Graham Breed wrote Thursday, December 11, 2008 1:01 AM
I can demonstrate the bug with that file though. Here's an example:
\version "2.11.65"
\include "arabic.ly"
melody = \relative {
\key re \bayati
do re mi fa sol la si do
}
\score {
\new Staff \melody
\layout { }
\midi { }
}
It fa
On 11 Dec 2008, at 04:47, Graham Breed wrote:
Yes, but nobody agrees on what that intermediate pitch *is* do they?
And Arab pop music really does use equally tempered synthesizers
however much the purists may object.
It may in fact be even more complicated: the intermediate pitch (or
absence
On 11 Dec 2008, at 04:47, Graham Breed wrote:
Now, everyone agrees that in Arab music, the intermediate pitch
isn't that -
in fact the guy who write it said he was taught to lower it, which
agree
with the values Farhat uses in Persian music (using koron and
sori; see
below).
Yes, but nob
2008/12/10 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Now, everyone agrees that in Arab music, the intermediate pitch isn't that -
> in fact the guy who write it said he was taught to lower it, which agree
> with the values Farhat uses in Persian music (using koron and sori; see
> below).
Yes, but nobody
2008/12/10 Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You'll want to pay special attention to ly/arabic.ly, and make
> sure you understand everything that's happening in there.
I found it! There's some stencil stuff which looks interesting, but
otherwise it doesn't do very much -- the tuning comes f
On 10 Dec 2008, at 20:14, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Happy to add the link, but I'm not sure non-standard
key signatures are working properly. Try this:
\relative c' {
\set Staff.keySignature = #`(((0 . 3) . ,SHARP)
((0 . 5) . ,FLAT)
((0
Graham Percival wrote Wednesday, December 10, 2008 2:04 PM
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 08:01:08PM +0800, Graham Breed wrote:
I've checked the documentation for key signatures and see no
indication that \key b \bayati could possible work though.
Say what?
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.11/Documentati
On 10 Dec 2008, at 16:26, Graham Breed wrote:
You can uncomment anything you like now because the
rational numbers are accepted.
Fine.
But if you try and do \key d \bayati you'll get that error.
OK. I don't remember. It works in E24, though.
I've checked the documentation for key
signatu
2008/12/10 Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 08:01:08PM +0800, Graham Breed wrote:
>> I've checked the documentation for key signatures and see no
>> indication that \key b \bayati could possible work though.
>
> Say what?
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.11/Documentation/u
2008/12/10 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 10 Dec 2008, at 13:01, Graham Breed wrote:
>> You can uncomment anything you like now because the
>> rational numbers are accepted.
>
> Fine.
But if you try and do \key d \bayati you'll get that error.
>> I've checked the documentation for key
>> s
On 10 Dec 2008, at 15:04, Graham Percival wrote:
You'll want to pay special attention to ly/arabic.ly, and make
sure you understand everything that's happening in there.
Have you looked it into yourself? - It goes on like
bayati = #`(
(0 . 0)
(1 . ,SEMI-FLAT)
(2 . ,FLAT)
(3 .
On 10 Dec 2008, at 15:04, Graham Percival wrote:
I have no clue (beyond "microtones") what you two have been
talking about, but perhaps Hans should take a serious look at what
is ALREADY WORKING in 2.11.65 before discussing new features.
The guy set it in E24, which is obviously wrong.
Hans
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 08:01:08PM +0800, Graham Breed wrote:
> I've checked the documentation for key signatures and see no
> indication that \key b \bayati could possible work though.
Say what?
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.11/Documentation/user/lilypond/Arabic-music#Arabic-key-signatures
Doc team
On 10 Dec 2008, at 13:01, Graham Breed wrote:
doing transpositions. Otherwise, one could have written
\key b \bayati
Say what? You're talking about key signatures again, not
transpositions.
I just assume the system for transposing key signatures is synced
with that.
You can uncomment
On 10 Dec 2008, at 12:47, Graham Breed wrote:
Perhaps you mean the between a sharp and a flattened M, like
between F# and
Gb, which may be positive or negative. Since I do not impose any such
relations, those are not confused.
Yes, that's the one. If you only record pitches with M and m the
2008/12/10 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 10 Dec 2008, at 07:55, Graham Breed wrote:
>
>>> I attach an example file.
>>
>> I don't see any transpositions.
>
> From what I recall, if one uncomments the key signature, lilypond complains
> that it cannot handle the rational numbers. So one does
On 10 Dec 2008, at 12:47, Graham Breed wrote:
I did it for E53 - it did not work. I attach a file.
No you didn't. You did something else in E53 and that didn't work.
There are still no transpositions. There are some attempts to get the
MIDI output to work. Did it? It looks like you're on t
2008/12/10 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 10 Dec 2008, at 07:40, Graham Breed wrote:
>> Transpositions aren't "computed against" any equal temperament. If
>> you transpose by a comma, then a comma will be added or subtracted
>> from the previous alterations. The resulting alterations wil
On 10 Dec 2008, at 07:55, Graham Breed wrote:
I attach an example file.
I don't see any transpositions.
From what I recall, if one uncomments the key signature, lilypond
complains that it cannot handle the rational numbers. So one does not
get as far as doing transpositions. Otherwise, o
On 10 Dec 2008, at 07:40, Graham Breed wrote:
Not using key signatures will not solve that problem.
I didn't say anything about not using them -- although, as it happens,
they are trouble in microtonal music. What I said is that they lead
to confusion. The main point is that learning contra
2008/12/9 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 9 Dec 2008, at 13:26, Graham Breed wrote:
>
> I attach an example file.
I don't see any transpositions.
> I think it is the commented out part (long time ago), which for some reason
> only works with E24. Therefore, the keys must be written explicitl
2008/12/9 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 9 Dec 2008, at 13:42, Graham Breed wrote:
>
> 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
On 9 Dec 2008, at 13:42, Graham Breed wrote:
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
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.
On 9 Dec 2008, at 13:26, Graham Breed wrote:
No, because Lilypond also preserves the number of scale steps. At
least, it should.
I attach what I wrote for E36. There seems to be two systems, but
they keep
the ratio M/m = 2.
Where are the transpositions?
I attach an example file.
I thi
2008/12/9 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 9 Dec 2008, at 05:00, Graham Breed wrote:
>> No, because Lilypond also preserves the number of scale steps. At
>> least, it should.
>
> I attach what I wrote for E36. There seems to be two systems, but they keep
> the ratio M/m = 2.
Where are the tr
On 9 Dec 2008, at 12:50, Graham Breed wrote:
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?
Sorry, that should be m and m. C-Db is m and C-C# plus a diesis is m.
So the goal is to distinguish m from m.
I
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.
When a musician's reading the notation, they're not looking above or
before the key si
I wrote:
> 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?
Sorry, that should be m and m. C-Db is m and C-C# plus a diesis is m.
So the goal is to distinguish m from m.
Graha
2008/12/9 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 9 Dec 2008, at 03:13, Graham Breed wrote:
>> Lilypond code is already semantic markup for music. Your intermediate
>> file would end up looking a lot like the original.
>
> If that would be the case, it would be not point, right?
Right.
> The forma
On 9 Dec 2008, at 03:13, Graham Breed wrote:
So it might be better to write an intermediate sound file with the
diatonic
structure. Then it can be used to return the output without
having to
recompile the typeset output.
What's an "intermediate sound file"?
The idea is, instead of writing
On 9 Dec 2008, at 05:00, Graham Breed wrote:
To get it to sound right, you multiply by 6. If accidentals and
transpositions don't work you may need to define a different grid
from
them. The worst is that you need one init file to define the
notation
-- so that the accidentals are distinct
On 9 Dec 2008, at 02:29, Graham Breed wrote:
Also, I made keyboard map, which I have used in Scala playing in
mainly
E31
for the last couple of months:
A# B# Cx Dx Ex
A B C# D# E# Fx Gx Ax Bx
Bb C D E F# G# A# B#
Cb Db Eb F G A B C'# D'#
Dbb Ebb
On 9 Dec 2008, at 06:09, Graham Breed wrote:
Are you on board with the regular mapping paradigm? I may as well
promote it while I'm here.
http://x31eq.com/paradigm.html
I looked a bit at it, the section "The Core Paradigm". The model I
indicated
also chooses some generators, but in additio
2008/12/8 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 8 Dec 2008, at 05:20, Graham Breed wrote:
>> To get it to sound right, you multiply by 6. If accidentals and
>> transpositions don't work you may need to define a different grid from
>> them. The worst is that you need one init file to define the no
2008/12/8 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 8 Dec 2008, at 12:28, Graham Breed wrote:
>
>>> So it might be better to write an intermediate sound file with the
>>> diatonic
>>> structure. Then it can be used to return the output without having to
>>> recompile the typeset output.
>>
>> What's an
On 8 Dec 2008, at 12:28, Graham Breed wrote:
Are you on board with the regular mapping paradigm? I may as well
promote it while I'm here.
http://x31eq.com/paradigm.html
I looked a bit at it, the section "The Core Paradigm". The model I
indicated also chooses some generators, but in additio
On 8 Dec 2008, at 12:28, Graham Breed wrote:
Also, I made keyboard map, which I have used in Scala playing in
mainly E31
for the last couple of months:
A# B# Cx Dx Ex
A B C# D# E# Fx Gx Ax Bx
Bb C D E F# G# A# B#
Cb Db Eb F G A B C'# D'#
Dbb
On 8 Dec 2008, at 12:28, Graham Breed wrote:
So it might be better to write an intermediate sound file with the
diatonic
structure. Then it can be used to return the output without having to
recompile the typeset output.
What's an "intermediate sound file"?
The idea is, instead of writing
.
A similar problem appear with music typeset in E12: if it should
be retuned,
one must first resolve enharmonic accidentals.
Music isn't typeset "in E12". It's typeset in a diatonic notation
system, exactly as you wanted. The problem is that it tends to be
heard in E12.
2008/12/8 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 8 Dec 2008, at 04:53, Graham Breed wrote:
>> Right. But the actual fifth has to be specified so you need an init
>> file to do that. The exact meaning of the alterations also have to be
>> specified in an init file. So there has to be a different
On 8 Dec 2008, at 04:53, Graham Breed wrote:
Now, that leads to the model I indicated if one uses an abstract
perfect
fifth, as the m and m can extracted from it by iteration and octave
transpositions.
Right. But the actual fifth has to be specified so you need an init
file to do that.
ot an exact quarter-tone.
>>
>> So change the init file.
>
>
> There is the personal interaction problem: even though one agrees what the
> notation should be, one does not agree what the tuning should be. So as it
> is, set in E24, people may typeset a lot music that can
2008/12/7 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The paper
> Sagittal A Microtonal Notation System
> by George D. Secor and David C. Keenan
> says:
> The Sagittal notation uses a conventional staff on which the natural notes
> are in a
> single series of fifths, with sharps and flats (and doubles t
On 7 Dec 2008, at 14:59, Graham Breed wrote:
Now that fixation is not only a problem for MIDI files, but may cause
transposition problems, as a half-flat may be erroneously altered
to a
half-sharp on the semi-tone below.
Could it? Define the "half-flat" as a bit less than half a
semitone
On 7 Dec 2008, at 14:59, Graham Breed wrote:
As Sagittal isn't working we are a bit short of sharp symbols.
There
are some arrowed accidentals on the way, though.
This would be the long haul.
I made good progress during the summer. It'll hopefully work as soon
as someone looks at setting
On 7 Dec 2008, at 14:59, Graham Breed wrote:
That is not the problem , but that whole tone is not the double of
the half
tone. M = 9, m = 4, so that there are 5*M+2*m = 53 tonesteps or
commas in an
octave.
How is that a problem?
The rules for computing accidentals and transpositions will
2008/12/7 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> That is not the problem , but that whole tone is not the double of the half
> tone. M = 9, m = 4, so that there are 5*M+2*m = 53 tonesteps or commas in an
> octave.
How is that a problem?
> The same problem is in meantone tunings, in E31, M = 5, m = 3,
as in an octave.
The same problem is in meantone tunings, in E31, M = 5, m = 3, so
that M/m = 5/3.
What do you mean by "a diatonic
notation system"?
It is what yo get by adjoining to the notes A B C D E F G,
octaves, sharps
and flats. When reducing in octaves, this is a finite sy
of 12,
> whereas it should be E53.
Ah. Well, that's one configuration file, which you can change. The
tunings are expressed as a fraction of a whole tone but I don't think
there's a limit on the precision.
>> What do you mean by "a diatonic
>> notation syste
On 7 Dec 2008, at 11:42, Graham Breed wrote:
The only 12-ness is in the tuning of MIDI files, which I think you can
change to get extended meantone.
The implementations in Turkish music seemed to force a multiple of
12, whereas it should be E53.
What do you mean by "a diatonic
not
2008/12/7 Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> From what I know, LilyPond uses essentially E12 (12-ET), with some
> extensions (right?). Have you considered switching to a diatonic notation
> system (or extended meantone system)?
The only 12-ness is in the tuning of MIDI files, which
From what I know, LilyPond uses essentially E12 (12-ET), with some
extensions (right?). Have you considered switching to a diatonic
notation system (or extended meantone system)?
Hans
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
53 matches
Mail list logo
