Re: [abcusers] something really simple

[Bob Archer]

Jack Campin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> >In an attempt to wrap up this thread, would the following proposal
> >for a new field meet everyone's requirements ?
> >
> >Field Name: q:playing style
> >Header: Yes
> >Tune Body: No
> >Description: Contains a written non-numerical description of the
> >  tune's tempo or "mood".
> >
> >Examples: 
> >
> >q:Allegro
> >q:Lento
> 
> That says exactly nothing about the semantics.

I think it does say something about the semantics. The text is part 
of the 'q' field which gives it the semantics 'a textual description of 
the speed of the tune'.

> Unless your "q:" field provides me with a way of DEFINING those
> strings in a musically intuitive way so that a numerical playback
> speed can be statically deduced from the musical text (e.g. by a
> playback program), there is no point in what you're suggesting.  There
> are already about 10 different ways to put uninterpreted text into a
> tune header, we *do not* need another one.

It's not uninterpreted text, it's text with a meaning. We already have 
the Q field which provides a computer readable indication of the 
speed usable by player programs. We now have this field to provide 
a textual description for display programs.

> And these *have* to go in tune bodies.  It is quite routine for tempo
> to change in the middle of a piece.

Agreed. I'd suggest that Q and q fields be allowed in the body of a 
tune.

> That suggestion ignores 95% of the issues we've discussed in this
> thread so it's nowhere near "wrapping it up".  The central problem is
> how to specify the required definition mechanism.

Actually, I think the advantage of the suggestion is that it ignores 
95% of the issues discussed. I think it cuts to the chase.

A player program might default to looking at the Q field to get its 
tempo, or it could have the tempo specified on the command line, 
or it could have a separate "tempo definitions" file (similar to a 
stress file) and attempt to interpret the text in the q field (thus 
allowing for tempo descriptions such as "A little too fast")

A display program can choose to display the Q field, the q field, 
both or neither depending on what program specific options are set.

With the caveat that q should be allowed in the tune body I like the 
suggestion. I think it hits the sweet spot between power and 
simplicity, and it avoids adding fields which should be placed 
before the beginning of the first tune in a file. The extra 'per file 
definition fields' seems like quite a major extension to ABC to me, I 
don't think we have anything quite like that at the moment, and I'm 
not convinced about the need to add it for this.

> In the case of pipe band marches, each band today has its own set of
> tempi.  There are ABC files out there with hundreds of marches.  It's
> up to the pipe-major to decide the speed, NOT the tune transcriber,
> and it's a waste of the P-M's time if they have to go through the
> whole file and treat every tune as a special case.

I would suspect that the P-M would have a tempo definition file on 
their computer containing their preferred definitions and would have 
set the playback program to use the q field rather than the Q field. 

Bob


--
-- Bob Archer  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

[abcusers] Tune information

[Frank Nordberg]

Does anybody know anything about this tune?

Frank Nordberg

---


X:3294
T:The admiral's hornpipe
C:anon.
R:Hornpipe
Z:Transcribed by Frank Nordberg - http://www.musicaviva.com
M:2/4
L:1/16
K:F
D|FGAB AGFA|G2D2 D3D|FGAB AGFA|B2G2 G3G|
FGAB AGFA|G2D2 B3G|FGAB AGFA|G2F2 F2z2|
F3G AGFA|GFGA B2z2|G3A BAGB|AGFG A2z2|
F3G AGFA|GFGA B2G2|F2AG F2AF|DFGA BAGA|
FGAB AGFA|G2D2 D3D|FGAB AGFA|B2G2 G3G|
FGAB AGFA|G2D2 B3G|FGAB AGFA|G2F2 F2z|]
W:
W:
W:  From Musica Viva - http://www.musicaviva.com
W:  the Internet center for free sheet music downloads.

---
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

Re: [abcusers] something really simple

[Jack Campin]

>> Unless your "q:" field provides me with a way of DEFINING those strings
>> in a musically intuitive way so that a numerical playback speed can be
>> statically deduced from the musical text (e.g. by a playback program),
>> there is no point in what you're suggesting.  There are already about
>> 10 different ways to put uninterpreted text into a tune header, we *do
>> not* need another one.
> The problem I have with the "definition" idea is that definitions are
> only useful if you re-use the definition. If a term is defined at the
> beginning of a tune, used once and then lost there is no point in
> having it. This seems to be how written tempos are normally used.

No it isn't.  A typical dance tune book will use "reel time" or "waltz
tempo" the same way all through.  In the Kurdish song book I quoted,
the same Italian tempo terms are used over and over again and are NEVER
defined at the beginning of a tune.  There wouldn't be any point in
tempo terms unless they had an understood meaning in a context wider
than an individual tune.  Today, everybody who has a metronome uses the
commonest 8 or so Italian terms in the same way to about 1% precision
because they're engraved on the scale, and I would guess the world
contains a few million more metronome users than ABC users.

A typical case where definitions need both to be shared among multiple
tunes and also need to be easily redefinable: military marches.  In some
cases, British regiments have been using the same tunes to march to for
300 years.  And they have usually had their tempi labelled the same way
all that time: slow march, quickstep, retreat.  But the numerical values
of those tempi have risen steadily over the years, as soldiers have had
better roads to march on and needed to carry less of their own equipment
(the exact numbers are in period military manuals, and were insisted
on; disagree with the RSM about the speed of a march and you could look
forward to cleaning the parade ground with a toothbrush).  And these
terms have still faster definitions when the same tunes are used for
country dances.  So, if you've got a file of marches, and want to hear
them as they might have been played in the American War of Independence
or the Crimean War, it makes sense to just change the tempo definitions
*once* at the start of the file and have *all* the tunes interpreted
consistently.

In the case of pipe band marches, each band today has its own set of
tempi.  There are ABC files out there with hundreds of marches.  It's
up to the pipe-major to decide the speed, NOT the tune transcriber,
and it's a waste of the P-M's time if they have to go through the
whole file and treat every tune as a special case.


> It seems we haven't even agreed what the problem is.

The problem is how to use textual descriptions of numerical playback
speeds in ABC.


> I think it will be difficult to agree on a solution.

We've had quite a few variant proposals but they're mostly in the same
ballpark regarding what they can express, most of the differences are
merely syntactic.  So I don't think this is going to be all that hard.

===  ===


To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

Re: [abcusers] something really simple

[James Allwright]

On Thu 22 Nov 2001 at 12:22AM +, Jack Campin wrote:
> 
> That says exactly nothing about the semantics.
> 
> Unless your "q:" field provides me with a way of DEFINING those strings
> in a musically intuitive way so that a numerical playback speed can be
> statically deduced from the musical text (e.g. by a playback program),
> there is no point in what you're suggesting.  There are already about
> 10 different ways to put uninterpreted text into a tune header, we *do
> not* need another one.
> 

The problem I have with the "definition" idea is that definitions are
only useful if you re-use the definition. If a term is defined at the
beginning of a tune, used once and then lost there is no point in
having it. This seems to be how written tempos are normally used.

It seems we haven't even agreed what the problem is. I think it will
be difficult to agree on a solution.

James Allwright

To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

Re: [abcusers] something really simple

[James Allwright]

On Wed 21 Nov 2001 at 01:41PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> At 03:40 PM 11-21-2001 +, James Allwright you wrote:
> 
> >In an attempt to wrap up this thread, would the following proposal
> >for a new field meet everyone's requirements ?
> >
> >Field Name: q:playing style
> >Header: Yes
> >Tune Body: No
> 
> Would this make it impossible to transcribe music which is supposed to be 
> played "Placidly" in the main, except for a passage which is supposed to be 
> played "Excitedly"?

Use "_Excitedly" in the middle of the tune and then go back with
"_Placidly".

> 
> >Description: Contains a written non-numerical description of the
> >   tune's tempo or "mood".
> >
> >Examples:
> >
> >q:Allegro
> >q:Lento
> 
> Could the proposal be fleshed out more?  How does the new q: field interact 
> with the Q: field? 

It doesn't really, except that in the absence of a Q: field, a player
program might try to interpret the q: field to choose the tempo to
use.


> Any recommendations as to how playback or printout 
> programs should treat q: and Q: fields?
> 

A  playback program looks for a Q: field and ignores the q: field
most of the time (unless it is a top-of-the-range abc program
which knows how to how to read Italian).

A printout program would probably print whichever field
is present and both if you have both unless you have some 
special option to suppress one or the other.

James Allwright
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

Re: [abcusers] how to change L:

[James Allwright]

Try abc2abc. This has options for doubling up and halving the L:
value used. I usually stick with one L: value for a tune though;
swapping about would make it too confusing to read in my opinion.

James Allwright

On Wed 21 Nov 2001 at 11:06PM +0100, Simon Wascher wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> from time to time I come across abc text where I want to change the L:
> value, to say it more precise the value of one letter in the text, for
> the whole tune, after it is written. 
> 
> often it is that I want to change a tune from:
> 
> `a/b/c/d/ ag b2' to  `abcd a2g2 b4' 
> 
> Is there a tool that can perform such a change ?
> 
> there is some idea in my mind of an ideal tool which counts the
> "noteheads" i.e. the number of characters needed at differen L:values,
> so it is possible to optimize/minimize the number of characters needed
> by telling which is the best L: value for a short text (in the short
> example above, its 14 vs. 12 characters - last but not least this means
> compressing the tune size about 1/7, often it will be much more).
> 
> Simon Wascher
> 
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: 
>http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html