Re: [frogs] Re: Lilypond's internal pitch representation and microtonal notation |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lilynet.net/frogs Archives
]
- To: Wols Lists <antlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [frogs] Re: Lilypond's internal pitch representation and microtonal notation
- From: Carl Sorensen <c_sorensen@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 16:31:00 -0600
- Accept-language: en-US
- Acceptlanguage: en-US
- Thread-index: ActZtYtbKT/9XFDORBe0ZrwN6gTEagAJx88y
- Thread-topic: [frogs] Re: Lilypond's internal pitch representation and microtonal notation
On 9/21/10 11:50 AM, "Wols Lists" <antlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 21/09/10 14:22, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> I think you can get the output you want without an engraver (I know, we've
>> had this conversation before). I'd recommend that you update your
>> modifications to the chord_name_engraver to be based on either two pitches
>> or a transposition pitch and get all of that working properly.
> Okay, that'll teach me a bit more. So rather than capoFret, I'll have
> capoKey, and just set that to a pitch. I'll then learn how to extract
> the key from the key-signature, and calculate the difference. The latter
> I think will be easy, the former a bit more tricky :-)
It might be easier to start with capoPitch (the interval you want to
transpose by) and thus avoid all the difficulties of calculating capoPitch.
Then, if you're interested, you can set capoKey later on.
But whatever you want to do, of course...
Thanks,
Carl
---
----
Join the Frogs!