[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[talk] easy tuplets
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
[talk] easy tuplets |
Date: |
Sun, 23 Sep 2012 14:45:44 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
This is an informal chat idea, following David's latest suggestion
that such emails could go on -devel instead of requiring a
separate mailing list. I fully expect this not to work.
Currently, durations are limited to powers of 2 (plus dots).
Making a triplet involves the wordy \times x/y { ... } or a *x/y
scaling factor. We could avoid this (in common cases) by allowing
arbitrary integer durations.
c4 e \times 2/3 { c4 e g }
into:
c4 e c6 e g
The general rule is that the duration x is (whole note)/x. So in
addition to the current
1 2 4 8
we have
3 => \times 2/3 { c2 } (whole note divided by 3)
6 => \times 2/3 { c4 } (whole note divided by 6)
... etc.
These notes can be grouped together like we do for beaming, and
produce tuplet brackets according to tuplet-beaming rules.
I know that this idea has been floated at least twice in the past
ten years, but since this is only a [talk] idea, I'm not going to
bother looking up those discussions in the archives. Remember
that you're not allowed to call me a lazy idiot for not looking up
those discussions because this isn't a formal proposal. This
email thread should have "the casual atmosphere of a friendly
discussion at a pub or coffee house", and that nobody "will
complain about technically infeasible ideas, wasting developer’s
time, having to defend the parser, or anything like that".
- Graham
- [talk] easy tuplets,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: [talk] easy tuplets, David Kastrup, 2012/09/23
- Re: [talk] easy tuplets, David Kastrup, 2012/09/23
- Re: [talk] easy tuplets, Francisco Vila, 2012/09/23
- Re: [talk] easy tuplets, Janek Warchoł, 2012/09/23
- Re: [talk] easy tuplets, Keith OHara, 2012/09/23