[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Relative mode

From: David Raleigh Arnold
Subject: Re: Relative mode
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:52:15 -0400

On Thursday 23 October 2003 02:47 am, Aaron wrote:
> Well just to add more fuel to the fire.
> I am curious how all this will the ability to analyse lilypond
> scores?

That is the point.  Relative mode makes note entry faster at the cost 
of making reading the more difficult.
> I like the flexibily of the various ways of entering notes, but
> mostly want to know exactly whats happening.
> The abc notation idea is that anything within a set octave will
> always be same.

That is what people are referencing as "absolute" mode.  I did a filter 
to use caps for one comma, like E for e, , but having tried it I don't 
see any advantage to it.  The way it is in lilypond now is the best 
possible way IMHO.  The "C=c," is still in "ptfilter.txt" on my 
website, so if you like it you have it.  I thought of the anchor note 
idea some time ago, but never gave any thought at all to a possible 
syntax, and might never have if the subject of another relative mode 
had not arisen.

If c:,, establishes a fixed pitch to start relative mode, the only 
purpose of \relative would be to use some note other than c, so that 
statement could be eliminated if one wanted to use a c in any octave.

It would be good to have a way to leave relative mode also, however, 
and the simplest way would be two colons, so just type c::,, and you 
wouldn't be in relative mode any more at all.

The proposed new relative mode has more typing than the present 
relative mode, yet it is no more readable, so it seems to me to have 
the disadvantages of both and the advantages of neither.
> For me setting the octave or octaves of a piece seems the most
> logical.

That can be done with \transpose
> Mats called this absolute mode, although I didn't see such a mode
> mentioned in the docs.

If it's not relative, it's absolute, that's all.
> If there was a way to define a range in advance it would be much
> cleaner for me. This I guess presupposes a stlye of music I guess.

That can be done with \transpose
> I would say that having clear modes would be most helpful. If
> absolute mode is \transpose I would wish it became \absoulte.

If you don't transpose, and if you don't use \relative, then you don't 
need \absolute because you have it already.
> And why is this worse or better than relative mode???
> As per DA suggestion I personally dont change modes often, I would
> rather or additionally like an option to add the octave or range to
> the header \range a - a maybe using a2 - e3 or something like that

\relative establishes the octaves.  Why do you need anything else?
> or a folksong mode
> with relative mode I find that the brackets are a bother and usually
> waste a bit of time sorting them out especially if the come near
> second endings in repeats.

It probably would be better if neither \transpose nor \relative 
required brackets other than being in \notes{}, because the brackets 
make it awkward to switch around between them within \notes{}, but it 
is better for both of them to have brackets rather than for one to have 
them and the other not.

c:,, d e f g c:,, d e f g would be equivalent to:

c,, d,, e,, f,, g,, c,, d,, e,, f,, g,,

or \relative

c d e f g c, d e f g 


Br`er Fox told Br`er Rabbit that the Tar Baby had dissed him, and Fox 
made a
dummy out of tar and put him in Rabbit's path.  When the Tar Baby 
failed to
return a civil greeting, Rabbit punched him with a right, a left, both 
feet and
butted him with his forehead.  Along came Br`er Fox who saw that he was
thoroughly "stuck up".  Br`er Fox is much smarter than Br`er Rabbit, 
and in
spite of all Rabbit's pleas for help, no one is going to unstick him 
and throw
him in the briar patch, so now Br`er Fox is liesurely eating Rabbit's 
D. Raleigh Arnold dra@ address@hidden

reply via email to

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