Roger Hare

Fair comment. I'm still learning/experimenting. I'm using C: and O: for the simple (and probably not very good) reason that these fields appear in the ABC score window below the title. For me that's 'useful' at the moment, but I may change later - possibly if I try typesetting my scripts. <off-topic> I also just stumbled across another interesting 'feature' of the R: field. In a French ABC file I found: R:Bourrée This simply refused to play at all using EasyABC. When I replaced it with: R:Bourr/'ee it played fine, I don't know if this is behaviour is 'expected', but to be on the safe side I went through the file replacing all instances of accented characters with their explicit 3-character 'backslash' representations. What a pain... </off-topic> Roger

This follow-up is a little shorter than it would have otherwise been - I just lost the lot for no apparent reason!! 2nd attempt coming up... Thank you folks for the informative follow-ups (follows-up?) to my OP. Taking the points in your (edited by me) post in order: (1) Thank you - I was beginning to think it was me. I tried it with ABCExplorer before posting my original message, but couldn't get it to work (I always have trouble with ABCExplorer ). Maybe I should try it with MuseScore. (2) Mea Culpa! I had put the R:Hornpipe in there while trying to get the brute to play properly. I inadvertently left it in there when I posted the script to you. My apologies! I have been trying out the R: field in any case, and my empirical conclusion is that it's not particularly helpful. I now use the C: or O: field to include information about the rhythm. (3) I think, when I get the chance, I will try and run a few test files directly through abc2midi to to see if it's abc2midi or EasyABC which is barfing... Thank you for the exhaustive analysis and for the 'triplet exerciser' - I must try that out (later, after lunch...). I too, even with my limited knowledge, would have expected M:C and M:4/4 to behave in the same way... See my comment above. I am now following the same strategy, albeit using different fields! Thanks again folks. Roger

I've sent you the ABC script as a PM - because I'm a little twitchy about publishing a script based on what may be copyright material on the public forum. Hope that's OK? Roger.

Thank you for taking the time to investigate my query! I haven't, so far, investigated the underlying components of EasyABC, other than to confirm that abcm2ps works 'as advertised'. Perhaps it's time I did, and looked at the functioning of the other components such as abcmidi. I based my idea that (3AB<c was 'wrong' on the fairly unambiguous statement in Gonzato's manual that "The notes in a tuplet must have the same length." (page 19 of the current version). If that is itself inaccurate (and there doesn't seem to be any other reason that notes in a triplet (tuplet) can not be of differing lengths), then 'Bob's yer uncle'. I wasn't aware that abcmidi was 'buggy'. Useful qualitative information to bear in mind for the future, and I'll stick with the better-sounding(3AB<c in my transcription... Edit: I've now looked at the ABC2.2 spec(http://abcnotation.com/wiki/abc:standard:v2.2), and in section 4.13, in the discussion relating to tuplets, although it's talking about a different method of specifying different-length notes, there is a paragraph beginning "This can be useful to include notes of different lengths within a tuplet", so clearly it is permissible. Job done! Thanks again. Roger

I've just had occasion to use a triplet for the first time in an ABC script, ie: (3ABc It looks OK in the score, but sounds rotten when I play back the MIDI representation [I'm using EasyABC] - the three notes are not the same duration. If I 'fudge' it - (3AB<c - it is better, but still not good [and strictly is not 'correct' ABC? As I understand it, the notes are intended to be the same length, and should be specified as such in the code]. As far as I can see, using the full form of tuplet specification: (a:b:c wouldn't help here. Any suggestions for ensuring that the three notes of a triplet can be forced to be of the same duration on playback? Or is this just a 'feature' of EasyABC? Thank you. Roger

OK, I dragged my weary body along to look at this this morning. It is as described, plus: There is no indication that it is a 'Linota', externally at least. It is 6.25" across the flats. It is C/G. It is not 'playable' - there are some notes not sounding, and some seriously out of tune. There is some air leakage - I suspect from dodgy valves - the bellows (black papers) looked in reasonable condition to me. I did manage to get the first few bars of 'The College Hornpipe' out of the brute - not helped by the fact that the right hand strap is broken (got the auction room staff dancing though... ). I took some fairly dodgy photographs which are attached. I'm not yet expert enough to give a definitive opinion, but I think that with a lot of TLC this might be a nice instrument, though I certainly wouldn't even consider doing it myself. I don't intend to return to the sale tomorrow, but the staff tell me that prices realised should be available via their website on Wednesday... Roger

This is good medicine... My (fairly pedestrian) approach is to put 'concertina tabs' into the ABC score of any tune I want to try out The first thing I do after finishing this task is to look at the fingering to see if there's a 'better way' which is apparent, without even playing the tune. Surprisingly (to me), this technique frequently gives a positive outcome. R.

I have no intention of buying this instrument, but as I'm now living only a few miles away, I will probably stagger along on the viewing day (19 Sept) - just to have a look, and to see if it's playable. How do I tell if it is a Linota? What should I look for? Thank you. Roger

I have had problems like this when downloading files while connected to the internet via an ISP with servers located in another country. For example, I have found that certain BBC podcasts will not download if connected via servers hosted in Ireland (domain name .ie). This is for actual downloads, not simple connection as you describe, so maybe it's unrelated. Just a thought... Roger

I suspect that post was aimed at a thread I had started, so I'm sorry that I won't see your response, but, if it's any consolation, I have lost stuff like this when I was logged in. Highly frustrating!!!! I wonder if it's connected to the browser in use? There was a thread a while back discussing the inability to 'cut and paste' text when editing. This was browser-specific (It was Explorer, see http://www.concertina.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=18366&hl=). I'm currently using Firefox. I sometimes see 'Document expired' messages when I try to go back, and have to re-connect to the forum, also while logged in. Could that be a different flavour of the problem that JL has encounterd? R

It was precisely such a situation which prompted me to try getting around it with the use of P:, and also to post my original query. I too now use an explicit 'start of repeated section' marker as default. R

Tell me about it! Two things which I've discovered recently! I've decided to adopt a personal 'style' of ABC coding which does not 'vary wildly', is consistent, and is standard-conforming. EasyABC is quite good for preparing such code - some of the automagic typing facilities are a help here. And: Up to a point, I'm dealing with the first point in the quote above by 'editing' scripts which are just too wild so that they conform to my style... I'm now using three pieces of documentation to 'check' my ABC: Guido Gonzatos comprehensive guide (http://abcplus.sourceforge.net/#ABCGuide) Steve Mansfields notes (http://www.lesession.co.uk/abc/abc_notation.htm) The standards document referred to a couple of posts back. (http://abcnotation.com/wiki/abc:standard:v2.1) With these three under my belt, I hope I can tackle most problems. If I need to check the 'correctness' of the finished score, I have a tame professional French Horn player to consult (though he doesn't know it yet!). As far as mistakes are concerned, I've found that the ABC software is variable in terms of its tolerance. For example, EasyABC deals with the use of a tie when a slur is meant [ A-B instead of (AB)] and also a space at the end of a slur [ (AB ) instead of (AB) ] by producing an apparently correct score and ignoring the error on playback. The first of these 'errors' sends the Android application TradMusician crazy when playback is tried, the second produces a (clearly) incorrect score. As far as getting the key right for 'modal' tunes goes, I haven't quite got my head around that one yet but 'l'affaire marche'. Thank you for the helpful remarks. Roger

I almost never see a 'tina-related advert these days. The current one relates to prefabricated data centres - whatever they are. My question is: When I signed on with c.net two years ago, I didn't see this strip advert at all. Did I do something to turn it on? Can I turn it off? Roger

Thank you - food for thought there. I had assumed that instruments were (usually) as supplied by the manufacturer and not modified later(*). The idea of moving the reeds around myself had not occurred to me - I might try that. Thank you folks. (*) As someone said in a response to an earlier post - don't assume...

Take two Anglos: 1: 26-button C/G Lachenal. G-row, LH button 5 has B/A (blaw/sook). The A (as opposed to the more usual D, see below?) effectively extends the range in the key of G. Accidental row RH button 2 has A/G. 2: 30-button C/G George Jones. G-row, LH button 5 has B/D. According to my (limited) understanding, and to Mick Bramich's 'In-between Anglo', this is the more usual configuration. Accidental row RH button 2 has G#/G (MB has A/G for this button). So, I have two instruments with different non-standard layouts... There are other differences - for example the G# on the accidental row of the 26-B instrument is on button 3 (G#/Bb), and on the 30-B instrument, I haven't yet quite sussed out the accidental LH buttons 1&2 and RH buttons 3,4&5 (my ear is not that good). I hope all of that made some sort of sense. MB discusses different layouts briefly in the book (and defends himself against criticisms for sometimes getting layouts 'wrong'). Given what I'm seeing on these two instruments, MBs arguments seem perfectly OK, and he discusses the options available when one acquires an instrument with a 'non-standard' layout. My question is: How common are these differences and what should one do about it if one has more than one instrument? What is the opinion of the 'body of the kirk' on this one? Experience tells me that I'll get some sensible and thought-provoking answers here... It's relevant to me because I now have enough instruments that changing them all to a 'standard' layout would be expensive and time-consuming. It would also be (IMO) a sort of low-level 'vandalism'(*) - some of these instruments have been kicking around (and in some cases been kicked around!) for upwards of a century. Why change it... On a personal level, I think I find the idea of picking up one instrument and having to play a tune differently because the layout is different is challenging, and makes it even more fun (if that's possible). I only twigged this when I started playing the first few bars of a tune I'm learning which has a couple of G#s and had to go for a different button on each instrument. I thought it was me at first... Any thoughts? Thank you. Roger (*) A bit strong maybe, but I couldn't think of a better word.

JC, DB. Thank you for that extra information. Since my original post, I have been looking at loadsa ABC scripts and have encountered a few non-standard and mildly puzzling examples of ABC, some of which are pointed up in the standard. Very useful. Thank you! I don't use BarFly, but the point about spaces is well-made. As a result of these responses to my OP and the information supplied, I have been able to consolidate my limited musical knowledge and am now confident enough to have started transcribing stuff into ABC while avoiding some of the non-standard usage. Excellent! Thank you! Thanks. Roger

Some leather suppliers will supply material for 'craft' purposes, e.g. Neumann in Bury: http://www.neumannleathers.com/leathergoods.htm I don't know if such firms could supply the right sort of material for bellows, but worth a try? I typed 'leather suppliers' into Google. Roger

Thank you, I'll bear that in mind. I wish now that I'd taken a couple of photographs and posted them - I'll certainly do that in the future. It was very interesting for me (as a complete novice 'fettler') to look at the mechanism in detail, in particular, to see difference between the mechanics of this instrument and those of some of the top-end instruments which have been pictured in this forum. R.

I hope the key word is 'series', and that Mr. Levy would consider including Manchester ('Second city of the Empire' ) in his list of places to visit. I'd be up for it... Roger

Thank you. Taking my courage in both hands, I whipped the end off and found: the disc and pad had parted company the pivot post had pulled out of its 'seating' on the pad board (do I mean action board?) as a consequence of the problem with the pivot post, the lever arm waggling about in space, and the spring had disengaged itself I think that the above might be the order in which things happened. disc and pad re-united with a spot of PVA glue pivot post re-seated - with a very tiny smear of PVA glue after drying time, re-assembled Seems to work - for how long we shall see. I wouldn't have given this detailed post-mortem were in not for the fact that the pivot post had become unfixed. This is not (I think) mentioned in Dave Elliot's manual. Examination of the post with a glass showed very shallow grooving on the base of the post, presumably to allow it to grip the pad board when in position. I was however able to pull it in and out with hardly any trouble. I didn't tempt providence by trying any of the other posts! Other than bashing it in really hard with a small hammer (no, no, please no...). I couldn't think of anything to do except apply a tiny bead of PVA to the base and push it back home in the hope that the PVA will fix the post more securely. I just hope I haven't done anything disastrous... Roger

The C#/Eb notes on the accidentals row of my 26-button C/G Lachenal have just started to sound without the button (R1) being pressed - that is C# is sounding when I push and Eb when I pull. Curses... Before I open the instrument tomorrow, I thought I might seek some advice here, as I have so far had little experience of fixing concertinas. Two years in, I suppose it's about time I got my feet wet... I've had a look at Dave Elliot's manual and have come away a little 'confused'. I think I could understand it if only one note was 'stuck', but I can't quite get my head around the idea of both of them being 'stuck'. Is it likely to be a problem with the reeds themselves, or the mechanics between the button and the reeds? How do I determine what the problem is, and how do I fix it - or is it something for a properly competent fettler to have a look at? The only thread I can find here dealing with sticking notes (buttons) seems to deal with pads on adjacent buttons fouling each other resulting in sticking notes on two adjacent buttons - not quite the same problem I have? Help! Thank you. Roger

Yes. But, as I am in Manchester, and they were in Hong Kong (it may have been Singapore), I didn't take the matter any further at the time. I tried a couple of small, specialist 'print shops' but they were utterly hopeless (and also clearly thought I was a lunatic, which may or may not be the case...). I wonder if coloured 'craft' paper available from places like 'The Works' might be the (only practical) answer? I have a pad of a dozen sheets of various colours in front of me as I type. I think I got this from Lidl for something else, but can't really remember. The stuff I have is 120 g.m-2 and has quite a 'soft' surface (ie: not 'glazed' with china clay or whatever is used). It's also possible to get heavier duty card from places like 'The Works'. I think the stuff I have is ~200 g.m-2, and is very slightly 'glazed'. Whether any of this stuff would be suitable for bellows papers I don't know. It's certainly not 'faux leather' which is what Don originally asked for. Roger

I got 'nothing' only when I typed "a" or "e". I assume that this is because in 'do-re-mi' mode, none of the notes ("do re mi fa so la ti do") begins with an "a" or "e", so EasyABC just gave up? Or is that too simplistic? Roger

Don is far more musically literate than I am, and he is far more knowledgeable about music software than me, but for what it's worth, I agree with him. EasyABC is pretty good. You will find lots of other ABC software described briefly at: http://abcnotation.com/software On my PCs, I have tried: EasyABC ABCExplorer ABCEditor and (for me) EasyABC is the 'best'. It has an interface which is relatively flexible/sophisticated, but does not over-gild the lily. ABCExplorer has a user interface which is (to me) a bit 'fiddly'. It does however allow the 'automagic' generation of chords for ABC scripts which do not already have them (I think you mentioned chords in one of your posts). If I use this facility, I generate the chords in ABCExplorer and then do any other stuff (adding fingering details, transposition, etc.) in EasyABC. As far as I can see, ABCEditor has not been updated since 2008, so I didn't pursue this one other than confirming that the program did indeed load and display ABC code files (please correct me if that is wrong!). I have also looked at MuseScore which is fine but doesn't quite do what I want - basically, it's a bit advanced for a numptie like me... If you wanted something for an Android tablet, TradMusician is a good all-encompassing ABC player (and for 'phones?) - I haven't tried the built-in editing facility as I do all my editing within EasyABC. I use EasyABC and TradMusician. Be aware that EasyABC and TradMusician seem to parse and process ABC code slightly differently, resulting in a slightly different-looking score when displayed using the two programs. You would need to experiment and develop your own 'style' of ABC coding to produce a 'compromise' which displayed scores to your satisfaction with both programs. Roger

Go to: https://thesession.org/tunes/92 You'll find 16 (ABC) versions of the tune there, plus some discussion - not all of it 'pro'. I don't think concertinas were mentioned though... R