So the top line is a duration based on the key signature for which you are interested in composing in. So in 4/4 time you could decide the duration is a quarter note and then measures would look like: Measure 1: Dotted 1/2 note, quarter note carried over to the next measure as a quarter note, Measure 2: carried quarter note, quarter note, half note carried over to quarter note Measure 3: carried quarter note, quarter note, half note Measure 4: dotted 1/2 note, quarter note rest The quarter note rest I put in to complete the measure you could just as easily repeat the sequence.
The attack is used to decide if we single, double or triple play a note in a rhythm so adding the attack: Measure 1: 1/2 note with played quarter note (or visa versa), quarter note carried over to the next measure as a quarter note, Measure 2: carried quarter note, quarter note, half note carried over to quarter note Measure 3: carried quarter note, quarter note, half note Measure 4: dotted 1/2 note, quarter note rest So an attack of 3 on a 3 duration note on a piano would mean you hit a key 3 times for equal duration. An attack of 2 on a 3 duration note would mean one of 3 things: play 2 equal durations for the 3 duration time or play 1 duration then play a 2 duration note or play a 2 duration note and then a 1 duration note. If you read music I can send you a staff representation in pdf if you want me too. I did a simplified translation of this. The goal would be to chose a note (quarter note, eighth note, sixteenth note, etc) as the base duration that minimizes the carry of a held note over to the next measure. Tom McGuire > On Apr 22, 2020, at 6:45 PM, Devon McCormick <devon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Tom - I will be happy to share whatever I do with this. My main problem is > my lack of musical knowledge so it's helpful to have my music teacher > friend look this over. One thing that confused both of us is the output of > the "RSLTNT" code on page 54. I see that you reproduced this in J as > "resultant" but am unsure how the output, e.g. 3 2 1 3 1 2 3,:2 1 1 1 1 1 1 > as the output from RSLTNT 5 3, is supposed to sound. > > The book says of this output that the "...first line contains the same > durations derived by the geometric method (the intervals between > endpoints), and the second line shows the number of 'generators' > simultaneously 'attacking' each duration." Looking at the diagram on page > 55, I can follow how he generates the first line but am confused about the > second line. If the number of generators for the first "3" is 2, then why > isn't there a 2 for the last "3" as well? Is it because the beginnings of > the two attacks are not on the same beat as they are in the first case? > This seems like the sort of thing that might be more understandable if I > could hear how this result sounds. > > Thanks for the code. I don't currently have an APL installed on my machine > but it would be a good idea for working with this. > > Regards, > > Devon > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 5:48 PM Thomas McGuire <tmcguir...@gmail.com > <mailto:tmcguir...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> Devon, >> >> I believe I have only gotten as far as some of the Rhythm routines. The >> rhythm code is based on work of Schillinger >> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schillinger_System >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schillinger_System> < >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schillinger_System >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schillinger_System>>} who developed a method >> back in the early 1900s. Supposedly Benny Goodman, George Gershwin, and >> Glen Miller were influenced by the method. Cybernetic Music seemed to >> incorporate the rhythm in the routines for harmonizing a melody and counter >> point. Those are the parts I haven’t gotten to (and the ones I was most >> interested in). Much of my problem is that while I know some APL, I found I >> had to code in APL at times to make sure I was producing equivalent output. >> It was a pretty tedious process for someone who hadn’t used APL in long >> time. >> >> If you push further in the text and code up some the routines, I hope you >> will share. I would be interested in seeing how well they work. >> >> Tom McGuire >> >>> On Apr 22, 2020, at 2:22 PM, Devon McCormick <devon...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:devon...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 3:18 PM Thomas McGuire <tmcguir...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:tmcguir...@gmail.com> >> <mailto:tmcguir...@gmail.com <mailto:tmcguir...@gmail.com>>> wrote: >>> >>>> For those of you interested in using J as an adjunct to lilypond or >> other >>>> such program: >>>> >>>> Making a few changes to the lilypond statements that get prepended and >>>> appended to the notes generated (in my previous email on the subject). >> You >>>> can get lilypond to generate a midi file of the score: >>>> >>>> lilypondhdr =: ('\score{',LF);('\version "2.20.0"',LF);('\relative c'' >>>> {',LF);('\clef treble',LF);('\time 3/4',LF) >>>> lilypondend =: (('\layout {}',LF);('\midi {}',LF)),<'}' >>>> 'lilymusic.ly' fwrites~ ; lilypondhdr,(LF,~ each >>>> lilypondnotes,<'}'),lilypondend >>>> >>>> Basically adding the score tag and inserting '\layout {}’ and ‘\midi {}’ >>>> causes lilypond to generate both a pdf of the score and a midi file that >>>> GargeBand or other such program can play for you. When I generated >> MusicXML >>>> the musescore program could play the tune right from the score. >>>> >>>> Tom McGuire >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> >> > > > -- > > Devon McCormick, CFA > > Quantitative Consultant > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
