shelly0312 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 (edited) I have in the past been delighted with the ease of use to translate ABC to dots on the tune-o-tron. But in the past couple of weeks I have not had success. I am not too familiar with ABCs--so I do not know exactly how much of that nomenclature should be included on the translator? I have tried any number of tunes that come up in these discussion, no luck. Any suggestions? Michelle SE Wis USA Edited March 28, 2011 by shelly0312 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P Carr Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Seems to be working fine for me. I've just checked by copying the Cheshire Waltz abc's from a recent posting: X:1 T:Cheshire Waltz M:3/8 L:1/8 Z:Peter Dunk 12 May 2007 K:D |:A |ff/g/f/e/ | dd/e/d/c/ | Bcd | A2f | gfe | bac | edd | d2 :| g | fa/f/e/d/ | ceg | f/a/f/d/B/F/ | DFA | GBf | ged | ce/d/c/B/ | A2A | ff/g/f/e/ | dd/e/d/c/ | Bcd | A2f | gfe | bac | edd | d2:| A | FAd | dcB | cea | g2f | gfg | Bed | cdB | A2:| G | FAd | dcB | cea | g2f | gfg | Bed | d/c/B/A/B/c/ | d2:| You have to include the "X:1" line... and all the other stuff as well as the tune specification. Perhaps you haven't been copying the whole thing? Good Luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindizzy Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 You have to include the "X:1" line... and all the other stuff as well as the tune specification. Perhaps you haven't been copying the whole thing? That X:1 (or any other number) is one that catches me sometimes ... you've got to have it for the tune-a-tron, but because it's not always needed it can be left out of some examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shelly0312 Posted March 29, 2011 Author Share Posted March 29, 2011 ah-haaaaaa; I knew it was something silly simple I was missing. Thanks "youse guys"--it worked perfect now. I wasn't going all the was to the top--just where I figured the musical part started. whew! Michelle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 I found this this morning. It's a short tutorial แปลงโน็ตเพลงABCเป็นPDFฟรีออนไลน์ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gabIaHPQVM8&fmt=18 Convert ABC Notation to PDF Free Online http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKgnKepT-d4&fmt=18 Thanks Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglogeezer Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 This is where I go to when I need to refresh my knowledge of ABC :-LeSession Jake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shelly0312 Posted April 1, 2011 Author Share Posted April 1, 2011 That ABC explaination is perfect and very understandable. Thanks for that link. Now this nomenclature makes better sense. I wondered how "they" noted timing, length of notes etc with this ABC thing. And I then even found out what people are talking about "quavers" huh?? Ya' just gotta' keep reading!! ain't the internet great! Michelle SE Wis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dunk Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 That ABC explaination is perfect and very understandable. Thanks for that link. Now this nomenclature makes better sense. I wondered how "they" noted timing, length of notes etc with this ABC thing. And I then even found out what people are talking about "quavers" huh?? Ya' just gotta' keep reading!! ain't the internet great! Michelle SE Wis Michelle, there is much debate regarding the naming of note lengths. Unusually most of the European musicians I encounter favour the US system of naming notes as whole or fractions thereof. For what it's worth I consider the naming of notes as semi-breves (1), minims (1/2) crotchets (1/4) quavers (1/8) and so on antiquated and completely illogical. If you find ABC logical I applaud that - it makes sense to me too! Arcane terminology drives me nuts. Music is beautiful, good music is really hard to achieve as a player, so why make it so much harder by making musical theory inaccessible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindizzy Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 Michelle, there is much debate regarding the naming of note lengths. Unusually most of the European musicians I encounter favour the US system of naming notes as whole or fractions thereof. For what it's worth I consider the naming of notes as semi-breves (1), minims (1/2) crotchets (1/4) quavers (1/8) and so on antiquated and completely illogical. I always thought of crochets as 1 with the family going breve, semibreve, minimi, crochet,quaver,semiquaver, demi-semiquaver etc! In ABC that's what the L: is for in the header - it tells you what 1 is Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dunk Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 Considering a crotchet to be one beat is fine in simple time like 4/4 and 3/4 but it doesn't work in compound time or in 2/2 or 4/2 or 3/2 for that matter. At no time can a crotchet be thought of as a whole note, that's just wrong. The L: field in an abc header simply sets the default note length chosen by the transcriber to minimise the amount of typing, usually dictated by the most often used note length in the piece. In some cases the L: field will change from one part to another if the general note length changes for that section of the tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now