On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:18 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > It might be argued on that grounds that German note names should be > canonical: I know of no other note name language that has been employed > similarly for silly acronyms and word games.
Ravel isn't consistent in this regard: in this piece, "H" means plain b http://imslp.org/wiki/Menuet_sur_le_nom_d%27Haydn_%28Ravel,_Maurice%29 in this other piece, "B" means plain b http://imslp.org/wiki/Berceuse_sur_le_nom_de_Gabriel_Faur%C3%A9_%28Ravel,_Maurice%29 > Well, almost. When writing ut queant laxis > <URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ut_queant_laxis>, French note names > would be more appropriate. Oh, we don't have them. The Italian note > names use "do" rather than "ut". I have a Swiss accordion score from > 1933 here, and it uses "ut" throughout. Maybe it's just Swiss French, > or obsolete Swiss French. I don't know about Swiss French, but here in France we rarely use "ut" at all; it is merely used by snobbish people when referring to a piece's tonality: "Sonate en Ut Majeur" (but regular people will just say "Do Majeur"). Cheers, Valentin. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user