John Wlash wrote:
Phil taylor wrote
I can't actually do that for ~ at the moment, because I haven't included
the tilde in the list of symbols which can be reassigned (only H..Z).
There *are* several ways to play rolls on some instruments, of
course, and sometimes you'd play them
John Walsh wrote:
Ah yes, the M word. I think I added my own bit to the confusion,
tho not, I hope, to the flames. What is clear is that there are a couple
of definitions of macro floating around. They overlap but don't
coincide; and there are a couple of different types of macro in
John Walsh wrote:
First, in my on-line Websters, a macro is defined as:
macro n, pl macros [short for macroinstruction] (1959): a single computer
instruction that stands for a sequence of operations.
One serious problem with this definition is that all subroutine and
function mechanisms
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Buddha Buck wrote:
Thank you Buddha; I think it's a nice summary of the
three different symbol manipulation facilities we're
dealing with.
1) long macros -- Phil Taylor's m: macros. These
are prefixed in the ABC music with a special
character, like ~, or @ or something,
Buddha Buck wrote:
The confusion in abc comes from the fact that there are a couple
of types of macros (or macro-like entities) floating around: First,
Phil Taylor's Barfly macros seem to fit the Hacker's definition nicely.
(Even his transposable macros fit, since the definition allows
I've read with great attention and interest the last thread about
microtone. Although I'm not an expert in this field, I'm
interested in writing notation for persian music, and playing it
as well.
I regret I haven't worked much on this project (including
transcribing music) recently, but I had a
I must admit that I like Buddha Buck's idea the best.
I'd like to suggest a small modification in case someone ever needs a subdivision of the whole tone smaller than 1/8.
1. The step size should be defined in a special field in analogy to the default fraction specified in the L: field (as Irwin
Sorry, what I meant was ratio not step size.
I still think this should defined in a separate line.
I might use an incomplete abc implementation (only the things I really need) in my own real-time notation program; I'll leave it to others to integrate Buddha Buck's or my suggestions in their more
Georg Hajdu wrote:
Is that correct, or could there be an attempt to make eighth-tone
notation (which is quasi-standard in places such as IRCAM, Paris)
standard in abc with predefined symbols?
What do these symbols normally look like. I've seen quarter-tone
symbols, but not 8th-tone. Can you
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Bernard Hill wrote:
I was advised by Chris Walshaw himself that that is the current
standard and has replaced the one on the standard web site.
Cool. Thanks. First I'd heard. No mention of it on Chris's web
site (still refers to it as
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jeff Bigler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:06:28 +0100
From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes
Bernard Hill wrote-
Surely by the standard
Proposed symbols for eighth-tone notation:
1/8 sharp: =` ( ` is back quote is ascii 96)
1/4 sharp: ;
3/8 sharp: `^
1/2 sharp: ^
5/8 sharp: ^ `
3/4 sharp: or ^ ``
1/8 flat: `=
1/4 flat: ?
3/8 flat: _ `
1/2 flat: _
5/8 flat: `_
3/4 flat: \ or ` `_
Example A `= would be middle-a
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Georg Hajdu wrote:
Proposed symbols for eighth-tone notation:
1/8 sharp:=` ( ` is back quote is ascii 96)
[snip]
3/4 flat: \ or ` `_
Example A `= would be middle-a eighth-tone flat or 6875 MIDI cents.
If these are the symbols you need, what
4/8 sharp IS a full sharp (as you know, the reference interval is always a whole tone). Therefore labeling it ^4 may be a bit misleading, but it's ok if you can use the symbols alternatively. Other than that, I like it.
Microtonal notation is mostly used to approximate tonal events that can't be
Georg Hajdu wrote:
4/8 sharp IS a full sharp (as you know, the reference interval is
always a whole tone). Therefore labeling it ^4 may be a bit
misleading, but it's ok if you can use the symbols alternatively.
Other than that, I like it.
Microtonal notation is mostly used to _approximate_
Buddha Buck writes:
| Georg Hajdu wrote:
| Actually, I could suggest another notation: _#C, where # is a single
| digit, means flatting C by that many eighth-tones. For finer control,
| _##C, where ## is a pair of digits, means flattening C by that many
| cents, or 100ths of a semitone. ^#C
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Georg Hajdu wrote:
4/8 sharp IS a full sharp (as you know, the reference interval is
always a whole tone).
Sorry, I didn't realize that. I thought you were
dividing a regular sharp into 8 pieces. Now I
understand we are actually dealing with eighth-tones.
Therefore
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, John Chambers wrote:
Buddha Buck writes:
| Georg Hajdu wrote:
| Actually, I could suggest another notation: _#C, where # is a single
| digit, means flatting C by that many eighth-tones. For finer control,
| _##C, where ## is a pair of digits, means flattening C by that
Hello Phil,
As a composer and computer programmer I'm currently working on a
real-time music notation system for networked music performances that
can also display (microtonal) scores (see http://www.quintet.net),
Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:Exit3.jpg (JPEG/prvw) (00057D27)
OK. The jpeg
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Georg Hajdu wrote:
The parsing of xml files seems more difficult,
XML is very easy to parse: you can make use of several
free off-the-shelf parsers that either create a
complete document tree (DOM standard) or generate
parser events (SAX standard).
Just have a look at
Bernard Hill wrote-
Surely by the standard
(www.gre.ac.uk/~c.walshaw/abc/abc-draft.txt) H *is* predefined
as fermata.
But that's not the standard. That's the draft of the elusive next
standard. Version 1.6 is still the operational standard and it
says:
| New notation
|
|
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes
Bernard Hill wrote-
Surely by the standard
(www.gre.ac.uk/~c.walshaw/abc/abc-draft.txt) H *is* predefined
as fermata.
But that's not the standard. That's the draft of the elusive next
standard.
I was advised by Chris Walshaw himself
Bernard Hill wrote:
I was advised by Chris Walshaw himself that that is the current
standard and has replaced the one on the standard web site.
Cool. Thanks. First I'd heard. No mention of it on Chris's web
site (still refers to it as draft and 1.6 as current).
Does everyone know about this?
23 matches
Mail list logo
