[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Absolute vs. relative pitches

From: Trevor Daniels
Subject: Re: Absolute vs. relative pitches
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 09:18:24 +0100

Graham Percival wrote Thursday, August 14, 2008 12:42 AM

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:31:16 +0100
"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:

John, you wrote Wednesday, August 13, 2008 5:53 PM

> IMNSHO we *must* discuss absolute vs. relative pitches with usage
> cases in the Learning Manual.

I agree with this.  IIRC I wanted to do so but Graham vetoed it, but
maybe he opposed it just in the early sections of the manual.

I still disagree.  One of the big changes in GDP was standardizing
on \relative c'' {} for the example.  Now you want to go back? :(

Not at all.  No one is suggesting changing any of the
examples.  I agree standarising these on relative is right.
The suggestion is simply to discuss the merits and demerits of relative and absolute properly, later in the manual.

Some new users found it really confusing when examples were
randomly switching between relative and absolute -- sometimes even
on the same doc page!

I wouldn't mind adding a section to LM 3 about absolute mode, with
usage cases and whatnot.  But I still really think that everything
else in the docs should be \relative.

Great!  We are agreed, then :)

- Graham

reply via email to

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