[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Key and accidentals in Lilypond

From: Rune Zedeler
Subject: Re: Key and accidentals in Lilypond
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 01:15:51 +0100

(sorry sending reply to the wrong posting - for some reason I didn't
receive the posting from s.abeccara)

Simon Bailey wrote:

> > | if i'm reading a piece in g major, then i
> > | will read any note in the bottom space of the treble staff as an
> > | f-sharp, not as an f. so i write "fis" for this note... :o)
> >
> > i don't agree. it is really not an f sharp, it is a natural f in the
> > key of G, so nothing has to be added to it. if you are singing a piece
> > and you aren't told which key it is in (unless you have an absolute
> > ear) you will sing "sharp" notes completely automatically, like
> > natural ones. :o)

Oh, so you mean that when playing a piece in g major on the piano the
"left one of the 3 black keys" are to be called "f" - not "f sharp".
This is perhaps common in italy (I don't know) - but it is definitely
not common in english or the german group (danish, swedish, norwegian,
dutch) of music notation.

If fis is really called 'f' when playing in g major, then - by the same
argument - one should also call fis 'f' when playing in fis major.
Actually, when playing a piece in fis major, all the notes would (after
your definition) have the same names as if the piece was in f major.
So - using your naming method - how does one tell whether the piece runs
in f major or fis major - both would be called "f major" ???

I really don't understand.

> > for people really playing and singing music, and not simply
> > typesetting it, this is ridiculous.

I think that as good as everybody on this list "really play and sing
music" - and for some reason we don't find it rediculous.


reply via email to

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