Re: [abcusers] abc's of old-time, country, texas swing andbluegrass

[\"R.J.Peach (personal mail)\"]

On 04 Nov 02 5:52 am, Frank Nordberg wrote:
> Jack Campin wrote:
> This probably isn't good netiquette, but try:
> http://www.musicaviva.com/test/reed.html
> with some bulk downloading program (such as Interarchy).
> One warning, though, the tif files are big, so you should see if you
> could manage with just the gifs first.

wget -A  gif -r  http://memory.loc.gov/afc/afcreed/

(linux)  gets the gifs & quite a lot of other stuff too

-- 
RJP - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .


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

Re: [abcusers] Over the rainbow

[\"R.J.Peach (personal mail)\"]

On 25 Oct 02 3:08 pm, John Chambers wrote:

> Of course, as with the plain-text vs word-processor debate, ABC lacks
> most of the fancy music formatting of some other packages.
Once upon a time, the orchestra was given the tune & perhaps an
indication of the bass line together with some general comment
about what sort of dance & that was that.
ABC can already deal  with this very well, and I should imagine
that that is all that the majority of musicians that use it want or  need.

>  But if we can keep it that  way,  with  "just  the  music"  and  a  minimum  
> of formatting  stuff,  then  ABC will probably live for a long time, for
> the same reason that we'll have plain-text files around  for  a  long
> time  despite  all  the  efforts  of  the  Word  Processor vendors to
> discourage or block its use.
Just so.  A good analogy.  Cannot help feeling that attempts to
make ABC more sophisticated would largely defeat it's greatest
virtue - of being essentially a simple `pencil & paper' notation method.

-- 
RJP - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .


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

Re: [abcusers] Over the rainbow

[\"R.J.Peach (personal mail)\"]

On 24 Oct 02 5:16 pm, John Chambers wrote:

> hand-written,  human readable music notation that didn't even require
> a computer, much less any specialized software. There are quite a lot
> of  abc  users  who  still use it this way.  I've suggested this to a
> number of people who  asked  me  how  to  solve  their  abc  software
> problems, and some of them have been happy with the answer.

Y. that is it's main virtue AFAIKS

> Maybe some day we'll all have full music software on our pocket  comm
> gadgets.
A tin whistle / Harmonica in the pocket is easier... (apart from the fluff)

> to  always  use  fancy music software, the Lilypond and MusicML folks
> are going to give you something much more  powerful  than  ABC.   The
> value  of  ABC is that it's simple, typable, and readable without any
> special software.  If we lose that, we will have lost one of the main
> reasons that ABC came into existence in the first place.

Something like Sibelius is just NOT going to be matched where
complex musical notation is concerned.

What might be useful is an import / export facility for ABC
that could be worth doing I reckon.


-- 
RJP - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .


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

Re: [abcusers] RE : tune finder

[\"R.J.Peach (personal mail)\"]

On 16 Jul 02 4:00 am, John Walsh wrote:
> John Chambers writes:
> >One of the cuter illustrations of this: There's an old test
> >for  telling whether someone is a scientist/engineer or one
> >of those humanities types.  You ask them "If you call a tail
> >a leg, how many legs does a dog have?"
> >
> >The answer, of course, is "Four, because calling a  tail  a
> >leg  doesn't  make  it one." (At which point the humanities
> >types all get indignant.  ;-)

If a tail is DEFINED to be a legthen  5
but still only 1 tail not 5 since we have not DEFINED a leg to be a tail


-- 
RJP - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .


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