Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
HP Hp are scale specific rather than instrument specific. You can play a pipe tune on a fiddle provided you know what the pipe mode is. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Taylor) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 11:53:57 +0100 Bryan Creer wrote: Strike the concertina's melancholy string! Blow the spirit-stirring harp like anything! W.S.Gilbert Laurie Griffiths said - An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open E string is musically relevant. My concertina doesn't have E or G strings and I'm not playing top E on the G string of my fiddle for anyone. A difference between two pieces of notation is musically relevant if and only if it means they should sound different. This and the example imply that the instrument being played is relevant. Wouldn't it be best to exclude instrument specific notation from abc? It could get very messy if you don't. That's a purist approach. While it would be nice to have a notation system uncluttered by instrument specific notation it would rule out a lot of useful stuff which is already in abc, e.g. the HP and Hp key signatures, u and v in fiddle music, and even [chords], since they are only relevant to polyphonic instruments. The difficulty is to know where to draw the line. Instrument-specific markings should not make it difficult to read or parse the abc. If Laurie wants to write something like ^F9S3e in his music to indicate that the note is to be played at a particular point on the fingerboard I don't see why he shouldn't. The result _does_ sound different, and is relevant to a guitarist playing from the music, and although I doubt if anybody will ever write a player program capable of dealing with such subtleties, I can see that such hints could be useful to a program which generated tablature from abc. Having said that, it's clear that if he wanted to mark every note with fret/string markings, he ought to be using tablature in the first place, rather than abc. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
RE: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
I have been trying for 2 days to unsubscribe from this list, as indicated below, and I'm still receiving messages. Please, could the owner(s) of this list take me out? The email address is either [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks. 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
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
gris_sanderson said - HP Hp are scale specific rather than instrument specific. You can play a pipe tune on a fiddle provided you know what the pipe mode is. Fair enough. Can you point me to any documentation and/or examples of their use? Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
John Walsh - One basis of misunderstanding here may be an assumption that instrument-specific notation must be carved in stone in the language--as u and v for upbow and downbow are now, for instance. It doesn't. (It can't, really, for abc doesn't have the resources. In my own case, I have to invent notation which would be quite useless to almost anyone else, and I certainly don't want to saddle others with it.) I agree wholeheartedly. What I don't want is to be told You can't use character such-and-such in your new abc extension, even though it would be of enormous benefit to all users, because I'm already using it to indicate forked F on the oboe. (It's a slightly different pitch so it is musically relevant.) I think a distinction has to be made between private and public abc. If you are just using abc as an input format for your own typesetting software, then obviously you can do what you like. It doesn't affect anybody else. If you are exchanging tunes with a group of people with the same specialist interest, again, no problem. as long as you've all got access to software that will handle it. The problem comes when you go public and try to distribute tunes to a wider audience. Then I think restrictions should apply. I figured you'd shown that that line of reasoning led to the outlawing of instrument-specific notation in abc. Well, it didn't take much figuring since that is what I stated explicitly but it is the public aspect of abc that I was referring to. I'm not sure why you consider this mislistthropic. I want to be able to exchange tunes with everybody, regardless of what instrument they play or what software they are using. I love you all! Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Bryan Creer writes: Well, it didn't take much figuring since that is what I stated explicitly but it is the public aspect of abc that I was referring to. I'm not sure why you consider this mislistthropic. I don't at all---I was just referring to your statement that: There was no intention of sarcasm but perhaps my dealings with this list have left me a little bitter and twisted. ...What I don't want is to be told You can't use character such-and-such in your new abc extension, even though it would be of enormous benefit to all users, because I'm already using it to indicate forked F on the oboe. (It's a slightly different pitch so it is musically relevant.) This brings up a problem I've noticed in some of the abc2ps clones, tho it's probably more general: some of the characters H--Z are permanently bound to notation---J to a slide, H to a fermata, S to a segno, P to a pralltriller... (The first three don't bother me, since I use the same characters for the same things, but the fourth does, since I don't.) According to the standard, these characters are supposed to be free, but they are rapidly being taken up. I have no real quarrel with this---I use most of the characters the same way myself, and I'm glad for the extra notation---*as long as there is a way to turn it off*. (!) Or even better, to redefine the binding. It could be an entry in the fmt file, for instance. In other applications, it could be in preferences. Or...it could even be a formal part of abc... Cheers, John Walsh To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
John Walsh | ... However, I think that a | lot of the instrument specific--and other--notation could be introduced | from the users end, if there just is sufficient flexibility in abc. (And | there is, at least potentially.) For instance, suppose we had a | generalization of the much-overused guitar-chord mechanism which would: | | (a) put arbitrary text over the staff | (b) ditto under the staff | (c) ditto over a note | (d) ditto under a note | (e) ditto in front and behind a note | and which could | (f) deal with fonts, and | (g) have enough flexibility in positioning to | keep things from overwriting each other, and even (heresy!) make them | look nice. ... | [Non-uilleann example: I've just been transcribing some tunes from | Ryan's/Coles for John Chambers' project. These include fingering for the | fiddle on some notes. I had to use guitar chords to stick this in, and, to | be charitable, it looks awful. The numbers are too far from the notes, | and often conflict with other markings on the same notes. I wouldn't put | up with this for my own music, but this is John's project, so I can't use | abc2mtex.] I'd have to agree that putting fingerings in as 2 or ^2 doesn't look pretty. I'd also note that it does give about the same look as in the Ryan/Cole books, which is also not pretty. John Walsh has mentioned to me that there is confusion in at least a few tunes between a 3 as a fingering and a 3 as a triplet indicator. They look the same in this collection. This confusion is only made worse by the failure to use the usual bracket or slur-like marks above the notes of a tuplet. This is an interesting case, because we're once again dealing with an important historical collection, and an ABC version should try to get as close to it (warts and all) as possible. So the ugliness of the 3 as a fingering is excusable on the grounds that Ryan did it that way. We could even complain, with tongue firmly in cheek, that ABC can't properly represent the confusion with a triplet, since ABC forces us to write (3 for the latter. But somehow I think the sticklers for historical accuracy wouldn't go quite this far. BTW, the Ryan/Cole transcription has been going slowly, and I've been thinking of publicising it a bit more to get a few more people doing the tunes. Anyone here want to contribute? John Walsh has been doing tunes in the usual way, emailing in batches of tunes. I've also been experimenting with a web interface for entering the tunes, and it could be fun to get a few more people using (and criticising) it. It's also likely that random people have tunes from this collection that they've transcribed. If so, would you like to send them to me? One problem with Ryan/Cole is that tunes weren't numbered. The two publications ordered the tunes differently, and so page numbers don't work. Some titles are used more than once. And so on. This is a pain if you're trying to make it easy to find a tune. As nearly as I can tell, the title+rhythm combination is unique, so I've been using that. Thus the file names: IrishAmericanJig.abc IrishAmericanReel.abc MissJohnsonsHornpipe.abc MissJohnsonsReel.abc OurBoysJig.abc OurBoysReel.abc To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Bryan Creer wrote: Oh, did Bryan mean that statement seriously? Hmm... I thought there was a hint of sarcasm there, just as I've taken this entire thread as an indirect demonstration that the saying abc is for the music alone* (_whatever_ that may mean), is a worthy rule of thumb for overall design, but an unreliable guide for individual decisions. Sorry John, but I was perfectly serious. There was no intention of sarcasm but perhaps my dealings with this list have left me a little bitter and twisted. Hmm... Actually, I thought it was humor, not misanthropy (mislistthropy?); sarcasm may not have been the right word. In fact, after I posted, I thought I should have said reductio ad absurdem instead, since I figured you'd shown that that line of reasoning led to the outlawing of instrument-specific notation in abc. Which I thought--think--is absurd, and that everybody would agree with me on that. Clearly I'm wrong on at least one of the two. From my point of view, instrument-specific notation is necessary. I use abc for, among other things, transcribing uilleann pipe music. Like most instruments, the pipes have some techniques unique to themselves: cranning, popping, ghost D, hard and soft low D, off-the-knee fingering, regulators... At the minute, I can handle this more-or-less to my satisfaction (tho I'd like more) with abc2mtex, but not with any other application. One basis of misunderstanding here may be an assumption that instrument-specific notation must be carved in stone in the language--as u and v for upbow and downbow are now, for instance. It doesn't. (It can't, really, for abc doesn't have the resources. In my own case, I have to invent notation which would be quite useless to almost anyone else, and I certainly don't want to saddle others with it.) However, I think that a lot of the instrument specific--and other--notation could be introduced from the users end, if there just is sufficient flexibility in abc. (And there is, at least potentially.) For instance, suppose we had a generalization of the much-overused guitar-chord mechanism which would: (a) put arbitrary text over the staff (b) ditto under the staff (c) ditto over a note (d) ditto under a note (e) ditto in front and behind a note and which could (f) deal with fonts, and (g) have enough flexibility in positioning to keep things from overwriting each other, and even (heresy!) make them look nice. Then one would be able to handle much, even the majority, of these things. (The suggested notations ^foo and _foo are a start, but I'm more ambitious--I think font-handling and flexible positioning are also needed.) [Non-uilleann example: I've just been transcribing some tunes from Ryan's/Coles for John Chambers' project. These include fingering for the fiddle on some notes. I had to use guitar chords to stick this in, and, to be charitable, it looks awful. The numbers are too far from the notes, and often conflict with other markings on the same notes. I wouldn't put up with this for my own music, but this is John's project, so I can't use abc2mtex.] It almost goes without saying that this implies that definitions--the details of the way this mechanism would be used--would be given outside the abc, either in the header or in an auxiliary file, say--since in the abc, this would probably be called with one of the letters H--Z, or even h--y. Of course, the wish-list doesn't end here, but it would be a very good start. Cheers, John Walsh To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
John Walsh wrote: One basis of misunderstanding here may be an assumption that instrument-specific notation must be carved in stone in the language--as u and v for upbow and downbow are now, for instance. It doesn't. (It can't, really, for abc doesn't have the resources. In my own case, I have to invent notation which would be quite useless to almost anyone else, and I certainly don't want to saddle others with it.) However, I think that a lot of the instrument specific--and other--notation could be introduced from the users end, if there just is sufficient flexibility in abc. (And there is, at least potentially.) For instance, suppose we had a generalization of the much-overused guitar-chord mechanism which would: (a) put arbitrary text over the staff (b) ditto under the staff (c) ditto over a note (d) ditto under a note (e) ditto in front and behind a note and which could (f) deal with fonts, and (g) have enough flexibility in positioning to keep things from overwriting each other, and even (heresy!) make them look nice. BarFly does (a) - (e) already. (f) is planned for the version after next. The text editor will already let you set the font, style, size and colour of any range of characters (even individual characters if you want), and this information will be transferred to the music display on request. Of course it won't be possible to transfer this information to other programs, as it's not part of the abc. I'd like (g) to be automatic if at all possible, but it remains to be seen if that can be done. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Strike the concertina's melancholy string! Blow the spirit-stirring harp like anything! W.S.Gilbert Laurie Griffiths said - An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open E string is musically relevant. My concertina doesn't have E or G strings and I'm not playing top E on the G string of my fiddle for anyone. A difference between two pieces of notation is musically relevant if and only if it means they should sound different. This and the example imply that the instrument being played is relevant. Wouldn't it be best to exclude instrument specific notation from abc? It could get very messy if you don't. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Bryan Creer wrote: Strike the concertina's melancholy string! Blow the spirit-stirring harp like anything! W.S.Gilbert Laurie Griffiths said - An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open E string is musically relevant. My concertina doesn't have E or G strings and I'm not playing top E on the G string of my fiddle for anyone. A difference between two pieces of notation is musically relevant if and only if it means they should sound different. This and the example imply that the instrument being played is relevant. Wouldn't it be best to exclude instrument specific notation from abc? It could get very messy if you don't. That's a purist approach. While it would be nice to have a notation system uncluttered by instrument specific notation it would rule out a lot of useful stuff which is already in abc, e.g. the HP and Hp key signatures, u and v in fiddle music, and even [chords], since they are only relevant to polyphonic instruments. The difficulty is to know where to draw the line. Instrument-specific markings should not make it difficult to read or parse the abc. If Laurie wants to write something like ^F9S3e in his music to indicate that the note is to be played at a particular point on the fingerboard I don't see why he shouldn't. The result _does_ sound different, and is relevant to a guitarist playing from the music, and although I doubt if anybody will ever write a player program capable of dealing with such subtleties, I can see that such hints could be useful to a program which generated tablature from abc. Having said that, it's clear that if he wanted to mark every note with fret/string markings, he ought to be using tablature in the first place, rather than abc. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Phil Taylor wrote If Laurie wants to write something like ^F9S3e in his music to indicate that the note is to be played at a particular point on the fingerboard I don't see why he shouldn't. Fingerboard of what instrument? Banjo? Lute? Cittern? Balalaika? Guitar tuned DADGAD? Players of all these might want to use the same idea and then you have to specify not just the instrument but the tuning as well. Getting a wee bit specific. OK, pipers have done the same but at least K:HP says loud and clear This is a highland pipe tune right from the start. If they are only interested in exchanging tunes between themselves, that's fine. It doesn't cause problems for anyone else. More to the point, this subject came up a while ago and Laurie gave an example of his notation - i.e. a3;4 means play the a on the 4th string claiming precedence for the use of the semicolon over somebody else's suggested use. The ascii character set is a limited resource so if people start laying claim to characters for narrow usages we could start running out. At the time I suggested using the same notation for English concertina cross fingering and several people were quick to tell me this was a bad idea. For those who didn't realise it at the time, I was joking. I would say the same about u and v for fiddle bowing (and I play fiddle) but it's been done now so it's too late. [chords] may not be relevant to all instruments but they are relevant to a great many, not just one. I can see that such hints could be useful to a program which generated tablature from abc. If you are simply using it as input for a tablature generation programme fine, but if you are using it to distribute tunes to fellow musicians regardless of how they are going to use them they are just more useless clutter. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Bryan Creer, then Phil Taylor, wrote: This and the example imply that the instrument being played is relevant. Wouldn't it be best to exclude instrument specific notation from abc? It could get very messy if you don't. That's a purist approach. While it would be nice to have a notation system [...and goes on to make a good point...] Oh, did Bryan mean that statement seriously? Hmm... I thought there was a hint of sarcasm there, just as I've taken this entire thread as an indirect demonstration that the saying abc is for the music alone* (_whatever_ that may mean), is a worthy rule of thumb for overall design, but an unreliable guide for individual decisions. Cheers, John Walsh * Misquoted, I'm sure---sorry, I've forgotten the exact wording. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
Laurie Griffiths wrote Well of course you need to specify the tuning for tablature. Obviously. The only interesting question is how much of this, if any, should be encoded in the ABC. None at all, because ABC is not tablature. The recipient could be playing anything from a carillon to a Mongolian nose flute. It applies to not just one instrument but to a fairly large family, including unfretted instruments such as violin. (guitar, 5 string banjo, tenor banjo, mandolin, mandola, bouzouki, balalaika, bass guitar, violin, viola, cello, double bass, viola da gamba, cittern, vihuelha, ud, p'i-p'a, gekkin, sitar, vina, tampura, lute and no doublt many others). and you generate G;4 for G on string 4 for all of these? (Including the balalaika?) Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Re: To tell the dancer from the dance
John Walsh said Oh, did Bryan mean that statement seriously? Hmm... I thought there was a hint of sarcasm there, just as I've taken this entire thread as an indirect demonstration that the saying abc is for the music alone* (_whatever_ that may mean), is a worthy rule of thumb for overall design, but an unreliable guide for individual decisions. Sorry John, but I was perfectly serious. There was no intention of sarcasm but perhaps my dealings with this list have left me a little bitter and twisted. Laurie said - An instruction to play a note on fret 9 of the G string instead of the open E string is musically relevant. If you are going to go down to that level of detail for guitars in conventional tuning then you must allow it for any and every instrument in any tuning. It would be just as valid for me to try and notate cross fingering on the English concertina (which you have to do if you want to play a fifth jump legato rather than staccato, so it does make a difference to the sound and hence fits Laurie's criterion for musical relevance). I would consider it absurd to do so. I don't believe that the abc format has the capacity to handle all the variations that this policy would produce so although abc is for the music alone might be a bit absolute, I think it is the direction to go. Matters of performance, including choice of instrument, are for the performer. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
