From: Jean-Francois Moine

>> Again the example makes this clear: the music is printed for bass voice
>> at
>> exactly the right pitch, and the provided midi file plays it correctly.

> The MIDI file has been generated with extra %%MIDI transpose commands
> which are not in the example of the ABC 2.0 specification.

Now I *am* confused.  Are you saying that the midi file accompanying the
example in the standard has *not* been generated from the abc file shown
there?.    If that is true it is not going to make interpreting the standard
very easy.   But in any event, according to your interpretation, it would
leave the example with a bass part which sounds two octaves higher than
written: I can't believe it is supposed to do that.

>> I would want any MIDI play-back of the abc, to play the same notes as
>> you'd
>> get by printing the music as notation from the abc and giving it to the
>> player/singer it is intended for.  Otherwise ABC is a fairly pointless
>> representation of the music.

> For that, you must use the octave= command which is understood by both
playing and typesetting programs.

NO!   "I would want any MIDI play-back of the abc, to play the same notes as
you'd  get by printing the music as notation from the abc and giving it to
the player/singer it is intended for."

Not abc written with some commands to work, and with others to be
inconsistent:  I want *all* abc files (which are   written in compliance
with the standard) to define the music so it plays the same notes on a
synthesiser, as the intended player would play on receiving the printed
music.   Otherwise there is no point in having a standard.

Why should one distinguish between playing and typesetting programs?   Files
with different standards for playing and typesetting are completely useless
to me: my program does both.  It shows the music in a WYSIWYG window,
prints it, as shown, with the File/Print command  and plays what is written
if you press F2.   It does not store one set of music for playing and
another for printing.

> Again, middle= is a typesetting
command and transpose= .... is a playing
command. All ABC users and programmers know that, but you!<

I have essentially no problems with transpose=  but it is used by my
software BOTH for playing and for typesetting.   For playing it defines the
relationship between the pitch which is sounded, and that which is written
on a score presented at 'written pitch'.   However I can also show (and
print) the score at 'concert pitch', in which case the transpose= is
necessary to define the typesetting.

I can't accept this division of the world's software into "playing programs"
and "type-setting programs" and the idea that a given abc file is only for
one or the other.   I am surprised I'm the first, or only one, who can't.

And again, the abc2.1 standard *does* indicate with the example that the
same abc file will do both.  But you say they've cheated and used different
abc files to get the picture and the midi?    I find that idea extremely
disappointing.

>> If you want to print/play 'generic' music then it should be both written
>> and
>> played by default at concert pitch.

> There is no absolute concert pitch. ABC defines the music, then any
software may play or print it the way the users want.

Of course there's an absolute concert pitch.  You can choose it within
limits, according to when the composer lived, where he lived, and what he
intended,  but the A above middle C is at 440Hz  or thereabouts: not 220,
and not 880.

Yes of course any software can do with the file what its user wants,  but
mine is attempting to start with what the music in the file actually
represents.  The user can then go to the menus and toolbars, transpose it,
re-instrument it, change the time signature, rearrange it, but when he opens
and abc file, he'll get what is written in the file, and that is defined by
a standard, and that standard is currently abc2.1


>> In the abc2.1
>> sample middle=d on the bass clef clearly does this, both for the
>> print-out
>> and the sample midi.

> Did you read the abcmidi documentation?

Briefly.

> abcmidi ignores middle=, as abcm2ps ignores transpose=.

Then all I can conclude is that abc2pms cannot write a concert pitch score
which includes transposing instruments,  and abcmidi will play the bass
parts on the abc2.1 sample two octaves higher than they're supposed to
sound.

> I am beginning to appreciate (you'll know better than I) that abc software
> has come about with one program designed to play an abc file (or output a
> MIDI file) and another designed to produce a graphic image of the music
> (eg
> via postscript).

> At the beginning, there was only one typesetting program (abc2mtex),
and, as the ABC notation was published, many programmers extended it.
The same thing happened to HTTP/HTML which was firstly rendered by a
simple Tcl/Tk script and which evolved up to the future HTML5 and many
tens of HTML browsers. The price to pay is some incompatible syntaxes
when concurrent developments occur at a same time. These problems are
reduced later by a precise and common definition of the language. So,
your erroneous understanding about the middle= command is just due to
the lack of precision in the standard.<

I am aware that many published abc files will not comply with the abc2.1
standard, just as older web sites don't comply with modern HTML standards.
Actually modern browsers are a lot less tolerant of what is (now) poor HTML
than the older ones were.

But again the Zocharti Loch example makes what might have been an ambiguous
definition of the effect of "middle" absolutely precise - as long as one
accepts that it is correct.   And if, as you say, the accompanying MIDI file
should be playing the bass parts two octaves higher, it would clearly not be
what the composer intended.   So it all looks completely consistent to me.

> Eventually, and I will stop this thread, I wonder why you are fighting
about middle=. This is a computer command. You may remove/ignore all
such commands from any ABC tune without changing the music (FYI, in K:
and V:, clef=, middle=, transpose= and stafflines= are computer
commands, while, on the contrary, octave= is a description which cannot
be ignored without altering the music). <

I am writing a music notation program, which wants to import music notation
from abc.  I therefore need to know what the file means.   I therefore need
a documented standard, and that standard is abc2.1.   I am generating both
printed music and a sensible play-back of the music: not one or the other.
The 'music' to me is the set of printed notes, AND the sound they make; not
one or the other.   I therefore (in principle) cannot ignore *anything* in
the abc file.

From the Zocharti Loch example in the standard, the only abc2.1
documentation I have to go on, middle=  (and therefore, when middle is
present, also clef=)  cannot be ignored for play-back or typesetting.   And
neither can transpose= (because I can view scores at written pitch and at
concert pitch).

If the abc2.1 standard *is* the standard then Zocharti Loch makes it very
clear than middle= *has* to be the way I'm interpreting it.  (If abcmidi
plays it back differently, with bass parts 2 octaves high, then that cannot
be my worry.)    If the abc2.1 standard is *not* the standard, then I have
nothing to work with.

( If the standard is amended when abc2.2 comes out,  so that middle=d on the
bass clef explicitly introduces a two octave transposition in the printed
part,  then I have no problem in Mozart, assigning the bass parts to a
fictitious instrument which sounds 2 octaves higher than written, but I
don't want to (a) because the standard does not tell me that I should, and
(b) the gar klein recorder is the only instrument I can think of which does
this, and the written bass clef notes would be out of its range anyway.)

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm

From: Hans Davidson

>But if new users of ABC is trying to use existing ABC files to find out
the correct way to interprete the standard, without knowing if those files,
even if written using a new ABC version, ...<

A file conforming with abc2.1 standard has to start with %abc2.1

As this was only introduced a few months ago, I imagine there will be rather
few of them at the moment.

> .. was intended to both look good
and sound good or not, then the situation may become very confusing. <

I see no reason why a file conforming with the abc2.1 standard  should not
both look right and play correctly.

If you print the music, and it is clear what kind of instrument it is for
(and the transpose keyword is enough for that),  then playing the printed
music on that instrument should give the same notes as playing the abc on a
synthesiser.

There is absolutely *no* reason (with the abc2.1 standard) to define
separate files suitable for playing and printing (even if there once was).
To make such a distinction is a retrograde step.

You can get sound from .mid files and get images in .png files; music
notation files should give you both consistently, otherwise you can use a
painting program to create your music image, and a midi sequencer to get
your sound, and the game is pointless.

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm

David Webber wrote:
>> middle= does not affect playback software. It is only an instruction on
>> how to display the music on the staff. No playback transposition is
>> assumed.
>
> Then the bass parts in the example i the spec will have to be sung by
> sopranos.   However, gratifyingly, the software which produced the MIDI file
> accompanying the spec, does, respect the octave defined by middle=.

I wonder what MIDI file you refer. I could not find any MIDI file
accompanying the ABC specification. And, yes, that ABC sample seems to
be written only for score, otherwise it "will have to be sung by sopranos".

>
>> In many scores, octave transposition is assumed without clef=...-8/+8
> (e.g. voice of tenor, guitar, soprano/bass recorder, doublebass etc.).<
>
> Yes, and I would expect those to be signalled by transpose=-12 or
> transpose=+12 as appropriate.

Me too.



--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

David Webber wrote:
> In a way.  The assumption that these two routes should lead to sounds
> different in pitch seems to be the problem.   A well-conceived music
> notation file (of whatever format)  should behave in the same way in
> each case.

It is just a case of an imperfect example in the specification. Recall
that transposition (including octave transposition, K:.. octave=..) was
just recently standardized. There are several files in the real world
that were based in different features of different programs, and yet
files that were specifically written for a single program, ignoring
if/how other programs would interpret them.

As it is, middle= only applies to score, and is intended to avoid
writting many commas in low octaves. To sound right, the music should
include a %%MIDI octave instruction, omited in the example -- is was
that caused the confusion.

--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

On Fri, 4 May 2012 20:14:16 +0100
"David Webber" <dave@...> wrote:

> Hudson didn't give a link so I just googled it and found it at
> <http://abcplus.sourceforge.net/choral/Canzonetta.abc>
>
> Where did you get yours?

Simply at the end of the ABC 2.1 specification (13.4 Canzonetta.abc).

--
Ken ar c'hentañ |       ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef  |  http://moinejf.free.fr/

Any guitarists/bassists who play left handed, on the mailing
list?

I'm teaching a left-handed bass guitar student, and have hit a point
where I want to prepare a few neck diagrams to give her at the next
lesson, but I'm unsure whether I should:

     (a) just draw them normally with the nut at the left and
         the lowest string on the bottom (as for a right-hander),

     (b) reverse them so the nut is on the right (and keep the
         lowest string on the bottom), or

     (c) invert them so the lowest string is on top (and keep the
         nut on the left).

I note that (b) has the advantage that the "lay the instrument and the
page on the table and everything lines up" thing will still work, and
the order of the strings stays the same as in tablature.  But is that
the easiest eyes-to-hands mapping?

Are any of these particularly more intuitive than the others, from a
left-handed player's perspective?  And if the most intuitive in't (a),
should I use that anyhow on the grounds that any neck diagrams she
finds on the web by herself will be right-handed ones?

(They're all equally easy for me, as I'm drawing them in Postscript
so sticking in a "-1 1 scale" will produce (b) and "1 -1 scale" will
give me (c), without my having to "think upside down" while writing.)

I'm actually left-handed myself, but I play everything except drums
right-handed.  (I play drums right-handed but left-footed, which makes
for a somewhat nonstandard arrangement of the kit.  But I digress...)

					 -- Glenn

On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:52:24 -0300
Hudson Lacerda <hfmlacerda@...> wrote:

> I wonder what MIDI file you refer. I could not find any MIDI file
> accompanying the ABC specification. And, yes, that ABC sample seems to
> be written only for score, otherwise it "will have to be sung by sopranos".

In the ABC 2.1 spec (7. Multiple voices). The link is after the .png in

"You can listen to the audible output (as MIDI) here."

(http://abcnotation.com/media/standard/multivoice.mid)

--
Ken ar c'hentañ |       ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef  |  http://moinejf.free.fr/

From: Hudson Lacerda

> I wonder what MIDI file you refer. I could not find any MIDI file
accompanying the ABC specification. And, yes, that ABC sample seems to
be written only for score, otherwise it "will have to be sung by sopranos".

Under the picture of the Zocharti Loch music it says:

"You can listen to the audible output (as MIDI) here."

and there's a link, but it's a bad one: it references an html file instead
of a MIDI file.    But by right clicking and downloading it I managed to get
the MIDI file - I attach it.   The bass voices do *not* sound two octaves
high!

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm

From: Hudson Lacerda

>As it is, middle= only applies to score, and is intended to avoid
writting many commas in low octaves. To sound right, the music should
include a %%MIDI octave instruction, omited in the example -- is was
that caused the confusion.<

So you and Jef are both saying that the document specifying the abc2.1
standard is wrong.

The statement about the meaning of middle= is ambiguous: it says what it
does for clef positioning - eg that d is now the middle line on the bass
clef.    It does not say that it should not be played back as the middle
line on the bass clef; it does not say that this is a method of defining a
two octave transposition so that the note on the middle line on the bass
clef sounds as if it were the 4th line of the treble clef.   But it does not
say anything explicit about play-back at all.

So, from the standard, I have two things to think about:

1. Why would anyone want to use middle= to redefine the middle note of the
bass clef (clearly for ease of typing) for typesetting only, and leave it
sounding two octaves too high on play back?   It makes no sense.

2. The Zocharti Loch example: this clearly shows that the note on he middle
line of the bass clef is to sound as the middle line of the bass clef.

So I have two options: either I import abc in conformance with the abc2.1
standard (as it is) and Zocharti Loch will play back correctly, or I ignore
the standard and do what other software apparently does (some other software
at least, as there is still the attached midi file), in which case anyone
who imports the Zocharti Loch example will find that it sounds silly.

This is all very unsatisfactory!

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm



--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

From: Jean-Francois Moine

>> Where did you get yours?

> Simply at the end of the ABC 2.1 specification (13.4 Canzonetta.abc).

Ah!    So yes they're different, and that one looks more sensible.   And as
it is in the abc2.1 standard document, I'll use that one in my test
collection as I develop abc import.

It imports as the attachment (I haven't developed my import of w: any
further yet).

And as Hudson originally said (to paraphrase) it will only play back
correctly if middle=d implies that d should not only be drawn on the middle
line of the bass clef, but should also play back as the middle line of the
bass clef.

This is entirely consistent with the Zocharti Loch example in the standard,
and to me it confirms that this is exactly what the standard intends, even
if that differs from the interpretation of some existing play-back software.

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm

Hello,

just to add some info about my usage of clef=none: I use it only as a display
feature when compiling a tune book, so you will not find it in the tunes I put
online.

%%suppress clef
would do the job as good.

the questions remining are

* what is the intended usage of clef=none - in other words its musical meaning
other than "suppress clef".
* how to make clear that any usage with the meaning "suppress clef" is an abuse
of the standard.
A clear  definition of clef=none in simple english is missing so far.

M:none I use a lot, especially for music wherein the classical understanding of
the meters does not fit, like if there is a permanent ambiguity between 3/4 and
6/8 3-time or for music with swing feeling like mazurka or if the meter is
completely missleading as with polska - corresponding with:
a lot of use of M:none at folkwiki.se

Regarding the key-signature taken from K: content I use a lot the possibility to
draw mixed or unusual key-signatures such as  K:G mixo =f  or K:D dor =B  or K:G
dor _B =e

kind regards, Simon

Hello,

rlwalker2@..., 04.05.2012 23:24:37
Subject: Re: [abcusers] Re: Standard: =a proposal for intonation

> Is this the crux of the problem?

Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...>

>> When talking about 'sound', do you mean the sound done by a real
>> instrument played by a human being reading a generated music sheet, or
>> the sound created by an automatic ABC to sound translater and generated
>> by some internal or external synthesizer?

this suports my thougts on the mess that is within the standard music notation,
not within abc.

all the methods of sound generation were developed arround a documented standard
in the last 50 years.
abc music notation gets developed as a documented standard.
standard music notation is no such documented standard.

Standard music notation is not a single entity but the generic name for several
music notation schools that exist independently from each other. To name some:

early music notation, Music notation of the 18th century, classical music
notation, Bartok notation, Jazz notation, Folk notation.... not to speak about
all the music schools, classical or not, that exist outside the western music
school and might be notated in standard music notaion, by members of these
schools or from outsiders/musicans of  the western school.

so it is even more complex: the crowd of people who aim to do
> sound done by a real instrument played by a human being reading a generated
music sheet

is not consistent.

This is the reason why it is so important to ditinguish between
abc-notation itself (a human readable consistent method to describe a musical
event)
and
standard music notation (several other human readable consistent methods to
describe a musical event)

effectively standard music notation display is one (some) conversion(s) of the
abc-notation itself.

kind regards,

Simon

rlwalker2@..., 04.05.2012 23:24:37
Subject: Re: [abcusers] Re: Standard: =a proposal for intonation

> Is this the crux of the problem?

Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...>

>> When talking about 'sound', do you mean the sound done by a real
>> instrument played by a human being reading a generated music sheet, or
>> the sound created by an automatic ABC to sound translater and generated
>> by some internal or external synthesizer?

From: 2009@...

> this suports my thougts on the mess that is within the standard music
> notation, not within abc....

Not really.  While music-notation does not have an 'official standard' in
the sense that a computer language does, there are plenty of books
explaining it, and it has been used to communicate ideas from composer to
player for a long time.

Yes, it has evolved, and if you're interested in that, I'd recommend
starting with the 'period of common practice' as it is known, (roughly Bach
to Stravinski) and work outwards from there.   ABC essentially has it
covered in principle, with one or two extra things like chord names and
non-standard key signatures.   [Music notation in one sense is the
collection of everything any composer has written down, but that doesn't
mean that many aspects of it are not standardised.]

Clear within the standard is that the A on the second space of the treble
clef is (nowadays) 440Hz.   But that was only standardised well after the
advent of railways (as musicians could then travel from one town to the
next, and it was a good idea if groups in the next town were playing at the
same pitch).   Previously there were variations, but by no more than 10% or
so, if memory serves me.

So when you have a clef it is clear which note goes where, and which octave
it is in.

Early instruments came in 4' choirs and 8' choirs.   The 8' choir defines
the modern standard;  recorders, crumhorns, etc came in 4' choirs.
Names like 'bass', tenor' etc, are defined relative to what sort of choir
you have, with names like "bass recorder" referring to an instrument whose
lowest note is higher than that of a normal clarinet.   But nevertheless,
the 8' choir defines the standard with middle C being the C below A440.
Little 8's were frequently put on clefs of descant, and bass recorder parts
to indicate the transposition of the octave.  ABC also offers these.   It
*is* all very standard.

If you are really interested in standards of music notation and typesetting,
then I recommend

'The AB Guide to Music Theory', by Eric Taylor
'Behind Bars' by Elaine Gould
'Music Notation', by Gardner Read

which are all good in the aspects they cover, though none of them cover
everything.

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm

Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:52:24 -0300
> Hudson Lacerda<hfmlacerda@...>  wrote:
>
>> I wonder what MIDI file you refer. I could not find any MIDI file
>> accompanying the ABC specification. And, yes, that ABC sample seems to
>> be written only for score, otherwise it "will have to be sung by sopranos".
>
> In the ABC 2.1 spec (7. Multiple voices). The link is after the .png in
>
> "You can listen to the audible output (as MIDI) here."
>
> (http://abcnotation.com/media/standard/multivoice.mid)
>

Thanks.
Is is clear that %%MIDI directives were used to generate the MIDI file,
but omited in the ABC notation example.

--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

David Webber wrote:
> So you and Jef are both saying that the document specifying the abc2.1
> standard is wrong.

Correct. The example (not the spec text) is not complete.

[...]
> 1. Why would anyone want to use middle= to redefine the middle note of the
> bass clef (clearly for ease of typing) for typesetting only, and leave it
> sounding two octaves too high on play back?   It makes no sense.

Because no play back was wanted at all.

That is a historical result of different programs introduciong different
features -- before a unifying standard. Before ABC-2.1, octave= only
affected playback, and middle= only affected score -- no common
(playback+score) standard existed for ease of typing.

Most of my ABC files were never intended to work with abc2midi or any
programs other than abcm2ps. I use ABC almost exclusively to generate
scores and documents for music classes, and explore extensions that are
unique to abcm2ps. Therefore, I might use middle=d as a way for fast
input or low pitches (without commas), but would not willing to add a
command "%%MIDI octave=+2" for a program that could not understand the
extended ABC syntax used at first.

With ABC-2.1, octave= / transpose= work for both score and playback, and
soulhd be the preferred way to save typing. So, "middle=" is obsolete,
and may lead to inconsistences.

>
> 2. The Zocharti Loch example: this clearly shows that the note on he middle
> line of the bass clef is to sound as the middle line of the bass clef.
>
> So I have two options: either I import abc in conformance with the abc2.1
> standard (as it is) and Zocharti Loch will play back correctly, or I ignore
> the standard and do what other software apparently does (some other software
> at least, as there is still the attached midi file), in which case anyone
> who imports the Zocharti Loch example will find that it sounds silly.

No solution will be satisfactory for incomplete ABC files, like that
example.

>
> This is all very unsatisfactory!
>
> Dave
>
> David Webber
> Mozart Music Software
> http://www.mozart.co.uk
> For discussion and support see
> http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm
>
>
>


--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

dglenn@... wrote:
> Any guitarists/bassists who play left handed, on the mailing
> list?

I play the guitar like the right-handed people.

>
> I'm teaching a left-handed bass guitar student, and have hit a point
> where I want to prepare a few neck diagrams to give her at the next
> lesson, but I'm unsure whether I should:
>
>      (a) just draw them normally with the nut at the left and
>          the lowest string on the bottom (as for a right-hander),
[...]

I would guess (a) is the best option, since it is the usual in published
music, and also because the position is arbitrary after all.

There are, for example, opposite standards of tablatures: the neck as
viewed in front, or from behind / in a mirror. It is a matter of
interpretation of the figure (like the "Necker cube").

I do not know if there is some more intuitive option. But, we,
left-handed people, usually deal well with making adaptations.

--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

From: Hudson Lacerda

David Webber wrote:
>> So you and Jef are both saying that the document specifying the abc2.1
>> standard is wrong.

> Correct. The example (not the spec text) is not complete.

Well the text is ambiguous as it doesn't mention play-back pitches.

>> 1. Why would anyone want to use middle= to redefine the middle note of
>> the
>> bass clef (clearly for ease of typing) for typesetting only, and leave it
>> sounding two octaves too high on play back?   It makes no sense.

> Because no play back was wanted at all.

It's not an option I have: if someone imports the file, they can press the
play button.

> That is a historical result of different programs introduciong different
features -- before a unifying standard. Before ABC-2.1, octave= only
affected playback, and middle= only affected score -- no common
(playback+score) standard existed for ease of typing. <

But abc2.1 is explicit in that it wants to unify things.

>... So, "middle=" is obsolete,
> and may lead to inconsistences.

I would certainly like to regard it as obsolete.

> No solution will be satisfactory for incomplete ABC files, like that
example.

Well treating middle=d as also meaning that the bass clef middle line plays
back at the pitch of the bass clef middle line works fine for the files in
the 2.1 standard document.   But I now appreciate that it may not work for
other files.

For abc import:  I think I am just going to have to warn my users that, for
historical reasons, abc sometimes has issues with octave transpositions, and
they should be prepared to edit them.   It's only a few mouse clicks.

For abc export: I'll use octave and transpose, and if necessary clefs like
alto5, treble1 (they'll be rare), and not export "middle" at all.

Dave

David Webber
Mozart Music Software
http://www.mozart.co.uk
For discussion and support see
http://www.mozart.co.uk/mozartists/mailinglist.htm

David Webber wrote:
[...]
> Well treating middle=d as also meaning that the bass clef middle line plays
> back at the pitch of the bass clef middle line works fine for the files in
> the 2.1 standard document.   But I now appreciate that it may not work for
> other files.

Unfortunately.

You can find middle=d ABC for voice of bass (sounding two octaves below
the ABC code, and equal to the staff notation), or for bass recorder
(sounding one octave below the ABC code, but one octave above the staff
notation).

[...]
> For abc import:  I think I am just going to have to warn my users that, for
> historical reasons, abc sometimes has issues with octave transpositions, and
> they should be prepared to edit them.   It's only a few mouse clicks.

It sounds very reasonable.

Also, check for the presence of octave= / %%MIDI octave in the same
voice that contains middle.

>
> For abc export: I'll use octave and transpose, and if necessary clefs like
> alto5, treble1 (they'll be rare), and not export "middle" at all.

Good.

--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

--- In abcusers@yahoogroups.com, 2009@... wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> just to add some info about my usage of clef=none: I use it only as a display
feature when compiling a tune book, so you will not find it in the tunes I put
online.
>
> %%suppress clef
> would do the job as good.
>
> the questions remining are
>
> * what is the intended usage of clef=none - in other words its musical meaning
other than "suppress clef".

In my view, "clef=none" means: do not draw any clef here, but display the music
as specified in the "middle=" clause, or by default as if a treble clef were
present. A new directive "%%suppress..." would be handy for people who do not
want to see a clef at the start of every score line, but only at the beginning
and whenever clefs *change*. An analogous directive should be introduced for the
time signature.

> * how to make clear that any usage with the meaning "suppress clef" is an
abuse of the standard.

The only such "abuse" (or makeshift = Notlösung) I can think of is to try to
achieve the effect of the future "%%suppress..." by starting a voice, say, with
"clef=bass", and put "K:clef=none middle=D," after the first bar line. It
usually works but requires care.

A good keyword for that may be something like "%%suppress-repeated-clefs".

> A clear  definition of clef=none in simple english is missing so far.

More precisely, clef=none means or should mean:
Do not print any clef for this voice, possibly until the next "clef="
instruction. If middle=x is found in the same field, notes must be displayed so
that x is displayed on the middle line [TODO: what line is that if stafflines is
not 5?] (x can be any note without accidental). By default middle=B is assumed,
i.e. the behaviour will be like that of a treble clef, even if a different clef
was drawn before!

It is the user's responsibility to make sure that readers will make the desired
sense of a clef=none or clef=perc instruction, whereas all other "none"s have
well-established precise meanings.

%%suppress... will remain in force for the whole voice (or piece, if in the tune
header); in particular it will survive all changes of clefs.

-Alex-

( http://www.midicond.de/Freeware/index_en.html#MidiZyx2abc )

 

dglenn@... wrote:
> Any guitarists/bassists who play left handed, on the mailing
> list?

I play the guitar like the right-handed people.

>
> I'm teaching a left-handed bass guitar student, and have hit a point
> where I want to prepare a few neck diagrams to give her at the next
> lesson, but I'm unsure whether I should:
>
> (a) just draw them normally with the nut at the left and
> the lowest string on the bottom (as for a right-hander),
[...]

I would guess (a) is the best option, since it is the usual in published
music, and also because the position is arbitrary after all.

There are, for example, opposite standards of tablatures: the neck as
viewed in front, or from behind / in a mirror. It is a matter of
interpretation of the figure (like the "Necker cube").

I do not know if there is some more intuitive option. But, we,
left-handed people, usually deal well with making adaptations.

--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/

Hello,

Am 05.05.2012 um 18:05 schrieb scheutzow4cond:
> In my view, "clef=none" means: do not draw any clef here, but display the
music as specified in the "middle=" clause, or by default as if a treble clef
were present. A new directive "%%suppress..." would be handy for people who do
not want to see a clef at the start of every score line, but only at the
beginning and whenever clefs *change*. An analogous directive should be
introduced for the time signature.
>
> > * how to make clear that any usage with the meaning "suppress clef" is an
abuse of the standard.
>
> The only such "abuse" (or makeshift = Notlösung) I can think of is to try to
achieve the effect of the future "%%suppress..." by starting a voice, say, with
"clef=bass", and put "K:clef=none middle=D," after the first bar line. It
usually works but requires care.
>
> A good keyword for that may be something like "%%suppress-repeated-clefs".

it seems there are several cases of  "suppress-clefs", as clefs get drawn
automatically (not in the abc text) at several positions in the score:

* at the beginning of the notation,
* repeated clefs at the beginning of any new line,
* a clef at key-changes
* extra clefs before linebreak if there is a key-change at newline.
* clefs at clef-changes.
* extra clef before linebreak if there is a clef-change at newline.

a good "suppress-clefs" standard should be able suppress clefs in all possible
(sensible?) combinations

The following case I would think is the default behaviour:

* DRAW clef at the beginning of the notation,
* DRAW repeated clefs at the beginning of any new line,
* DRAW clef at key-changes
* SUPPRESS extra clef before linebreak if there is a key-change at newline.
* DRAW clef at clef-change.
* SUPPRESS extra clef before linebreak if there is a clef-change at newline.

this gives the need for keywords having the following meaning, which can be
combined:

* DRAW extra clefs before linebreak if there is a key-change at newline
* DRAW extra clefs before linebreak if there is a clef-change at newline
(unusual)
* SUPPRESS clef at the beginning of the notation AND SUPPRESS all repeated clefs
at the beginning of any new line
* SUPPRESS repeated clefs at the beginning of any new line
* SUPPRESS clef at key-changes (only show key-signature)
(suppress clef at clef-change seems not to be sensible)

* the default behaviour is reestablished with the appearing of the next clef
command notated in the abc-text.

additionally a "SUPPRESS THIS clef" command could be handy, in cases where one
is happy with the default behaviour but for whatever reason wants to suppress
the display of one clef.


kind regards,
Simon

Also:

* Display clef where wanted for instructional matters.

Simon Wascher wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Am 05.05.2012 um 18:05 schrieb scheutzow4cond:
>> In my view, "clef=none" means: do not draw any clef here, but display the
music as specified in the "middle=" clause, or by default as if a treble clef
were present. A new directive "%%suppress..." would be handy for people who do
not want to see a clef at the start of every score line, but only at the
beginning and whenever clefs *change*. An analogous directive should be
introduced for the time signature.
>>
>>> * how to make clear that any usage with the meaning "suppress clef" is an
abuse of the standard.
>>
>> The only such "abuse" (or makeshift = Notlösung) I can think of is to try to
achieve the effect of the future "%%suppress..." by starting a voice, say, with
"clef=bass", and put "K:clef=none middle=D," after the first bar line. It
usually works but requires care.
>>
>> A good keyword for that may be something like "%%suppress-repeated-clefs".
>
> it seems there are several cases of  "suppress-clefs", as clefs get drawn
automatically (not in the abc text) at several positions in the score:
>
> * at the beginning of the notation,
> * repeated clefs at the beginning of any new line,
> * a clef at key-changes
> * extra clefs before linebreak if there is a key-change at newline.
> * clefs at clef-changes.
> * extra clef before linebreak if there is a clef-change at newline.
>
> a good "suppress-clefs" standard should be able suppress clefs in all possible
(sensible?) combinations
>
> The following case I would think is the default behaviour:
>
> * DRAW clef at the beginning of the notation,
> * DRAW repeated clefs at the beginning of any new line,
> * DRAW clef at key-changes
> * SUPPRESS extra clef before linebreak if there is a key-change at newline.
> * DRAW clef at clef-change.
> * SUPPRESS extra clef before linebreak if there is a clef-change at newline.
>
> this gives the need for keywords having the following meaning, which can be
combined:
>
> * DRAW extra clefs before linebreak if there is a key-change at newline
> * DRAW extra clefs before linebreak if there is a clef-change at newline
(unusual)
> * SUPPRESS clef at the beginning of the notation AND SUPPRESS all repeated
clefs at the beginning of any new line
> * SUPPRESS repeated clefs at the beginning of any new line
> * SUPPRESS clef at key-changes (only show key-signature)
> (suppress clef at clef-change seems not to be sensible)
>
> * the default behaviour is reestablished with the appearing of the next clef
command notated in the abc-text.
>
> additionally a "SUPPRESS THIS clef" command could be handy, in cases where one
is happy with the default behaviour but for whatever reason wants to suppress
the display of one clef.
>
>
> kind regards,
> Simon
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Hudson Lacerda
Visite: http://www.votoseguro.org/