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
Bernard Hill wrote on 29 Jul 2003
I did not say beginning of a piece I said beginning of a section. It
has always been standard notation to assume the first repeat is from the
beginning of the work. We are talking about
| . | | :|
| . | | :|
which
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
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Walsh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Correction: in Irish music, a roll is a specific way of playing
several repeated notes, not a general ornament on a given note. It's
basic to the music, which is why it's part of abc. I'm not at all
surprised rolls aren't
There has been quite a bit of discussion about features which are not
part of standard notation and yet are acceptable in abc.
Fine. But I propose that all such things are NOT implemented in version
2 but wait for version 3. This would include
strange key signatures.
N-times repeats ::| etc
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes
Bernard Hill wrote on 29 Jul 2003
I did not say beginning of a piece I said beginning of a section. It
has always been standard notation to assume the first repeat is from the
beginning of the work. We are talking about
| . |
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
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote:
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 actuall leaves also a c^. The
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 09:38:29AM +0100, Bernard Hill wrote:
There has been quite a bit of discussion about features which are not
part of standard notation and yet are acceptable in abc.
Fine. But I propose that all such things are NOT implemented in version
2 but wait for version 3.
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: [abcusers] ABC Standard 2.0 revision III
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Arent Storm wrote:
For the church-modes part I agree, the explicit
accidental signature will confuse anyone trying to
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:19:44AM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote:
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
From: John Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 12:38 AM
Subject: [abcusers] N-times repeats
I. Oppenheim writes:
| 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
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Richard Robinson wrote:
K:D _b _e ^f actuall leaves also a c^. The point of the exp is to
*override* the normal key sig of D.
[1] The given example actually produces 1 sharp and 2 flats, ie is
equivalent to D exp.
Nope. As I have explained earlier, K:D _b _e ^f
is
From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: [abcusers] ABC Standard 2.0 revision III
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Walsh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Correction: in Irish music, a roll is a specific way of playing
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 12:36:17PM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Richard Robinson wrote:
K:D _b _e ^f actuall leaves also a c^. The point of the exp is to
*override* the normal key sig of D.
[1] The given example actually produces 1 sharp and 2 flats, ie is
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
Wrong address.
Please ignore anything libellous.
Bryan Creer
Guido writes
good. Since breaking backwards compatibility with thousands of tunes is
apparently no longer a problem, I vote to change 'A' 'B' 'C'... to 'LA'
'SI' 'DO' ... :-)
You seem to be saying that there are thousands of tunes written in abc with
!---! decorations.
Are they on the web? If
Irwin,
* I think it would be wise to explicitely reserve the use of nonmentioned
letters E, Y lowercase letters. for future extension and urge implementors who
need more to use
%%packagename-fieldname instead
Move ''exended information fields'' paragraph to front, just after the normal
ones
*
I notice that the clefs section uses only a small number of arbitrary
names, and doesn't allow for specifying shapes on lines. I think you
should also allow:
G1, G2,...G5
F1, F2,...F5
C1, C2,...C5
Or at least, make C, G, and F names as well as treble, alto, etc.
For the
I don't see any discussion of the relationship between accidentals and
barlines. This is important, because in order to translate ABC, which
records the appearance of a note in staff notation, into, e.g., MIDI
or lilypond, which records the absolute pitch of the note, you need to
know how long
From: Arent Storm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hardly anybody will know what an Irish-roll is (is it eatable?)
Is there even such thing? In Krassen's version of O'Neils, I find mention of
a long roll and a short roll in Irish fiddle playing. He also comments that
his notation is only appropriate for
* I think it would be wise to explicitely reserve the use of nonmentioned
letters E, Y lowercase letters.
Move ''exended information fields'' paragraph to front, just after the normal
ones
* irregular compound meter: two ways of display
1) 3+2+2/8 displayed as is
2) (3+2+2)/8 displayed as 7/8
I agree with Richard
wil
Richard Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:19:44AM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote:
Is "K:D exp _b _e ^f" different from "K:D _b _e ^f" ?
Where does this come from, has it been
Arent Storm wrote:
* ~ I always thought that ~ is used for a prall-trill by default.
Hardly anybody will know what an Irish-roll is (is it eatable?)
I'll bet there are at least a hundred times as many abc users
who know what an Irish Roll is as there are those who recognise
what a prall-trill
I still have some problems understanding the %%staves directive,
and it still strikes me as being extremely cryptic compared with
putting the same information into V: fields in the header.
The draft standard says that:
when enclosed by curly braces `{}', the voices go on a single couple of
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Arent Storm wrote:
* irregular compound meter: two ways of display
1) 3+2+2/8 displayed as is
2) (3+2+2)/8 displayed as 7/8
I think both should be displayed as:
3 + 2 + 2
8
If you want the semantics of 2), simply type:
M:7/8 % (3+2+2)/8
*G: group; clarify (I
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Laura Conrad wrote:
%%MIDI nobarlines
indicates that there are no barlines dividing the measures, so an
accidental applies only to the note it's on, and not to all the notes
until the end of the piece. It's really necessary to be able to
specify this.
OK. I
BarryBarry Say says:
| Bernard Hill wrote on 29 Jul 2003
|
| ... We are talking about
|
| | . | | :|
| | . | | :|
|
| which is ambiguous. And should maybe be
|
| | . | | :|
| |:.. | . | | :|
|
|
| In British
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
|
Bernard Hill writes:
|
| You *have* to make your standards document intelligible
| by normal musicians if ...
Normal musicians - what a concept!
(Are there enough of them in the world that we should pay
any attention to what they think?)
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to:
I. Oppenheim writes:
|
| What you call strange key signatures, is standard
| notation among musicologists, Klezmer musicians etc.
| Finale can certainly deal with them, even a simple
| program like Noteworthy Composer has support for them!
|
| If there are any other features that you would
From: Phil Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: [abcusers] ABC20-draft review
Arent Storm wrote:
* ~ I always thought that ~ is used for a prall-trill by default.
Hardly anybody will know what an Irish-roll is (is it eatable?)
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:16:37AM -0400, Wil Macaulay wrote:
I agree with Richard
wil
Richard Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:19:44AM +0200, I. Oppenheim wrote:
If I could have a couple of meta-whatsits, for a moment ?
All Wil's messages appear in my mailer as above
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
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 03:27:13PM +0100, Phil Taylor wrote:
Arent Storm wrote:
* ~ I always thought that ~ is used for a prall-trill by default.
Hardly anybody will know what an Irish-roll is (is it eatable?)
I'll bet there are at least a hundred times as many abc users
who know what an
Richard Robinson writes:
| On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 09:38:29AM +0100, Bernard Hill wrote:
|
| One possible counter-argument would be, that if ABC was able to express
| things that no other software can, just imagine the explosion of
| usefulness. Tunes might start turning up containing information
John == John Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John (I do think abc could use some competition, though. When are we going
John to see some big Lilypond or MusicML web sites?)
Mine's a pretty big Lilypond web site. There are pointers to a couple
of others on the lilypond page. In
From: John Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(I do think abc could use some competition, though. When are we going
to see some big Lilypond or MusicML web sites?)
I don't know how big is big but the digital tradition database is the
largest collection of folksongs I know of on the Internet. The dt
Do we lose anything if we couple this to M:none? or do we need to be
able to specify
both a meter (M:C comes to mind) and separately the behaviour of
accidentals?
Laura Conrad wrote:
I don't see any discussion of the relationship between accidentals and
barlines. This is important, because in
Dear Phil,
%%staves {1 2 3 4}
Will typeset 4 voices on one keyboard staff.
A keyboard staff consists of two coupled staves
that are connected with a { symbol in front of them.
%%staves (1 2)(3 4)
Will print two separate staves, with two voices on each of them.
No { symbol will appear in
Wil == Wil Macaulay [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wil Do we lose anything if we couple this to M:none? or do we
Wil need to be able to specify
Wil both a meter (M:C comes to mind) and separately the behaviour of
Wil accidentals?
Yes.
Not having barlines is very different from not
- Original Message -
From: Jon Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: [abcusers] ABC20-draft review
From: Arent Storm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hardly anybody will know what an Irish-roll is (is it eatable?)
Is there even such
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 09:53:19AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am one of the world's only specialists in Thuglarki music, which as
you know is performed by three or four elderly yak herders in the
Kletnuf Mountains of Central Asia when they have nothing better to
do.
Oh, splendid. I
Strikes me that the %%MIDI directives are the equivalent of an audio
stylesheet...
wil
Laura Conrad wrote:
Wil == Wil Macaulay [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wil Do we lose anything if we couple this to M:none? or do we
Wil need to be able to specify
Wil both a meter (M:C
John Chambers wrote:
In Ryan's case, the p.37 examples do have a double bar before the
repeat colon - at the end of the preceding staff. This may have been
the origin of that perverse :|!: example that we saw recently. If the
! means new staff, this would exactly match what Ryan did.
It's
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 06:54:42PM +0100, Phil Taylor wrote:
Richard Robinson wrote:
All Wil's messages appear in my mailer as above (though without the
quote marks, you pedants) - very spaced out vertically. At least
2 0x0a newlines, sometimes more, sometimes interspersed with 0x20s.
Do
hopefully
this
fixes
the
problem
(text only, no html in netscape mailer)
wil
Phil Taylor wrote:
Richard Robinson wrote:
All Wil's messages appear in my mailer as above (though without the
quote marks, you pedants) - very spaced out vertically. At least
2 0x0a newlines, sometimes more,
From: Ray Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Jon Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Arent Storm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hardly anybody will know what an Irish-roll is (is it eatable?)
Is there even such thing? In Krassen's version of O'Neils,
I find mention of a long roll and a short roll in Irish
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: [abcusers] %%staves
Dear Phil,
%%staves {1 2 3 4}
Will typeset 4 voices on one keyboard staff.
A keyboard staff consists of two coupled staves
that are connected with a {
From: Phil Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also I don't like the idea of
%%MIDI nobarlines
because it means something totally at odds with what it says. Bar
lines have nothing to do with midi - the midi standard provides
no way of representing them because they are a purely visual
feature of
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
Phil == Phil Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not having barlines is very different from not having a meter. Most
Renaissance tunes have a meter of C, C|, 3/2 or something, but they
either didn't use barlines at all or used them for something very
different from telling you
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:26:03PM -0400, Wil Macaulay wrote:
hopefully
this
fixes
the
problem
(text only, no html in netscape mailer)
wil
Looks good here. Thanks, you just became a lot easier to read.
--
Richard Robinson
The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes - S.
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Phil Taylor wrote:
%%staves [(1 2)(3 4)]
Gives a score format: two staves, coupled with a large
[ on the left side.
or should that be
%%staves ([1 2)(3 4])
No. That has no defined meaning.
%%staves {1 2 3} a keyboard staff with two voices in the right hand
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:45:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Arent Storm wrote:
And what if I want one large { with four staves ?
You could use %%staves [1 2 3 4] instead,
which will place a [ before the staves, though.
We can of course consider to make the semantics of {..}
similar to [...].
I.e: %%staves {1 2 3 4} will print 4
I still have some problems understanding the %%staves directive,
and it still strikes me as being extremely cryptic compared with
putting the same information into V: fields in the header.
So what's the difference between
You can look at
http://anamnese.online.fr/abc/passemedio.pdf
It doesn't
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Arent Storm wrote:
And what if I want one large { with four staves ?
You could use %%staves [1 2 3 4] instead,
which will place a [ before the staves, though.
We can of course consider to make the semantics of {..}
similar to
Jon Freeman writes:
| From: John Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| (I do think abc could use some competition, though. When are we going
| to see some big Lilypond or MusicML web sites?)
|
| I don't know how big is big but the digital tradition database is the
| largest collection of folksongs I
It feels silly posting this amidst all the talk of standards, etc., but I'm going to
post anyway.
I asked a while ago about drum notation (I'm not a drummer, but I'm trying to
transcribe the drum music for my Corps). I have since gotten ALMOST everything I need
to do by using the existing
Richard Robinson writes:
| On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:45:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Technically, since neither of these has a real component, they are not
| really complex but completely imaginary.
|
| *sigh*. So it is.
|
| But not to worry. jcabc2ps will accept, and display
I am just about catching up with this review process and
think I should add my tenpennorth as an advocate of
abc2mtex.
The ABC 2.0 draft was based on ABC 1.7.6, but the last
version of ABC2mtex produced was 1.6.1 which is pretty
well backwards compatible with all previous versions.
1.7.6 did
I am concerned about the lack of backwards compatibility of the proposed standard with
abc2mtex.
Since this was the original program for ABC, I think these issues deserve some
consideration.
1. I have already mentioned the E: field in a previous e-mail. This needs
reinstating
2.
How are we going to reach decisions on a new standard?
How come the proposal by Guido was suddenly expanded?
Shall I now post my version on a website and call it revision IV?
Are we going to vote?
If so who votes?.
The density of mail on the list is no guide to the opinion of list
members.
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
It feels silly posting this amidst all the talk of standards, etc., but I'm
going to post anyway.
I asked a while ago about drum notation (I'm not a drummer, but I'm trying to
transcribe the drum music for my Corps). I have since gotten
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T:Plain 2/4
M:2/4
L:1/8
K:perc
%%graceslurs no
V:1 up
c|:7c{c}c {c}cc-|7c{c}c {c}cc-|7c{c}c {c}c/Lc/c/c/|\
[1.2.3. {c}c{c}c {c}cc-:|[2 {c}c{c}c {c}c{c}c||
The result ps looks surprisingly good, with the exception
of the slashes on the stems that I want to
The largest body of published abc is in the realm of Irish dance music, in
which
the roll is a well-understood term meaning 'decorate here as appropriate
to
your combination of instrument, region and personal aesthetic'.
It will be interesting to see where the next explosion (of content, I
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
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 09:49:33PM +, John Chambers wrote:
Richard Robinson writes:
| On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:45:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Technically, since neither of these has a real component, they are not
| really complex but completely imaginary.
|
| *sigh*. So
Chris Meyers writes:
The one thing I'm missing is putting the slashes on the stems of the
notes. Obviously, an extension to the code is necessary, and I'm even
willing to gasp step outside the bounds of the emerging abc standard
to accomplish my goal, since my real intention is only in creating
I still have some problems understanding the %%staves directive,
and it still strikes me as being extremely cryptic compared with
putting the same information into V: fields in the header.
So what's the difference between
You can look at
http://anamnese.online.fr/abc/passemedio.pdf
Oh, I've
in addition,Chris your suggested solution would be inadvisable because
it would be errror
prone:
//C //C
and
//C//C
look pretty similar, but most parsers use C// as a synonym for C/4
wil
John Walsh wrote:
Chris Meyers writes:
The one thing I'm missing is putting the slashes on the stems
74 matches
Mail list logo
