Re: sharping naturals

[David Raleigh Arnold]

On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 14:20:24 +0200
David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

> Robert Schmaus <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > I wasn't being rude,
> 
> Rudeness is determined at the receiving end of a
> communication.  The best you can say is that you did not intend
> to be rude.
> 
> > just reminding the guy what his patron saint considers to be
> > "objective, absolute, and immutable truth". Which everyone's
> > free to believe ... as long as they keep it to themselves.
> 
> And then I have my problems even reconciling that with what you
> write here.
> 
> > Rude would be to badmouth guys (like you & me) for trying to
> > help - the advice on SE was pretty much the same as from the
> > list - because they suggested that you might not understand
> > what you're doing.
> 
> LilyPond's notename philosophy happens to be from a culture
> remote from the English speaking world.  In Dutch or German,
> you never, ever, would call a "cis" anything other than "cis".
> It's not a "c sharp", namely some qualified "c".  That's a
> totally different note and name.  There is no such thing as a
> "c natural" when talking about notes.  It's either "c" or not.
> You don't need to specify the key signature when discussing a
> chord: all note names are absolute.  Always.
> 
> LilyPond is internationalized in that it offers English
> notenames, but it does not offer the accompanying notename
> philosophy.  And the fuzziness coming with such a philosophy is
> not helpful in the context of a computer description of music,
> so it's not all that likely that this will ever change.
> 
> But that does not mean that other philosophies are only
> entertained by idiots, so there is no necessity of letting that
> kind of vibe come off here.
> 
> The best advice with regard to dealing with LilyPond's notename
> philosophy is to get used to it.  LilyPond editing tools may
> give offer some of the efficiency advantages of more flexible
> naming philosophies without having ambiguities creep into the
> resulting input text.
> 
> > As for tolerance: I agree I shouldn't have made the remark in
> > the first place. This is not the place for it, so sorry to
> > everyone for the extra mails. But the Pius Brothers are about
> > as tolerant as the IS when it comes to anything outside their
> > "objective, absolute truths" (note the plural), so I simply
> > couldn't suppress the urge.
> 
> This mailing list is not the place for trying to propagate your
> religious affiliations.  People are invited to communicate here
> about LilyPond without having to hide their gender, religion,
> nationality and other parts of their identity.
> 
> It may be worth mentioning that one priest who was grateful for
> LilyPond allowing him to prepare scores suitable for the
> eyesight of his older brethren gave me some part of his modest
> remaining possessions when he took his vow of poverty.
> 
> Different religious convictions do not preclude us from
> treating each other with respect.  Even if it means suppressing
> your urges.  Let's not forget that the whole idea of being
> civilized is not being a slave to your urges.
> 

Just a reminder from a Buddhist that if it
weren't for the Christian church, we would not have music
notation. We'd be stuck with tablature like every other society.

Kindest regards, Rale

-- 
Guitar teaching materials and original music for all styles and
levels. Site: http://www.openguitar.com (()) eMail:
address@hidden Contact:
http://www.openguitar.com/contact.html