Choan Gálvez <choan.gal...@gmail.com> writes: > Current tunings for tenor and baritone ukulele are string > reversed. From `ly/string-tunings-init.ly`: > > %% ukulele tunings > \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-tuning \stringTuning <g' c' e' a'> > \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-d-tuning \stringTuning <a' d' fis' b'> > \makeDefaultStringTuning #'tenor-ukulele-tuning \stringTuning <a' e' c' g> > \makeDefaultStringTuning #'baritone-ukulele-tuning \stringTuning <e' b g d> > > Those two last tuning should be <g c' e' a'> and <d g b e'> respectively. > > In addition, I'd say those two tunings are weirly named -- from the > same file, all guitar tunings are named `guitar-something`, all banjo > tunings `banjo-something`.
But those are not tenor or baritone tunings of a ukulele, but rather tunings of the tenor or baritone ukulele. Namely different instruments. So there is some consistency after all: <instrument>-<tuningvariant>-tuning Not sure whether this reason is good enough. > As I haven't find any report about the wrong definitions, I think it's > be safe to assume that no one is using them and it would be ok to > rename them. Indeed this would seem to indicate that a convert-ly rule would not need to accompany such a change. > I'd suggest rewriting them as: > > \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-linear-tuning \stringTuning <g c' e' a'> > \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-baritone-tuning \stringTuning <d g b e'> > > or alternatively, remove them. > > What do you think? Not sure about the renaming. Of course, strings need to get reversed. It would appear that this had been wrong in any version of the file. I seem to remember, however, that LilyPond is not overly skilled dealing with non-increasing string pitches, so the standard ukulele would likely not be fabulously supported either. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user