home tune search software learn abc discuss about blog Starbound/LOTRO contact  

  [abc standard: home | current | route-map | updating | proposals]

 

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
abc:standard:v2.1:proposals:transposition:alexmidicond:v2 [2013/04/04 18:42]
alexmidicond
abc:standard:v2.1:proposals:transposition:alexmidicond:v2 [2013/04/08 16:04] (current)
alexmidicond
Line 383: Line 383:
 A special aspect of the same problem is the concert score: it must react to both mechanisms, which may look pretty intransparent. A special aspect of the same problem is the concert score: it must react to both mechanisms, which may look pretty intransparent.
  
-== A contestant of some charms: the "​Hudson-Chris-Alex model" ==+== Why not support "​re-instrumentation"​ directives? == 
 + 
 +Some have asked for an additional voice-related command like "​I:​rewrite_for Eb-1", to change the existing instrumentation. It would amount to yet another transposition layer, effective on the dots but starting with the sounding notes (similar to the transformation used for the concert score, which would in principle correspond to "​I:​rewrite_for C".) This is possible, but my arguments against it are the following:​ 
 + 
 +  - It adds complexity and reduces readability. 
 +  - Like the concert score, it may involve clef issues, so that people may want yet another directive "​I:​clef_rewrite ...", e.g. "​I:​clef_rewrite treble"​ when reassigning a bassoon voice (that uses the tenor clef passage-wise) to a baritone saxophone. Or even "​[I:​clef_rewrite Eb-1 treble][I:​clef_rewrite C tenor]"​... to cater for various anticipated re-instrumentations - not exactly simple. 
 +  - Changing the instrumentation of a tune coded "as written"​ can be viewed as creating a **different** arrangement,​ for which simultaneous administration is not required. Software may offer such functions in abc2abc style, allowing for manual post-editing such as fixing the clefs and ottavas. And of course, if we have an "ifdef mechanism",​ people can prepare their scores for as many use cases as they want - they may not always be happy with it, though. In contrast, the concert score and shared staves are felt to leave the piece **essentially unchanged**,​ therefore they deserve that special support.  
 + 
 +(As for "​overall transposition",​ it is somewhere in between. The points in favour of its support are:\\ 
 +a) the use case is very common, much more so than re-instrumentation,​\\ 
 +b) if it were absent, as in Chris'​s proposals until v9, people would be tempted to abuse our voice-related transposition directives, creating chaos if these are simultaneously used for their proper purposes,​\\ 
 +c) we need not offer modifications of clefs and ottavas here, since the intended usage is "​one-off"​ transposition by a small interval, unknown in advance, to suit a particular singer. See my "​Clefs"​ proposal text.) 
 + 
 +=== A contestant of some charms: the "​Hudson-Chris-Alex model" ​===
  
 Some users would like to have the "​instrument="​ syntax available even if coding neither as written nor as sounding. This is why Chris introduced an independent voice-related mechanism, which unfortunately has the serious drawbacks mentioned above. The most severe drawback is that he allows "​transpose-score"​ to differ from "​transpose-sound",​ on top of an "​instrument="​. If only "​transpose-both"​ were allowed in the independent mechanism, at least the dots<​->​sound relation would be preserved (i.e. reserved to a single mechanism/​level). Some users would like to have the "​instrument="​ syntax available even if coding neither as written nor as sounding. This is why Chris introduced an independent voice-related mechanism, which unfortunately has the serious drawbacks mentioned above. The most severe drawback is that he allows "​transpose-score"​ to differ from "​transpose-sound",​ on top of an "​instrument="​. If only "​transpose-both"​ were allowed in the independent mechanism, at least the dots<​->​sound relation would be preserved (i.e. reserved to a single mechanism/​level).
abc/standard/v2.1/proposals/transposition/alexmidicond/v2.txt · Last modified: 2013/04/08 16:04 by alexmidicond
 
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
Recent changes RSS feed Donate Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki