Differentiating between sharps and flats on a chromatic staff

[Paul Morris]

Hi Mark G. and John K.,

I'm arriving late to recent discussions, and haven't been able to read
all the recent messages, but I saw you were discussing the the
representation of "enharmonic equivalents" in the recent "Gabriel Music
Notation by William Tapley" thread.  I thought I'd start a new thread
for this topic.

FWIW, I just wanted to add that it is possible to represent distinctions
between "enharmonic equivalents" (sharps and flats etc.) on a chromatic
staff, preserving all the nuances of what composers wrote in traditional
notation.  For example, see Clairnote DN's alternative accidental signs:

https://clairnote.org/dn/accidental-signs/

I'm not aware of another system that takes this approach, so I think
it's fair to say that it's one of Clairnote's "contributions to the field".

Cheers,
-Paul

P.S. For anyone curious, there's a general discussion of enharmonic
equivalents, as they relate to chromatic staff notation systems,
including the argument for visually distinguishing between them, see
this MNP tutorial:
http://musicnotation.org/tutorials/enharmonic-equivalents/

[Mark Gould]

Hi Paul

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I see that all of my points are addressed in this tutorial. It even covers my point that an 'unadorned' 12ET notation loses information, which as you point out can be 'recovered' in a notation like Clairnote (a 6-6 notation with lines 4 semitones apart). 

My complaint is that theorists begin with the piano and 12ET, but really the diatonic scale generates 'TN' through its structure. 12ET does not differentiate between a chromatic step F to F# and a diatonic semitone, between F and Gb and so forth. It's the 'beginning with 12ET' approach that is my concern for learning how tonal music works, when really, as the tutorial makes clear, it's a much more complex beast. 

The richness of 'possibility' in tonal music, and understanding that it's a compromise between different ways of intoning notes and keeping certain intervals close to their natural ratios is fundamental to knowing what tonality is. I think beginning with 12ET misses this. 

My schooling in music theory was away from the piano, beginning with the diatonic scale, and _showing_ through the transpositions by fifths upwards and downwards how the chromatic notes appear in the sharp and flat keys. At some point in this learning, it's drawn to the student's attention that A major has a G sharp and E-flat major has an A-flat. It is _then_ that a discussion was had about the idea of enharmonics occurs, and how historically different ideas about how this might be dealt with practically, and showing how we arrive at closing the circle of fifths at this point, and forming the enharmonic relations we have today. All of this showed that 12ET is a *choice* not a preordained _this is how it is_. It also differentiates between a thing, and the representation of a thing. Acknowledgement of this fact seems very lacking in 12ET circles, and should alert us to the fact that 12ET notations are a notation for a temperament, or as we find in non-tonal or non-diatonic music today, a specific set of pitch-classes which composers use.

There's a lot of group-theory and other mathematics behind diatonic (and other) scale structures and the 'options' for how they are represented, but I find a lot of individuals 'in denial' that these other representations can (and do) exist. Presenting a student 'beginning with 12ET' fails to show them the _why_ of what they are doing, and it's this I have found is often crucial to understanding. It opens the door to the richness of 'possibility' tempered by the 'necessity' of having physically practical musical instruments.

Nowhere do I suggest that 12ET notations are no good at notating music written with 12ET in mind, only, at the risk of repeating myself, with their ability (unadorned) to do justice to tonal relations in diatonic music.

Kind regards

Mark

[gguitarwilly]

Hi Paul,

You offer a very clearly formulated case for using accidental signs. I find them useful, mainly for quickly spotting notes outside the current key,

I find Clairnote still offers me everything I need from a notation. I'm using it for (janko) piano, guitar and chromatic button accordion.

Especially for the accordion the notation is useful, because on the five row symmetrical keyboard it's far more useful to think in intervals instead of absolute note names. The same goes for Janko piano, for the same reason.

I hardly used Clairnote on guitar the last two years because I've been mainly playing the lute, for which all music is written in TAB notation.

When I picked up my guitar after all this time, I still could play my Clairnote scores without any problem.

I use the DN original variant of Clairnote, as I find SN offers a confusing number of pseudo-ledger lines, and the alternating colours of the DN variant are one of the main advantages of Clairnote.

I find it a bit sad to conclude that I can't see how Clairnote may be improved, or replaced by a better system, because the search for the holy grail is exciting and fun.

best wishes, Willem

Op woensdag 21 april 2021 om 13:55:15 UTC+2 schreef Mark Gould:

[Paul Morris]

Hi Willem,

Thanks for your kind words.  It's great (and motivating) to know that you are still using and enjoying Clairnote (DN)!  Always good to hear your thoughts and experiences with it.  Very cool that you were able to easily go back to reading Clairnote and playing guitar after two years away.

A chromatic button accordion sounds like a nice portable isomorphic instrument.  I'm focusing on guitar these days, but if I have time for another instrument at some point, I might have to look into an accordion.

All the best,
-Paul

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/b5059c76-5569-421e-a7b5-2fe7b27ed3bfn%40googlegroups.com.

[John Keller]

I notice that the advocates of ClairNote are players of isomorphic instruments such as  janko, guitar, button accordion, etc. (And also I suspect that it is mainly single note melodies that are referred to when playing by intervals.) 

Where are other players of the standard keyboard who are trying alternative notations? Or standard orchestral instruments other than strings, that as far as I know, are all based on the natural scale plus enharmonically equivalent extra fingerings. 

I also prefer the Dual Noteheads version of ClairNote for the same reason as Willem described.

Willem, does your button accordion have the usual bass button chords in 5ths layout? And do you read these from chord letters or a notation?

Cheers,

John Keller

Express Stave pianoforte notation

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/efc75d24-8b8e-430d-ee25-f542b2db419a%40paulwmorris.com.

[John Keller]

Hi all,

My students are asking for a way to transform TN into Express Stave themselves.

I need some help with ideas on where to go from here.

Currently I still use Finale 2006 with a past version of windows OS to transnotate into ES.

I don’t think the procedure works smoothly in more recent versions of Finale.

A few options:

Continue with adapting Finale and overcome the glitches the current version has with the process. In asking for help with this previously i just came across resistance to the whole idea of an alternative notation.

Get a LilyPond software designed. When i worked on this previously, i came to a stop at the point of importing my ES fonts, but to continue with this method I would have to relearn LilyPond, and feel my brain is not as sharp as it used to be, specially while I go through chemo.

See if MuseScore can somehow be wrangled to use the custom fonts and percussion note heads along with custom staves etc, as i did for Finale. Somehow i doubt whether this is feasible.

Ask computer coding experts to design a custom software. I would be happy to pay for this if it was possible.

Any suggestions or help appreciated.

Regards,

[Musical Supersystem]

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 1:31 AM John Keller <jko...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

See if MuseScore can somehow be wrangled to use the custom fonts and percussion note heads along with custom staves etc, as i did for Finale. Somehow i doubt whether this is feasible.

Hi John,

They say the formula is:

A good idea + perseverance + execution.

There are a few good ideas around and perseverance is overwhelming but execution is everything. 

It seems ES is overdue for execution given that it's been a while that it is stable, if you have finally decided to execute, it seems to me your best option could be to pay someone to customize or implement your notation in this project

https://github.com/CraigFisher/MuseScore/tree/alternative

You may try to contact him first, he used to post here, but if you can not reach an agreement there are a lot of good freelance programmers that probably for a reasonable money you could have your notation implemented in that project.

google -  freelance programming, and you will see a lot of  places, usually you describe what you need and they bet, but there are many options just explore that possibility and good luck.

Enrique.

 

Ask computer coding experts to design a custom software. I would be happy to pay for this if it was possible.

Any suggestions or help appreciated.

Regards,
John Keller
Express Stave pianoforte notation

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/DDCB4D39-716F-4F2C-8318-557A769C9C7A%40bigpond.net.au.

[John Keller]

Hi Enrique,

Thanks for your suggestion.

I noticed Craig Fisher hasn’t done anything for 6 years on Github.

What is Github, anyway? Does it stand for anything. 

I did notice an entry on Clairnote. Paul, does this mean you asked for help from other programmers for your LilyPond work?

Does Musescore have people coding for alternative systems? Would they be found at the Github site?

Please excuse my ignorance about all this. I obviously need someone to explain it all to me as an absolute beginner.

Cheers,

John

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/CAARA0-_Q-Fo56Z5AtS5FD0m4oZSxnqgEq1QTYvuW8aLYMr6Jeg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Musical Supersystem]

In a nutshell, Github works as a host for open-source projects in a way that many programmers can work at the same time in the same project.

As I recall the intention of Fisher was to incorporate alternative notations to Musescore but I think they were not interested, but programmers can continue to improve what he did indefinitely.

If you are willing to pay a programmer you have to talk with them about the way to go to achieve what you need.

Lylipond is not related to that project and Github is not intended to look for freelance programmers.

In your search you can fine tune by typing e.g. "freelance programmer musescore" or music notation.

And you may find something like this:

https://www.upwork.com/hire/musescore-freelancers/

Then have fun negotiating with them.

I am a programmer but have more work than what I can do, but if you need help in any technical issue let me know, I will try to help you.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/FFFD2140-4874-413B-ADFE-3FC58D497803%40bigpond.net.au.

[Musical Supersystem]

Be aware that rates are not necessarily related to qualifications, it has to do also with the region of the world they live and availability, 

This might help you also in the search

https://myexperteam.com/freelance-musescore-websites/

I know this is a tough road to completely depend on programmers but given the characteristics of your notation preference and the maturity of musescore this might be your more feasible option.

 

[Paul Morris]

Hi John,

Sorry to hear you are feeling the squeeze of software obsolescence.  I
think LilyPond is the most promising path here, which is why I use it
for Clairnote.  There are various reasons for that but basically Finale
is proprietary so you're at their mercy, and MuseScore is open source
but is a complex graphical application that is much harder to extend or
modify what it does than LilyPond.

Craig Fisher had basic chromatic staff notation features working in his
fork of the MuseScore code, but I think he gave up because it was too
much work to keep it working as the MuseScore code base changed and kept
breaking what he had done.  At the time the MuseScore developers were
not very supportive of this niche use of the software.  (They even
disallowed using any external music fonts, to ensure that all MuseScore
files always had a consistent appearance, so that's not exactly
embracing user freedom.)

I'm curious about what you refer to, the "entry on Clairnote". (I have
not asked for help from other programmers on my work with LilyPond.)

Let us know if you have any other questions.

Cheers,
-Paul

[John Keller]

Paul,

The entry on Clairnote was the one by Craig Fisher.

That is disappointing that MusesScore is not supportive.

In LilyPond, can you tweak the layout of scores easily? I like to make all my ES scores 'page turn' friendly and avoid ending on half pages etc. You will see that each of my Bach 2 Part Inventions are on a single page. ES is conveniently compact (as opposed to my Alfred Masterworks edition where they go to 3 pages each with inconvenient page turns, making sight reading frustrating).

And can LilyPond import a whole font, because the ES note heads are subtly different for each pitch.

It is years since I worked on LilyPond code (with your help), and I feel like I would know where to start. Any suggestions?

I also asked for help from Finale support in case the newer versions might be able to be wrangled.

And have put out a request for coders on Upwork as suggested by Enrique.

Cheers,
John

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
> To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/5dfc8f7d-42c5-7f80-0183-dade126b1051%40paulwmorris.com.

[Musical Supersystem]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 9:09 PM John Keller <jko...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

That is disappointing that MusesScore is not supportive.

John, while what Paul told you I think is right it rather applies to what Fisher wanted, which is not what you need, as I recall he wanted to integrate and move alone with Musescore updates which at the time I thought it was not going to happen but what you need is just to fork from a version that is compatible with what you need to implement ES.

Fork means that your ES project may separate, split from MScore and it no longer matters what they do.

But I agree that might be a complex way to go but it may have some advantages also.

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/CCCF45FA-0C2A-4833-BA11-92A0151A4113%40bigpond.net.au.

[drtec...@gmail.com]

Let me jump in here. I've just noticed this thread.  As some of you know, I've tried my hand at creating notation software from scratch and had a couple systems producing single-page "chromatonnetz" scores (basically a shape-note version of Klavarskribo.). 

I have also been using Lilypond extensively to produce TN scores for my own piano lessons. Lilypond also does shape-notes so custom noteheads are in principle do-able and I believe Paul has actually done it. 

The real problem with Lilypond is getting 12-position staves which Paul has solved to some extent, though I'm not sure how compatible it is with all the other Lilypond features I like, such as shape notes, note colorings, mid-measure breaks, etc.

 

BTW, John, with manual editing you have great flexibility in Lilypond to break lines and pages anywhere you want--I do it all the time.

I like to break my lines at phrase/lyric breaks, and pages at section breaks.  Of course, you can only get so many notes on a page and still see them, but anything reasonable can be done.  For a while  (pre-cataract surgery) I needed to print all my scores "big-note" just to read them and Lilypond was able to handle it.

 

One problem you didn't mention was the input format to the score editor.  Lilypond accepts an alphanumeric text format; it's not graphical or WYSIWYG as far as I know, although adding Frescobaldi gives you a near-immediate rendition of the actual score.

I was working for a while on  the midi-to-Lilypond converter but the real problem there is with MIDI--there's just not enough information in the MIDI file to make a score without a lot of supplement or artificial intelligence.  Problem areas are timing and  dynamics, even bar placement between measures and note durations, fermata, etc., and "decoding" a succession of the same note at different volumes as a single sustained note with changing loudness. If the MIDI is output by other software, it's easier, but that presupposes you already have converted the score into computer form.

 

I personally moved away from alternative notation because it took more effort to convert a score than to learn to read it in TN--in fact,

if you are *converting* a score, you must of course already know how to read the TN--just not necessarily in real-time.  What I do now is set Lilypond coloring options to make sharps red, flats blue, and I have extra colors for white accidentals.  Of course that doesn't help with the octave differences for the two staves and ledger lines. For singing I use 7-shape shape notes.

 

I believe isomorphic notations work best with isomorphic instruments--and especially vice-versa.  I had a Chromatone for a while and used Chromatonnetz with it, but the Chromatone broke and I went back to conventional keyboard because you just can't get an isomorphic keyboard at your local music store. To say nothing of trying to find a sympathetic teacher, much less one who can actually teach you to play it.  So I believe something like ExpressStave explicit to 7-5 makes more sense on a 7-5 keyboard.

 

But as to the way forward. I am currently working on using web technologies (PWA and SVG or Canvas if you know what that means) to create a score creator. With sufficient motivation (non-monetary) I expect I could produce something that could generate single-page scores with staves and notes,  possibly fingering and chords,   but with dynamics and other notations "deferred to a later release".  Of course,  a teacher or student could add the rest by hand.  If I can get anything working I'll let y'all know. Or if anybody else wants to volunteer to lead a project I would be glad to lend a hand. I know some C++, JavaScript, Java, Python, HTML. SVG, Canvas and more;  I'm not as familiar with the internals of Lilypond as Paul but I can learn.

 

Personally, I like vertical staves so I would do that; I'm not sure Lilypond can.

 

I don't really know anything about MuseScore. I may have tried it a time or two but I found Lilypond did most of what I want.

 

Joe Austin

aka DrTechDaddy

 

 

[drtec...@gmail.com]

John,
Do you have a detailed spec for the shape and position of your ExpressStave noteheads?
As a minimum, I would like the height and width of the two types of noteheads,
and the center-to-center distances on the staff for each pitch position.

By eyeballing in, I assumed three flat noteheads or two slant noteheads fill the space between lines,
but then this doesn't give equal spacing for slant noteheads relative to the one centered on the line.
If I equally space the centers, the slant noteheads either miss or cut the line, or overlap each other;
I can't perfectly fit two between the lines.

Joe Austin aka DrTechDaddy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/DDCB4D39-716F-4F2C-8318-557A769C9C7A%40bigpond.net.au.

[John Keller]

Hi Joe,

This page might help you see the details of how the ES notes fit. 

The dimensions must take into account the width of the staff lines.

The slanting notes (‘bigs’) more or less tip the lines, while the flat note heads (‘smalls’) sink into the lines.

You can see by the ascending notes in the F clef that the centres are all equally spaced vertically, 

but I haven’t actually engineered exact dimensions.

The horizontal width of all notes should be equal so that chords stack neatly. 

One big and one small stack neatly between two staff lines, e.g. A and C or H and I. 

Thanks for your interest and any help is appreciated.

Cheers,

John

[drtec...@gmail.com]

John,

 

Thanks.  That confirms that the note centers are equally spaced and adjacent slant notes do overlap.

 

Joe Austin aka DrTechDaddy

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/6BF011BA-D5BE-4A8F-9C67-55984CCFD998%40bigpond.net.au.

[John Keller]

Hi Joe,

The small flat notes also overlap slightly (by the width of the staff line).

So all whole tone intervals must be written with notes on opposite side of stems.

All minor thirds (one big plus one small) fit neatly together without a gap.

Cheers,

John

On 29 Jun 2021, at 11:27 am, <drtec...@gmail.com> <drtec...@gmail.com> wrote:

John,

 

Thanks.  That confirms that the note centers are equally spaced and adjacent slant notes do overlap.

 

Joe Austin aka DrTechDaddy

 

 

From: musicn...@googlegroups.com <musicn...@googlegroups.com>On Behalf Of John Keller
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2021 6:51 AM
To: musicn...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MNP] How to procede

 

Hi Joe,

 

This page might help you see the details of how the ES notes fit. 

The dimensions must take into account the width of the staff lines.

The slanting notes (‘bigs’) more or less tip the lines, while the flat note heads (‘smalls’) sink into the lines.

 

You can see by the ascending notes in the F clef that the centres are all equally spaced vertically, 

but I haven’t actually engineered exact dimensions.

 

The horizontal width of all notes should be equal so that chords stack neatly. 

One big and one small stack neatly between two staff lines, e.g. A and C or Hand I. 

 

Thanks for your interest and any help is appreciated.

 

Cheers,

John

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/6BF011BA-D5BE-4A8F-9C67-55984CCFD998%40bigpond.net.au.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tomusicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/009b01d76c85%24fd1ceb20%24f756c160%24%40gmail.com.

[drtec...@gmail.com]

John,

 

Regarding stem-side:  When I was scoring for Janko, I actually put all the notes from one whole-tone scale (Janko row) on one side of the stem and notes from the alternate scale/row on the other. Of course that made somewhat more intuitive sense with a vertical staff, since noteheads for different rows of keys were actually in different "rows" on the stem.

 

I am working on a score-writer.

My goal is to develop a Progressive Web App using SVG or Canvas,

but I'd best not make any promises.

 

I did try another approach using Excel Macros to draw Klavar staves and noteheads in a spreadsheet--basically a variation on PianoRoll.
I think it might be adapted to ExpressStave.

 

I'm not trying to replace Finale or Lilypond, just do something so a student can create his/her own arrangements of lesson pieces on a 12-position staff.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/4FC65F9D-D720-4B2A-865D-0950114452FF%40bigpond.net.au.

[John Keller]

Thanks, Joe,

I am very ignorant about all these tech platforms. 

I am also worried that i am forgetting how i developed my transmutation method in Finale and TypeTool font design.

I feel that Express Stave and my conversion method is the culmination of my life's work as a piano teacher. But it is not available to my advanced students or others at this stage, because of the changes in Finale over the years since the 2006 version. So i am feeling anxious that my time is running out.

I am also disappointed that i seem to have rubbed people up the wrong way with my overuse of this forum for my own promotion, but I don’t know where else to try to share it.

I appreciate your interest and help.

John K

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/005101d76e19%245337e9d0%24f9a7bd70%24%40gmail.com.

[Mark Gould]

Hi John

May I make a hopefully useful suggestion. Why not create a Google Group for Express Stave, and I am sure Paul M on here would be happy to include a link from the Express Stave listing on MNMA. You can then discuss what it does and anyone who wants to discuss and improve ES can do it there without it invading every thread on here.

Mark

[John Keller]

Is anyone here interested to try reading my ES piano files if I set up a separate discussion group?

John

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/4a48714e-1ad6-42f1-9760-8f95f05edd09n%40googlegroups.com.

[J R Freestone]

Hi John,

I probably wouldn't be particularly interested in reading a lot of your piano files, but I do find the examples interesting to peruse in this discussion group, along with your ideas and arguments about notation generally. I'm sure there would be value in hosting your work together on a website or other platform for your students and other interested parties. I don't know how hosting is allocated on the MNP site itself, but I see some inventors have pages of their work (including you). Are there limits to that? If not, would that suit as a repository of ES music?

I feel this forum is a sensible place for us all to discuss alternative notation together (although you may also want to set some discussion group up for ES too, of course) and I'm quite taken aback by Mark's recent posts. I haven't experienced your use of the forum as excessive, and the examples you've posted I didn't see as self promotion, but part of valid discussion about solutions to different notation problems, in which ES will obviously feature. You haven't even posted whole pieces. I have noticed that you tend to post a bit randomly, rather than sticking to the topic of the original thread, but Google Groups doesn't help in this regard, and it's easy to lose track of the thread, particularly if you reply via email rather than on the website. I don't know that you're any worse for going off topic than anyone else, either.

This point might help smooth things in future. If you begin a specific thread on whatever you want to discuss (about ES or related issues), presumably nobody can be rubbed up the wrong way by it (but you never know).

However, apart from inadvertently hijacking a thread about "Differentiating sharps and flats on a chromatic staff" (about which Paul Morris doesn't seem to have objected), it seems perfectly reasonable to ask for help about the particular issue you're dealing with at the moment on this forum, as I imagine you're likely to find members who have dealt with similar issues themselves. I wish I could help more myself. It's not within my expertise, but I'll keep thinking about it and see if any other ideas that haven't been mentioned yet come to me. One option you mentioned was to re-learn Lilypond, but you don't feel too confident about your ability with it at the moment. If Lilypond theoretically provides a solution, it strikes me as a good way to go, especially as you said "re-learn", and maybe it won't be as difficult as you imagine, particularly when you're through the chemo. As you might tell students worried about a difficult piece, just take it slowly, bit by bit, and you'll get there.

Cheers,
¬~ (lettersquash)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/81BE6012-A108-44C8-9655-018BFC1BA07E%40bigpond.net.au.

[Mark Gould]

There's no need to be taken aback. That suggests to me how people get inured to sales pitches. And that's all we get.

As we know, when we're gone all we do will be footnotes. So it's best to see our efforts in that light. This is not the place to sell products that we know will never replace TN, so best to discuss the 'how things could be better' rather than try to think a solution will become the accepted way of notation. We can admire particular solutions and ideas but that is all they will be. It is foolish to think otherwise.

Take Klavar for example, there are volumes of publications, but the reality is they have become irrelevant and an over time will fade away. Interesting, but not the future of notation.

I think many on here have become deluded into thinking that their reform will become the notation of the future. Sadly, this is not the case. Sorry to be negative, but that is simply how it is, an interesting curiosity, that's all.

Mark

[J R Freestone]

Mark, I don't get it. Where does John say his notation will replace TN? But you didn't tell him to go and create his own forum because he thinks his notation will replace TN, you've just switched to that criticism now, apparently, by vague implication (and also that he's deluded). You said he was "invading every thread on here" and all but told him to shut up about ES and go somewhere else. I was taken aback by how rude that was. If you're so offended by his "sales pitch", just don't read his posts. You have the option to choose what you consume. You don't get to tell other users of the Internet they're overusing parts of it you frequent and have they thought of going somewhere else?, at least not without some push back. Similarly, of course, if I'm offended by your rudeness, I can stop reading your posts.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/17febccd-c351-467c-bf9a-3acc546a84b6n%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark Gould]

Good, then don't read my posts. I don't care about your posts either. Nobody cares about mine either.

Everyone. Get real. You're discussing things that won't change things. Don't get upset, just accept it. Instead, talk about what might be, but don't get upset that it won't happen.

That is all it is. And I'm surprised people get worked up about it. John can sell Express Stave but the reality is it will go the way of all other reforms, a footnote.

But turn this forum into an 'ad' stream...?

[J R Freestone]

You would do yourself more favour by thinking about what I wrote and answering (at least to yourself, in time) some of the questions. Instead you're lashing out like a child. You're upset. I get it. Nothing in the music notation world will ever change. And yet some stupid deluded people are teaching actual students with new notation systems. And not yours. It's all too confusing.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/a546c1f2-9dda-4d98-a3d9-c27d377c1c47n%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark Gould]

John  F, 

No not upset, just maddened by the way ES is pushed as the 'be all and end all' of notation reform. I have no 

System, other than an 'experiment' at rhythm notation. I think about what others post about notation, but for you to suggest to me that I need to learn from you is hilarious, that made my day. 

[John Keller]

A picture is worth a thousand words, right? 

If I illustrate some things like headless tied notes, grouping of beat units, and augmentation symbols at the beam end (which Dominique also advocates), then what notation system do you expect me to use?

Just get over it Mark, I will naturally use my system to illustrate these ideas.

Do you expect me to be all humble and apologise for showing ES?

John Keller 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/f05bf5ff-ec34-4d9b-83be-8c6a5f5b59fdn%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark Gould]

John

I don't expect you not to give examples (of which the recent one with headless notes produced a strange effect with minims tied over giving the impression of bar lines drawn in the bar for no apparent reason. I wonder if this would be even worse over page turns when we can't see what note is being sounded). 

What I don't like is that in discussing something like rhythm notation, you made it clear that you prefer traditional notation. There's nothing wrong in that, but then why, in that thread, post an example and say 'look how clear it is' etc, and run other ideas down? If a thread is not for you, why spend time contradicting others in it?

I was hoping to have a discussion about the semantics and syntax of rhythm notation - but instead a discussion is cut down with 'traditional notation is fine, why change it?' responses, and rubbishing the discussion. Sometimes, people need to try ideas out even if wrong, to work towards a better understanding. Your contemptuous dismissal of his notion of making beams the 'duration line' is symptomatic of my issue with the way you argue. 

If one argues that TN rhythm doesn't need changing, one could argue that pitch notation doesn't need changing either, but I'm sure if someone made those comments, you would be quick to defend the need for pitch notation reform.

Responding everywhere with ES examples and effectively pushing your answer is not debate, it's just promotion and it sticks in my craw. I've rarely brought up the topic of Equiton, (it's not my invention btw), but I've not filled the group with constant examples of Equiton. Mostly because the MNMA precepts make it clear Equiton is not a valid notation reform because it doesn't have 12 positions for the 12 pitches. So I don't try to push.

I think ES has (some, not many) faults as a notation, and so do other notations, but when I try to explain them, I am accused of not answering questions. The whole 'which is higher' argument over pitch was a good example of a stupid question meant to divert from an important topic - whether a notation captures the possibility of being performed in other tunings. Some can and some can't, but to argue that it's 'irrelevant' is not supportable.

Other people suggest I can learn from them, even when they themselves own up to not being able to work out TN rhythm notation with beams! Some of the reforms of rhythm I have seen do not take into account other very basic notational items - part writing on one stave, tremolandi, grace notes, ornamentation, accent marks, tuplets and the like. 

I've worked on my own compositions and typeset in the past several large modern orchestral scores in TN, and it's been very interesting to see how when discussing notation reform, how even a relatively 'simple' composer rhythmically as Beethoven can write things that would look worse than TN rhythm in some reforms. 

My point about all this being a footnote is very true - so many reforms over many decades have flourished for a time then faded, and TN marches on. Is this because they are wrong? Or because of cultural inertia?

Mark

[J R Freestone]

Mark, I will of course leave John Keller to answer these points if he wishes, but since I already got entangled in all this and you've mentioned our tangle in passing again, I'll make a few points.

First, I am really pleased to see you express somewhat more coherently the things that have angered you. This looks like it might lead to some valuable discussion between you two. I hope so. I also understand that in the moment, when we are "maddened", we don't always calmly criticise or express our concerns (and also I'm a newbie and you two might have been through this before and got nowhere, which would be even more maddening).

Secondly, to respond to this: "Other people suggest I can learn from them, even when they themselves own up to not being able to work out TN rhythm notation with beams!"  I would say that people can learn from each other on one thing even if they are more expert in another area, and to demonstrate that you don't understand that looks like an opportunity for you to learn something. :)

But I should also correct any misunderstanding that I can't "work out TN rhythm notation with beams". I can and regularly do exactly that, and the point I was making is perfectly expressed by the phrase "work out". TN rhythm, as I said, requires a kind of mathematical symbol crunching rather than being a direct graphical representation, in the same way that TN pitches have to be "worked out" by reference to key signatures and accidentals instead of being proportional. I sight read TN rhythm notation moderately well, but the design of it means it becomes much harder to process with complex rhythms (than it needs to be), just as identifying pitches becomes much harder for students of music as they progress to more complex keys and melodic or harmonic structures.

As a general point, I think we all (including me) tend not to see our own mistakes and inconsistencies, which is why we do well always to be on the lookout for learning we can get from feedback from others rather than dismissing it.

I am sorry you think all this notation reform will be a mere footnote in history, but I find it irritating that you bother to argue about it and experiment, in that case. The criticism could be raised of you, therefore, that you're deluded for being on this forum at all, since you think nothing will change, meanwhile criticising others for bothering to try.

This view of yours is also speculation. It looks like you've become disillusioned with the hope, which is understandable. You might be right, you might be wrong, but you do not have a crystal ball, so telling people they're wasting their time (especially when you're engaging in discussion and "experiment" in that area yourself) is curious to say the least.

Klavarskribo, according to wikipedia, has about 10,000 users, so it is hardly "fading away" currently, as far as I know. Perhaps you have tracked the number of users of it over recent years or decades and know that it's declining, but I doubt it, and you still can't predict that it won't increase again, nor that another superior system won't take off quite well in future, or several.

Some of us do not expect a single notation system to replace TN (and I have no evidence to hand that John Keller thinks his will do so, indeed, IIRC, he designed his system with the capacity of being a bridge to TN in mind, if students want that, and he also teaches TN!). If five students, or even one, find your rhythm notation helps them get on in music, or ES, or any of the other alternative ideas we discuss here, this is a good thing, and if the vast majority of musical academia refuses to budge from TN, that's obviously what they want, so it's fine too. They obviously don't think they can learn anything from us. ;)

LS

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/0687a99f-9b2b-4768-855f-4c8200d0b1d5n%40googlegroups.com.

[John Keller]

Mark, i did express a view about the headless tied notes. 

Unfortunately the comment got lost directly under the Google Groups “You received this message” etc

I said i was not sure I liked the headless ties. The strange barline-like appearance - so we agree on this point. I wanted to know what others thought.

John Freestone is correct in that I never expressed that ES would take over from TN, and in fact I use ES to help teach TN. e.g. bass clef, key signatures, key circle, …

My comment about TN rhythm not having anything wrong was misleading. Basically i think it can be improved by insisting on clear beam groupings and other tweaks like stems for all note values rather than note-head changes, and the augmentation ‘dot’ relocation.

I was just disagreeing with Dominique’s idea that the TN beaming needs radical change. I am sorry if Dominique took offence by my sentence without spacing, but i thought that keeping words separated was the best analogy for my argument to not have strictly linear ligatures, and the idea of the elided sentence was meant as humour.

I would be interested if more people illustrated their ideas. As I said, a picture can be much better than text in a lot of cases. Eg i would like to see Equiton examples.

Asking which pitch is higher if enharmonics are different, is NOT a silly question! It is the most logical question. I had not ever come across the examples of different temperaments in my musical life before you referenced some examples, Mark. And i still think it is irrelevant for the vast majority of musical situations. It has never come up in my 40+ years of orchestral viola playing, and all the wind and brass instruments have the same notes and fingering for 'black keys’. In any case, if one 12 note system can add enharmonic accidentals, then they all can.

Lets continue by breaking up the discussions to separate topics from here. 

eg in “Rhythmic Improvement", I would like John (or anyone) to show an example of a rhythm that is a difficult deciphering problem. Or show a case where my augmentation ‘dot’ solution may not work.

Cheers, 

John K

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/5c6f1405-2ece-8ad4-8559-826c0334829b%40gmail.com.

[Mark Gould]

Dear John and John (apologies for this but surnames would be too formal)

Thanks to you both for your comments. I don't have any long answer this time.

I'm not disillusioned by notation reform - even as a footnote, reform ideas may be picked up later. As a bridge to TN, ES does at least differentiate between what is a 'natural' from what may be performed as a sharp or flat, excepting the the usual caveat with B sharp / C flat and E sharp F flat. (My concern with this aspect of ES is that it reinforces that there are 'white' and 'black notes' and reflects the arrangement of the piano keys rather than being neutral, but as always this is an opinion, maybe others find it useful)

I want to say that I know I can be tough to get on with - but for reference I am a softy in comparison with some of the names I've worked with over the years (their comments on notation reform are unprintable here) - but I do appreciate the time taken by others to give replies. I also appreciate John K's welcoming of examples in Equiton, as I had understood it to be one of those notations dismissed as part of the study as not pitch proportional and so not worth looking at again. 

For everything else, thanks again for your time to reply, and there are things I would like to discuss about notation, but I sense they are probably too technical or obscure for general interest here. It's this that if find disheartening.

Mark

[John Keller]

Hi Mark,

By “B sharp / C flat”, did you mean a single pitch in-between B and C, or did you just mean the two separate notes?

Yes, I thought you might agree with the fact that ES distinguishes the naturals from those “extra” pitches that you would each split into two.

And I would be very interested to hear some of the objections or comments you received from conservative musicians about notation reform!

John K

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/cec97392-7faa-4344-b8b6-bac6ff7c26f5n%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark Gould]

HI John,

About the 'black and white' notes, from my own perspective though it 'helps' in one sense to see which note is which, the idea that say your note L is a black note as opposed to the G and A around it, just seems to be 'retaining' the idea that this note lies between G and A but an auxiliary way. I know you have your notehead positioning, but as I have said previously, when I read ES, I feel the noteheads are 'wriggling about' in front of me, and their tipped up and horizontal shapes I find visually distracting.

As for conservative musician friends (one or two are eminent composers and conductors from my days working with the SPNM in the UK), one described the reforms as 'complete trash - if [TN] is good enough for Mozart and Mahler it's good enough for the rest of us'. Also from another - 'but that means having to learn two systems - better just learn the one, and learn it well'. Some have been a little less 'understanding' (what a stupid idea), and some a bit more (I can understand the idea, but my visual sense of where a note is by looking at it at a glance would be ruined). PS, this is about new notations in general, no specific ones; only Klavascribo was mentioned by name, and 'a Potty idea' (their pun not mine), with 'I don't remember oboes and violins having black and white keys'. I could add a few more but you get the idea. Their view is that it is several hundred years old, the greatest masterworks we know are written in it, and it serves them perfectly well, we had had better just get used to it. And no they didn't like Equiton either, though they did grudgingly accept that for microtones it is better than 'plastering a stave with lots of weird squiggles that nobody will play in tune, but then that's the idea isn't it, no?' (I did say some of these people are much more cutting and acerbic than I can be.)

Mark

[Mark Gould]

Hi John,

To answer your specific question - that the note C is also a B-sharp, that F is also E-sharp and so forth, we have a 'white note' that from some people's view 'ought' to be some sort of black note (because it has a sharp or flat in front of it. It is a question my partner gets asked by students when they meet one for the first time). 

I think it is the reason why contemporary theory uses the numbers from 0 to 11 and is better than inventing new letter names. We can see in, say the key of G# minor (relative of B major), that we have an F-double sharp, and one wonders if a student might not think this is really a K# in your system (though this is of course incorrect). As my partner says in their explanation of keys: 'in all the keys are all seven letter names, but which have sharps or flats by them is determined by the key'.

Mark

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 00:10:58 UTC+1 John Keller wrote:

[John Keller]

Hi Mark,

I teach the same rule about traditional notation (TN), namely that each of the 7 letter-names A to G must be used in each 7-degree (diatonic) scale. 

We can see in, say the key of G# minor (relative of B major), that we have an F-double sharp, and one wonders if a student might not think this is really a K# in your system (though this is of course incorrect). 

I respectfully disagree that to say that F-double sharp is 'really' K# in L minor would be incorrect. What is 'reality' depends on the system of terminology being used. I use the 12 piano ‘notes’ A to L  as the objects, and this 'degree card’ as the template for determining the various scales on the piano. If you accept 0 to 11 as legitimate terminology, can’t A-G plus H-L serve just as well?

[Mark Gould]

HI John

I know 'K#' is wrong and not a real note, but I wondered how you deal with 'double sharps' in your letter system? The 0-11 system is deeply ingrained in contemporary theory texts (not traditional ones of course), so I can't vouch for what other theorists would say about using extra letters. 

Obviously, in TN there are such things as F# and Fx, and I wondered if any of your students had made the mistake of asking if G = K#, following this logic:  if K = F#, therefore G = K#, and similarly K = Gb therefore F = Kb? I'm not trying to disagree here with your system except very gently suggest that such logic might come to other minds. This would be the fault of any letter system. I too devised a letter system a very long time ago, using the extra German nomenclature so my 'extras' were 

S = Eb/D#

B = Bb

H = B

J = F#/Gb (from Ges pron. 'Jes')

K = C#/Db (from Cis, so 'Kiss')

And Z for G#/Ab for 'As (Az) and 'Gis '(Giz) 

I gave up on mine relatively quickly, going over to PC numbers a long time ago. 

Mark

[John Keller]

I would say all your equations like Kb=F are ok and correct within my terminology.

Just like in 0-11 PC terminology, b6 = 5.

NB: PC is pitch class, not politically correct!

So your “extras” were K,S and J,Z,B.  Cool, my initials are still included. : )

I know 'K#' is wrong and not a real note, 

Its not a ‘real note’ in TN terminology.  It is real in ES terminology. 

And I explained how I teach about translating it into a double # according to TN rules.

Whether something is ‘real’ or not, depends on the terminology you have defined.

If you define your 'real notes' by the Pythagorean 5ths line and TN (English) terminology, 

then the ‘real' just major 3rd (ratio 5:4) above D, would be Gb, not F#. 

We will always disagree on this, no doubt.

John K

[Mark Gould]

Hi John, yes, you were still in there. Your initials are of course early enough in the alphabet to permit a lexical coincidence.

I guess if you explain K is is F sharp in one system and K sharp is G in another to students I guess they won't go far wrong. 

I think my concern is using letter names (of any derivation) in a 12-tone context,  I feel it could be a potential point of confusion, so I use pitch-class numbers - it also defuses the whole sharp and flat issue to some extent. 

In some 12 tone theory texts they annoyingly use t for ten and e for eleven so as to have one character per pitch class, and others (wait for it) use A for 10 and B for 11 in line with number base theory. Both are prone to being misread, so another reason not to use letter names there!

Schoenberg didn't like the idea of extending the letter names too, writing "one hates to think of a tenor singing a top M!'

Mark

[J R Freestone]

Hi guys,

I think one of the most important questions in designing new systems is how much people are able to change their approach to music, and it seems unrealistic to imagine widespread uptake of any new system that renames all the notes, whether to an alphabetic, numeric or other series. Most people will keep returning to A-G+...and endlessly translate, so I think the best compromise is to provide new "pseudo-natural" names for the "extras".

One of the reasons a radical switch to a serial renamed system is difficult is precisely because the diatonic system is so useful (i.e. it's not purely inertia; it's the basis of Western music). In a 0-11 system, or in any chromatic system, the first thing most musicians (or at least music teachers and theorists) will want to do is reconstruct the major scale, and they'll find a template for it, e.g. "zero major". If 0 = the old C, that's an incentive to return to the old system, because it's commonly used and familiar and learning a new system is hard. If 0 = any other pitch, little is gained beyond making it even harder to transition. Pitch-proportional notation is a useful idea. I'm not sure chromatic naming is.

Cheers
¬~

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/1ae2e8e2-5df3-4fee-942a-fbdcedca2cabn%40googlegroups.com.

[Waller Dominique]

Hi John,

what you say is so true that I've considered accepting, even proposing a temporary compromise like :

do 1 re 3 mi fa 6 sol 8 la 10 si do (for Latin countries) or

C 1 D 3 E F 6 G 8 A 10 B C (for the rest)

before the 0-11 scale be ingrained in everyone's mind.

But I do think it's possible to teach the diatonic C scale with numbers, that goes 0 2 4 5 7 9 11 0. It's not difficult to memorize and the 2212221 semitones structure is easy to grasp too. And this numeric pattern is transposable to other keys. I call it scale calculation. Dominique

envoyé : 7 juillet 2021 à 10:06
de : J R Freestone <j.r.fr...@gmail.com>
à : musicn...@googlegroups.com
objet : Re: [MNP] How to procede

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/fde38e14-22a1-18ff-4d7d-31fb2d81fe23%40gmail.com.

[Mark Gould]

I agree with Dominique here regards using 0-11.

Perhaps it's not too superfluous to point out that intervals all just become simple add and subtract in semitones, and that the circle of 'fifths' or 'sevens' in 12-tone numeric notation is:

0 7 2 9 4 11 6 1 8 3 10 5 (0...

And so any diatonic major is just a continuous segment of seven of these numbers.

Mark

[Waller Dominique]

Yes, Mark, exactly.

envoyé : 7 juillet 2021 à 13:54
de : Mark Gould <equit...@gmail.com>
à : The Music Notation Project | Forum <musicn...@googlegroups.com>

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/318a8ff1-087d-4041-beae-df72fdd0578en%40googlegroups.com.

[gguitarwilly]

Hi John,

I seldom visit this page lately because I feel that the most commonly used alternative notations here have reached the goal they were intended for.

I must disagree with your assumption that Clairnote is mainly useful for isomorphic instruments, because I find it equally useful on regular piano.

The fact that Clairnote is uniform throughout the octaves and that every one of the twelve notes has its distinct colour/position combination makes reading music on piano very easy. Occasionally the notes on ledger lines are nearly as difficult to read as in standard notation.

My accordion has standard bass laout in fourths/fifths. I usually read chords, but I found that also when playing bass runs, using chromatic notation helps learning where the notes are.

Willem

Op zondag 6 juni 2021 om 06:22:56 UTC+2 schreef John Keller:

I notice that the advocates of ClairNote are players of isomorphic instruments such as  janko, guitar, button accordion, etc. (And also I suspect that it is mainly single note melodies that are referred to when playing by intervals.) 

Where are other players of the standard keyboard who are trying alternative notations? Or standard orchestral instruments other than strings, that as far as I know, are all based on the natural scale plus enharmonically equivalent extra fingerings. 

I also prefer the Dual Noteheads version of ClairNote for the same reason as Willem described.

Willem, does your button accordion have the usual bass button chords in 5ths layout? And do you read these from chord letters or a notation?

Cheers,

John Keller

Express Stave pianoforte notation

On 6 Jun 2021, at 3:08 am, Paul Morris <pa...@paulwmorris.com> wrote:

Hi Willem,

Thanks for your kind words.  It's great (and motivating) to know that you are still using and enjoying Clairnote (DN)!  Always good to hear your thoughts and experiences with it.  Very cool that you were able to easily go back to reading Clairnote and playing guitar after two years away.

A chromatic button accordion sounds like a nice portable isomorphic instrument.  I'm focusing on guitar these days, but if I have time for another instrument at some point, I might have to look into an accordion.

All the best,
-Paul

On 6/2/21 4:34 PM, gguitarwilly wrote:

Hi Paul,

You offer a very clearly formulated case for using accidental signs. I find them useful, mainly for quickly spotting notes outside the current key,

I find Clairnote still offers me everything I need from a notation. I'm using it for (janko) piano, guitar and chromatic button accordion.

Especially for the accordion the notation is useful, because on the five row symmetrical keyboard it's far more useful to think in intervals instead of absolute note names. The same goes for Janko piano, for the same reason.

I hardly used Clairnote on guitar the last two years because I've been mainly playing the lute, for which all music is written in TAB notation.

When I picked up my guitar after all this time, I still could play my Clairnote scores without any problem.

I use the DN original variant of Clairnote, as I find SN offers a confusing number of pseudo-ledger lines, and the alternating colours of the DN variant are one of the main advantages of Clairnote.

I find it a bit sad to conclude that I can't see how Clairnote may be improved, or replaced by a better system, because the search for the holy grail is exciting and fun.

best wishes, Willem

Op woensdag 21 april 2021 om 13:55:15 UTC+2 schreef Mark Gould:

Hi Paul

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I see that all of my points are addressed in this tutorial. It even covers my point that an 'unadorned' 12ET notation loses information, which as you point out can be 'recovered' in a notation like Clairnote (a 6-6 notation with lines 4 semitones apart). 

My complaint is that theorists begin with the piano and 12ET, but really the diatonic scale generates 'TN' through its structure. 12ET does not differentiate between a chromatic step F to F# and a diatonic semitone, between F and Gb and so forth. It's the 'beginning with 12ET' approach that is my concern for learning how tonal music works, when really, as the tutorial makes clear, it's a much more complex beast. 

The richness of 'possibility' in tonal music, and understanding that it's a compromise between different ways of intoning notes and keeping certain intervals close to their natural ratios is fundamental to knowing what tonality is. I think beginning with 12ET misses this. 

My schooling in music theory was away from the piano, beginning with the diatonic scale, and _showing_ through the transpositions by fifths upwards and downwards how the chromatic notes appear in the sharp and flat keys. At some point in this learning, it's drawn to the student's attention that A major has a G sharp and E-flat major has an A-flat. It is _then_ that a discussion was had about the idea of enharmonics occurs, and how historically different ideas about how this might be dealt with practically, and showing how we arrive at closing the circle of fifths at this point, and forming the enharmonic relations we have today. All of this showed that 12ET is a *choice* not a preordained _this is how it is_. It also differentiates between a thing, and the representation of a thing. Acknowledgement of this fact seems very lacking in 12ET circles, and should alert us to the fact that 12ET notations are a notation for a temperament, or as we find in non-tonal or non-diatonic music today, a specific set of pitch-classes which composers use.

There's a lot of group-theory and other mathematics behind diatonic (and other) scale structures and the 'options' for how they are represented, but I find a lot of individuals 'in denial' that these other representations can (and do) exist. Presenting a student 'beginning with 12ET' fails to show them the _why_ of what they are doing, and it's this I have found is often crucial to understanding. It opens the door to the richness of 'possibility' tempered by the 'necessity' of having physically practical musical instruments.

Nowhere do I suggest that 12ET notations are no good at notating music written with 12ET in mind, only, at the risk of repeating myself, with their ability (unadorned) to do justice to tonal relations in diatonic music.

Kind regards

Mark

On Tuesday, 20 April 2021 at 12:48:07 UTC+1 Paul Morris wrote:

Hi Mark G. and John K.,

I'm arriving late to recent discussions, and haven't been able to read
all the recent messages, but I saw you were discussing the the
representation of "enharmonic equivalents" in the recent "Gabriel Music
Notation by William Tapley" thread.  I thought I'd start a new thread
for this topic.

FWIW, I just wanted to add that it is possible to represent distinctions
between "enharmonic equivalents" (sharps and flats etc.) on a chromatic
staff, preserving all the nuances of what composers wrote in traditional
notation.  For example, see Clairnote DN's alternative accidental signs:

https://clairnote.org/dn/accidental-signs/

I'm not aware of another system that takes this approach, so I think
it's fair to say that it's one of Clairnote's "contributions to the field".

Cheers,
-Paul

P.S. For anyone curious, there's a general discussion of enharmonic
equivalents, as they relate to chromatic staff notation systems,
including the argument for visually distinguishing between them, see
this MNP tutorial:
http://musicnotation.org/tutorials/enharmonic-equivalents/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/b5059c76-5569-421e-a7b5-2fe7b27ed3bfn%40googlegroups.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/efc75d24-8b8e-430d-ee25-f542b2db419a%40paulwmorris.com.

[John Keller]

Hi Willem,

Thanks for your reply.

What sort of music are you reading in ClairNote on piano?

I have been going through the Bach preludes and fugues book 1, reading in both ES and TN .

I am currently up to number 16 book 1 (of 24).

I do have to admit that reading TN can be easier when you know the key signature and scale well.

This is because the melodic contours seem to be perceived faster without the note head colour changes.

I imagine that reading ClairNote DN would have the same kind of effect, but I could be wrong.

In some instances I have put accidentals back into the ES notation, because I noticed they alert me to scale changes coming up ahead.

eg bars 42 and 43 of this fugue: http://musicnotation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Bach-PF-bk1-no4-in-C-sharp-minor-ES.pdf

Cheers, 

John Keller

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/7b083a00-515e-4594-8477-78aa74ff4241n%40googlegroups.com.