2008/12/9 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 9 Dec 2008, at 11:57, Graham Breed wrote:
>>>
>>> The format should be such that it can be sued by sound generating
>>> programs.
>>
>> Do you have a patch?
>
> Then I would not need to mention it here as an idea, would I.
Fine, you've mentioned it.
>>> And key signatures make the notes sound different.
>>
>> Yes, and it's a classic cause of errors in performance, despite the
>> key being reinforced by the music.
>
> If you don't know how to read them.
Even if you know how to read them you are likely to make mistakes.
>> They always, or even generally, write in major keys. Willaert, in
>> particular, was writing before major keys were defined. But let's
>> assume they'd notate it as just intonation.
>
> But the question is how to notate a change a key from C to D.
Write different notes?
>> No, your system, at least as you describe it, only has two generators.
>> Sagittal allows for systems with any number of generators.
>
> No, the first two m M are used generate the staff system and sharps and
> flats.
>
> Then one add a suitable number of neutrals n_1, ..., n_k to get the
> intermediate pitches.
>
> For example, putting n = M3 - M gives an accidental suitable for Just
> relative Pythagorean.
Sorry, I was wrong. You do have more generators.
>>> If it now can produce other than multiple of 12.
>>
>> Do you have evidence that it ever didn't work?
>
> I attached file, you can try to tweak it into proper E53 if you like.
What does E53 have to with anything? We were talking about correct
transposition.
>> How can it possibly do so? Tell me! C to Db is m. C to the diesis
>> above C# is m. How does abstract m and M distinguish m from m?
[corrected]
>
> C to C# is M - m, C to Db is m.
>
> C to an E31 above C#, can be described as a double flat. double sharp, or by
> adding a neutral second, all having different musical function.
No, not an E31. An enharmonic diesis. m is not a double flat.
2(m-M) would be a double flat. m is not a double sharp. 2(M-m) would
be a double sharp. Adding a neutral second to what? m is not a
neutral second. m is, in fact, m. How does abstract m and M
distinguish it from m?
>>>> So, Lilypond being a notation program, you aren't worried about the
>>>> pitch fine-tuning? It already does what you want.
>>>
>>> I wasn't able to get E53.
>>
>> You said you weren't worried about pitch fine-tuning.
>
> I want to be able to produce the right output with narrow m's.
Then are you or are you not worried about pitch fine-tuning?
>>> Otherwise, I know roughly how new translations can be done. And it is
>>> very
>>> hard to translate E53 back to intervals letters, especially in the
>>> presence
>>> of variable scale degrees.
>>
>> What does this have to do with Lilypond?
>
> It would then be easy to typeset.
Typeset what? How does Lilypond make it difficult to typeset anything?
>>>> Of course it does! C-D is 9 steps, D-E is 8 steps, if C-E is to be a
>>>> pure major third.
>>>
>>> E53, in Scala is the Pythagorean notation system. The one you indicate
>>> would
>>> have to be given a different name.
>>
>> It doesn't matter how you notate it. The music will have two
>> semitones of different sizes.
>
> But i want to find out how you want to notate it: as E53 with intermediate
> pitches or a system where the note names have different interval values.
I'm not writing it. If I did I'd probably use Pythagorean notation
with a comma accidental. But I might use Erv Wilson's duodecimally
positive notation.
Graham
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
