Choan Gálvez <choan.gal...@gmail.com> writes: > On 5/12/12 16:08 , David Kastrup wrote: >> 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. > > Yes. And no. The most common tuning for ukuleles --soprano, concert > and tenor-- is <g' c' e' a'> (C reentrant tuning). > > The one which is currently defined as `tenor-ukulele-tuning` is used > in soprano, concert and baritone too: <g c' e' a'> (C linear tuning). > > And the most used tuning for tenor ukuleles is <g' c' e' a'> > (currently ukulele-tuning, that's fine). > > The `baritone-ukulele-tuning` is used --as far as I know-- only in > baritone sized instruments, as the pitches are too low to sound nice > in small instruments. But... there is an "A linear tuning" for > baritone too. > > I'd use the following naming strategy: > > * Start with "ukulele-" > * Use "pitch-" when the tuning is other than the common C tuning (C6) > * Use "linear-" when the tuning is linear instead of the more common > reentrant tuning > * Finish with "tuning".
I find "linear" weird. But it is not relevant what _I_ find weird if that is what Ukulele players associate with it. Programmers of LilyPond rarely know all the instruments that they are writing support for. If you have a development version of LilyPond checked out, I would suggest preparing a patch/issue using git-cl. Otherwise, submitting a careful proposal to the bug list should get your issue added to the bug database, but it will depend on someone picking it up to get a fix created. So proposing a patch yourself will speed up the process and make sure that the code corresponds best with what you consider useful for your instrument. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
