[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Is Anyone Working on a Better Tablature Algorithm?

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Is Anyone Working on a Better Tablature Algorithm?
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 09:24:40 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

christopher-heckman <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote
>> christopher-heckman &lt;
>> ccheckman@
>> &gt; writes:
>>> David Kastrup wrote
>>>> Personally I think there should be a _translator_ doing the string/fret
>>>> assignment and recording it into the music expression.
>>>> Why?
>>>> This translator can keep context and, for example, default to using the
>>>> identical assignment for repeated chords, continued _notes_ and similar.
>>> I strongly disagree with you on this.
>> The following rather sounds like you strongly disagree with something
>> else.  No idea what.
> You're saying the fingering should be the same every time you play a
> certain chord. Or at least that's what your email is saying.

No, it isn't.  "repeated chords, continued notes" is not the same as
"certain chord".  Particularly in connection with "keep context" it
implies several identical notes/chords in a _row_, without intervening
material.  And apart from special situations a human player _would_ keep
using the same fingering in consecutive chords/notes, so it would be a
reasonable default and would also have the advantage that we would not
have to special-case q for repeating fingering info in tabs: that would
work out by default.

> THAT is what I am disagreeing to.

You are free to disagree to whatever strawman you want but it has
nothing to do with what I wrote.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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