Figured Bass Context

[Trent J]

Good Morning,

I have been advised to send an email outlining my problems with the current 
figured bass context.

I have been using Sibelius 3.0 and while this program is very powerful I 
spend far too long setting out the layout and which can be very easily 
changed with a wrong click which could require a lengthy symbol by symbol 
change if it isn’t caught earlier enough.

The two biggest points that I like about Lilypond are:

1.	I can edit and enter music anywhere all that I need is a text editor and 
I’m on my way...

2.	Most of the layout is done by the program requiring very little changing. 
For example when recently typesetting the vespers of Monteverdi. I retained 
the original note values as they show the tempo relationships within a 
piece. This often entails typesetting a lot of breves and semi-breves in a 
row. Sibelius dutifully saw these as large notes so decided to leave a lot 
of space between each note making the page layout of the score very 
unwieldily and requiring retuning each bar. Lilypond on the other hand was 
flawless and was able to keep the breves and semi-breves together just as if 
they where crotchets and quavers.

The problem I have at the moment is the figured bass support. Although it’s 
there (Finale 2005 takes a your on your own approach). Sibelius on the other 
hand supports figured bass very well and extender lines can be added using 
line tools which expand and contract as the music is formatted.

I’ve read many discussions about figured bass support and have found that 
the main problems where figured bass support needs to be beefed up are as 
follows:

•	Inserting a single number under each note is fine. But the problems occur 
when multiple numbers are needed eg. 6 4 2 in a column and more so with 6 
(#)4# 2 ( the bracketed sharp indicates that the sharp can be placed either 
side). The sharp figure when placed on the left creates misaligns the 
columns and on the right there is a space between the 4 and sharp which 
might be seen as a cadence rather than and sharpened 4th. One way to avoid 
this I might suggest is to have a dedicated font with all the figured bass 
symbols that are commonly used. One example is at 
http://www.facsimilus.com/FacsimilusFontFamily/en/Default.aspx. It might be 
appropriate that the sharp, natural and flat’s be added to the numbers to 
form one character ie. #3 as one character or 3# as one character. These 
would then be needed for numbers two up to 9 but excluding 8. This would 
then eliminate the alignment problems as the figure would only be one 
character not two. There would also need the creation of explicit slash and 
plus characters yet again the website above show which ones to be slashed 
etc. Now that’s the easy bit...

•	The harder bit is the extender lines they pose the bigger problem I guess 
with how lilypond works that they would require separate schemes. While I 
guess the numbers is a part of the lyrics/text markup, extender lines 
complicate this scheme as they lines can either be under one note or 
continued across several notes. They can even be column specific eg. If 
you’re to have a 6 4 2 chord it is feasible that the 4 and 2 is held across 
a series of notes while the six may change to a seven and the 2 may change 
to a 3 later on eg.

  *   *     *               *   *   *
  6   ------ 7 -------------------------
  4  ------------------------------------
  2  --------------------------- #3  ----  etc

As can be seen here it's the mixture of the two schemes that cause the 
problems. Could a figured bass scheme be based on columns. Only four or five 
columns would be neded e.g.

Figured bass
{ { 6 4 2 }4 { __ __ __ }4 { 7 __ __ }2 etc... the numbers outside the 
brackets could indicate the beat value and the underscore lines that occur 
in a particular column form a continuous line until that column is changed 
or terminated (ie no value entered).

The other way is to keep the lines in a seperate scheme.
This might be a better way since extender lines are not use in every figured 
bass... mainly french scores and religious or any other works that have an 
organ conitnuo.

so that  a figured bass might be enetered normally and the extender lines 
take the form of

{ \column 3 __2. } ie an extender line continues in column 3 for 3 beats.

Finally the format of the numbers requires they be built from top to bottom 
under a note and not built from the bottom up.

I don't know what other people think but the figured bass should go 
underneath the bass part in a full score and might in some way be placed 
above the bass line in a part. This is for two reasons.

1.	If the figured bass was to go above the bass part in a full score then a 
score would have to have a large white gap between the bass part and the 
previous stave. This might not be a problem with scores that have a detailed 
figured bass but would look weird for scores that use figured bass symbols 
very sparingly. Eg. In a lot of Monteverdi’s music there is only an 
indication occasionally that the major third (so only a sharp symbol) is to 
be played.
2.	Parts could show the figured bass parts above since it’s the only part 
shown and would be of great advantage to a continuo player as it is a 
reminder that the figured pitches should be played above the bass notes and 
not below hence why some manuscripts/scores have the figured bass above the 
stave since the continuo part was to be ‘improvised’ above the bass part.

I hope this email might prompt some further discussion and an eventual 
inclusion on an excellent figured bass system into an already excellent 
program.

Regards,

Trent Johnston...

P.S. I think its lunacy to try and provide midi output for a figured bass 
system since it’s not there for a player to play only chords but rather as a 
skeleton for improvising and accompaniment. It should remain and only be a 
text system.