Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[Hilflos-im-Dode]

Thomas Morley-2 wrote
> Not to mention german tablature, though I never understood german
> tablature, or more precisely I never _wanted_ to...

Looking because of this message, how German Lute tablature works. Combining
the idea of Davids translation code and parallel music function of lilypond
could be helpful to convert german tabulature to standard notation.




--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels"  writes:

> Also, David's method of entering bars of irregular length causes the
> bar numbering to be incorrect, although the bar lines appear in the
> correct positions.

Yes, I think something like a scorewide

\set Timing.measureLength = #100

is needed connected with something like

"|" = { \partial 1*0 }

(and then one does not need to muck with the bar engraver anymore).  Not
tested: at the current moment it might do nonsense.  But something like
that should be salvageable into sane behavior eventually.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[Hans Åberg]

> On 20 Mar 2017, at 00:31, David Kastrup  wrote:
> 
> Hans Åberg  writes:
> 
>>> On 19 Mar 2017, at 23:54, Trevor Daniels  wrote:
>>> 
>>> David Kastrup wrote Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:11 PM
>>> 
 Here is my version using
 
 \new TabStaff \with { stringTunings = \lute-tuning
 tablatureFormat = #fret-letter-tablature-format
 fretLabels = \markuplist \bold \fontsize #3 \lower #0.2
 { 픞 픟 픠 픡 픢 픣 픤 픥 픦 픨 픩 픪 픫 픬 픭 }
 } \content
 
 (\bold does not seem to work, however):
>>> 
>>> Much nicer.
>> 
>> The mathematical bold fraktur are separate Unicode code points, so
>> probably must have a separate list.
> 
> Ok, so
> 
> \new TabStaff \with { stringTunings = \lute-tuning
> tablatureFormat = #fret-letter-tablature-format
> fretLabels = \markuplist \fontsize #2 \lower #0.2
> { 햆 햇 했 행 햊 햋 햌 햍 햎 햐 햑 햒 햓 햔 햕 }
> } \content
> 
> But c and e _do_ look too similar.  Well, it was a nice idea.

Probably better to use a special font, with letter in the ordinary code points. 
WP has an article about the style:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraktur

Also SMuFL has some Renaissance tablature stuff:
  http://www.smufl.org/version/latest/range/renaissanceLuteTablature/


  
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Re font-embedding, the attached uses the characters you suggested
> above, 

Note that there is a fundamental problem with the transcription:
It's not clear how long accidentals are valid.  For such unmetered
music it probably makes most sense to always write accidentals.
A problematic place is for example bar 13, fourth quarter: the chord
must be , not .

Regardless of that, there is a typo.  A tablature rhythm indicator is
missing for the dotted chord in bar 22.


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[David Kastrup]

Hans Åberg  writes:

>> On 19 Mar 2017, at 23:54, Trevor Daniels  wrote:
>> 
>> David Kastrup wrote Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:11 PM
>> 
>>> Here is my version using
>>> 
>>> \new TabStaff \with { stringTunings = \lute-tuning
>>>  tablatureFormat = #fret-letter-tablature-format
>>>  fretLabels = \markuplist \bold \fontsize #3 \lower #0.2
>>>  { 픞 픟 픠 픡 픢 픣 픤 픥 픦 픨 픩 픪 픫 픬 픭 }
>>> } \content
>>> 
>>> (\bold does not seem to work, however):
>> 
>> Much nicer.
>
> The mathematical bold fraktur are separate Unicode code points, so
> probably must have a separate list.
>
>
>

Ok, so

\new TabStaff \with { stringTunings = \lute-tuning
 tablatureFormat = #fret-letter-tablature-format
 fretLabels = \markuplist \fontsize #2 \lower #0.2
 { 햆 햇 했 행 햊 햋 햌 햍 햎 햐 햑 햒 햓 햔 햕 }
} \content

But c and e _do_ look too similar.  Well, it was a nice idea.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels"  writes:

> David Kastrup wrote Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:11 PM
>
>> Here is my version using
>>
>> \new TabStaff \with { stringTunings = \lute-tuning
>>   tablatureFormat = #fret-letter-tablature-format
>>   fretLabels = \markuplist \bold \fontsize #3 \lower #0.2
>>   { 픞 픟 픠 픡 픢 픣 픤 픥 픦 픨 픩 픪 픫 픬 픭 }
>>  } \content
>>
>> (\bold does not seem to work, however):
>
> Much nicer.
>
> Re font-embedding, the attached uses the characters you suggested above, 
> in a pdf produced  by LP running in Frescobaldi (if that matters).  Is there
> a problem with font embedding now?

Looks ok in either viewer.  On second thought, maybe I exaggerated the
font size a bit.  A bit smaller will likely end up more rather than less
readable.

> (BTW, on second thoughts, I think the smudge could be an e - note A - as 
> shown here.)

Musically maybe, but the graphics don't support that: there is a
"proper" e right below and it has a different horizontal position and
quite dissimilar inking.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[Hans Åberg]

> On 19 Mar 2017, at 23:54, Trevor Daniels  wrote:
> 
> David Kastrup wrote Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:11 PM
> 
>> Here is my version using
>> 
>> \new TabStaff \with { stringTunings = \lute-tuning
>>  tablatureFormat = #fret-letter-tablature-format
>>  fretLabels = \markuplist \bold \fontsize #3 \lower #0.2
>>  { 픞 픟 픠 픡 픢 픣 픤 픥 픦 픨 픩 픪 픫 픬 픭 }
>> } \content
>> 
>> (\bold does not seem to work, however):
> 
> Much nicer.

The mathematical bold fraktur are separate Unicode code points, so probably 
must have a separate list.



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[Thomas Morley]

2017-03-19 22:41 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup :

> Given how annoying I found the process of figuring out the notes from a
> tablature source, I am somewhat surprised that nobody considers this
> aspect of the example I posted worth commenting on.

Speaking only for me, probably because I am a classical guitarist,
I'm used to decipher many sorts of historic tablatures.
Mostly italian and french tablatures. The tablature used by Luis
Milan. Alfabeto Italiano, etc.
Not to mention german tablature, though I never understood german
tablature, or more precisely I never _wanted_ to...

Studying those deeply, gives me a better feeling how to perform the
music, with regard to note-durations, voices, polyphony, etc

As you write yourself:

> Of course, getting good notes out requires _more_ than this since the
> tablature only shows note starts, not note ends.  That makes it easy to
> enter everything as one voice, but in a proper note rendition one would
> want to let a number of notes have longer note values and use multiple
> voices.

As a performer I'm not very interested in modern typeset tablatures.
Ofcourse I'm aware many people are. I mostly do tablature work, when
answering user-requests on the list, lol.
So I'm sure your "tab-input-mode" will find lots of enthusiastic users.

Best,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels"  writes:

> David Kastrup wrote Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:36 PM
>
>
>> So here is a sketch of entering this score by tab:
>
> Looks good and seems to work well.
>  
>> Pretty sure I entered stuff wrong here (there is some programming error,
>> too) and probably did not decipher all of the tab correctly.  Anybody
>> wanting to proofread?
>
> I could see only one issue - in bar 16 there is a spurious Bb I think.
> It seems to be just a smudge in the original score, so I deleted it.

Yes, I chose the same.  Not sure whether it's some sort of embellishment
though.

> I attach a rerendering for lute using your file and a cobbled-together
> toy engraver I wrote for outputting lute tab. (I had to change only
> the octavation.)  This makes checking the data entry very easy by
> straight comparison with the original.

With xpdf, I see a fat display font for fret letters (and I find the use
of r for c rather confusing).  With the default PDF viewer "Atril"
(Evince for the Mate desktop) on my desktop, I only see empty spaces.

So something seems to be amiss with the font embedding.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[David Kastrup]

Thomas Morley  writes:

> I didn't proofread.
> Though some observations.
>
> (1)
> Why not
>
> "|" = \bar "|"
>
> instead of
>
> content = #(map-some-music
> (lambda (m)
>  (and (music-is-of-type? m 'bar-check)
>   #{ \bar "|" #}))
> content)

Beat you to it: it already looked like that before you observed this.
Probably the original thought was that I was proposing an entry method
and should not go about redefining existing functionality, but the
haphazard metrum is really specific for that piece anyway, so there is
no point in that transformation.

> (2)
> A seven string tablature is hard to read, imho.
> Why not use 'additionalBassStrings'. I would print "0" below sixth string 
> here.

Uh, I wasn't really talking about that specific piece.  I was more
interested in opinions about the input rather than the output.

> (3)
> I tried to boil down the programming error. Minimal:
>
> \new Score \with { defaultBarType = "" } { c'1. }

Oh.  Interesting.

> It's already present in 2.14.2.
> 2.12.3 doesn't print an error. No clue if the error isn't there for
> this version or if it's not recognized and printed to the terminal.
>
>
> I'd need to have a far closer look at the 'tabtranslate', before I
> could say anything relevant about this function.

Oh, I wasn't asking for a critique of how the function is implemented.
It can be made more robust, and its performance is sort of a non-issue
since it transforms the input in a single pass doing rather little.

I was more interested in the opinion of people about _what_ the function
does, not how it does it.

The whole point was being able to enter tablature coded by string and
fret number (well, actually name) rather than by note.

One could write a notename language with note names O I II III IV V VI
... instead of a b c d e f g but of course for this particular French
style score, the a...g approach was more convenient.

So instead of

  4
  q8 d\2 |
  16
  c\2 c8\2
  16
  a32\2 d\3 a8\2 |

one could write this as

  4
  q8 III\2 |
  16
  II\2 II8\2
  16
  O32\2 III\3 O8\2 |

Or the same in lowercase?

  4
  q8 iii\2 |
  16
  ii\2 ii8\2
  16
  o32\2 iii\3 o8\2 |

At any rate, the point I was trying to make is that this kind of input
is pretty quick to enter, is supported by the current parser, and can be
transformed reasonably straightforwardly into notes.  One shortcoming is
that there should be a way to override the enharmonic notename choice on
a case-by-case basis.  Maybe just not descend into
\relative/\fixed/\absolute ?

I remember several requests about being able to enter tablature in its
raw form.  And after transcribing a few bars manually I decided that I
wasn't going to do the brunt of a tedious task that was reasonably
suited for a computer to do.

Given how annoying I found the process of figuring out the notes from a
tablature source, I am somewhat surprised that nobody considers this
aspect of the example I posted worth commenting on.

Maybe my inability to focus on any tedious task for more than half an
hour is coloring my own impression of usefulness here.

Of course, getting good notes out requires _more_ than this since the
tablature only shows note starts, not note ends.  That makes it easy to
enter everything as one voice, but in a proper note rendition one would
want to let a number of notes have longer note values and use multiple
voices.

But for reproducing the information content of the tablature, this is a
good first approximation.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Entering (lute) tablature

[Thomas Morley]

2017-03-18 23:36 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup :
>
> Well, lute tablature has the obvious advantage(?) to be using letters
> instead of fret numbers.
>
> I went totally annoyed over entering the first few measures of the
> following tablature appended as PDF
>
>
>
> so I finally decided that this wasn't working for me.
>
> So here is a sketch of entering this score by tab:
>
>
>
> Pretty sure I entered stuff wrong here (there is some programming error,
> too) and probably did not decipher all of the tab correctly.  Anybody
> wanting to proofread?
>
> At any rate, at least for lettered tabs this is a somewhat cure entry
> method (of course, the "letters" start over since the order is
> a b c d e f g a' b' c' d' ...).
>
> Should something like this, though likely more robust against bad
> entries, be part of LilyPond's standard tool chest?
>
> --
> David Kastrup



Hi David,

I didn't proofread.
Though some observations.

(1)
Why not

"|" = \bar "|"

instead of

content = #(map-some-music
(lambda (m)
 (and (music-is-of-type? m 'bar-check)
  #{ \bar "|" #}))
content)

(2)
A seven string tablature is hard to read, imho.
Why not use 'additionalBassStrings'. I would print "0" below sixth string here.

(3)
I tried to boil down the programming error. Minimal:

\new Score \with { defaultBarType = "" } { c'1. }

It's already present in 2.14.2.
2.12.3 doesn't print an error. No clue if the error isn't there for
this version or if it's not recognized and printed to the terminal.


I'd need to have a far closer look at the 'tabtranslate', before I
could say anything relevant about this function.


Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user