[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
I do in a sense. I think the lute has *way* too small a pool of performers and audience. To create a large professional class and amateur base we have to do something different, we have to make big changes. Had we started this 20 years ago, there would be 20 times more professional players, and thousands more amateurs. If people need to make money, there could be a tiered system where people get free editions, then gravitate up. Or, the model used by ensembles, where editions are supported by arts patrons. But we need more players, then everyone does better. I make a fine living playing the lute, but many of my colleagues on violin, etc, have a much larger base to draw upon. For the lute to really thrive we need a big base. Conservatory jobs are now being cut back, and it is up to us to encourage new players. Many of my colleagues on the lute have to scramble for work, or take day jobs--nothing wrong with that, I worked some pretty bad jobs in school. And why should there be so few professional concert artists on the lute? We can change this. dt At 11:52 PM 12/9/2008, you wrote: Am 9 Dec 2008 um 14:47 hat David Tayler geschrieben: 7. All editions should be free. We need more lute players. Thanks to all who make the music available. Yes, and all lessons likewise. And all the concerts, we need more listeners, you see. After all the applause is the bread of the artist... Honestly David, do you think we all should do some real work and leave the arts to private amusements? Best regards, Stephan To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Clarity above clutter is a common factor in many postings. Personal preferences - grid rhythm signs versus minimal use of rhythm signs, landscape versus portrait, where to place measure numbers - are not interesting in itself, but if there are enough people sending in their preferences some sort of order will come. To avoid complaining about bad practices, all too easy, I'd like to know what people think is beautiful tablature. Some favourites of mine, in no particular order but facsimiles only for starters and beginning on one side of the bookshelves so leaving out much else: Saizenay (not always clear but always beautiful), the Petrucci prints (because it still looks like it was printed yesterday, although I must say I have difficulty with the continuous stream of rhythm signs), Morlaye (second book with the straight bar lines, every measure a rhythm signs, btw), Vallet (a bit cramped on the page, but such elegant ciphers and adapting the d's and b's to available space), Gerle (comforting amounts of white page around the music, pity of the page turns), Airs de Cour books from Ballard (nice d's that fit neatly between the lines), Ballard premier livre (good page lay out, clear signs, very wel done, buy the facsimile now, even if you have the CNRS edition), and Toyohiko's handwriting, I might add: elegant and clear. Could be summarized as clarity above clutter with elegance mixed in. FWIW, Finale has the option to break tablature lines at the ciphers, a feature greatly enhancing legibility. David -- *** David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines, impossible!
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 1:19 AM To: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines, impossible! If you provide tablature in electronic format you completely loose control. true. Who needs control? no copyright exists on it as music. Apparently, you are joking. Believe it or not: I have the copyright on every single piece in my Holborne edition because I have changed every single piece. My proposal was not intended to interest publishers, but I think it will interest players and scholars. No scholar will use a tablature file from the internet for any serious purpose without comparing it with the original source. Rainer adS CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER The information in this email and in any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message, delete any copies held on your systems and notify the sender immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this email for any purpose outside of any NDA currently existing between Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH and yourselves. Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH Hansaallee 181 - 40549 Duesseldorf - Germany Phone: +49 (211) 5296-0 - Fax: +49 (211) 5296-400 Handelsregister Duesseldorf HRB 22487 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Hitoshi Otsuka Amtsgericht Duesseldorf To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Tablature notation guidelines
Dear Tom, indeed it is built into Fronimo. Just choose MIDI Files as the file format into the standard Fronimo file open dialog box. In other words, there is not a specific import command but the import is done by opening the MIDI file. Best wishes, Francesco -Original Message- From: Stewart McCoy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 2:05 PM To: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Tablature notation guidelines Dear Tom, Alain Veylit's Django software will convert MIDI files to tablature automatically. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 08 December 2008 20:16 To: List LUTELIST; howard posner Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines One feature in Finale that I find very useful is you can import a MIDI file and it will notate it automatically (errors, of course, but much quicker than starting from scratch). This is a feature I would like to see built into Fronimo. Tom Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008, David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Clarity above clutter is a common factor in many postings. agreed, clutter is bad for legibility. Grids can be good, when the music has a regular pulse that is shown clearly. Sparse flags can get me lost, the occaisional redundant reminder is good, say, at beginning of each bar. Regular spacing uses the paper best, some musicians have a preferrence for proportional spacing as is seen in engraved editinos, but that is a huge can of worms and endless tweeking. Useful when polyphony is shown by notes with real duratinos; but in tablature we obscure the actual durations of polyphony (when it is present), so I prefer a denser display, for me there is no gain to spreading the longer 'chords' further apart. I can number my own measures, markup my own fingerings, and add my own ornamentation marks in my own systems thank you. Landscape vs portrait is in part an issue of what stand I am working on and how I am organizing it. I might be working from a tall fakebook, or a wide edition - playing on both wind and plucked or perhaps singing; If the book is wide, tall music (not necessarily tab) placed behind and projecting above (legal longways) lets me switch between both as desired; maybe a wind player stands behind me sharing the stand... Dont be despayrd ye publishers, I can always take the originals to a copyshop and make what is necessary for that performance. I'd like to know what people think is beautiful tablature. For magically clear french fretglyphs I think Granjon's font is the best first used on the continent for a variety of cittern and lute tab, and also in england - Kingston used it in 1574 for Le Roy's _Instruction...Lute_, and Wm Barley used it in the 1599 print of Richard Alison's settings of the _Psalms of David_. It is rare to have distinct small round miniscule a, c, e, but granjon achieved that. -- Dana Emery To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
@Betsy Lahaussois: Intel macs can run windows very well via Boot Camp or Parallels or some other virtualisation tool. If you use Boot Camp (free with OSX leopard) you will only need a Legal copy of Windows XP with an integrated SP2 or later. Vista will run fine as well. How to do that is explained inthe manual you got with your Mac. However you should note that one cannot run Windows on a PPC- Mac. You will find that in most instances Windows runs smoother on a Mac than on a PC. So maybe your move wasn't so bad after all. Cheers! Lex van Sante To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
I think everyone has their faves, just like the original copyists. Here's a few themes: 1. Landscape vs portrait-- Both existed historically, some formats work better for some music. But see below 2. Diplomatic facsimile--hints at, or strongly resembles the original. A very good choice for many lute players as they have knowledge of original tab notation. A nice choice for many less problematic items, follow the original in choosing paper size, flags, etc 3. Reconstructive facsimile Used in some but no all musicological editions. The idea here is that whatever is on the page will allow you to recreate the original. There are many ways to do this, it is a very good way to present editions. 4. Edition Facsimile Choose an editing option and facing or on subsequent pages include the original. NB This is the only satisfactory way to do an edition since we do not use sophisticated proofing techniques. You need not do a rigorous reconstructive edition as the facsimile is present, unless you so choose. 5. Study editions This is a bit off topic, but everyone should be using study editions, ideally in three or four part staves, although most of these are in keyboard notation. However, unless you are training in short score, which is of course a great way to get gigs, single line expansion is much, much better for study and improving your playing than keyboard, and has historical precedent as well, for example, Dowland's Lachrimae set. Once you have decided which kind of edition you are making, many choices will follow a sort of house style, for example, in a diplomatic facsimile you will want to choose the fonts and spacing that resemble the original. However some of these choices will be personal; the computer allows the end user to repersonalize the edition. So, include a computer file so the end user can mess around with it. Currently Finale and Sibelius users benefit by the XML interchange format, a standard interchange format--other than midi--would be a good thing, although midi has sort of occupied that slot, G Flats and all. 6. A wiki interface for correcting online editions should be present. This is very important. 7. All editions should be free. We need more lute players. Thanks to all who make the music available. dt At 12:08 PM 12/9/2008, you wrote: On Tue, Dec 9, 2008, David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Clarity above clutter is a common factor in many postings. agreed, clutter is bad for legibility. Grids can be good, when the music has a regular pulse that is shown clearly. Sparse flags can get me lost, the occaisional redundant reminder is good, say, at beginning of each bar. Regular spacing uses the paper best, some musicians have a preferrence for proportional spacing as is seen in engraved editinos, but that is a huge can of worms and endless tweeking. Useful when polyphony is shown by notes with real duratinos; but in tablature we obscure the actual durations of polyphony (when it is present), so I prefer a denser display, for me there is no gain to spreading the longer 'chords' further apart. I can number my own measures, markup my own fingerings, and add my own ornamentation marks in my own systems thank you. Landscape vs portrait is in part an issue of what stand I am working on and how I am organizing it. I might be working from a tall fakebook, or a wide edition - playing on both wind and plucked or perhaps singing; If the book is wide, tall music (not necessarily tab) placed behind and projecting above (legal longways) lets me switch between both as desired; maybe a wind player stands behind me sharing the stand... Dont be despayrd ye publishers, I can always take the originals to a copyshop and make what is necessary for that performance. I'd like to know what people think is beautiful tablature. For magically clear french fretglyphs I think Granjon's font is the best first used on the continent for a variety of cittern and lute tab, and also in england - Kingston used it in 1574 for Le Roy's _Instruction...Lute_, and Wm Barley used it in the 1599 print of Richard Alison's settings of the _Psalms of David_. It is rare to have distinct small round miniscule a, c, e, but granjon achieved that. -- Dana Emery To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Dec 9, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Lex van Sante wrote: However you should note that one cannot run Windows on a PPC- Mac. I do it all the time using Virtual PC. Not exactly a perfect option... -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
@ Howard Posner: Probably off topic: Sorry! You mean you have actually been able to use Fronimo with Virtual PC? That is no mean feat! I've tried using it but it was all very slow, unstable, not to mention costly. I was fortunate that my Apple dealer at the time offered me a chance to test this on one of his PPC's. After fiddling around for about 15 minutes I had enough. Like you say: Not exactly a perfect option. Cheers! Lex van Sante To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
I ran Stringwalker, Django and Fronimo on VPC until about 3 years ago. No difficulties, aside from horrendous echo in midi playback. I now keep both a Mac and a PC, for a different set of reasons. RT - Original Message - From: Lex van Sante [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute mailing list list lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 7:47 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines @ Howard Posner: Probably off topic: Sorry! You mean you have actually been able to use Fronimo with Virtual PC? That is no mean feat! I've tried using it but it was all very slow, unstable, not to mention costly. I was fortunate that my Apple dealer at the time offered me a chance to test this on one of his PPC's. After fiddling around for about 15 minutes I had enough. Like you say: Not exactly a perfect option. Cheers! Lex van Sante To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Dec 9, 2008, at 4:47 PM, Lex van Sante wrote: You mean you have actually been able to use Fronimo with Virtual PC? I've never tried to use Fronimo. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Me too for the last 5(?) years and the only program I run on it is Fronimo which works mostly fine. (ok, and Firefox to download the newest Fronimo 3 from time to time ;^) My only slowdown is playing the midi files. I have to save them as midi files, send them to the shared folder and then open them in Quicktime (or iTunes). Do folks runing Fronimo on Intel macs have to do this workaround? Sean On Dec 9, 2008, at 3:59 PM, howard posner wrote: On Dec 9, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Lex van Sante wrote: However you should note that one cannot run Windows on a PPC- Mac. I do it all the time using Virtual PC. Not exactly a perfect option... -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008, howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Dec 9, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Lex van Sante wrote: However you should note that one cannot run Windows on a PPC- Mac. how about mac OS on a pentium with a partition for windoz? Yes, it obliges purchase of pentium, which i supose was the original object, sigh, time for bed. Maybe you can find a nice used quadra 650 and one of those nu-bus cards that puts a pentium co-proc inside, network it to the rest of the world. -- Dana Emery To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Am 9 Dec 2008 um 14:47 hat David Tayler geschrieben: 7. All editions should be free. We need more lute players. Thanks to all who make the music available. Yes, and all lessons likewise. And all the concerts, we need more listeners, you see. After all the applause is the bread of the artist... Honestly David, do you think we all should do some real work and leave the arts to private amusements? Best regards, Stephan To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
David, I agree with your preferences, especially about the diapassons. FWIW, here are some personal guidelines that have crystalized through the years, and this in relation to tablatures only, I'm not talking about grand staff or notation: Landscape view, to make the score easily readable on the screen (or steady on the music stand) Do not repeat rhytmic signs until they actually change value (much easier to read in all respects, also for prima-vista) Number bars at the beginning of each staff (easier to navigate the score - no numbering is hopeless when discussing a score via mail f. ex.) Don't cram the staffs. 6 on one sheet is maximum for my 12-14 point font in landscape view Adjust the tablature font size to your sight (some can read 8-10 point, I'm most comfortable with 12-14) Wherever possible, slightly reduce global symbol spacing to include those 2 or three bars on page 2 to avoid a page change Include composer name, date of publication and eventual name of publication, but also the library and shelf name for easier locating of the original facsimile if a manuscript. Allow room for pencil marks of ornaments etc. Tablature numbers on lines makes for quicker reading, (at least for me) (debatable also for letters) Make book editions instead of single pieces, for easier navigating and correcting, as well as global page settings Include a few (or many) lines of available information from New Grove or original source at beginning or end of book (not forgetting to name the contributors when available!) as well as info on personal settings, signs, etc. of publication And a note to our eminent programmers. Please, please, make works made in earlier versions of the program display *perfectly* on the newer version. IMO, don't publish a newer version until this is the case! This is now _not_ the case :( I am aware, that these are my own very personal settings. From what I've seen these past 15 or so years, not _one_ editor does it like any other. Each and everyone has at least some personal features. Some are easy to read, some are quite difficult, like those with the raster rhythm signs and also those, who try to emulate the original facsimile with some fancy but hard to read font. IMO the main guiding formula should always be to keep it as _simple_ and as _easily readable_ as possible, at the same time providing the most information possible. A tablature publication should _not_ try to be a work of art in that sense - it should mainly be an instrument to enable duplication and interpretation of the composers intentions. So I for one would prefer to throw those other unhelpful aesthetic considerations overboard. Modern (as in newly composed) scores will probably have to differ from these guidelines in some respects I've probably forgotten something, but WTH Best G. - Original Message - From: David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:54 AM Subject: [LUTE] tablature notation guidelines These days there are many software packages enabling everybody to produce tablatures. Many of us do, for free on our websites or in home-made inexpensive editions. Not all of these tablatures are as beautiful, or as easy to read. For the free or inexpensive editions that's fine with me; if the content is interesting I'll read from anything, or make my own version if it's too revolting. I'm glad I could find the music. But in looking at not so inexpensive editions from 'real' publishers, I am repeatedly struck by their far from perfect tablatures, and staff notation for that matter, as well. For staff notation, there are guidelines that help in making decisions on how to solve notational questions. The better engraving software will automatically follow these guidelines. For an example, have a look at http://mpa.org/music_notation/. These guidelines should present musicians with more or less standard sheet music. The benefits are obvious: it's fine to be able to read facsimiles, necessary for us, obviously, but when you're playing in an orchestra and are presented with your part on the day of the rehearsal or the concert, it's nice you don't have to spend time in deciphering what the editor meant. So, in stead of complaining about the poor output of such and such software, engraver or publisher, wouldn't it be nice to have some guidelines to help all of us make better tablatures? Yes, that should include simple things like b's and d's running into each other, g's that look like a's with an ornament, i's that lack a dot (or are these l's?). There are many, many aspects that are time and place dependant - I like to read my Ballard in another font than my Gaultier, I like different flag rules for Dowland than for Weiss - but I wouldn't want ciphers run into each other in either, and clumsy diapasson notation is unwanted in all. The various solutions people have found to
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Hm, Landscape view, to make the score easily readable on the screen (or steady on the music stand) I prefer portrait and I never play from the screen Do not repeat rhytmic signs until they actually change value (much easier to read in all respects, also for prima-vista) For me this is very difficult to read. I prefer the gridiron system. Number bars at the beginning of each staff (easier to navigate the score - no numbering is hopeless when discussing a score via mail f. ex.) Some people prefer numbering every fifth bar. Adjust the tablature font size to your sight (some can read 8-10 point, I'm most comfortable with 12-14) That is sort of difficult on paper :) Tablature numbers on lines makes for quicker reading, (at least for me) (debatable also for letters) I always wonder why people think tablature with a strike-through should be easier to read. Would you strike through everything in a book? I am aware, that these are my own very personal settings. From what I've seen these past 15 or so years, not _one_ editor does it like any other. Each and everyone has at least some personal features. Some are easy to read, some are quite difficult, like those with the raster rhythm signs and also those, who try to emulate the original facsimile with some fancy but hard to read font. I prefer those 'raster rhythm signs'. IMO the main guiding formula should always be to keep it as _simple_ and as _easily readable_ as possible, at the same time providing the most information possible. You can't square the circle. A tablature publication should _not_ try to be a work of art in that sense - it should mainly be an instrument to enable duplication and interpretation of the composers intentions. So I for one would prefer to throw those other unhelpful aesthetic considerations overboard. Composer intentions? Nobody knows Dowland's intentions. Best wishes, Rainer aus dem Spring IT Business Solutions Division CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER The information in this email and in any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message, delete any copies held on your systems and notify the sender immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this email for any purpose outside of any NDA currently existing between Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH and yourselves. Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH Hansaallee 181 - 40549 Duesseldorf - Germany Phone: +49 (211) 5296-0 - Fax: +49 (211) 5296-400 Handelsregister Duesseldorf HRB 22487 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Hitoshi Otsuka Amtsgericht Duesseldorf To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Dec 8, 2008, at 6:54 AM, Spring, aus dem, Rainer wrote: Would you strike through everything in a book? It would be a great improvement in many books. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Yeah! But jokes aside, if one would actually take a look at, and play from tablature on the lines, one could easily see what I'm trying to say. The arguement that its easy(er) to read should hold ground quite nicely! G. - Original Message - From: howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: List LUTELIST Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:26 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines On Dec 8, 2008, at 6:54 AM, Spring, aus dem, Rainer wrote: Would you strike through everything in a book? It would be a great improvement in many books. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
-Original Message- From: G. Crona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:34 PM To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines Yeah! But jokes aside, if one would actually take a look at, and play from tablature on the lines, one could easily see what I'm trying to say. The arguement that its easy(er) to read should hold ground quite nicely! Not at all. And I can't see any reason why it should. Best wishes, Rainer aus dem Spring IT Business Solutions Division Tel.: +49 211-5296-355 Fax.: +49 211-5296-405 SMTP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER The information in this email and in any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message, delete any copies held on your systems and notify the sender immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this email for any purpose outside of any NDA currently existing between Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH and yourselves. Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH Hansaallee 181 - 40549 Duesseldorf - Germany Phone: +49 (211) 5296-0 - Fax: +49 (211) 5296-400 Handelsregister Duesseldorf HRB 22487 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Hitoshi Otsuka Amtsgericht Duesseldorf To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Dec 8, 2008, at 6:54 AM, Spring, aus dem, Rainer wrote: Hm, Me too, mmm. I don't mean to answer Rainer here but will offer my responses to the same questions to show my differing taste. Landscape view, to make the score easily readable on the screen (or steady on the music stand) I prefer portrait and I never play from the screen I prefer portrait but often play from the screen. One can get two portrait pages comfortably enough on a screen larger than 17. My 12 laptop screen really pushes the limit for two pages but may work for a single landscape page. Unfortunately, that's not a long piece of music. Do not repeat rhytmic signs until they actually change value (much easier to read in all respects, also for prima-vista) For me this is very difficult to read. I prefer the gridiron system. And I prefer ciphers only on a change. The raster system like the English mss. (eg. Board book) makes the page so busy w/ superfluous information that I find it distracting. I also find the gratuitous use of a rhythm sign at the beginning of each measure distracting. Number bars at the beginning of each staff (easier to navigate the score - no numbering is hopeless when discussing a score via mail f. ex.) Some people prefer numbering every fifth bar. I like it on every measure. When working w/ other musicians the 2 or 3 seconds everyone takes as they count from the first measure of that line (or 5th measure) is distracting. I know this clutters up the page but the brain quickly learns to disregard them. Yes, I know I stand virtually alone on this point. A good tab program should give you the choice. Adjust the tablature font size to your sight (some can read 8-10 point, I'm most comfortable with 12-14) That is sort of difficult on paper :) 12-14 works for me. And for any kind of performance I use a bold variant. Visibility, visibility visibility! Anything smaller means that the music has to be so close as to lose any contact w/ the audience. What's the point of having a beautiful instrument if your audience only sees a standard issue music stand? Tablature numbers on lines makes for quicker reading, (at least for me) (debatable also for letters) I always wonder why people think tablature with a strike-through should be easier to read. Would you strike through everything in a book? Ditto! It's pointless to take a perfectly readable typeface and then run a stupid line through it! I am aware, that these are my own very personal settings. From what I've seen these past 15 or so years, not _one_ editor does it like any other. Each and everyone has at least some personal features. Some are easy to read, some are quite difficult, like those with the raster rhythm signs and also those, who try to emulate the original facsimile with some fancy but hard to read font. One more personal thing I need is to seperate long passaggi into groups of 4 (or 6 if nec.). When flying along on consort music or Terzi that little dot below doesn't do enough to show me where the larger beat is or show me my place if I have to check my fingering. (btw, words and text have been doing this to great advantage for years!) If the tab program doesn't let me do this easily then it's essentially useless for performance reading. I do a lot of work in the two Fronimos but for performance I ALWAYS copy it into Fronimo 2.1 for this very reason. I also prefer the choice of creating more space for longer note values. I take a lot of info in by peripheral vision and knowing where the long notes are coming up helps in interpretation. My father was a layout editor for many years and taught me the value of what works for the eyes and how the brain subconsciously uses it. Maybe, on the other hand, I'm crippled by my visual standards but I have to feel comfortable about what I put on the music stand in front of people. my 2 cents, Sean To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Likewise. I can play OK from either, but I prefer tab between the lines, not on them. I doubt you can make a clearcut case for either; I think it's more a matter of preference/habit. Any tablature guidelines that you come up with need to accommodate the fact that different people are going to have different preferences about things like on/off the line symbols, fonts, even things like how many measures to a stave and staves to a page (I like to be able to pack them in or stretch them out if necessary to avoid awkward breaks). I'd also prefer flexibility in measure numbering, although that's more important for accompaniment or ensemble playing. -Original Message- From: Spring, aus dem, Rainer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 7:51 AM To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines -Original Message- From: G. Crona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:34 PM To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines Yeah! But jokes aside, if one would actually take a look at, and play from tablature on the lines, one could easily see what I'm trying to say. The arguement that its easy(er) to read should hold ground quite nicely! Not at all. And I can't see any reason why it should. Best wishes, Rainer aus dem Spring IT Business Solutions Division Tel.: +49 211-5296-355 Fax.: +49 211-5296-405 SMTP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER The information in this email and in any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message, delete any copies held on your systems and notify the sender immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this email for any purpose outside of any NDA currently existing between Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH and yourselves. Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH Hansaallee 181 - 40549 Duesseldorf - Germany Phone: +49 (211) 5296-0 - Fax: +49 (211) 5296-400 Handelsregister Duesseldorf HRB 22487 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Hitoshi Otsuka Amtsgericht Duesseldorf To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Well, there you go. I can appreciate that. See, choice is good. That's if we are designing a program for our personal use. To design a standard for what we'd like to see from the published/outside, on-paper world gets more difficult. It may come about that tabs eventually get published in digital format. If we had our machines ready and could open the file to change it to our preference we'd be good to go. Maybe the lute societies and webpagers could tell us more about how they distribute music on the web and what feedback they get from their constituents. my 2.1 cents Sean On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, William Brohinsky wrote: I think, maybe, we can skip the prejudicial ad-hominem remarks. I try to play from all kinds of tablature, and frankly, I find the in-the-line notation hardest. And, as my age increases (which can be said of all of us on this list: if you've figured a way to get younger as time progresses, please contact me 8^) it only gets more pronounced. That said, when the lines are too close together, between-lines is harder to read than on-lines. There are way too many variables for anyone to get too didactic, really! ray On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 11:18 AM, G. Crona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you actually tried to play from it, I believe that you'd get my point. G. - Original Message - From: Spring, aus dem, Rainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:51 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines -Original Message- From: G. Crona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:34 PM To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines Yeah! But jokes aside, if one would actually take a look at, and play from tablature on the lines, one could easily see what I'm trying to say. The arguement that its easy(er) to read should hold ground quite nicely! Not at all. And I can't see any reason why it should. Best wishes, Rainer aus dem Spring To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Question: If all lute tab publishing is standardized to one specific variety, based on some overarching consensus, what happens to the art of reading the other varieties? Won't we be setting ourselves up to become so wedded to one variety of TAB that there won't be anyone left in two generations (other, maybe, than doddering nonogenarians) who can manage transcription from other kinds of Tab? I'll admit that I'd like french-style baroque tab with a little less flourish and confusion. But if I don't ever bother to learn to read it, I won't be able to do anything with manuscripts. I, for one, don't want that lost. ray On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Sean Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, there you go. I can appreciate that. See, choice is good. That's if we are designing a program for our personal use. To design a standard for what we'd like to see from the published/outside, on-paper world gets more difficult. It may come about that tabs eventually get published in digital format. If we had our machines ready and could open the file to change it to our preference we'd be good to go. Maybe the lute societies and webpagers could tell us more about how they distribute music on the web and what feedback they get from their constituents. my 2.1 cents Sean On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, William Brohinsky wrote: I think, maybe, we can skip the prejudicial ad-hominem remarks. I try to play from all kinds of tablature, and frankly, I find the in-the-line notation hardest. And, as my age increases (which can be said of all of us on this list: if you've figured a way to get younger as time progresses, please contact me 8^) it only gets more pronounced. That said, when the lines are too close together, between-lines is harder to read than on-lines. There are way too many variables for anyone to get too didactic, really! ray On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 11:18 AM, G. Crona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you actually tried to play from it, I believe that you'd get my point. G. - Original Message - From: Spring, aus dem, Rainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:51 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines -Original Message- From: G. Crona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:34 PM To: Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines Yeah! But jokes aside, if one would actually take a look at, and play from tablature on the lines, one could easily see what I'm trying to say. The arguement that its easy(er) to read should hold ground quite nicely! Not at all. And I can't see any reason why it should. Best wishes, Rainer aus dem Spring To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
I just think we need the choice. We have half-a-loaf of choice and are wondering how we can better work w/ the publishing world. And that means the publishing world will start to work w/ our own software. That means we have to define our formats, expectations, prices and protections and then we'll see what we and the market will bear. Over the last 20 centuries many simple distribution models have come and gone depending on the technology available. The next century _will_ pass too and I'm sure that we'll muddle through it. It's a shake-up. Some folks will make out like bandits; some won't. I'm just thinking that if we get our dialogs and tabs out here we'll get a better operating system going as we feel out the first few steps. Sean On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:43 AM, G. Crona wrote: Sean, you and I seem to be somewhat more in agreement than me and Rainer who seem to be antipodic in this matter. pls. read between the lines... - Original Message - From: Sean Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:52 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines On Dec 8, 2008, at 6:54 AM, Spring, aus dem, Rainer wrote: Hm, Me too, mmm. I don't mean to answer Rainer here but will offer my responses to the same questions to show my differing taste. Landscape view, to make the score easily readable on the screen (or steady on the music stand) I prefer portrait and I never play from the screen I prefer portrait but often play from the screen. One can get two portrait pages comfortably enough on a screen larger than 17. My 12 laptop screen really pushes the limit for two pages but may work for a single landscape page. Unfortunately, that's not a long piece of music. I have a 19 flat screen and two pages is still too small. There is a simple solution to the portrait / landscape disagreement though. Just flip the flatscreen! ;) I cant remember how many times I've laboured in making a single portrait sheet stand steadily on a music stand. (Easier viewing for the audience as well :) Do not repeat rhytmic signs until they actually change value (much easier to read in all respects, also for prima-vista) For me this is very difficult to read. I prefer the gridiron system. And I prefer ciphers only on a change. The raster system like the English mss. (eg. Board book) makes the page so busy w/ superfluous information that I find it distracting. I also find the gratuitous use of a rhythm sign at the beginning of each measure distracting. We totally agree on this Number bars at the beginning of each staff (easier to navigate the score - no numbering is hopeless when discussing a score via mail f. ex.) Some people prefer numbering every fifth bar. I like it on every measure. When working w/ other musicians the 2 or 3 seconds everyone takes as they count from the first measure of that line (or 5th measure) is distracting. I know this clutters up the page but the brain quickly learns to disregard them. Yes, I know I stand virtually alone on this point. A good tab program should give you the choice. My distinction was between numbers or _no_ numbers. Each or each 5th bar is better than none at all as you may often encounter Adjust the tablature font size to your sight (some can read 8-10 point, I'm most comfortable with 12-14) That is sort of difficult on paper :) 12-14 works for me. And for any kind of performance I use a bold variant. Visibility, visibility visibility! Anything smaller means that the music has to be so close as to lose any contact w/ the audience. What's the point of having a beautiful instrument if your audience only sees a standard issue music stand? Hear, hear! As a number cruncher, bold italics 12-14 works best for me Tablature numbers on lines makes for quicker reading, (at least for me) (debatable also for letters) I always wonder why people think tablature with a strike-through should be easier to read. Would you strike through everything in a book? Ditto! It's pointless to take a perfectly readable typeface and then run a stupid line through it! That stupid line is so thin, it really does not interfere with the visibility of the cipher, while instantly and unequivocally gives the right course. If I knew of a hassle free site where I could post an example, a GIF would say more than a thousand postings. Any suggestions? I am aware, that these are my own very personal settings. From what I've seen these past 15 or so years, not _one_ editor does it like any other. Each and everyone has at least some personal features. Some are easy to read, some are quite difficult, like those with the raster rhythm signs and also those, who try to emulate the original facsimile with some fancy but hard to read font. One more personal thing I need is to seperate long passaggi into groups of 4 (or 6 if nec.). When flying along on consort music or Terzi that little dot below doesn't do
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Peter Nightingale wrote: See Feynman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EZcpTTjjXY Fascinating, captain. A prominent scientist offering two minutes of meaningless generalities without a single fact. Completely illogical. Yours truly. Mr. Spock -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Hi, New to ther Lute list, and just acquired a Renaissance lute and had a wonderful lesson with Ed Martin last Thursday. I have been typesetting and transcribing music in Finale since 2000. I just acquired and registered Fronimo last night. What I am seeing in this thread are pleas for BOTH standardization AND maleability, and I totally understand the need for both. With many high end graphics and typesetting / notation programs, the developers do their best to keep their file types proprietary. This allows them to earn a living from selling their programs. The down-side is that is limits the ability of the user to share files with colleagues, unless their colleagues have also bought the same expensive program. Add to this that if I haven't upgraded (i.e. sent another ton of money to the developer) my Finale program, I won't be able to open files from a colleague who has and sends me their newer version. It's a frustrating racket that thwarts maleability. I would like to see more cooperation amongst developers in this regard. I realize that for somebody writing a notation program in their spare time this could be a time consuming thing (nightmare?), but wouldn't it be nice if one could import, for example, a Fronimo file into Finale, or vice versa? Or at least be able to change the formatting of a file to suit your taste without having to start entering every character from the beginning? One feature in Finale that I find very useful is you can import a MIDI file and it will notate it automatically (errors, of course, but much quicker than starting from scratch). This is a feature I would like to see built into Fronimo. Finale probably wouldn't even talk to Francesco, but perhaps other Lute Tablature developers could work together on sharing file types? All that said, the best way to share printed music on the web that I have found so far is PDF. PDFs are not alterable, but they sure are handy. Unfortunately, to MAKE PDFs it usually requires that one has bought the full version of Adobe Acrobat (not cheap), which incorporates a printer called the Acrobat Distiller. One must use this feature in order to embed fonts like Fronimo Pavan, that other users may not have in their computers. Otherwise the end user sees gobbletygook. (I actually got Spiders once!) One can make scans into PDFs also (I do this by importing the scanned image into a graphics program like CorelDraw, then printing to the Distiller), but to get good resolution the scan needs to be at least 300 - 400 dpi and the Distiller PDF settings should be 1200 dpi. Otherwise the end user cannot enlarge it for their older eyes without it being blurry. Anyway, I think whatever software develpoers could do to allow their users to share files would be a benefit. Tom Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362 On 8 Dec 2008 at 9:50, howard posner wrote: On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Peter Nightingale wrote: See Feynman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EZcpTTjjXY Fascinating, captain. A prominent scientist offering two minutes of meaningless generalities without a single fact. Completely illogical. Yours truly. Mr. Spock -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.13/1826 - Release Date: 12/3/2008 9:34 AM Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
For PDFs, Mac OSX has a built-in Print to PDF feature that works well. For Windows there are free virtual printers around that also work pretty well. I remember using one that had Pony in the name (sorry to be so vague). On Dec 8, 2008, at 9:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, New to ther Lute list, and just acquired a Renaissance lute and had a wonderful lesson with Ed Martin last Thursday. I have been typesetting and transcribing music in Finale since 2000. I just acquired and registered Fronimo last night. What I am seeing in this thread are pleas for BOTH standardization AND maleability, and I totally understand the need for both. With many high end graphics and typesetting / notation programs, the developers do their best to keep their file types proprietary. This allows them to earn a living from selling their programs. The down-side is that is limits the ability of the user to share files with colleagues, unless their colleagues have also bought the same expensive program. Add to this that if I haven't upgraded (i.e. sent another ton of money to the developer) my Finale program, I won't be able to open files from a colleague who has and sends me their newer version. It's a frustrating racket that thwarts maleability. I would like to see more cooperation amongst developers in this regard. I realize that for somebody writing a notation program in their spare time this could be a time consuming thing (nightmare?), but wouldn't it be nice if one could import, for example, a Fronimo file into Finale, or vice versa? Or at least be able to change the formatting of a file to suit your taste without having to start entering every character from the beginning? One feature in Finale that I find very useful is you can import a MIDI file and it will notate it automatically (errors, of course, but much quicker than starting from scratch). This is a feature I would like to see built into Fronimo. Finale probably wouldn't even talk to Francesco, but perhaps other Lute Tablature developers could work together on sharing file types? All that said, the best way to share printed music on the web that I have found so far is PDF. PDFs are not alterable, but they sure are handy. Unfortunately, to MAKE PDFs it usually requires that one has bought the full version of Adobe Acrobat (not cheap), which incorporates a printer called the Acrobat Distiller. One must use this feature in order to embed fonts like Fronimo Pavan, that other users may not have in their computers. Otherwise the end user sees gobbletygook. (I actually got Spiders once!) One can make scans into PDFs also (I do this by importing the scanned image into a graphics program like CorelDraw, then printing to the Distiller), but to get good resolution the scan needs to be at least 300 - 400 dpi and the Distiller PDF settings should be 1200 dpi. Otherwise the end user cannot enlarge it for their older eyes without it being blurry. Anyway, I think whatever software develpoers could do to allow their users to share files would be a benefit. Tom Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362 On 8 Dec 2008 at 9:50, howard posner wrote: On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Peter Nightingale wrote: See Feynman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EZcpTTjjXY Fascinating, captain. A prominent scientist offering two minutes of meaningless generalities without a single fact. Completely illogical. Yours truly. Mr. Spock -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.13/1826 - Release Date: 12/3/2008 9:34 AM Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Hit Reply instead of Reply All... -Original Message- From: Guy Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 1:02 PM To: 'Doc Rossi' Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines Word 2007 has a Save to PDF feature (introduced with that version, I think). Never tried it, though. Guy -Original Message- From: Doc Rossi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 12:39 PM To: List LUTELIST Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines For PDFs, Mac OSX has a built-in Print to PDF feature that works well. For Windows there are free virtual printers around that also work pretty well. I remember using one that had Pony in the name (sorry to be so vague). On Dec 8, 2008, at 9:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, New to ther Lute list, and just acquired a Renaissance lute and had a wonderful lesson with Ed Martin last Thursday. I have been typesetting and transcribing music in Finale since 2000. I just acquired and registered Fronimo last night. What I am seeing in this thread are pleas for BOTH standardization AND maleability, and I totally understand the need for both. With many high end graphics and typesetting / notation programs, the developers do their best to keep their file types proprietary. This allows them to earn a living from selling their programs. The down-side is that is limits the ability of the user to share files with colleagues, unless their colleagues have also bought the same expensive program. Add to this that if I haven't upgraded (i.e. sent another ton of money to the developer) my Finale program, I won't be able to open files from a colleague who has and sends me their newer version. It's a frustrating racket that thwarts maleability. I would like to see more cooperation amongst developers in this regard. I realize that for somebody writing a notation program in their spare time this could be a time consuming thing (nightmare?), but wouldn't it be nice if one could import, for example, a Fronimo file into Finale, or vice versa? Or at least be able to change the formatting of a file to suit your taste without having to start entering every character from the beginning? One feature in Finale that I find very useful is you can import a MIDI file and it will notate it automatically (errors, of course, but much quicker than starting from scratch). This is a feature I would like to see built into Fronimo. Finale probably wouldn't even talk to Francesco, but perhaps other Lute Tablature developers could work together on sharing file types? All that said, the best way to share printed music on the web that I have found so far is PDF. PDFs are not alterable, but they sure are handy. Unfortunately, to MAKE PDFs it usually requires that one has bought the full version of Adobe Acrobat (not cheap), which incorporates a printer called the Acrobat Distiller. One must use this feature in order to embed fonts like Fronimo Pavan, that other users may not have in their computers. Otherwise the end user sees gobbletygook. (I actually got Spiders once!) One can make scans into PDFs also (I do this by importing the scanned image into a graphics program like CorelDraw, then printing to the Distiller), but to get good resolution the scan needs to be at least 300 - 400 dpi and the Distiller PDF settings should be 1200 dpi. Otherwise the end user cannot enlarge it for their older eyes without it being blurry. Anyway, I think whatever software develpoers could do to allow their users to share files would be a benefit. Tom Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362 On 8 Dec 2008 at 9:50, howard posner wrote: On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Peter Nightingale wrote: See Feynman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EZcpTTjjXY Fascinating, captain. A prominent scientist offering two minutes of meaningless generalities without a single fact. Completely illogical. Yours truly. Mr. Spock -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.13/1826 - Release Date: 12/3/2008 9:34 AM Tom Draughon Heartistry Music http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
I switched to Mac from Windows, and could no longer use Fronimo(Bad Move! said Francesco, when I asked him how I could use Fronimo on my new computer!) Thanks to someone's tip, I did download free from the internet Cute PDF, which allowed me to transform Fronimo files into PDFs, and share them with myself on Macbetter than nothing! Betsy On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Guy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hit Reply instead of Reply All... -Original Message- From: Guy Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 1:02 PM To: 'Doc Rossi' Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines Word 2007 has a Save to PDF feature (introduced with that version, I think). Never tried it, though. Guy -Original Message- From: Doc Rossi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 12:39 PM To: List LUTELIST Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines For PDFs, Mac OSX has a built-in Print to PDF feature that works well. For Windows there are free virtual printers around that also work pretty well. I remember using one that had Pony in the name (sorry to be so vague). On Dec 8, 2008, at 9:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, New to ther Lute list, and just acquired a Renaissance lute and had a wonderful lesson with Ed Martin last Thursday. I have been typesetting and transcribing music in Finale since 2000. I just acquired and registered Fronimo last night. What I am seeing in this thread are pleas for BOTH standardization AND maleability, and I totally understand the need for both. With many high end graphics and typesetting / notation programs, the developers do their best to keep their file types proprietary. This allows them to earn a living from selling their programs. The down-side is that is limits the ability of the user to share files with colleagues, unless their colleagues have also bought the same expensive program. Add to this that if I haven't upgraded (i.e. sent another ton of money to the developer) my Finale program, I won't be able to open files from a colleague who has and sends me their newer version. It's a frustrating racket that thwarts maleability. I would like to see more cooperation amongst developers in this regard. I realize that for somebody writing a notation program in their spare time this could be a time consuming thing (nightmare?), but wouldn't it be nice if one could import, for example, a Fronimo file into Finale, or vice versa? Or at least be able to change the formatting of a file to suit your taste without having to start entering every character from the beginning? One feature in Finale that I find very useful is you can import a MIDI file and it will notate it automatically (errors, of course, but much quicker than starting from scratch). This is a feature I would like to see built into Fronimo. Finale probably wouldn't even talk to Francesco, but perhaps other Lute Tablature developers could work together on sharing file types? All that said, the best way to share printed music on the web that I have found so far is PDF. PDFs are not alterable, but they sure are handy. Unfortunately, to MAKE PDFs it usually requires that one has bought the full version of Adobe Acrobat (not cheap), which incorporates a printer called the Acrobat Distiller. One must use this feature in order to embed fonts like Fronimo Pavan, that other users may not have in their computers. Otherwise the end user sees gobbletygook. (I actually got Spiders once!) One can make scans into PDFs also (I do this by importing the scanned image into a graphics program like CorelDraw, then printing to the Distiller), but to get good resolution the scan needs to be at least 300 - 400 dpi and the Distiller PDF settings should be 1200 dpi. Otherwise the end user cannot enlarge it for their older eyes without it being blurry. Anyway, I think whatever software develpoers could do to allow their users to share files would be a benefit. Tom Tom Draughon Heartistry Music [5]http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362 On 8 Dec 2008 at 9:50, howard posner wrote: On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Peter Nightingale wrote: See Feynman: [6]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EZcpTTjjXY Fascinating, captain. A prominent scientist offering two minutes
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines
Portrait. New rhythm sign at a change or at a new line. I have some poorly edited publications in which a rhythm sign is redundantly introduced, and it just causes confusion. Consistency within a piece is perhaps the better rule: new sign only with a change of rhythm or line; or, all notes using a grid. There are times in fast passages of many notes per bar that the grid system visually organizes the notes so that the beat can be more easily maintained. M2CW Leonard Williams On 12/8/08 7:05 AM, G. Crona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, I agree with your preferences, especially about the diapassons. FWIW, here are some personal guidelines that have crystalized through the years, and this in relation to tablatures only, I'm not talking about grand staff or notation: Landscape view, to make the score easily readable on the screen (or steady on the music stand) Do not repeat rhytmic signs until they actually change value (much easier to read in all respects, also for prima-vista) Number bars at the beginning of each staff (easier to navigate the score - no numbering is hopeless when discussing a score via mail f. ex.) Don't cram the staffs. 6 on one sheet is maximum for my 12-14 point font in landscape view Adjust the tablature font size to your sight (some can read 8-10 point, I'm most comfortable with 12-14) Wherever possible, slightly reduce global symbol spacing to include those 2 or three bars on page 2 to avoid a page change Include composer name, date of publication and eventual name of publication, but also the library and shelf name for easier locating of the original facsimile if a manuscript. Allow room for pencil marks of ornaments etc. Tablature numbers on lines makes for quicker reading, (at least for me) (debatable also for letters) Make book editions instead of single pieces, for easier navigating and correcting, as well as global page settings Include a few (or many) lines of available information from New Grove or original source at beginning or end of book (not forgetting to name the contributors when available!) as well as info on personal settings, signs, etc. of publication And a note to our eminent programmers. Please, please, make works made in earlier versions of the program display *perfectly* on the newer version. IMO, don't publish a newer version until this is the case! This is now _not_ the case :( I am aware, that these are my own very personal settings. From what I've seen these past 15 or so years, not _one_ editor does it like any other. Each and everyone has at least some personal features. Some are easy to read, some are quite difficult, like those with the raster rhythm signs and also those, who try to emulate the original facsimile with some fancy but hard to read font. IMO the main guiding formula should always be to keep it as _simple_ and as _easily readable_ as possible, at the same time providing the most information possible. A tablature publication should _not_ try to be a work of art in that sense - it should mainly be an instrument to enable duplication and interpretation of the composers intentions. So I for one would prefer to throw those other unhelpful aesthetic considerations overboard. Modern (as in newly composed) scores will probably have to differ from these guidelines in some respects I've probably forgotten something, but WTH Best G. - Original Message - From: David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:54 AM Subject: [LUTE] tablature notation guidelines These days there are many software packages enabling everybody to produce tablatures. Many of us do, for free on our websites or in home-made inexpensive editions. Not all of these tablatures are as beautiful, or as easy to read. For the free or inexpensive editions that's fine with me; if the content is interesting I'll read from anything, or make my own version if it's too revolting. I'm glad I could find the music. But in looking at not so inexpensive editions from 'real' publishers, I am repeatedly struck by their far from perfect tablatures, and staff notation for that matter, as well. For staff notation, there are guidelines that help in making decisions on how to solve notational questions. The better engraving software will automatically follow these guidelines. For an example, have a look at http://mpa.org/music_notation/. These guidelines should present musicians with more or less standard sheet music. The benefits are obvious: it's fine to be able to read facsimiles, necessary for us, obviously, but when you're playing in an orchestra and are presented with your part on the day of the rehearsal or the concert, it's nice you don't have to spend time in deciphering what the editor meant. So, in stead of complaining about the poor output of such and such software, engraver or
[LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines, impossible!
And therein lies the problem. I have a copy of Rainer's Holborne edition (which is an impressive and valuable piece of scholarship). I'd love to have it in digital form so I could tinker with format and what have you, but I fully understand Rainer's reluctance to release his sources, which is why I've never even asked. Open Source is an interesting and sometimes useful approach to things, but it has its limits. Guy -Original Message- From: adS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:20 PM To: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: tablature notation guidelines, impossible! Dana, as you know I am one of the people on the lute net who created a scholarly edition of lute music. I totally disagree. If you provide tablature in electronic format you completely loose control. The files will be distributed, modified, distributed again, appear with a different copyright notice, ... To create and distribute tablature in electronic format is fine. However, this will never replace printed editions. The only thing one could consider is pdf. pdf or ps is used by some (at least mathematical) on-line journals. For a scholarly edition you must produce a frozen version. However, I must say that I would never publish anything as a pdf file that took more than a few days. Rainer adS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I come late to this discussion, and can barely take the time today to pen this, but will try. Modern engraved music has evolved in several major publishing houses taking lifetimes of numerous senior editors who have interacted with the representatives of major orchestras thruout the world to settle issues such sa the ones I see up for debate. We dont have to make money witht he resulting decisions as they did, so we arent as likely to have that focus to keep us from endless debate. And, with todays technology, we have a better way to deal with it all. If the player has an electronic file specifying the tablature, and suitable software, she can cause to be displayed or printed whatever pleases. German tab becomes staff, french, or neapolitan tab as desired. Big print, small, wide, narrow, whatever. Data entry by us as a large committee wouldnt take so long; the resulting DB could be handled PD online, with minimal download fees supporting the website and perhaps an administrator (modestly). Current print publishers would have to find some hook to keep our interest in their editions, perhaps we will cease to need them and they can go on to other business. There is no 'everyman' answer to even the first question, which form - french, italian, german? Yes, most seem to prefer french, but enough prefer italian that you cant ignore that market. There is then other issues - what font to use, thru lines or between spaces, how large the type, seperate sparse flags or totally beamed. Petrucci-style floating flags or all flags above. If ornaments are to be printed, which set of signs are to be used? Alphabeto lurks in the wings if anyone thinks these issues can find any resolution. No, best way is to defer the decision to the enduser and provide an enabling technology. Maybe even a choice of technologys. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
