Re: Ukulele string tunings

[David Kastrup]

Choan Gálvez <address@hidden> writes:

> Current tunings for tenor and baritone ukulele are string
> reversed. From `ly/string-tunings-init.ly`:
>
> %% ukulele tunings
> \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-tuning \stringTuning <g' c' e' a'>
> \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-d-tuning \stringTuning <a' d' fis' b'>
> \makeDefaultStringTuning #'tenor-ukulele-tuning \stringTuning <a' e' c' g>
> \makeDefaultStringTuning #'baritone-ukulele-tuning \stringTuning <e' b g d>
>
> Those two last tuning should be <g c' e' a'> and <d g b e'> respectively.
>
> In addition, I'd say those two tunings are weirly named -- from the
> same file, all guitar tunings are named `guitar-something`, all banjo
> tunings `banjo-something`.

But those are not tenor or baritone tunings of a ukulele, but rather
tunings of the tenor or baritone ukulele.  Namely different instruments.
So there is some consistency after all:
<instrument>-<tuningvariant>-tuning
Not sure whether this reason is good enough.

> As I haven't find any report about the wrong definitions, I think it's
> be safe to assume that no one is using them and it would be ok to
> rename them.

Indeed this would seem to indicate that a convert-ly rule would not need
to accompany such a change.

> I'd suggest rewriting them as:
>
> \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-linear-tuning \stringTuning <g c' e' a'>
> \makeDefaultStringTuning #'ukulele-baritone-tuning \stringTuning <d g b e'>
>
> or alternatively, remove them.
>
> What do you think?

Not sure about the renaming.  Of course, strings need to get reversed.
It would appear that this had been wrong in any version of the file.  I
seem to remember, however, that LilyPond is not overly skilled dealing
with non-increasing string pitches, so the standard ukulele would likely
not be fabulously supported either.

-- 
David Kastrup