Eric Galluzzo wrote:
>I really like the U: mechanism, but I don't think that it's enough: I
>think that we need to be able to specify each symbol longhand as well.
>I don't personally care whether we use ! ! or ` ` or * * or what, but I
>think it would really be handy.
>
I agree with you that the U: mechanism runs out of steam a bit when
stretched to deal with music which has lots of dynamic markings and
other such embedded symbols. I'm currently transcribing a string
quartet as an experiment, and even using single-symbol marks the abc
is getting very cluttered. Mind you, using text symbols between
delimiter characters would be even worse from this point of view.
A better solution for this kind of music (and one which has been
suggested here before) is to use a separate track for dynamics and
other playing instructions. The idea is to move these symbols out
from the music and place them in separate fields parallel to the
tune, aligning them with the notes in the same way as the w: field
does for words.
>
>P.S. In case anyone's interested, I've recently put up some ABC tunes,
>mostly modern classical music, on my Web site; the URL is in my sig (go
>to the "My Compositions" link). They're not that great, but they're
>okay, and most are original. Some glitches in some ABC tools (namely,
>abcm2ps and abc2midi) are also thus exposed, with "Mysterious Is the
>Lord" being the primary culprit in both cases. ;)
>
I do like "Mischievous Dances". BarFly's player objects to the
mordents on chords though. Should the ornament be applied to both
notes?
Phil Taylor
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
