Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Notation'.
Found 4 results
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
Hello - I have a question on musical notation for the English Concertina (although it could equally apply to Anglo & Duet). Is there a generally accepted standard of musical notation to indicate bellows direction? (Text takes up too much space and is too busy) The reason I ask is that I recently delivered a couple of sessions at the Swaledale Squeeze and was asked how (or whether) I could write out what I actually do on a particular tune. One thing that became apparent is that in one place I consistently use a pull note in a particular way to achieve softer note articulation on a descending run - but I change to pull a note earlier in the previous bar and it's this I want to indicate. My natural choice was to use violin Up & Down bowing (Down indicating Push) like so: All references, examples, contradictions & comments welcome. thanks Rob
I've been looking over the chart for English concertina fingering as given here: http://www.concertina.com/fingering/ The first chart, English Concertina Keyboard -- http://www.concertina.com/fingering/images/english48-W842H736.gif has me wondering why it's shown as starting an octave above Middle C. This isn't 'wrong' but I can't figure out if it's actually 'correct' and I would in fact be somehow wrong to show the chart with the lowest C being notated with a capital C, not the small c. So, I would have started with the low G being lower, notated as G, -- then continue up going G#, Ab, Bb, B, C -- etc --- simply an octave lower than it's given on the chart. Sound-wise, the chart is more correct, maybe? But as far as what I'd want to read or write on the musical staff, I think I'd want to go with the lower octave start. Am I missing something...?
"The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from" - Andrew Tanenbaum Since the very first concertina tutor (Hoselbarth, c.1840), there have been over 130 tutors published for the Anglo, many with widely differing button numbering and tablature systems. The result of numerous attempts to try to make sense of the Anglo having two notes in different directions for each button, plus having alternate notes on other buttons. Standard musical notation by itself does not indicate which alternate note or direction is preferable, and since many published tutors print the music an octave high or low, learning actual notes still might not help much, hence the various attempts at tablature systems. Tablature patterns are easily transferable between instruments with different keys, so that's a good thing. Beginners often buy one or more tutors, only to be faced with having to sort out wildly dissimilar ways of counting buttons and indicating bellows direction. So.......here, in all its insanity, is a first draft of a notation "Rosetta Stone" translation chart for the 30-button Anglo showing about 30 of the different notating systems. Additions, corrections? What an embarrassing gawdawful mess! I know many systems have their adherents and staunch defenders, but could we make it any harder to learn this somewhat intuitive instrument? Pity the poor beginner! Gary 30-Button Notation Translator.pdf