> "make transposition harder"? Of all the disadvantages to attribute to equally-spaced notation systems, > this one seems like an unlikely candidate. It's one of their redeeming > features.
Of all alternative systems discussed on this thread, the only one which is really appropriate for transposition is the "Lines a Whole Step Apart" system (http://musicnotation.org/systems/gallery/). There it is just a matter of moving the clef or switching the clef. The rest of them use either special note shapes for sharps/flats ("Clairnote", "Simplified notation"), which is not any better for transposition, or special note shapes for the in-between notes ("Twinline Notation"). The OP's system uses Four vertical positions between staff lines (including on-the-line). How do you transpose that by half a step? In contrast, in traditional notation you can easily transpose by moving or changing the clef and changing the key signature. Admittedly this is harder today with the modern accidental display practice (displayed once per bar), but 300 years ago musicians were able to do this on sight by imagining an alternative clef and key signature. See also the practice of Chiavette or chiavi transportate - transposition clefs. And, this works for both transposing by a semitone or by a fifth. Sharon -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/simplifying-chromatic-scale-notation-tp186415p186456.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
