Re: Ancient repeat sign
Hi Dan,
Dan Eble ezt írta (időpont: 2022. febr. 6., V, 21:32):
>
> https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/560909328587237881/
>
> The sections of this work seem to be separated with a kind of repeat sign.
>
> A :|||: B :|||: C :||: D :|:
>
> Q. Do I understand correctly that this is performed AAA BBB CCD?
Yes. (sort of.) (also, I've read Jürgen's e-mail and listened to
that performance, but I still think that the music is to be repeated.)
> Q. Is this the most obvious way to code it?
>
> {
> \repeat volta 3 \A
> \repeat volta 3 \B
> \repeat volta 2 \C
> \repeat volta 1 \D
> }
Yes. (sort of.)
the glyph is quite flexible, as anything in ancient notation. The
last time I met a repeat sign was in Josquin's Missa L'homme armé
sexti toni, where the top part of the Et resurrexit is to be repeated
four times. Three codices mark this in three ways:
the Chigi codex, page 197v marks it as _three_ points on both sides of
_two_ bars taking up three spaces (plus and minus half):
https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Chig.C.VIII.234
another Vatican codex, page 31v marks it as
.||.
||
||.
(but the lower left dot may be missing only because scarceness of space):
https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Capp.Sist.41
a Jena codex splits the movement, there's a pagebreak, so two
repetitions are in page 205v, two more on 206v, both marked as three
dots on both sides of two bars; the bars are not longer than three
spaces:
https://collections.thulb.uni-jena.de/rsc/viewer/HisBest_derivate_4510/BE_1047_0173.tif
p
Re: Ancient repeat sign
Hi,
I have to confess that I have not seen this notational sign before,
therefore I am not really sure. But I do not think that it represents
a repeat sign in the modern sense. It looks more like an annotation /
meta information to the divisio.
Specifically, my guess is that this sign refers only to the lyrics, but
not to the notes, i.e. how often the text in the previous section
should be distributed among the (un-repeated) performance of the notes.
I found a recording of this Kyrie on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImaLuZWs144
Assuming that they are performing it not completely wrong, if you
listen to the highest voice (it switches between two choirs, thus also
working out the repetition of the text), you can follow the notes in
the first three lines of the score and clearly hear the three
subdivision parts within the first "Kyrie eleison" part, with the text
repeated three times, but the notes performed only once. Similarly,
the notes of the following "Christe eleison" part are also divided into
three subsections, each with "Christe eleison" lyrics, and finally, the
"Kyrie eleison" part, this time with somewhat different subdivisions,
just like the signs differ.
-Jürgen
On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 9:32 PM Dan Eble wrote:
[1]https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/560909328587237881/
The sections of this work seem to be separated with a kind of repeat
sign.
A :|||: B :|||: C :||: D :|:
Q. Do I understand correctly that this is performed AAA BBB CCD?
Q. Is this the most obvious way to code it?
{
\repeat volta 3 \A
\repeat volta 3 \B
\repeat volta 2 \C
\repeat volta 1 \D
}
Q. Is "signum repetitionis" an appropriate name for one instance of
these signs?
Q. If LilyPond supported engraving these signs, which ancient staff
contexts should enable it by default? PetrucciStaff should, judging
from what I see in Harmonice Musices Odhecaton. I'm not sure about
the others.
Q. Is there anything else that I should have asked?
Thanks,
--
Dan
References
1. https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/560909328587237881/
Patch scheduling
For my guidance, I'd be grateful if the community would correct or amplify the following recap of the patch handling process. Working backwards: When an MR has been on Countdown for 48 hours, it goes to Push. When an MR has been or Review for 24 hours, it goes on the next countdown. When an MR is marked New, and any regression tests seem clean, it goes to Review. When the list of MRs has been scanned, notify the developers, using the countdown.py script. All the above can be overridden by any developer with access, where judgement calls for expediting an MR, or it is clearly trivial. MRs can also be set back in the flow by developers, when issues are found, or after new commits are added. Open discussions are not necessarily a reason to hold back an MR. If all that is reasonably close to the way things operate, the role of the patch scheduler is pretty mechanical, simply moving MRs into the next bucket. I remember that a Patch Meister was needed in the old days of Reitveldt, Savannah, and whatever other platforms were involved, but it seems that the new, integrated platform, with what seems to be trustworthy automated and sufficiently rigorous testing, has changed the flow significantly. The patch scheduling function, and again, I only describe my outsider's understanding, seems to have become a cron job running in wetware. It would seem more efficient to implement a script which would take the same set of decisions, update labels, and run a modified countdown.py to email the devel list with results and any anomalous conditions,such as open threads, recent commits, and the like. When I've understood the process fully, I'm content to keep performing the function, and I'll try to be more careful of where I put my feet. Thanks to you all for your patience as I come to grips with the system and the local lore, written and unwritten. Cheers, Colin
Re: Ancient repeat sign
Dan Eble writes:
> https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/560909328587237881/
>
> The sections of this work seem to be separated with a kind of repeat sign.
>
> A :|||: B :|||: C :||: D :|:
>
> Q. Do I understand correctly that this is performed AAA BBB CCD?
>
> Q. Is this the most obvious way to code it?
>
> {
> \repeat volta 3 \A
> \repeat volta 3 \B
> \repeat volta 2 \C
> \repeat volta 1 \D
> }
It would be strange that \repeat volta 3 ... \alternative gets a
different starting repeat sign than \repeat volta 3 ...
What if you want the old repeat sign but alternatives?
--
David Kastrup
Ancient repeat sign
https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/560909328587237881/
The sections of this work seem to be separated with a kind of repeat sign.
A :|||: B :|||: C :||: D :|:
Q. Do I understand correctly that this is performed AAA BBB CCD?
Q. Is this the most obvious way to code it?
{
\repeat volta 3 \A
\repeat volta 3 \B
\repeat volta 2 \C
\repeat volta 1 \D
}
Q. Is "signum repetitionis" an appropriate name for one instance of these signs?
Q. If LilyPond supported engraving these signs, which ancient staff contexts
should enable it by default? PetrucciStaff should, judging from what I see in
Harmonice Musices Odhecaton. I'm not sure about the others.
Q. Is there anything else that I should have asked?
Thanks,
--
Dan
