On Sunday 26 October 2003 01:18 am, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:24:00 +0200
>
> Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I tried the \transpose c c' and feel that I am missing something.
> >
> > a c major scale c d e f g a b c should not force any octave jumps
> > if you think about it logically. As long as we know it is absolutly
> > within a set octave there should be no jumps. Only greater than
> > that octave would the notes need a different symbol.
>
> You mean "only greater than a seventh", not "only greater than an
> octave". What does your second "c" in the major scale mean? Is that
> the low c or the high c? A human assumes that the second c is the
> high c, but a computer needs some way to be told that. Relative mode
> lets you input a scale as c d e f g a b c
> and absolute mode lets you input the same scale as
> c d e f g a b c'
>
> > The point for me is that if I know the range of a peice I should be
> > able to hard code that into a peice so that I shouldn't need to
> > indicate changes unless they exceed that range.
>
> What if a song uses two octaves? How are you going to indicate which
> c you want?
>
> Although the ' and , marks may be confusing at first, there isn't any
> method of avoiding them. The best we can do is to minimize their
> use, by picking the appropiate input method (be it absolute,
> relative, or David's new method).
Please, I don't propose any new methods, only an anchor and a short
cut.
c4, for c,,,,
and fis:' for }\relative c'{ fis (is that's right?)
are suggested as enhancements to the old modes and to Mats' new mode,
as additions not changes. I think that it would be a very bad idea to
remove c,,,, or \relative [a-g]. daveA
--
D. Raleigh Arnold dra@ http://www.openguitar.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Lilypond-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
