Notation For Repeats

[Roger Hare]

I've looked in a couple of books and on the internet without finding a completely satisfactory

answer to the following (somewhat convoluted) question:

 

In a score, simple repeats are specified with the start repeat and end repeat signs:

 

||: ... :||

 

 

and this is (pretty much) how it's represented in an ABC script.

 

In ABC, it's also possible to specify repeats with the P: keyword, for example:

 

.

.

P:AABB

K:

.

some ABC code

.

P:A

.

some more ABC code

.

P:B

.

.

 

The AABB tells the system to play section (part) A twice, followed by section B twice.

 

Which of these is correct in terms of musical theory? Or are they both correct, just different?

 

Thank you.

 

Roger

Edited August 11, 2016 by lachenal74693

[hjcjones]

They're slightly different. The ||: :|| symbols reflect standard musical notation. You might use them to repeat an entire part, but it could be just a few bars.

 

The P: field doesn't describe repeats but whole parts. It's really an instruction to the computer to play the specified parts in a particular sequence. It can also be an instruction to human players although I don't think it's part of standard notation. However it is sometimes used in folk dance books where there are several different parts which aren't necessarily played in a regular sequence.

 

For example, a morris corner dance might start with a once-to-yourself A part, followed by a couple of As followed by 3 Bs chorus (repeated several times), and perhaps 'slows' followed by the chorus. You could write this in ABC as

 

AAABBBAABBBAABBBCCBBB

 

This can be abbreviated and clarified with brackets:

 

A.(3AABBB)CCBBB

 

The Bacon "Black Book" which long pre-dates ABC uses something similar to show how the tunes are to be played for dancing.

 

If I just wanted to notate a standard folk tune with 2 or 3 16-bar parts I'd use repeat marks. I'd only use the P: field if I wanted to force printing of the part name or if the sequence was non-standard

[David Barnert]

The "AABB" option applies to abc notation and a few other contexts, but is never found in notation for classical or popular music. The lines and dots is standard in pretty much all contexts (at least in western music). Neither has anything to do with music theory.

[DaveM]

I've heard the AAB type of description of the high-level (e.g. verse/chorus/bridge) structure of a song in many contexts.

In pop music, a song that goes verse-chorus-verse-bridge-verse-chorus might be described as: ABACAB,

I've also seen it a classical context in describing the sonata form. It's not something you'd usually see in a proper score, but is a commonly

used shorthand in more informal descriptions like lead sheets, song notes, verbal dialog etc.

I figure that the people behind ABC notation had these kinds of ideas in mind.

[David Barnert]

I've heard the AAB type of description of the high-level (e.g. verse/chorus/bridge) structure of a song in many contexts.

In pop music, a song that goes verse-chorus-verse-bridge-verse-chorus might be described as: ABACAB,

I've also seen it a classical context in describing the sonata form. It's not something you'd usually see in a proper score, but is a commonly

used shorthand in more informal descriptions like lead sheets, song notes, verbal dialog etc.

I figure that the people behind ABC notation had these kinds of ideas in mind.

Of course. "Heard." "Described." But I was talking about seeing it on paper. I thought the original poster was, too.

[Jack Campin]

The P: notation is more flexible where it fits, and for folk tunes it usually does.

 

Try getting this into six lines of score using traditional repeats and segnos.

X:150
T:Music For A Found Harmonium (in D and F)
Z:Jack Campin, http://www.campin.me.uk/
F:Jack Campin's Nine-Note Tunebook
% last edit 03-02-2013
C:Simon Jeffes
S:Penguin Cafe Orchestra: "Broadcasting from Home" (EG Records 1984)
P:ABABCDAECDABABB
M:C|
L:1/8
Q:1/2=100
N:originally in C and E flat.
N:There should be a continuous stuttering D playing
N:throughout (a key on the harmonium was broken)
N:one note is off-range, octave shift indicated
K:D
P:A
D|FDGD FDDD|FDGD  FDCD|FDGD     FDDD|EDCD FDD:|
P:B
D|EDCD EDCD|FDCD  FDCD|GDED     CDGD|FDDD D2D:|
P:C
K:C
F|cFEF GF2F|cFEF  E3F |cFEF     GF2F|cFEF E3 :|
P:D
K:F
F|BFDF GF2F|BFDF  GF2F|BFEF     GE2F|BFEF GE2G|
K:D
  cGEG CG2G|cGEG  CG2G|cGEG     CG2G|cGEG CG2||
P:E
D|EDCD EDCD|FD=CD FDCD|GD[B,B]D GDCD|FDDD D2D:|

tmp_vJl2oq.pdf

[David Barnert]

 

The P: notation is more flexible where it fits, and for folk tunes it usually does.

 

Try getting this into six lines of score using traditional repeats and segos...

Yes...

 

On the abc users discussion list one December some 20 years ago (!), somebody offered a holiday challenge: Notate "The 12 Days of Christmas" in as few characters as possible. I won with imaginative use of the P: protocol.

[bellowbelle]

A nice coincidence that I checked the forums and found this thread today, since I looked for this information re the 'P' field and couldn't find it, recently.

 

Thanks!

[Roger Hare]

Thank you all for those informative replies.

 

My original post got slightly mangled - I have now edited it so it makes (more) sense.

 

The "AABB" option applies to abc notation and a few other contexts, but is never found in notation for classical or popular music.

The lines and dots is standard in pretty much all contexts (at least in western music). Neither has anything to do with music theory.

 

Yes, I should have used the word "notation", not "theory" - that was what I meant...

 

I had suspected from my perusal of printed books and the internet that the 'parts' style of

notation (or P: in ABC terms) might not be standard notation. Thank you.

 

 

The ||: :|| symbols reflect standard musical notation. You might use them to repeat an entire part, but it could be just a few bars.

 

The P: field doesn't describe repeats but whole parts. It's really an instruction to the computer to play the specified parts in a particular sequence. It can also be an instruction to human players although I don't think it's part of standard notation...

 

Yes, and although I didn't mention it specifically, I was aware of repeats of "just a few bars" when

I posed the question.

 

The question was however directed at the representation of an "entire part" (which is what you and

other respondents have addressed).

 

(I'm also aware of "first and second repeats" - the question was not concerned with these)

 

Thank you.

 

I've heard the AAB type of description of the high-level (e.g. verse/chorus/bridge) structure of a song in many contexts....It's not

something you'd usually see in a proper score, but is a commonly used shorthand in more informal descriptions...

 

Yes, that was the sort of 'conclusion' I had arrived at before I posed my question.

 

Thank you.

 

Of course. "Heard." "Described." But I was talking about seeing it on paper. I thought the original poster was, too.

 

Yes, in part (pun not intended!). I find it easier to read a score with those nice big part

names ("A", "B", etc.) than with the lines and dots (mark you, I can hardly read a score

at all at the moment - still really an absolute beginner!).

 

I was also thinking about the way ABC (and MIDI?) players interpret the ABC code. I'm

currently trying to really get to grips with two such players - EasyABC on my Windoze

machines, and TradMusician on my Android tablets. I can't quite put my finger on it yet,

but I think that the two programs may process the 'line and dots' and 'P:' formats in an

ABC script slightly differently. In particular I want to see if a 'simple repeat' nested inside

a 'part' which is itself repeated plays the specified number of times (if that makes sense...).

 

The question was posed in the hope that I might get a clearer understanding of what these

two formats mean, so that I can investigate what is actually happening in a more or less

sensible way.

 

I think I now have that information. Thank you.

 

Thanks folks.

 

Roger

Edited August 11, 2016 by lachenal74693

[hjcjones]

In case you are not already aware of it, Steve Mansfield has provided a very clear and understandable summary of ABC:

 

http://www.lesession.co.uk/abc/abc_notation.htm

 

The link is to part 1, which contains a link to part 2. It covers most of the points that all but advanced users will need to know.

Edited August 11, 2016 by hjcjones

[Roger Hare]

In case you are not already aware of it, Steve Mansfield has provided a very clear and understandable summary of ABC:...

 

Thank you. Yes, I was aware of SM's tutorial and have used it several times - excellent stuff!

 

I also use Guido Gonzato's comprehensive guide to ABC. I can't remember if I already mentioned

this one on this forum - it can be found at:

 

http://abcplus.sourceforge.net/#ABCGuide

 

Roger.

[Paul_Hardy]

In a score, simple repeats are specified with the start repeat and end repeat signs:

||: ... :||

and this is (pretty much) how it's represented in an ABC script.

A minor clarification about ABC for the avoidance of doubt - the standard repeat delimiters in ABC files are |: and :| (only one vertical bar). Many programs will handle variants like ||: and :||, but they are outside the standard.

 

Otherwise I agree with what else has been said - I use |: and :| for ordinary single repeat sections, particularly for the most common AABB traditional dance tune forms. I use parts for things like P:AABACAB for more complex tunes.

[Roger Hare]

 

In a score, simple repeats are specified with the start repeat and end repeat signs:

||: ... :||

and this is (pretty much) how it's represented in an ABC script.

A minor clarification about ABC for the avoidance of doubt - the standard repeat delimiters in ABC files are |: and :| (only one vertical bar).

Many programs will handle variants like ||: and :||, but they are outside the standard.

 

Thank you. That does indeed clarify something which has been niggling me.

 

I think I must have been unlucky in finding a script which used a non-standard "||:" and ":||", and then using

it as the basis of the example in my OP. Just my luck!

 

I'm assuming that ":||:" is OK, and simply denotes the end of one repeat followed immediately by the start

of another (in which case it should be OK to add a space for clarification, thus: ":| |:").

 

I have found several instances of one other 'mistake' which is to incorrectly (?) use a tie character ["A-B"]

when a slur ["(AB)"] is intended. The score generated by this looks OK, and (I think) EasyABC simply ignores

it during playback, but it drives TradMusician completely barmy when you try to playback...

 

Roger

Edited August 11, 2016 by lachenal74693

[David Barnert]

I'm assuming that ":||:" is OK, and simply denotes the end of one repeat followed immediately by the start

of another (in which case it should be OK to add a space for clarification, thus: ":| |:").

 

It's "OK," but the preferred format is ::

 

Don't assume. See the standard: http://abcnotation.com/wiki/abc:standard:v2.1#repeat_bar_symbols

Edited September 10, 2016 by David Barnert

[Jack Campin]

If you write :| |: , a barlength checker like the one built into BarFly will report an empty bar. You don't want to mess up error checking with spurious errors. Using the ABC-standard notation will avoid this.

 

BTW these days it is a bit silly to worry about the P: notation not being standard, given the variety of notations people have found useful. Have a read of this:

 

https://monoskop.org/images/a/a7/John_Cage_Notations_1969.pdf

or

https://archive.org/details/JohnCageNotations1969

Edited September 11, 2016 by Jack Campin

[Roger Hare]

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

[hjcjones]

ABC scripts can vary wildly. ABC is quite a forgiving system, and there are often multiple ways of transcribing something which may work but are not best practice. Also, many users (including me) may not be very knowledgeable about the niceties of music transcription and may make mistakes. A very common error is to use the wrong key in the K: field for modal tunes. Between the two there's plenty of scope for errors, even though the score may print and play acceptably.

 

None of this should put you off attempting your own transcriptions. If you come across something you're not sure about, then look it up on a reliable help source rather than just copying what someone else has done, or ask for advice on a forum. If you find yourself jumping through hoops and trying to use a function in a way which seems different from its intended purpose (such as the use of P: to generate repeats which started this) that's a clue that you're probably doing something wrong and there should be a better solution.

Good luck, and don't be afraid to ask!

[Roger Hare]

ABC scripts can vary wildly. ABC is quite a forgiving system, and there are often multiple ways of transcribing something, etc...

 

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

Edited September 12, 2016 by lachenal74693