >%%gchordfont times 14 > >or > >%%abc-copyright (C) Copyright John Smith 2003 Well, personally, I don't intend to do anything with them; they are comments and can be ignored. For those who do wish to process them, they are clearly distinguishable from ordinary comments so they can avoid removing them and deal with them whenever they feel it would be appropriate. This might become - 1/ Ignore comments except pseudo comments 2/ Combine lines 3/ Parse the resulting logical line 4/ Parse pseudo comments Wil Macaulay wrote - I'd like to propose >1. continued lines cannot have a trailing comment I still don't see why not. The 1.6 standard says - >A % symbol will cause the remainder of any input line to be ignored. which is pretty unequivocal. I don't feel I was breaking any standard when I implemented it and object to having Abacus made retrospectively non-standard without a pretty good reason. >2. pseudocomments cannot be continued Certainly not in the way Wil has illustrated but since anyone processing them will know they are doing so, something like - %%MIDI no\ %%ba\ %%rlines would work without mucking things up for software that ignored them. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: 8.3. Accidental directives
From Irwin's standard - > 8.3. Accidental directives > %%propagate-accidentals > > When set to not, accidentals apply only to the note > they're attached to. When set to octave, accidentals > also apply to all the notes of the same pitch in the > same octave up to the end of the bar. When set to > pitch, accidentals also apply to all the notes of the > same pitch in all octaves up to the end of the bar. > > The default value is pitch. > but as Richard Robinson points our elsewhere - >All these %%whatever usages are >based on the point that the first character makes it a comment, and thus >anything behind that will be ignored by any ABC application unless it takes >the trouble specifically to look for it. If this one is ignored, it will affect the playback of tunes. It is a necessary function but it should be part of the abc standard not part of the stylesheet specification. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] (no subject)
Richard Robinson wrote - >The standard says "It is also possible >to specify a complex meter". Bwahaha. jcabc2ps will accept both 4i/4 and >4/4i without complaint, but only displays the 1st of these correctly. >Interesting. I think you will find that, with a little rearrangement, 4/4i is equal to -4i/4. Negative Meter? Tricky. "Play this piece backwards from the beginning." Technically, since neither of these has a real component, they are not really complex but completely imaginary. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Sorry
Wrong address. Please ignore anything libellous. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Handout, boot in
AAARRRGGGHHH! Should I track down every copy and have it destroyed? That's actually Bloke sitting beside me which explains why I'm not kicking him in the head. He was being a bloody nuisance. The rest of us were still trying to do things to do with the Rob Harbron/John Dipper workshop when he muscled in. Oh dear, he's probably going to be there this year. I'd settle for bashing out The Roads again if that's all right by you. I need to get them right and you can do your Bob Hope joke. I've found the Adrian Schofield website and he is certainly unusual as much by design as accident. His name seems to crop up with all the establishment figures of the Nortghumbrian Piping scene. Bryan The fiddler on the front of the HoM handout looks rather like Marina.
[abcusers] Re: ABC Standard 2.0 revision III
John Chambers wrote - >Bryan Creer writes: > >| Talking of which, are there any plans for a procedure for amendments or >| extensions to the standard or do we just stick to the implement your favourite idea >| and argue about it afterwards system we have now? > >What a concept! This is a gang of musicians, you know. What are the >chances of us ever agreeing to any such thing? That's good because I've implemented tonic= and mode= in Abacus. >Next you'll be telling us that Britney Spears is a musician ... Yeah! And she' really is a virgin. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: ABC Standard 2.0 revision III
> K:A_b^f^c > > shouldn't that have a G# also since you've written K:A? and a lot of other stuff around the same subject. Perhaps it's time to plug my idea of - K:_b^f^c tonic=A mode=whatever Completely unambiguous. Talking of which, are there any plans for a procedure for amendments or extensions to the standard or do we just stick to the implement your favourite idea and argue about it afterwards system we have now? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - Hooraah!
Jef Moine wrote - >No problem: it is simpler, and it will be in the next release. >Sorry for I misunderstood the previous thread... Thanks Jef. It's nice to see a lot of ABCers working in the same direction. I hope Henrik doesn't feel we've slipped past him while he was on holiday. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Wil Macaulay wrote - >Another historic moment! Phil and Bryan and I all agree on something! Put it in the >standard, quick, before we lose it! Oh happy day! Over to you Jef? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Jef Moine wrote - >I though from the previous discussion that the length of the chord >was the length of the smallest note (and that's what abcm2ps does). >Then, if you want a bigger length, you may add invisible rests. >In a previous discussion, some people wanted the first note to >give the length of the chord. But later, it seems that everybody >agreed using the length of the smallest note. Not how I recall it and I certainly did not agree that. Invisible rests were not, at the time, part of the standard. At least it confirms that different length notes in a chord should not be illegal. I have just been trying to look up the original discussion in the archive. It appears under the threads "Abacus 1.0.0 launch" and "suggestions for [A4A2] notation " about a year ago. The archive is not easy to follow. The discussion did not seem to come to any particular conclusion. I had started from "highest note" defines chord length and had been persuaded that this would not work. I suggested "first listed note" and there seemed to be a concensus in that direction. I changed Abacus accordingly. Then someone started insisting that "shortest note" was best without giving very clear reasons. I said that I was not prepared to change Abacus again until given a good reason to do so. After that, the thread rather fizzled out. My case for "first listed note" is that it is unambiguous and independant of the musical content. The question to consider is "What is clearest and easiest to understand for the user?" Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: About the choice of '!'
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >Using ! and !..! in one and the same >tune may lead to disaster if you make a small typo. So, >while "!" should definitely be supported, I encourage >you to support "*" as well. It just seems to make a messy situation more complicated. You are still going to have to handle ! and !! so it brings no benefit. Whatever clever heuristics you come up with, there is no getting away from the fact that the dual use of ! is very unsatisfactory. Try and think about from the point of view of the ordinary user presented with this stuff. Let's look for the most practical way of solving it. abc2win is only obsolete in the sense that it is not being maintained. There is a large body of abc notation that uses it, it has many users and it is still available and becaues it is easily accessible to non-geeks it will continue to get taken up. As far as I can tell, !...! is much less widely used, the collections that use it and the software that implements it are still maintained. It could be changed. I hear the cry "Why should we?" I reply "For the greater good of abc." This may seem like letting Jim Vint "get away with it" but if I find someone blocking my way on the pavement, I ask them to move; if my way is blocked by a dead dog, I walk round it. That doesn't mean that I respect the dog more than the person, I'm just facing up to practical realities. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Nobody is opposing the [abc]2 idea are they? Can we take that as agreed and get onto the far more important business of different note lengths in one chord? Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >All the notes within a chord should have the same >length. More complicated chords can be transcribed with >the & operator, see section Voice overlay. This was discussed about a year ago and it was generally accepted that you could have notes of different lengths in the same chord. The issue, as John Chambers has mentioned, was which note represented the time elapsed before the following note - highest, lowest, longest, shortest... I opted for first listed on the grounds that it was independant of the musical content. Some agreed but others did not and (as usual) the dicussion reached no firm conclusion. I went ahead and implemented it in Abacus on this basis. For instance with L:1/4, [GD2] A B c would take four beats and [D2G] A B c would take five. I do put notes of two different length on different stems. I hate to think what would happen with notes of three different lengths. I'm quite happy to implement the & (or whatever) notation as well but do not want to see what I've already done outlawed. John Chambers wrote - >Similarly, the [ce]>[Bd] case is very useful, and already >works with some abc software. It works with Abacus. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: About the choice of '!'
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >line breaking > >To force a line break at all times, a star (*) can be >used. The star can be inserted everywhere, where a note >group could. > >Deprecated line breaking > >The abc2win program used a `!' character to force line >breaks, as is currently supported with the * operator >(see section Line breaking). If there is a recognised need for a line break character, then, whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, ! is well established in that role. It seems pointless to waste another character to do the same job. >The abc2win usage obviously conflicts with the !...! >style notation for musical symbols It would be more accurate to say that !...! conflicts with the abc2win usage and is far less widely used. (I've never come across an example in nature.) Why not use ** for musical symbols? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: %%ABC 2.0 identifier
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Must? What are you going to do if they don't? > >Please read carefully what I wrote. Then you will >understand, that: > >1/ Users are not required to manually add any of these >new fields to their ABC files at all. > >2/ Programs that import ABC files should not assume >that any of these files are present. > >3/ The only requirement that I made is that programs >that _export_ ABC notation, should add three fields to >their output, that make it possible to identify later >on which program generated the output, according to >which version of ABC. That's all. I have looked through the email I was quoting from and can find nothing corresponding to points 1/ and 2/. In 3/ you have modified "must" to "should"; an improvement. If you read carefully what I wrote, you will understand that the point I was trying to get over was that the principle of a standard is to unify abc regardless of its origin. I don't want to have to use a different set of parsing rules depending on the origin of the file. That is no improvement on the situation we have now. >> It is up to the developer to make it clear what >> subset of the standard they do implement then the >> user can make their choice and pester for the things >> they want. > >Nobody disagrees on that. Then why are you saying what applications MUST do? A a further point, you are defining %% commands as mandatory parts of the standard whereas their current usage is application dependant in such a way that they can be safely ignored by other applications. They are thus, by definition, not part of the standard. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: %%ABC 2.0 identifier
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >Applications which extract separate tunes from a file, >must insert the fields of the original file header, >into the header of the extracted tune. >Software that exports ABC tunes conforming to this >standard, must include a version field. >Software that exports ABC tunes conforming to this >standard, must include a creator field. Must? What are you going to do if they don't? What about the existing abc files? One of the strengths of abc is that you don't need any specialist software at all; you can write it using a simple text editor (or pen and paper for that matter). How are you going to get Microsoft Notepad to conform to this standard? If I Copy and Paste a tune from an abc file into an email how is the operating system supposed to extract data from the file header? Surely an abc standard shouldn't be about software, it should be about abc. It should define what abc is. What software does is up to the developer under pressure from their users. As Guido said a while ago - >That said, programs don't necessarily have to comply to 1.7.6 or 2.0.0 or >3.1415. Many users are happy with single-voice ABC, so programs targeting >these users may be left untouched. But what about we classical musicians, >who need more? What's more important, so-called standards or people's >needs? No application is likely to be a complete implementation of any version of the standard. It is up to the developer to make it clear what subset of the standard they do implement then the user can make their choice and pester for the things they want. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] RE : Abacus
Eric Forgeot wrote - >I tried later and it generally crashes after I copy and paste in >the box (after removing the notes, but I guess the previous >headers [since it's not full edition] can do some interference). >I've just made it crash now, I did this, and all was fine until I >hit "F7" for full edition. I get "Error 9, indice outside the >range" (translated from french) >Before that I played a bit with the clef option, I don't know if >it's linked. You can try too, you'll see. This is more likely to be something specific to the tune that I have missed. You couldn't send me an example could you? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Abacus
Eric Forgeot wrote - >There are good improvements in this new version, and it seems also >it crash less, unlike the previous version. The midi rendering is >good also. I think you already know for lyrics and multivoice :) >(it lacks cruelly) but will there be a midi export as well? "crash less" but still some? One correspondent claims he crashed it six times in twenty minutes but I'm still waiting for the evidence. >You made a "full abc view" (without display), it could have been >maybe better to have a "full abc view + display". I guess some >pple prefer to have full abc as default edition (AbcMus can do >this well, switching from a mode to an other) Well, AbcMus doesn't display the score on the screen at the same time so it's got more room and in the version I've got, it doesn't do Full ABC, just hides the header details and displays the tune in a bigger window. Maybe it's moved on since then. I can't see a desperate need for this. I'll see what the customers say. >Your package is still quite heavy to download. I noticed my >MSwindows had already several or your big files used in the system >folder (for VB basic I guess), so maybe you could propose a the >normal package, and a light one for people who know they have >already those special files ? I'll have a look into this. It's mainly a matter of phrasing the explanation so as not to confuse the technologically innocent. >You could include a file with some abc samples Good idea. Thanks for the feedback. Bryan
[abcusers] Re: expected abc audience
Jack Campin wrote - >the only program >that does interchange to any other general-purpose score format >in a meaningful way is Bryan's Noteworthy convertor? He probably >has figures for how many people use that but I doubt if it's as >much as 5% of the ABC community. In my dreams. Rather less than 1% if Arent's figures are to be believed although circumstantial evidence suggests that there may be quite a few unregistered users. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: >we can align our music with the very basic phenomena of the cosmos. Talking of which, didn't you guys have a little trouble aligning one of your probes with Mars because of a mix up between metric and Imperial? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Abacus 2.1.0 release
Abacus 2.1.0 is available for download. (2.0.0 never made it into the public arena.) I've been tinkering with it for so long that I can't remember all the new things since 1.0.0 but it's got a much whizzier interface and things like selecting print size and transposition. Oh yes, it doesn't fall over under Windows XP any more (probably). It is shareware with a registration fee of £10/$16 but you can play with it for quite a while before you register it. It is available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/ Constructive comments, useful suggestions and even intelligent criticism are welcome. Abuse and carping will be ignored. My response to "It doesn't do..." will probably be "No, not yet." Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: >I should maybe mention that this is a somewhat old W98 box >. And reboot is several times per day. Perhaps it's gone into a sulk because it's heard you being rude about Microsoft. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: >So I tried it. Got the Character Map window, found the copyright >char, double clicked on it, went to another window, clicked on it, >went to the Edit menu and selected Paste ... and a capital O with an >acute accent appeared at the cursor point in the window. There's a step missing in what you say there. After double clicking the character you should click Copy on the Character Map window. Failing that, what application are you pasting in to? It works all right for me. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: New standard(s)
John Chambers wrote: > > ©: 1998 Joe Smith ... > > But some people might have problems figuring out how to type this. On > many linux and *BSD systems, you can get the copyright symbol with > the ALT-) (or ALT-SHIFT-0) combination, but I don't think this will > work on Windoze or Mac systems. >From the Windows Help files - >. open Character Map by clicking Start, pointing to Programs, pointing to >Accessories, pointing to System Tools, and then clicking Character Map. > >Character Map works only with Windows-based programs. > >In Font, click a font. > >Double-click each character you want to insert. > >Click Copy. > >In your document, click where you want the characters to appear. > >On the Edit menu, click Paste. Just like that. Easy. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Phil Taylors wrote - >Bryan Creer wrote: > >>Phil Taylors extensions to the V: command were largely >>incompatible with >>the original and you speak of different syntaxes for BarFly and abc2mps >>extensions. > >If precedence is at all important, BarFly handled multivoice abc before >abcm2ps started. I think only abc2midi preceded BarFly in that >respect. Sorry for the late response; AOL in its wisdom/folly is still blocking your emails. I found your posting in the archive. Yes, multivoice abc originated in abc2midi as far as I know. Both abcm2ps (and others?) and Barfly then extended it in different ways to some extent incompatible with the original and each other. Hardly a satisfactory situation and, to my mind, exactly analogous to what abc2win did back in 1995. He is condemned but now it is considered normal practice. >It causes us a lot of trouble. We can't fix it and we can't persuade >its author to fix it. We used not to be hostile towards it; in its >early days it was widely admired, but then its author stopped >contributing to this list, and wouldn't fix even simple things >(like the fact that it misinterprets the Q: field and plays everything >at the wrong tempo). So the hostility is not due to the problems of the software but because Jim Vint went off in a huff for some reason? (The Q: problem is a bug but not a breach of the standard.) >He's left us a messy legacy of files that we >have to deal with. Not really irrational, just pointless. Carping at Jim Vint about it is irrational because it will achieve nothing other than to give abc2win users who join this list the message "There is nothing for you here. You aren't welcome." What is also irrational is that the problems arose because of poor communication between developers but the lesson hasn't been learnt. Jim Vint is criticised for doing things his way but many developers still claims the right to do the same. Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: QBasic "Play" statement
Excellent! abc2mtex was in clear breach of the standard set by QBasic (and I bet that wasn't the first). Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Jon wrote - >No Brian, it is disregarding the standard. If someone needs to use a symbol, >it is much better that it is agreeed by everyone and that it gets written >into the standard. If it had been agreed that ! could be used as a line >break and that had been documented in the abc standard, I doubt that the ! >would have been considered as the symbols for the macros. To some extent I agree but it isn't the way things are done. I doubt if you would get very far if you told current developers that they couldn't use anything that wasn't already in the standard. People have been laying claim to & for temporary voices and Z for one bar's rest, neither of which are in the standard but they aren't forbidden either. Frank Nordberg wrote - >Sorry Brian, but *that* definitely violates the ABC standard, who >explisitly states that a line break in the ABC also means a line break >in the standard notation output (except when counteracted by a \ of course). I was merely responding to Irwin's assertion that abc2win's use of ! was not documented. Do you mean the standard that was released 16 months after the first release of abc2win? >It's a somewhat different question when we're talking about the >application that *set* the standard in the first place, though. Strictly >speaking, before a published standard existed, ABC simply was whatever >abc2mtex program could read. >Realisticly, it is very much a question of how well ABC was decribed in >the abc2mtex documentation, and I know nothing about that. I think to elevate a piece of software that was still under rapid development to the status of a written standard is getting a little tenuous. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >Abc2win is significantly incompatible with the standard >that was set by abc2mtex, and worse, its deviations >have never been documented, up to this day. Taking the second point first, from the Help files for ABC2WIN - >The exclamation point will force a new staff line when the tune is drawn- you need >not necessarily start a new line in the editing window as well.. > >Copyright 1996, 1997 jimvintSystems As to the first point, this is standard setting by precedent of one piece of software in the absence of a written standard. You'd better take this up with Frank Nordberg who says, as an example - >There is no standard for specifying midi program changes in an ABC file, >so any claim that BarFly's way is wrong and abc2midi's is right (or vice >versa) simply have no fundation. >Syntax like |!: instead of |: is not an extension Nor is it part of abc2win, it is simply bad abc. I've only seen it once in a recent example that someone posted to this list but I've seen | : many times. >You did not notice those Abc2win users that complained >that their program could not handle lyrics or print >their tunebook properly? These are not breaches of the standard. >This program is hopelessly broken, something of an exageration >archaic, But still adequate for a lot of peoples needs >totally unsupported You can understand why Jim Vint may have got a little fed up with the whole business. >and not documented. What? Have you looked at its Help files? >Forget about it. I can't. It is widely used in the abc files that I am interested in. It is worth considering this from Chris Walshaw's short history of abc - >The real explosion in interest came when Jim Vint released his package abc2win in >September 1995. The tool was taken up by a large number of the members of >IRTRAD-L and abc's of tunes started appearing regularly. abc2win's strength is that it is easily accessible to non-geeks. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Frank Nordberg wrote - >No it isn't. ABC2WIN's ! syntax is breaking (no pun intended) the >"official" ABC standard (as Chris Walshaw published it). A) According to the chronology compiled by John Chambers on the abc home page, Chris Walshaw's published standard followed about 16 months after the first release of ABC2WIN. B) There is nothing in that standard that forbids the use of ! as a line break. It is an extension. It is something he saw a need for and his users found useful. >The differences >between the other major ABC applications are all about *extensions* to >the standard: additional features different developers saw the need for >and incorporated in their programs independent from each other and in >different ways. Which is why it is important for developers to be aware of what others are doing. Phil Taylors extensions to the V: command were largely incompatible with the original and you speak of different syntaxes for BarFly and abc2mps extensions. If the standard follows the software, how is it supposed to cope if different developers lead in different, and possibly incompatible, directions? If the answer is by following one particular piece of software, that puts all the others into retrospective breach of the standards which is what seems to have happened to ABC2WIN. Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >The problem with ABC2WIN is >C) that is >nevertheless advertized on the ABC homepage as being >the leading ABC application for the Windows platform! >From my experience that would appear to be true. (At the moment.) I'm not trying to defend ABC2WIN; there is a lot wrong with it. I just find the hostility towards it deeply irrational. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC sects
Frank Nordberg wrote - >An important point here is that BarFly has many of the same special >features as abc2ps/abcm2ps/midiabc, only it uses different syntaxes. > >Any programmers here that feel the call to create a nice little >conversion program/script for the benefit of the world at large? I'd much rather all abc software used the same syntax. Isn't BarFly doing just what ABC2WIN is criticised for? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: abc2win vs. ABC...
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >I honestly think that all ABC users have had (and still >have!) a fair opportunity to participate in the >standardization process and to react on the various >proposals. I hope you are right. Guido invites feedback from everybody which makes his assertion that "the standard should follow it [abcm2ps] closely" and others should follow a bit strange. >Bryan, it is important to remember that not only >developers participate in this process, but all users >of ABC that are part of the abcusers list community. You are absolutely right, of course. That make it even more imperative that the standard should not be centred on one piece of software. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: global accidentals
John Chambers wrote - >Why is it that I feel this powerful urge to take 10 minutes >to implement this? Someone please stop me! ... No! Don't stop. Do it NOW while the urge is upon you. Bryan Creer (Gets a bit tricky if you're transposing the tune.) To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: abc2win vs. ABC...
Guido Gonzato wrote - >abcm2ps is one of my favourite pieces of software _ever_. >In my view, it's so good and well thought-out that the standard should >follow it closely. Taken together with his earlier comment that - >other applications will have better try and follow the new standard for >their own good. I find this rather alarming. His draft standard is an excellent piece of work which I'll read a few more time before commenting on but a standard is meaningless without the cooperation of all those involved. If other developers do not have a fair opportunity to participate why should they take part? However beautifully formed it may be and however benign in it's intentions, an 800lb gorilla is still an 800lb gorilla. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
Richard Robinson wrote - >abc2win introduced constructs, out of the blue, >that the abc->ps family have never _been_ able to read. I really wish I understood this hate campaign against abc2win. On his website, Jim Vint credits a great many people who gave him support some of whom are still active on this list) so he didn't work in isolation. Many developers have introduced their innovations without consultation and continue to do so. In fact, it seems to be the accepted way of doing things since Guido says as a note in his draft standard - >features that are not implemented in ABC applications cannot be considered part >of the standard. which seems to imply that the standard follows the software, not the other way round. Here again, are some extracts from the chronology on the abc home page - 1995 September Jim Vint's abc2win version ___ announced for Windows 3.?. 1996 February First public version of abc2ps, a program that converts ABC directly to PostScript. 1997 January Version 1.6.1 of abc2mtex. This may have been the version used to write the first ABC syntax standard, 1998 March 3 Jean-Francois Moine's abcm2ps (multi-staff and multi-voice) variant of abc2ps was first announced. Will somebody please explain to me how abc2win was conflicting with abc2ps and the standard when neither existed when it was first released? Since it looks as if Jim introduced ! as a line break long before the introduction of the !! construct, why is this his fault? Was there any attempt at cooperation in those early days or was it enmity at first sight? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
Richard Robinson wrote - >It woul be a start. I fear the only real answer (or not even that) would be >for some masochistic altruist^H^H^H^H wonderful person to write a Windows >app providing similar functionality, to which people could be encouraged >to "upgrade" in order to solve compatability problems. Abacus 2.0.0 coming shortly. Not entirely altruistis, it will be shareware. Unfortunately, to really to solve compatability problems you need a masochistic altruist who will go back and remove all the line-break !s from all the tune files created with abc2win over the last eight years or so which might annoy the people who chose to put them in. (I'm not volunteering.) Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
John Chambers wrote - >The difference is somewhat minimal, though. The original text had as >example "K:D =c", which implies a key signature of two sharps but >with a natural written before all the c's. The natural reaction to >this is "If all the c's are natural, why put a c sharp in the >signature and then cancel it everywhere?" This is indeed rather >silly. It's better to just use ^f as the key signature. The difference seems real enough to me. If I specify an explicit key signature, I want it to appear at the beginning of the staff. Someone who wants global accidentals wants them scattered through the music. As far as I can see, global accidentals only make sense if you start from a key of C when they might make things clearer for learners by emphasising what a key signature means. Does anybody actually use them? I'd be happy to see them go. I think you suggested making it a run time option which seems reasonable. >OTOH, using >"K:Dmix=c" with ^f=c as the signature can be sensible, because that c >natural in the key signature instead of a sharp is an "advisory >accidental" that emphasizes the fact that the c is not sharp. I would have thought that this would confuse people unfamiliar with modes who will think that K:Dmix=c and K:Dmix are something different, especially since you also suggest things like K:Dphr^F where the ^F changes the key given by Dphr and implies that the mode is phrygian. K:_b_e^f tonic=D mode=freygish would be much clearer. >If we were designing abc from scratch, I'd agree. This is where I came in three (?) years ago, by using this as an example of how we were stuck with an unsatisfactory system when a little more thought and cooperation could have come up with a better way. >ABC is compact and cryptic, but easy to type. but is it easy to understand? There are more people trying to read it than type it. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Announcement: ABC 2.0.0 draft online
John Chambers wrote - >I've also found the phrase "explicit key signature" more useful than >"global accidentals", though I don't suppose that's a real big deal. These seem to me to be two separate things. Whem converted to conventional notation, an "explicit key signature" is the collection of sharps, naturals and flats you find at the start of the staff; "global accidentals" are accidentals applied to notes throughout the music. (Does anybody ever use these?) >Careful readers might note that I also dropped the old standard's >requirement that global accidentals be set off by spaces. Setting off by spaces is the only way to distinguish between these two different things in John's proposed notation. I would like to propose the addition of two new optional parameters to the K: command; tonic= and mode=. Using these, John's K:Amix=g could become - K:^f^c=g tonic=A mode=mixolydian which seems much clearer to me. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: chord lengths
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >This idea was proposed by Taral on this list on >Mon, 22 Oct 2001 08:43:51 -0700. > >It was found to be a good idea, and has been adopted by >abcm2ps and maybe some other programs as well. A lot of ideas are proposed on this list and discussed at great length. It is often hard to tell whether they have been taken up or not. >That's why Guido is now writing an uptodate standard. Let us hope he has more success than others have had over the last few years. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: chord lengths
Henrik Norbeck wrote - >Bryan Creer wrote about the & symbol: >> Did anyone outside the abcm2ps community know >> about this until now. If another developer had started using >> & for their pet idea we'd have the same sort of conflict. > >It was discussed on this list before it was implemented in abcm2ps. When was that? >I remember well having read about it a couple of months ago. I'm tempted to requote what Phil said. I too have vaguely heard of it but didn't realise it had been implemented. I probably thought "It's not in the standard so I don't need to worry about it." Does every new developer have to trawl through the entire abcusers' archive and the documentation of all 83 programmes mentioned on Frank Nordberg's list to find out if a symbol has been used? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re:Was: Re: ABC examples with bang?
Phil Taylor wrote - > That's a classic example of everything we don't like about abc2win. > The VMP files contain not only bangs, but every garbage variant > of abc you can think of, and consequently are unusable to any other > program unless you do a considerable amount of editing first. It's > such a pity because the material is excellent. The VMP files are, indeed, a little eccentric. I use them as test files. ABC2NWC handles them without falling over and produces acceptable results. ABACUS takes them as they are and allows you to edit them and see the results immediately. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: chord lengths
Phil Taylor wrote - > I'm told that recent versions of abcm2ps use the & > operator to set the time point back to the beginning > of a bar so that an additional layer of notes can be > added. This sounds like a good idea, but I haven't > seen any detailed description of how it works. (and Irwin gave him the details.) This sounds like a really neat idea but isn't it the sort of thing that leads to the ! and !! debacle. Did anyone outside the abcm2ps community know about this until now. If another developer had started using & for their pet idea we'd have the same sort of conflict. Can developers please let the rest of the world know what they are planning? Bryan Creer P.S. Where does this "bang" thing come from? "!" was always called "shriek" when I were a lad. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABC examples with bang?
Guido said - >I've been unable to find ABC files with the much-talked-about bang (!) for >breaking lines. Could any good soul send me some examples? It's for >extending abcpp to deal with this beast. Well here's one for a start - X: 1 T:Black Boy. ASH.01 M:2/4 L:1/8 Q:200 S:Harrison & Wall MS,Ashover,Derbyshire,1762-75 R:Mixed O:England A:Derbyshire Z:vmp.Chris Partington K:A A2 c/B/A/G/ | Acea | gbed | cA2B |ce^df | eg2e | fa g/f/e/^d/ | e2 E2 :|! :e=g2f | f/e/d/c/ d2 | B d2 f | e/d/c/B/ c2 | A c2 e | d/c/B/ A/ GB | Ed c/B/A/G/ | A2 A,2 :|]! M:6/8 L:1/4 K:D |:A/ |dd/ cd/|e/f/e/ e/f/g/ |dd/ cd/ |e/c/A/ AA/| dd/ cd/ |! e/f/d/ e/f/g/ |a/f/d/ g/e/c/ |dd/ d:|| :e/ |ff/ f/d/f/ |gg/ g/e/g/ |! ff/ f/d/f/ |e/c/A/Ag/| f/a/f/ d/e/f/ |g/b/g/ e/f/g/ |a/f/d/ g/e/c/ |dd/ d:|] For more of the same, go to the Village Music Prolect site at - http://www.performance.salford.ac.uk/research/vmp/Index.htm and click on The Manuscript Room. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] bloody ! again
John Chambers wrote - >BTW, a year or so back, I had my tune finder's search bot count the >tunes that seemed to come from abc2win. > >Maybe I should revive that code and do another count ... Could you count the tunes that use "!!" ? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Bert Van Vreckem wrote - >Well Bryan, I'm afraid I can't even use it. I'm one of them Linux people... When I've made my fortune from the Windows version I'll see about rewriting for other platforms. (Or employ somebody else to do it.) There's not much point in me providing the source code because it's in Visual Basic (and anyway, it's MINE). Skink works in a similar way doesn't it? Somebody else was working on the same sort of idea a few months ago. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] abc2win
Irwin Oppenheim wrote - >As far as I could check, the source code of abc2win has >not been released. So how could we do that? Well, you could try being nice to Jim Vint and inviting him to join in the standards process. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Bernard Hill wrote - >I hope you are not implying that software sold by shareware methods is >not as good as that sold off-the-shelf? It's probably better in some ways. For an analogy, if you buy your vegetables from your neighbour who's grown them in his back garden they are probably better than the ones from the supermarket but you will tolerate the occasional caterpillar and soil on the roots. Really, I was just covering my own backside. I implied that because I would like some payment for my efforts I would be more thorough than if I was giving the software away but I have limited resources and, with the best will in the world, I can't guarrantee that it will be bug free. When I have built my software publishing empire, I'll be able to afford teams of full time testers but while I'm one man in my back bedroom, the odd glitch might slip through. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] bloody ! again
I know it is fasionable to slag off abc2win on this list (and, obviously, I'm not too keen on it or I wouldn't be writing Abacus) but can we get a little historical perspective? >From Chris Walshaw's history of ABC on his abc home page - >The real explosion in interest came when Jim Vint released his package abc2win >in September 1995. The tool was taken up by a large number of the members of >IRTRAD-L and abc's of tunes started appearing regularly. More recently (in February >1996) Michael Methfessel released abc2ps... and from ABC Music Notation: History written by a certain John Chambers - >1995 > September Jim Vint's abc2win version ___ announced for Windows 3.?. >1997 January Version 1.6.1 of abctmtex This may have been the version used to >write the first ABC syntax standard, first as a narrative description, and then in BNF >format by Henrik Norbeck. There is no mention that I can find of when the !...! notation was introduced or when standard 1.7.6 was released as a draft but it looks as if abc2win has a prior claim on "!". I don't see how Jim Vint can be accused of "gratuitous violations" of a standard that didn't even exist. The fact is that both "!" as a line break and "!...!" are in use so let's develop a no blame culture and work out how to get round it. More to the point, can we try and work out a system to make sure we all know what others are doing so this sort of thing doesn't happen in the future? Bryan Creer
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Phil Taylor wrote - > That's the problem with live editing. The parser has to be > absolutely bullet-proof, as the user can hit it with absolutely > any combination of symbols. There is really no way you can > test it enough either. That's one reason why I kept BarFly > free for several years while under development - I needed the > whole community of users to use it and tell me about the bugs > in order to get it to its current state. I must admit that I have thought "If I give Abacus away free I don't have to worry so much about how good it is. I'll let other people find the bugs." That's more or less what I did with Abacus 1.0.0. I've done a lot of work on the next release so I think I'm entitled to a little recompense. I'm not saying there will be no errors but we are talking shareware not big software house. Bryan Creer By the way, I don't seem to be getting Phil Taylor's postings direct, just quotes in other people's. Is this happening to anyone else? To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Abacus Run-Time Error 70
Don wrote - >Someone was speaking of errors, and I just found that I can consistently >cause a Run-time error by following these steps: > >1. Open an existing file. >2. Click the 'Full ABC' button, which opens the Full ABC window and listing. >3. Close the Full ABC window with the Windows 'X' button in the upper right >corner (What does Microsoft call those buttons anyway? I've >forgotten...) This immediately produces an Abcus error box stating >"Run-time error '70': Permission denied". >4. Click the 'OK' button in the error box (only choice), and Abacus >immediately closes. Fixed in the new release. I'm developing under Windows 98 and didn't find this until a friend reported it on their XP machine. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Irwin Oppenheim said - >On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> That's exactly what Abacus does. Version 1 is >> available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/ but hang >> around, maybe just for a few days, and version 2 will >> be out. > >Seems to be a nice idea! Only too bad that when I made >a typing mistake, your application crashed with an >"Error #5" and no option to save my work... Could you send me details? If you can tell me exactly what that typing mistake was, I'll do my best to fix it. and - >The same >happened when I tried to read the Readme through the >Help menu. Worrying. I've changed the way I do this in the next release so perhaps it will go away. (Plze!) >and - I take it that there is no support for multiple voices >[v:] or lyrics [w:] ? Not yet; w: because that comes under "future developments" and V: because, like many others, I'm waiting for a single coherent specification of how it should work. I have my preferences, but I'll settle for something else if I know it's going to be generally accepted. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Free notation program for Windows - let's write it...
Bert Van Vreckem wrote - >However, a 'live' >conversion to sheet music while I'm typing ABC would be nice. But very >difficult to implement, I imagine. That's exactly what Abacus does. Version 1 is available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/ but hang around, maybe just for a few days, and version 2 will be out. This will be shareware; price to be decided. After the hundreds of hours I've spent writing it, I think I'm entitled to a little beer money. I've no moral objection to being payed as a musician either if the opportunity arises. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: My point of view on the abc standard
Emerging from a long hibernation to say how glad I am to see that a great deal of sense is being talked about the possibilities for a new standard; especially by some of the newer members of this list. I am not am abcm2ps user but, as far as I understand it, Jean-François is doing brilliant work in that area. I have had a look at Guido's abc manual and, while there are things I am not happy about, I think it is an excellent piece of work although, as he puts it himself, rather abcm2ps-centric. However, (those that know me will have seen that coming) I am rather concerned by the following statement from Guido - >In my humble opinion, when we have an ABC typesetting and an ABC player >application that are powerful, free, multiplatform, and compatible with >each other, we automatically have a 'de facto' standard. At that point, >other applications will have better try and follow the new standard for >their own good. In similar vein, Ulf recently said - > There is no way to isolate a standard from the software that uses it I fundamentally disagree with this. I believe that it is imperative that the standard and the software that uses it should be isolated. A quick glance at Frank Nordberg's abc applications list shows 83 different pieces of software; it seems unfair to expect all the other developers to follow the lead dictated by one development strand "for their own good". There is no need for one piece of software to be cross platform nor for it to cater for all users. Specialist Mac software such as BarFly can take advantage of the particular characteristics of their machine. No individual programme needs to implement the whole standard. Programmes aimed at western folk musicians may not need some of the complexities of classical music (or Klezmer or Persian). It is that abstract entity ABC itself that needs to be universal. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Buddha Buck wrote - >Based on the >"first note medody" idea that's been bandied around, that would imply >that the melody was [d6]2B2B2, which would sound like: > >V:1 >d6 >V:2 >z2B2B2 > >which is rather too polyphoneous as a melody for my tastes. Well I'm sorry about that because that's precisely what I was trying to convey when I first posted the example. It represents one bar in 3/4 time. The melody is d6 and the Bs (B flats in fact, since the piece is in F) are harmony. It is a real example from a piece called Holmwood by the great English concertina player Arthur Clements. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: XML music representation
Have a look at this - http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/xmlMusic.html Bryan To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Valid fractions
Henrik Norbeck wrote - >Maybe we should have an "obfuscated abc" competition... I think we've had one for several years now. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Abacus (again) and sound cards.
Henrik Norbeck wrote - >You must have some sort of "preferences" dialog to let the user >select which midi device to use. There are Windows functions for >getting a list of midi devices. You must open the midi device >anyway, so just specify the correct device to open according to the >user's choice. Please bear in mind that this is the first release of a programme that isn't setting out to be particularly sophisticated and that I am on a learning curve here. I use a multimedia control which allows me to specify a Device Type of "Sequencer" but not a particular device as far as I can see. A quick look at the VB documentation gives me no clue as to how I could do this. If you have any more specific advice I would be very grateful. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Abacus (again) and sound cards.
Eric Forgeot wrote - >I have two sound cards on my system and it has revealed that >Abacus doesn't follow the sound properties in the MSwindows >configuration : I have the second one by default for playing >samples / midi but Abacus plays only with the first one. I'm afraid I don't have the technical knowledge to help you there. Abacus generates a simple midi file and sends it to the Device Type "Sequencer" which is usually the sound card. What Windows does with this is beyond my control. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Ooops! Clicked the wrong button. Starting again - Frankly Laurie, I can't be bothered to argue the minutiae of which way is best. What I consider most important is that we have a concensus. We seemed to have one before you came back from Sidmouth. If you can persuade everybody else that "shortest" is best then I am quite happy to go along with it. Until then I am not changing my code (having changed it once) just because, in your opinion, "first listed" is a bad way of doing it. As I said before, wake me up when a decision has been made. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Frankly Laurie I can't be bothered to argue the minutiae To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Laurie Griffiths has demonstrated that he has read the whole "suggestions for [A4A2] notation" thread by quoting selectively from it. For some reason he omitted - Wil Macaulay I agree with that ["first-listed note" ] - the notator presumably knows which is the melody note, and that's the only scheme which gives him/her the ability to specify that without extending the language. Phil Taylor I'm inclined to agree with Bryan here. I haven't paid much attention to this previously (it's not common in abc tunes, and I've never wanted to do it in any of my own transcriptions). Using the first-listed note is certainly the most flexible rule, and leaves the decision up to the transcriber. He did quote - >I saw suggestions for >1. "highest note prevails" That was my original idea which I gave up in the light of the following discussion. >4. None of these (Phil: "Using unequal notes in chords just leads to too >many ambiguities"). > >A reply from Bryan saying "Noteworthy Composer does it..." Yes. Noteworthy Composer uses unequal notes in chords. (That was the question.) On examination, it appears to use shortest note counts. >Henrik voted for "shortest prevails" and gave an example of a fiddle tune >(Målargubbens brudpolska) which requires "shortest prevails". But when it was pointed out that "first-listed note" could handle this tune said - >Now that I understand what you mean I agree that "first-listed >note" is the best alternative. but has now changed his mind. >Bryan said 'the default behaviour without a following number would need to >be the "first-listed note" but did not explain his reasoning At the time (oh so briefly) "first-listed note" was the concensus view. >Bryan said "I think it needs to be recognised that the [...] construct isn't >going to cover all possibilities. Anything more complex will need separate >voices, possibly combined on one staff." but did not produce any counter >example to demonstrate the point. I'm sorry, but I would have thought that it was self evident that the [...] construct cannot cope with the same level of complexity as separate voices. >The printed piano music that I have seen seems to reply on "shortest >prevails" (it often also uses beams and other layout clues to connect up >notes into voices but when these fail it falls back on "shortest wins"). Would you care to produce an example to demonstrate the point? >I'm still in favour of "shortest". Fine. If that is the concensus view, I'll go along with it but a number of intelligent, experienced abc users have gone for "first-listed note". Wake me up when a decision has been made. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Henrik Norbert wrote - >Sorry, Bryan, on second thoughts and after Laurie's mails I >changed my mind. I'd be interested to know why since Laurie doesn't seem to have given much in the way of reasons for his view except that that is the way he has started developing Muse-2. Laurie Griffiths wrote - >Can someone explain why "first note determines length" is better than >"shortest determines length". A counter example that doesn;t work the other >way would be nice, especially if it were not contrived. I know you've been away Laurie but this has been discussed at some length for over a week now. A variety of people have given their reasons and examples. Perhaps if you would care to read the whole thread you could come up with specific reasons why you disagree and why you think "shortest determines length" is better. I am prepared to change Abacus to follow a concensus view, (I've already done so once) but we no longer seem to have a concensus. I'll only change my code a again for a concensus that looks as if it's going to last more than a few days. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Jack Campin wrote - >> OK, I'm with you and it's growing on me. It would be necessary for >> something I saw the other day which would need to be written >> [d6z2]2[B2G2][B2G2] although there would still need to be intelligence >> within the programme to recognise that the two Bs were not melody notes. > >Do you mean the B's are tied or printed as one note? It's a bit difficult to explain without diagrams and waving your arms around. [d6z2]2[B2G2][B2G2] represents one bar of 3/4 time. The d6 is a dotted minim over a crotchet rest. The [B2G2]s are two separate (untied) crotchet length chords. A classic Dum Ching Ching rhythm with the Dum sustained for the whole bar. Your absorptive-tie idea strikes me as a less than intuitive way of representing this. [d6z2][B2G2][B2G2] would work for "shortest note". [z2d6][B2G2][B2G2] would work for "first listed note" and "shortest note". None of them make sense for "first listed note = melody note". Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Henrik Norbert wrote - >So two of the most used* abc programs, Muse and AbcMus, both >use the "shortest determines length" method, which seems to >work well. I've had no complaints so far. Have you, Laurie? Do we >really have to change it? But a few days ago he wrote - >Now that I understand what you mean I agree that "first-listed >note" is the best alternative. > >BTW, AbcMus currently implements the "shortest note" alternative, >but I could easily change it to "first-listed note". I had launched Abacus using "highest note" and some people raised objections. After some discussion in which the case was put for both shortest and longest I thought we had arrived at a consensus for "first-listed note" on the grounds that this made no assumptions about the music at all. I changed the development version of Abacus accordingly. If there really is a better case for "shortest note", then fair enough but I would like to see a definite agreement before I bother to change it again. "Better case", as far as I am concerned, means what is best for the users and for abc as a whole, not what is least trouble for the developers. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Abacus printing problem
Eric Forgeot wrote - >I've reported in the past a print problem for abacus ... Unfortunately, I can only test with the printer I've got. I'll enquire amongst my beta testers, but at the moment, Eric is the only person reporting problems. Anybody else? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Starling wrote - > ... I had one question. What is a "melody note"? I have always > known melodies as defined by context, and subject to much > interpretation, rather than being defined by a specific type of > notation. Two different people can call a section of music melody or > accompaniment, and both may have valid opinions. I'm curious, what in >| your implementation requires certain notes to be selected as "melody"? >| Or am I totally misinterpreting the use of the phrase "melody note"? Melody note does seem to be an abstract and somewhat subjective concept which is why I think that "first-listed note = chord duration" is the only practical proposition. John Chambers wrote - >In the context of an abc discussion, there's a very practical meaning >of "melody note". There are a number of abc "player" programs (that >write MIDI or go directly to a sound card) that are monophonic. That >is, they can only play one note at a time. When faced with a chord, >such a program makes a choice of which note to play. As far as I've >heard, all of them make the same choice: the first note. In the >current discussion, this is what is meant by "the melody note". This is a best guess under the circumstances and is quite likely to be wrong. Jim Vint says he has changed abc2win to remove the requirement for chord notes to be in ascending order but there are a lot of tunes out there that will already have done it that way so, for these, first note will almost certainly not be melody note. In their position, I would have gone for highest note. Since different length notes in a chord are rare, "first note gives duration" will usually be right for existing abc. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Starling wrote - >We should probably establish that there is a difference between >[G2A4E2] and [G2A2E2] if we're going to standardize by the rule "first >listed note = melody note". Something like "The melody note in a >chord determines the default duration, but durations specified >within the chord override this setting. The duration of the melody >note determines when the next note begins, but the durations within >the chord specify when each note should end." I'm afraid that you have come in part way through this discussion. The proposal is that each individual note should have its specified duration which left the question open as to what defined the overall length of the chord, i.e. time before the start of the next note or chord. In my recently released Abacus (available from www.abacusmusic.co.uk) I had implemented "highest note specifies duration". It became apparent that this was unsatisfactory in some cases and after some discussion a consensus was arrived at that first listed note should specify the duration. During this discussion, duration of chord and duration of melody note were taken as synonymous but it now seems that this is not necessarily so. In your own example, [G2A4E2][F2D2] the melody note would appear to be the A with a duration of 4 while the duration of the first chord is 2 and the F in the second chord is not a melody note. What I meant by "packing two bits of information into one bit of data" was that "first listed note = melody note" and "first listed note = chord length" are two different and possibly conflicting bits of information. Er.. did that make sense? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Starling (?) wrote - >It might be better to have the duration of the chord >equal to the shortest duration within the chord. That way >[L:1/4][A4G2E2] is implicitly equal to a half note, just as in >keyboard music the shortest note in the chord is considered the length >before the next note begins. Whoops! Back to the dawing board. I think the assumption in the earlier part of this discussion was that melody note length = chord length so under the "first-listed note" rule, this was both the melody note and defined the chord length. Basic rule of data design - don't pack two bits of information into one bit of data. One of them has to go. Since there is already a lot of abc out there that won't be obeying any of these rules, (eg abc2win's ascending order) I don't think "first listed note = melody note" can be relied on so I'd go for "first listed note = chord length". The above example could be written [L:1/4][G2A4E2]. I think it needs to be recognised that the [...] construct isn't going to cover all possibilities. Anything more complex will need separate voices, possibly combined on one staff. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
John Chambers wrote - >Well, I can think of a simple example of how one might use this: > [A4G2E2]2[F2D2] >This would have a 4-count melody note above the [G2E2][F2D2] chord >change. With L:1/8, the first chord could be drawn on a single stem, >with an open oval for the A4 note and filled ovals for the G2 and E2 >notes. This sort of notation isn't at all unusual in keyboard music. >The abc seems quite readable to me. OK, I'm with you and it's growing on me. It would be necessary for something I saw the other day which would need to be written [d6z2]2[B2G2][B2G2] although there would still need to be intelligence within the programme to recognise that the two Bs were not melody notes. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0
>>I can't see the point of taking up >>valuable >>space on the screen for something you aren't using all the time. > >But for browsing several tunes it could be usefull. Maybe if this >subwindow would stay "on top" and doesn't disappear if we load a >tune (so we could move it at a corner of the screen), then we >could choose another tune and so on. (And eventually close it when >we don't want it any longer with the "x" on the top) > > >>I think all you are asking is for Full ABC to be full screen. > >In fact it's for full abc not to use a subwindows (in option) : >for example AbcMus allows to change in the options "full edit of >abc (called here raw edit) is default". But for those who prefer, >it's always possible to have a more user friendly header editor >(like the default editing in Abacus). Well, at the moment, Abacus doesn't do anything with more than one tune at a time (although it may in future releases) so there is no point in being able to select several (in fact you can't). It occurs to me that you may be working at a higher screen resolution if you talk about moving things into a corner of the screen. At 800 * 600 there aren't any unused corners. Perhaps I should look into different behaviour for different screen resolutions. >An other thing strange I noticed was the scrollbar at the side of >the partition area didn't follow the general scrollbars >adjustement in MSwindows, I have them very thin, but this >scrollbar wasn't. On my screen, it looks like every other scrollbar I've ever seen and looks OK if I increase the screen resolution. What settings do you have? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Wil Macaulay wrote - >BTW, Abacus worked pretty well for me, except that >it crashed when I tried to change instruments (WinNT wkstation 4.0) >running as a non-admin user. Would this be Runtime error 70? This seems to happen on every version of Windows except 98. I think I've fixed it but I don't have any means to test it until I can get access to a friend's machine in a few days. (Or stop being so tight fisted and go out and get XP.) >Also, I found the 'double open' >a little confusing at first, I'd rather see 'open' as file open and >a different menu selection to pick a tune from an already open file. Yes, a number of people have found it a bit strange. I'm looking at rearranging it along those lines. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : suggestions for [A4A2] notation
Phil Taylor wrote - >BarFly handles chords with notes of unequal >length by padding out the shorter notes with rests when playing, >so it's "longest note prevails". But Jack Campin (a BarFly user) had said - >but the semantics I'd need in every instance >where I've wanted it would be that the *shortest* note counts. PT - >The chord gets drawn on a single >stem though, so if you have an eighth and a sixteenth in the same >chord the result looks like two sixteenths, as they're both drawn >on a stem with two tails. Not what the writer asked for. >The way to deal with this, I suppose, is >to draw two separate notes with tails in opposite directions, but >then what do you do if there is more than two notes in the chord? That's what Abacus does and having just had a play with it, seems to handle it fairly well. If you have a sandwhich (middle note shorter or longer than top and bottom) and all notes are a quarter or less it gets in a bit of a twist but how often does that get done? (And how would conventional notation deal with it?) >On the whole, I'd prefer it if people >either used as many voices as necessary to represent the music, but since there's no agreement on how to implement voices >or used ties, i.e. [B2D2-]D2 instead of [B2D4]. which would sound the same but look different when converted to notation. >Using unequal notes in chords just leads to too many ambiguities. Noteworthy Composer does it and I'm basically cribbing what it does. Does anybody know what other packages do? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Jack Campi wrote - >This is a very good idea, but the semantics I'd need in every instance >where I've wanted it would be that the *shortest* note counts. So Eric wants longest note counts, Jack wants shortest note counts, I went for highest note counts and suggested first note counts This could be tricky. >This is more reliable than hoping you don't get pedal notes above the melody. This sounds more like two voices on the same staff than chords. >If you insist on the first note for >counting you're probably going to clash with other uses of note order >within chords, e.g. the way BarFly uses it to let you specify ties or >slurs to and from notes within the chord. Terrifying! But, again, it sounds more like two voices on the same staff. >> Does any existing software attach any significance to the order of >> notes in a chord? > >ABC2Win does too. But there, it's a bug. This doesn't seem to have any musical significance but is just to make his processing easier. I don't see why the progress of abc should be held up for the sake of one piece of software that doesn't appear to be under development anymore. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Steve Mansfield wrote - >Windows XP (Pro) includes msvbvm60.dll as standard. I hadn't realised that. I'd better raid my piggy bank and drag myself into the 21st century. Does XP(Home) include it? >On the principle that most users confident enough to download a >programme and install it will know what version of Windows they're >running (), I wouldn't like to bet on it. >'if you're running Windows 95 or 98 you'll also need to download this >file'. > >Which is what Jim does for Abc2Win (for vbrun300.dll) IIRC. Which I, as a moderately experienced computer user, found off putting. "Naaah. Can't be bothering with that." Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
I had said - >Sounds like a bug in Windows to me. Don Whitener said - >I wonder... I get exactly the same presentation. The application runs at >full (real full) screen, covering even the task bar, and the middle restore >button is grayed out and inactive. I have no other application that does this. You've got it, Don. I don't see why that should affect the task bar if it's marked always on top so it still sounds like a Windows bug to me but enabling the restore button gets round it. I always use Auto Hide on the task bar and that works fine. Fixed in next release. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Use of .abc extension
Something that has cropped up during the testing of Abacus is the use of the .abc extension. A friend, not unreasonably, double clicked on an abc file expecting it to start my programme. What they actually got was ABC Flowcharter; a programme for drawing flowcharts produced by Micrografx Inc. of Dallas, Texas. This is disgraceful; flowcharts were already considered old fashioned when I started out in IT twenty five years ago. Can Steve Allen sue? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re : Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Eric Forgeot wrote -
>Nice program ! I like when there are new abc applications, so I
>can complete my collection :)
Thanks Eric and thanks for the comments, some of which I agree with and
others not.
>ACTION: SystemFile: "C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MSVBVM60.DLL"
>(File currently on disk was already up to date)
>
>so this *huge* file was not compulsory to download.
I would have thought most people wouldn't have it and those with less
computer expertise would be put off by lots of technical jargon along the
lines of "If you've got this file do this but if not do that." Its only 8 or
9 minutes to download.
>- It's a pity it doesn't support "drag n drop"
>- ark, it doesn't support either command like ctrl+A for "select
>all"
Give us a break! This is only the first release.
>- it crashes from time to time. ("execution error 13. Incompatible
>type" or something like that)
>There are several reasons, but I find among others I had a tune
>with X:12b . I know it was a silly idea,
Well, Garbage In Garbage Out but, you're right, it shouldn't crash the
programme. Fixed in next release.
>- when you start Abacus, it comes in a sort of full screen mode
>and hide the MSwindows taskbar and you have to resize Abacus (like
>for some old windows 3.11 applications) : ok, it's a minor pb, but
>a bit annoying.
Sounds like a bug in Windows to me.
>- there is not shortcuts for play / pause / stop
Be patient.
>- "redraw score" is not always active (it becomes active after a
>print). The fact that Abacus is displaying notes when you type
>them in in abc implies maybe the drawback the display is quite
>"loose" : I mean if you display music, and then an other
>application is coming in front of the display window, the notes
>disappear, and you have to redraw them. I type a space in the abc
>and then the partition come back, but it would be great not to
>have lost it.
I'd taken the policy that Redraw Score was only enabled if the programme
needed you to do it so that if it was enabled then you should probably do it.
I'll change it to permanently on and issue a prompt.
>IT SUPPORTS NOTATIONS like [Af2],
>... I don't know why it's
>not in the standard, with for example a rule saying that in such a
>notation the longest note prevails in the counting of the times,
>for example
I've gone for highest note prevails in the counting of the times so you can
do things like -
X:1
T:The Cotillion
C:Trad (Bosham Band)
M:4/4
L:1/8
K:G
[G4D4][d4B,4]|[B2D4]AB [G2B,4]AB|[c2E4]B2[A2D4]G2|[FD4]GAF [D3A,3]D|
Perhaps it should be by length of the first note in the chord. Does any
existing software attach any significance to the order of notes in a chord?
>- I didn't managed to print scores with my HP DeskJet 520 Printer.
It works OK on my Epson Stylus 440.
>- The few I saw of the printing is that the staff lines are too thick.
A bit chunky perhaps. I'll look into it.
>- I would maybe have prefered the playlist selector on a window
more accessible (at the side of the main window, instead of a
"subwindow")
We'll have to agree to disagree. I can't see the point of taking up valuable
space on the screen for something you aren't using all the time.
>- I didn't tested to load and save tunes I have with %midi
>commands, or special commands for abcm2ps (like !alcoda!), I just
>hope it won't suppress what it can't display but it doesn't seem
>to be the case.
It shouldn't have any trouble with %midi commands, They are just comments and
will be ignored. Things like !alcoda! are not universally accepted (or
universally loved) and, in my experience, far less commonly used than
abc2win's use of ! as a line break. if any proper standard is decided, I'll
give it another look.
>For example I could be good to
>have the possibility to switch between a "full abc" window and the
>other for the standard editing (even if I like the facilities
>given by the editing fields for time signature, tempo etc., I'm
>used to create and manipulate the whole abc text for a tune.) So
>the field for editing abc could be even larger.
I think all you are asking is for Full ABC to be full screen. No problem.
>The fact that you have to confirm in Abacus that for example you
>don't want to store the tune, before coming to a subwindow, slow
>down the process to select quickly a tune. To give warnings is
>good, but it would be nice if we could turn them off (for example
>if I'm creating some tunes and I fear to loose data I can turn the
>warning on, and if I'm just playing with tunes I don't need them)
Good idea. I'll do that.
>Apart for the fact it's heavy to download (a compact program is
>often more popular), I'll recommend Abacus to newcomers in abc.
Thanks. (It's only a few minutes.)
In a later posting -
>I know AbcMus and Abacus are quickly converting the abc to midi
>before reading the midi file, so there is not this sort of
>problem.
Yes, that's what I do. My understanding is that there is so much operating
system in the way tha
[abcusers] Abacus 1.0.0 launch
Abacus 1.0.0 is now available from http://www.abacusmusic.co.uk/. Note that this is not my old AOL website. Abacus is an abc editor/player/printer programme - Windows only I'm afraid. Its main claims to fame are that it plays through the soundcard with complete choice of General Midi instruments and displays the score as you edit the abc. The print quality is adequate without being outstanding. The programme is still under development so no guarantees are offered that it is complete or bug free. Constructive (and politely worded) comments are welcome. Destructive, opinonated or downright rude ones will be ignored. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Phil Taylor wrote - >I think you guys are actually arguing from the same side of the fence. Thanks Phil we needed that and thank you for a posting which I was largely able to agree with. After being reprimanded by a Scotsman for something I hadn't said about English farmworkers I did rather lose the plot for a while. I was beginning to wonder why Jack was trying to prove me wrong by telling me things I agreed with. I will not get drawn any further into whether traditional singers thought in terms of modes before the folklorists "discovered" them. It is far too big a subject and, I realise, now that I've calmed down even more, totally irelevant to the point I was making. The actual question was "Did they use the terminology of the Rennaisance modes in the practice or notation of their music?" As far as I am aware they did not. One of the major uses of abc is to preserve and distribute music from old manuscripts (see the Village Music Project). Using the tonic/mode system misrepresents those collections and misleads the user. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Now that I've calmed down a bit I'll have another go. >I think you are underestimating the cultural sophistication of English >farmworkers by a VERY large margin. I'm not sure why saying that traditional singers could get all the information they needed from the music without having to read the label on the jar that says "A mixolydian" counts as underestimating their cultural sophistication. I would have thought it was more sophisticated. >Nearly all of them went to church, >and for most of the areas Sharp, Lloyd and Vaughan Williams collected >in, that church was the Church of England. With a tradition of choral >singing going back to Byrd, Tallis and Dunstable. Any really good singer >could expect to be noticed by the church organist and dragooned into the >choir, no matter if he spent Monday to Saturday digging ditches. So the >*practice* of Renaissance modality was general public knowledge. Are you saying that traditional music derives from the ecclesiastical and art music of the Renaissance? Isn't it just as likely to be the other way round? Couldn't it be that Renaissance scholars were doing exactly the same as twentieth century folklorists and saying "How do those ignorant peasants know the classical Greek modes?" then imposing them from the outside (and getting it wrong in the process)? > A good >singer is going to notice when similar phrases recur, even when the >contexts are as different as a doxology and a patriotic naval ballad, and >the recurrence is going to suggest using a similar intonation for both. Yes! They got that from listening to and performing the music. >So even in the absence of a theoretically explicit notion of octave >species, the richer notion of mode as comprising a set of cadential >formulae, and embracing both folk and liturgical music, would been hard >to avoid. The notion of mode may have been there (we do not know how they thought about their music) but if so, it came from within the tune. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: ABaCusMusic Web Site?
I just tried it and it seems to be available at the moment. AOL have been causing me a lot of grief and I will be taking my custom elsewhere soon. The new abc editor/player/printer programme is nearly finished and will be available shortly (honestly). Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
Jack Campin wrote - >I think you are underestimating the cultural sophistication of English >farmworkers by a VERY large margin. Nearly all of them went to church, >and for most of the areas Sharp, Lloyd and Vaughan Williams collected >in, that church was the Church of England. With a tradition of choral >singing going back to Byrd, Tallis and Dunstable. Any really good singer >could expect to be noticed by the church organist and dragooned into the >choir, no matter if he spent Monday to Saturday digging ditches. So the >*practice* of Renaissance modality was general public knowledge. A good >singer is going to notice when similar phrases recur, even when the >contexts are as different as a doxology and a patriotic naval ballad, and >the recurrence is going to suggest using a similar intonation for both. >So even in the absence of a theoretically explicit notion of octave >species, the richer notion of mode as comprising a set of cadential >formulae, and embracing both folk and liturgical music, would been hard >to avoid. I'm not sure whether to try and debate this in a calm and rational way or totally lose my rag. I have nothing but respect for the English farmworker. My father was one. I grew up in tied farm cottages. I am a descendant of those "ignorant peasants". I do not regard English rustics as a subject for academic scrutiny. That doesn't mean I grew up amongst traditional singers and musicians. That world was fading fast when I was a child, but I am familiar with the environment in which they lived. I know traditional singers. I know people who learnt from traditional singers and musicians. What they have in common is a love of the music. None of them would ever bother to look up what pi-3 meant if they couldn't remember. They don't have "a theoretically explicit notion of octave species" (whatever that may mean) but they knew a good tune. They knew what sounded right even if they didn't know the Greek word for it. They could sing the song without being told what the mode was. Music is what matters. All any notation system can give you is the notes. Everything else come from the heart not a computer algorithm. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Key/Mode algorithm
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. 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 To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE: Explicit key signatures
Jack Campin wrote - >As others have pointed out, the description of a tune purely by key >signature isn't complete unless you are using equal temperament; you >don't know the exact pitches of the notes unless you know the mode. As I have pointed out, the mode is in the tune and may vary as it goes along. I had always understood that the exact pitch of a note depended on its relationship to other notes and its context within the tune. It is a matter of performance and artistic judgement not simply the result of running a computer algorithm and, as others have pointed out, deviations from even temperament by traditional players do not necessarily follow obvious rules. That is why human performance will always surpass computers. While playing with just temperament might be an interesting programming exercise I hardly think it is a good reason to limit the development of abc. I don't want to go over the rest of his post in detail except to say that it is centred on the academic establishment view of traditional music and has little to do with the real people who left us this heritage. (I'm glad to discover that he doesn't think that ALL classically trained musicians are contemptible.) >See Lloyd's preface to the Penguin Book of English Folk Songs OK, not being a singer I missed that one. None of the EFDSS tune collections I have mention modes. Laurie Griffiths wrote - >That of course is stretching the phrase "knowing anything about" to breaking >point. They knew the scales and they knew how to harmonise them. They just >didn't know the Greek names. Shakespeare's Theorem applies: "A mode by any >other name will sound as sweet." Precisely the point I am making. They got all the information they needed from the notes of the tune. They could manage perfectly well without being told the Greek name for it. To force their music into the Renaissance modal system runs the risk of misrepresenting them just as much as forcing it into the major/minor system. I can easily imagine some academic saying "That's obviously meant to be Lydian but they've got it wrong." The notes they actually sang or played (if we have them) are the only certain truth. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE: Explicit key signatures
While surfing the net for more information about modes I came across this site - http://www.standingstones.com/modeharm.html which people might find interesting. I was particularly pleased to find this - >It was not until the early 20th century that researchers in traditional music >realized that traditional music used Renaissance modes. The pioneering >work of the likes of Cecil Sharp and Ralph Vaughan Williams was >greeted with statements along the lines of "How can you tell me that these >ignorant peasants are singing in the Mixolydian mode when some of our >finest music professors don't even know what it is?" The point being that the "ignorant peasants" were perfectly capable of singing their songs without knowing anything about modes. The modes were applied as decriptive classifications after the fact by middle class folklorists who were just the sort of classical musicians that some of the most dedicated supporters of modes on this list seem to despise. Cecil Sharp and Ralph Vaughan Williams don't seem to have convinced the English Folk Dance and Song Society who never seem to use modes in their published music. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Explicit key signatures
Phil Taylor wrote - >Even a wrong tonic+mode is better than nothing! I don't think I need to comment. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Explicit key signatures
Than you Phil Taylor for a sensibly argued case. A welcome change from the this-is-my-opinion-and-I'm-sticking-to-it attitude that has been prevalent lately. Unfortunately I didn't agree with any of it. He wrote - >In order to describe a piece of music completely, you need to >know any two of the tonic, mode and key signature. The key signature is sufficient alone. Tonic and mode are implicit in the tune. >Conventional musical notation gives only the key signature, which is >inadequate, and has led to the practice in classical music of including >the tonic in the title of the piece. I have been taking classical oboe lessons for three years and have never been given a piece with the tonic in the title. I think this practice died out years if not centuries ago. One of the tests my teacher occasionally springs on me is to put a piece in front of me and ask for the key or give me a key and ask for the key signature. >If the law was changed to make IOUs legal tender It was. A long time ago. They're called banknotes. The economy suffers if there are a lot of counterfeits in circulation which, in abc, there are. People are blatantly passing off Edorian tunes as K:D. >Please note Bryan, that I'm not objecting to this suggestion on the >grounds that it's likely to be popular Perhaps not; it's a subtle distinction. You ARE saying that you think a large number of people are not that concerned about having the tonic and mode and that the explicit key signature format would be widely used. You think that they should be prevented form doing so because you know better. My concern is that they will still find it simpler to say K:D to get two sharps because it's easier than K:^f^c. Perhaps it's tonic alone that should be outlawed (except that we can't of course, because it's too late.) >Finally, if we want to make life easier for people transcribing >from manuscript by permitting them to use an incomplete description >of key, perhaps we should do the same thing for those transcribing >by ear, and permit them to specify only the tonic. After all, >any competent musician who was familiar with the tradition concerned >should easily be able to figure out where to put the necessary >accidentals in order to make sense of the tune. But the user might not be familiar with the tradition so you'd have to include a sound file. In that case you wouldn't need a tonic (or the notes for that matter). abc software requires the K: command so the resulting abc would be something like - X:2312841276 T:The Pig and the Parlour Maid C:Trad N:From the playing of Gilbert "Hairy" Scrotum F:PigMaid.wav K: I don't think I'll be implementing that just yet. (Actually, come to think of it, it wouldn't be that difficult.) Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
John Chambers wrote - >But if the software doesn't agree on what pieces >of the notation mean, it can sorta interfere with getting >the music across. I've been thinking along the same lines myself for quite a while. >And abc has a quandary that's common in all other kinds of >computer communications: You find something that can't be >expressed using the standard language. What do you do? Discuss it with as many interested people as you can. Listen to their ideas and objections. Modify your proposal accordingly. Arrive at a consensus and only then implement your ideas. Isn't that what this list is for? >Start with a rule "Any >notation you don't understand should be ignored (perhaps >with a warning but not a fatal error message)". Not always possible when different sets of non-standard notation impinge on each other such as the use of ! and the various incompatible versions of the V: command. >When a small crowd finds something >that seems to solve the problem, they present what they've >done to the general population. And a lot of people like it so it gets used and becomes part of the system. Unfortunately it screws things up for other people who may cry "Wouldn't it have been better if " But it's too late. The damage is done. >Eventually most of the new ideas get incorporated into the standard language Not any more they don't. The standard hasn't been updated for several years and there is no mechanism to do so. >Alternatively, they don't get incorporated, and you get a >collection of dialects or a family of very similar but >incompatible languages. Yes, that's what's happening. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
Wil Macaulay said - >Yes, it would be 'better and less misleading' for the abc user community that >understands: > 1. 2 sharps Good. > 2. they are in the 'standard' place Not sure what you mean. > 3. E Dorian means E is the tonic. Of course it does but does K:D mean D is the tonic or just that the writer wanted two sharps? >Me, personally, just speaking for myself, I can play in (for example) G Dorian >without having to remember which flats are there, but I have to puzzle it out >if I see a tune written out with one flat and try to figure out which of the possible >tonics I should be thinking about. So, presumably, you never use books of conventional music notation which (apart from a few baroque pieces I've come across) never tell you the tonic. Very few of them give the mode either, certainly none of the collections of English traditional music that I have and not many of the Irish collections (Krassen's edition of O'Neill for instance). Those that do give the mode give it AS WELL AS not INSTEAD OF the key signature. If you have trouble working out the tonic from the notes of the tune does that mean we shouldn't rely on the accuracy of any tune you post? Of course, a lot of people know less than you do about modes so their postings will be even less reliable. >So therefore my, personal >speaking for myself selfish little opinion clearly shouldn't count. Everybody's opinion counts but it would always be nice to know the reasons behind that opinion and that that opinion was open to modification in the face or a reasoned argument. >A a positive comment, I don't have any objection to a notation that allows >the number of flats or sharps to be explicitly notated without tonic information, Thank you. That's all I've ever asked for. (In this context.) >I just have an objection to the statement or implication that that is somehow >wrong or misleading to the entire abc user community to allow tonic and modes to be >specified as a a first order definition. I wasn't aware that anybody had made such a statement. There are those (fortunately a diminishing number) who do not wish to allow the use of an explicit key signature and feel that the use of the tonic should be "compulsory". I have an objection to that. >Skink allows Dmaj or Dion as synonyms for D, if you like. You are assuming D means D major which in the case of K:D % E dorian it clearly did not. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
John Chambers wrote - >For example, recently I saw a line like: K:D % EDorian It could be that the author was using software that only allowed the tonic as shorthand for the key signature and didn't support modes (such programmes have been known to exist). He should be praised for adding the extra information in the only way available to him. Henrik Norbeck wrote - >Getting back to the abc, I would prefer to have the notation >K:^f ^c to K:D >because it simply means what it says and does not imply anything >else. Then you're free to place whatever you like in a comment >afterwards K:^f^c % "Irish" e minor I would just like to say that the summer here in England has been wet, grey and miserable so far but today the sun is shining which is just as well since I'm playing out of doors. I shall do so with a song in my heart. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE : tune finder
Eric Forgeot wrote - >I thought it was a good idea to use 2 K: fields to write both the >mode and the key, but this solution of K:D % EDorian is maybe >better. Will you forgive me if I use it in the future ? :) Wouldn't it be better and less misleading to be able to say K:^f^c % EDorian or better still have separate actual fields rather than a comment to hold the tonic and mode? Just a thought. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] ABC source code license?
John Chambers wrote- >There is a problem applying the GPL to music. The way it's phrased, >it really does apply mostly to software. Of course, that was what it >was designed for. I was recently browsing in a garden centre when I found a lavender with a label saying something to the effect that it was illegal to propagate this plant without a license obtained under the terms of the GNU General Public License. Well, I suppose DNA is coding. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Yawn. Sigh. Groan
Laurie Griffiths wrote - >Who ever wrote "I want it my way and no other.". Nobody, right? You just made it up, right? Nobody said it. I made it up. It was my ironic precis of John Chambers's assertion that - >The opposition was essentially from >people who didn't need it and didn't see why abc should be cluttered >up with things that only other people need. > >This is, of course, completely standard human behavior. It was not intended to represent anything that you or anyone else had said. If you think my precis is innacurate, please feel free to say so. If you disagree with John's assessment, take it up with him. >"we like it that way and reading this thread will reveal who 'we' are". I'm sorry, but I can't see that it matters whe "we" are. The point is that it includes some people and excludes others. >So MY OPINION which is derived from my growing up is that >modes matter and I don't want to see them go away. Neither do I, I just want to have the freedom to represent music accurately when the tonic/mode information is unavailable or unreliable or inappropriate. Anyway, the modes will never go away; they are there in the notes of the tune. Of course you are entitled to your opinion Laurie but I would like to know the rationale behind it. The choice is between tonic+mode or tonic+mode+key sig (all parts optional). Why would the latter cause you any problems? Why don't you like it? >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. The problem comes with converting form Noteworthy, which (like most other music packages in the world) doesn't have mode information, to abc. I was forced to put out bad abc and I didn't like it. >And I for one have never written "I want it my way and no other." I never said you did but it's interesting that you thought I was referring to you. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] RE: Anarchy
John Chambers wrote - >Heh. In this case, I was the lead musician.. Hmm. Benevolent dictatorship. Probably the best sort of government if you can find the right dictator. Thank you for the rest of that posting; it was very positive. >How about posting the galactic coordinates? And schedules for the >jam sessions? Lewes, East Sussex, England. Take a look at http://whatson.brighton.co.uk/folk/. (I would direct you to the Lewes Arms Folk Club website but AOL seem to have trashed it as well as my Abacus Music site. B@$¬4£DS). Brighton is dominated by Irish sessions. There is a strong French dance following. Lewes has two folk clubs and is the centre of an area with several pub tune sessions, some dominated by southern English dance music, others more general. If you want Swedish, Ben Paley lives in Brighton. It's a good place to live if you are into folk music (and for other reasons). >Do we shoehorn music into the >intersection of all supported features, or do we write it for a >subset of tools that have the additional features we want. The point about the explicit key signature idea is that it is widely applicable to all sorts of music and all manner of musicians. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
