lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: pb with 2.13 with doc example fret diagram


From: Marc Hohl
Subject: Re: pb with 2.13 with doc example fret diagram
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:12:49 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7

Am 22.12.2010 03:43, schrieb Carl Sorensen:
On 12/21/10 7:26 PM, "Marc Mouries" <address@hidden> wrote:



On Dec 21, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:

Well, it's supposed to be the number of semitones above middle C for each
open string, starting with the highest string.


Wow, that's really not self-explanatory but i get why it's needed. However
I'll have one less argument when my friend tell me that Lilypond is too
complicated.
Why not allow people to define tuning with notes, like:

violinTuning = #'(e' a d g)
guitarTuning= #'(e b g d a e,,)

Well, the short (and dumb) answer is because the notes e' a d g etc. are
lilypond input music expressions, and the string tuning needs to be a Scheme
list.

The next longer answer is probably "because nobody ever thought of it".

Not quite ;-)

http://lilypond-s-support-for-tablatures.3383434.n2.nabble.com/TAB-guide-tp5813587p5818252.html

and then have an internal function would compute the distance to from and to
the middle C?


The final answer is that it will be quite easy to to create a music function
that creates a string tuning object. How would this syntax be?

\makeStringTuning #'violinTuning {e' a d g}

If this sounds good, I'll have it done in the next day or so.

Sounds very promising indeed! As Patrick mentioned in his tablature test file, a tablature key (i.e. string labels indicating the pitch) would be a useful enhancement.

I didn't dig very deep, but how complicated would it be to allow note names for
string tunings?

For standard situations, the music function \makeStringTuning will work, and we could save the note names for later use within a tabKey. On the other hand, if the tuning is given in the numeric way, the corresponding note names (at least with some tunings) will be not unambiguous.

So IMHO, while the latter solution will be easier to implement, the former proposal
is more extensible for the future.

Just my 2ct

Regards,

Marc




Thanks for the idea!

Carl


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user





reply via email to

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