On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 12:03:03AM +, John Chambers wrote:
Richard Robinson writes:
| What about the cases where notes in different octaves
| have different accidentals ? I don't see why notes in the key
| signature couldn't take the full normal ABC value, with uppercase
| and lowercase
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Is K:D exp _b _e ^f different from K:D _b _e ^f ?
Where does this come from, has it been mentioned before ?
As I have always understood the standard, the accidentals following it
*modify* the key sig. So
K:D _b _e ^f
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
What about the cases where notes in different octaves
have different accidentals ?
I personally think that the explicit key signature
scheme as it is currently defined in the standard is
already quite complex.
Making
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 09:22:12AM +0100, Bernard Hill wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Is K:D exp _b _e ^f different from K:D _b _e ^f ?
Where does this come from, has it been mentioned before ?
As I have always understood the standard, the
Bernard Hill writes:
| In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
|
| What about the cases where notes in different octaves
| have different accidentals ?
|
| I personally think that the explicit key signature
| scheme as it is currently defined in the standard is
|
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, John Chambers wrote:
In most cases, musicians will be following the rule that
accidentals apply in all octaves, so for them it doesn't
matter where the key-sig accidentals are drawn.
You seem to forget that ABC players also should be able to make
sense of the
I. Oppenheim writes:
|
| I suggest the following:
...
| 2) [K:D oct _B,,, _e'' ^F] will accept octave sensitive key signature definitions.
That's wonderful! I'm going to have to find an excuse to do
something like this. I'm not too sure of Zouki's example,
but with a bit more thought, I'm sure
Dear Abcusers,
Thank you for your feedback. Based on your input (both
on and off-list) I have made the following
modifications to the standard.
-- The debated section on Key sigs reads now as
follows:
By specifying K:none, it is possible to use no key
signature at all.
The key signatures may
I've now also updated the ties and slurs section of
http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/abc/abc2-draft.html
to give PNG examples of nested slurs.
Please have a look to see if you can agree.
Groeten,
Irwin Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
~~~*
Chazzanut Online:
http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/
To
On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 10:08:13PM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote:
-- The debated section on Key sigs reads now as
follows:
...
The key signatures may be modified by adding
accidentals, according to the format K:tonic mode
accidentals. For example, K:D Phr ^f would give a
key signature with
Richard Robinson writes:
| What about the cases where notes in different octaves
| have different accidentals ? I don't see why notes in the key
| signature couldn't take the full normal ABC value, with uppercase
| and lowercase and , and ' as necessary, so that somebody could
| express a key
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Richard Robinson wrote:
What about the cases where notes in different octaves
have different accidentals ?
I personally think that the explicit key signature
scheme as it is currently defined in the standard is
already quite complex.
Making distinction between the octave
12 matches
Mail list logo
