[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals
From: |
Christ van Willegen |
Subject: |
Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:03:08 +0200 |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:33 PM, David Raleigh Arnold<address@hidden> wrote:
> It is also perfectly reasonable for a person who has been writing
> music for decades for it to make no sense. Why? Because it
> makes no sense, and never did.
>
> Why not a \followKeySignature command?
>
> It would require an "n" in addition to the other four chromatic
> sign designations, and that's it. It would save typing, and
> it would make the notes blocks easier to read, for /musicians/
> that is.
I do have to disagree here...
First of all, let me tell you that I am terrible at reading sheet
music (I do know how to read notes, but just barely, and am unable to
play a tune on the piano in any acceptable speed). When I see a black
dot in the middle of a staaf, and it's a G cleff, I tend to play a 'b'
note, even if the music is in F (and consequenly has one flat). If I
were to read a note block 'by eye', and would see a key signature in F
(major), and see a 'b' note, that's what I would play on the piano,
and never a b-flat.
I think that Lilypond's method of inputting the notes that _are to be
played on the instrument_ (disregarding transposed instruments for
now...) is the way to go. It's confused me at first, but if ou
would'nt do that, it would be almost impossible to transpose a melody
to another key and/or instrument. It would also royally screw things
up if you'd first type the notes and later add another key signature.
If you do that _now_, the music becomes unreadable because of the
extra flats, naturals and sharps. In _your_ case, the music would come
out sounding differently if you change the key signature. Not a good
plan...
Christ van Willegen
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, (continued)
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Simon Mackenzie, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Bobroff, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Bobroff, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Simon Mackenzie, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Tim McNamara, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Graham Percival, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Alexander Kobel, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, James E. Bailey, 2009/08/25
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Rogers, 2009/08/27
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Raleigh Arnold, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals,
Christ van Willegen <=
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Kieren MacMillan, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Rogers, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Alexander Kobel, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Kieren MacMillan, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Graham Percival, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Kieren MacMillan, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Rogers, 2009/08/28
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, David Raleigh Arnold, 2009/08/29
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Patrick McCarty, 2009/08/29
- Re: Accidentals: Unwanted naturals, Kieren MacMillan, 2009/08/29