[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lilypond-user
Subject:    Re: TabStaff feature requests
From:       Steve Yegge <steve.yegge () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-11-26 13:40:46
Message-ID: AANLkTin-+PCpoeTjctaehayTQuQU-NdVhYt7E5d2qO=o () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Jan Warcho=C5=82 <
lemniskata.bernoulliego@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2010/11/25 Steve Yegge <steve.yegge@gmail.com>
>
>> I bit the bullet and went through all 100-odd guitar music publications
>> I've
>> collected over the years, from publishers around the world on every
>> continent,
>> across multiple genres (although admittedly mostly classical and South
>> American).  The set includes many volumes whose purpose is purely
>> didactic.   And yet I was only able to find three books that use this
>> notation.
>>
>> So I suspect that "standard" isn't exactly the right word to use here. :=
-)
>> It's probably better to say that it's the "correct" way of guitar notati=
on
>> -- one
>> that is satisfying from a theoretician's standpoint, but rarely used in
>> practice.
>>
>
> I have two guitar publications using this notation (treble clef with
> explicit 8 at the bottom).
>
> Frankly, the absence of this mark in many of the scores annoys me very
> much. Nobody gets hurt by this tiny 8, and its presence clarifies things.=
 In
> my opinion we should support it, there's no point in sticking to a wrong
> habit :)
>
> cheers,
> Janek
>

OK, you've all convinced me.  I would be ashamed to publish a
professional-quality LilyPond-typeset score without the tiny 8 now.  I will
be sure to include it. :)

-steve

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Jan Warchoł <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a \
href="mailto:lemniskata.bernoulliego@gmail.com">lemniskata.bernoulliego@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> \
wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt \
0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> <div \
class="gmail_quote">2010/11/25 Steve Yegge <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a \
href="mailto:steve.yegge@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">steve.yegge@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span><div class="im"><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, \
204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">

<div class="gmail_quote"><div>I bit the bullet and went through all 100-odd guitar \
music publications I&#39;ve</div><div>collected over the years, from publishers \
around the world on every continent,</div> <div>across multiple genres (although \
admittedly mostly classical and South</div><div>American).   The set includes many \
volumes whose purpose is purely</div><div>didactic.    And yet I was only able to \
find three books that use this notation.</div>


<div><br></div><div>So I suspect that &quot;standard&quot; isn&#39;t exactly the \
right word to use here. :-)</div><div>It&#39;s probably better to say that it&#39;s \
the &quot;correct&quot; way of guitar notation -- one</div>


<div>that is satisfying  from a  theoretician&#39;s standpoint, but rarely used in \
practice.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I have two  guitar  \
publications using this notation (treble clef with explicit 8 at the bottom).</div>

<div><br></div><div>Frankly, the absence of this mark in many of the scores annoys me \
very much. Nobody gets hurt by this tiny 8, and its presence clarifies things. In my \
opinion we should support it, there&#39;s no point in sticking to a wrong habit \
:)</div>

<div><br></div><div>cheers,</div><div>Janek</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>OK, you&#39;ve all convinced me.   I would be ashamed to \
publish a professional-quality LilyPond-typeset score without the tiny 8 now.   I \
will be sure to include it. :)<br><br>-steve<br>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]