Re: [abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:31:28 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wil Macaulay wrote - Another historic moment! Phil and Bryan and I all agree on something! John agreed too. Put it in the standard, quick, before we lose it! Oh happy day! Over to you Jef? No problem: it is simpler, and it will be in the next release. Sorry for I misunderstood the previous thread... -- Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** | http://moinejf.free.fr/ Pépé Jef| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:32:39 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] For instance with L:1/4, [GD2] A B c would take four beats and [D2G] A B c would take five. [snip] I though from the previous discussion that the length of the chord was the length of the smallest note (and that's what abcm2ps does). Then, if you want a bigger length, you may add invisible rests. -- Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** | http://moinejf.free.fr/ Pépé Jef| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Jef Moine wrote - I though from the previous discussion that the length of the chord was the length of the smallest note (and that's what abcm2ps does). Then, if you want a bigger length, you may add invisible rests. In a previous discussion, some people wanted the first note to give the length of the chord. But later, it seems that everybody agreed using the length of the smallest note. Not how I recall it and I certainly did not agree that. Invisible rests were not, at the time, part of the standard. At least it confirms that different length notes in a chord should not be illegal. I have just been trying to look up the original discussion in the archive. It appears under the threads "Abacus 1.0.0 launch" and "suggestions for [A4A2] notation " about a year ago. The archive is not easy to follow. The discussion did not seem to come to any particular conclusion. I had started from "highest note" defines chord length and had been persuaded that this would not work. I suggested "first listed note" and there seemed to be a concensus in that direction. I changed Abacus accordingly. Then someone started insisting that "shortest note" was best without giving very clear reasons. I said that I was not prepared to change Abacus again until given a good reason to do so. After that, the thread rather fizzled out. My case for "first listed note" is that it is unambiguous and independant of the musical content. The question to consider is "What is clearest and easiest to understand for the user?" Bryan Creer
Re: [abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Wil Macaulay wrote: I agree with Bryan's conclusions (and that's what I did for Skink). Me too. I _think_ that's what BarFly does (although since it's not a feature I make use of I'd really have to go and check). Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Wil Macaulay wrote - Another historic moment! Phil and Bryan and I all agree on something! Put it in the standard, quick, before we lose it! Oh happy day! Over to you Jef? Bryan Creer
[abcusers] Re: Chord length - waaaah!
Nobody is opposing the [abc]2 idea are they? Can we take that as agreed and get onto the far more important business of different note lengths in one chord? Irwin Oppenheim wrote - All the notes within a chord should have the same length. More complicated chords can be transcribed with the operator, see section Voice overlay. This was discussed about a year ago and it was generally accepted that you could have notes of different lengths in the same chord. The issue, as John Chambers has mentioned, was which note represented the time elapsed before the following note - highest, lowest, longest, shortest... I opted for first listed on the grounds that it was independant of the musical content. Some agreed but others did not and (as usual) the dicussion reached no firm conclusion. I went ahead and implemented it in Abacus on this basis. For instance with L:1/4, [GD2] A B c would take four beats and [D2G] A B c would take five. I do put notes of two different length on different stems. I hate to think what would happen with notes of three different lengths. I'm quite happy to implement the (or whatever) notation as well but do not want to see what I've already done outlawed. John Chambers wrote - Similarly, the [ce][Bd] case is very useful, and already works with some abc software. It works with Abacus. Bryan Creer
