[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)

From: demery
Subject: Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 16:51:51 -0000

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009, "Anthony W. Youngman"
<address@hidden> said:

>>So do we care what reference concert pitch uses?  Does it matter if it's
>>A=440, or A=445, or A=450?
> It does matter that the reference is accurate.

it also matters that the 'Standard' is not always observed; especially for
the music of Mozart and earlier, which is very much of interest to us and
our users.

>>2) Transposing instruments use notation relative to some other frequency
>>standard, such that a C in the transposing instrument notation is the same
>>frequency as the transposing instrument's note in concert pitch.

!?!  the concept of transposed notation is never easy to explain, I dont
thnk it is possible to do it briefly.  Much easier concept to introduce
from an historical perspective, given a couple of whys to hang things on
makes all much more easily understood.

>>It seems to me that all the rest of the information is more than is needed
>>for the LilyPond glossary; it's available in some other music dictionary.

I tried to find a list of transposing instruments in my home library,
nada.  If we do it and get it right it will be a service to our users; and
to ourselves should we ever create a part extraction from score feature.

> But a little extra information always helps. 

hear! hear!  Yes, new concepts sometimes need a bit of dancing around to
be fully assimilated.

> And, while I don't want to plug my instrument as an example, I've come 
> across too many cases here with lilypond and elsewhere where people 
> don't understand how to correctly notate transposing instruments, that I 
> think a bit of extra information is important.

fully agree.

Dana Emery

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]