Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013

[luis jure]

on 2013-05-21 at 09:26 PMA wrote:

> I think a serious go at terminological precision
> would note the distinction: pitch vs pitch-class.

indeed. that's why in my first mail i said that pitch involves a specific
octave. but i thought the intention was not covering the whole theory of
music, but rather discussing how the word "pitch" is used in the lilypond
manual.

unlike david, i think lilypond's own glossary is correct:

===
1.235 pitch

ES: altura, I: altezza, F: hauteur, D: Tonhöhe, NL: toonhoogte, DK:
tonehøjde, S: tonhöjd, FI: sävelkorkeus.

1. The perceived quality of a sound that is primarily a function of its
fundamental frequency.
===

the problem i see is that then in the manual the term is used too loosely,
often in a way that is not quite correct. often it's used to mean what i
would call simply "note name".

anyway, i didn't bring this up, the discussion began with the use of the
term in florian's presentation (by the way, i found the presentation very
good). i jumped in just because terminological precision in music theory
is one of my favorites pastimes...