John Walsh said > Oh, did Bryan mean that statement seriously? Hmm... I thought >there was a hint of sarcasm there, just as I've taken this entire >thread as an indirect demonstration that the saying "abc is for the music >alone*" (_whatever_ that may mean), is a worthy rule of thumb for overall >design, but an unreliable guide for individual decisions.
Sorry John, but I was perfectly serious. There was no intention of sarcasm but perhaps my dealings with this list have left me a little bitter and twisted. Laurie said - >An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open >E string is musically relevant. If you are going to go down to that level of detail for guitars in conventional tuning then you must allow it for any and every instrument in any tuning. It would be just as valid for me to try and notate cross fingering on the English concertina (which you have to do if you want to play a fifth jump legato rather than staccato, so it does make a difference to the sound and hence fits Laurie's criterion for musical relevance). I would consider it absurd to do so. I don't believe that the abc format has the capacity to handle all the variations that this policy would produce so although "abc is for the music alone" might be a bit absolute, I think it is the direction to go. Matters of performance, including choice of instrument, are for the performer. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
