Re: [tablatures] Baroque lute tablature

[Marc Hohl <marc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Trevor Daniels schrieb:
> Carl et al
>
> I was inspired by the appearance of the Baroque lute tablature
> produced by Fronimo and the interest shown in adding this capability
> to LilyPond by several users, including Dana Emery, Laura Conrad,
> Marc Hohl and others recently.  I've been considering how this
> functionality might be added to LilyPond.  As a reminder, examples
> of this tablature can be seen at http://www.mateus-lutes.com/tablature/.
>
> I've attached a pdf showing what can be achieved by modifying the
> input stream to insert markups to render the durations above the
> tab context and the bass courses below the tab context, but otherwise
> using just standard LilyPond input syntax, as shown below.  This is
> the first two systems from the mateus-lutes site referenced above.
Wow, I am very impressed! I had some preliminary ideas of implementing it,
but I was still far away from doing so ... great job!
> The Scheme for doing this is rather messy - it was just a lash-up
> to see what was possible by applying a function to the input stream -
> but as this is not the way it should be implemented I'm not attaching
> it.
>
> Here's what I've learned:
>
> a) Most of the glyphs needed to output Baroque lute tablature
> would need to be designed.  The glyphs used for the fret indications
> and bass courses I 'borrowed' from the Fronimo site - these would need
> to be redesigned for LilyPond as the Fronimmo licence does not permit
> commercial use.  The glyphs used for the durations are taken from the
> standard LilyPond font set, but are not so beautiful as the Fronimo
> durations; they could with advantage be redesigned but are OK for a
> starter.  There are also a few more glyphs like the section separator
> and end-of-piece indicator that would need to be designed.
Some years ago, I worked with metafont, so implementing this font seems
to be doable, but a complete list of the signs needed in this font would be
crucial (I am not the fastest guy on earth with respect to metafont, but
I would like to give it a try).
> b) Markups above and below a standard tab seems quite satisfactory
> to indicate durations and bass courses, and are easy to implement.
>
> c) Right hand fingerings and string indications can be easily rendered
> in Baroque style, although the precise placement of the right hand
> fingerings will need more control.
>
> d) I haven't yet looked into adding the decorations (the comma, the
> small curve and line under notes) mainly because I'm not sure what
> they represent musically.
>
> e) But the big lesson is that transcribing from tab to tab via
> notemode is totally impractical.  I and many lutenists do not
> know what pitch a particular fingering generates.  A tabmode entry
> form will be essential.  
There are two situations: when you need *only* tablature output,
you don't need to bother about the key signature, because it doesn't show
up in tablature. When you want lilypond to display normal notation
in addition to the tablature, you'll have to set the key signature for 
yourself,
because (at least in my opinion) there is no algorithm which can cover all
situations in a satisfying way.

A tablature input mode is very useful for electric guitar, too. There are
many situations where only tablature is needed, so the double translation
(fret board to notation for lilypond input and lilypond's translation into
tablature again) is just not straightforward.
> This has some obvious difficulties,
> the main one being the lack of information about how accidentals
> should be represented when outputted in a standard staff.  Not
> sure what to do about this.
As Laura pointed out in her response, there are no accidentals in tablature
(this doesn't make sense in my opinion).

> OK, I've rambled on long enough.  What I want to know is whether
> I should continue with this.  
Yes, please!
> I'm confident we can produce acceptable
> output from standard notemode input, but I'm equally confident
> this would be of little use to lutenists without tabmode input.
> I'm also confident tabmode input can be provided without too much
> difficulty for Baroque lute, using letters to represent frets,
Would it be too difficult to expand the input format to fret numbers, so
a user has a choice to use lute letters or fret numbers? This would be
a big step forward for lilypond.
> but
> how should accidental indications be made, and would this be of any
> use to other forms of fretted instruments?
>
> So a few thoughts and comments from others would be very helpful.
>
> Trevor
>
> ps, here's the input I used for the attached file
>
> notes = {
>  % Usual string tuning for 13-course Baroque lute
>  \set stringTunings = #'(17 14 9 5 2 -3 -5 -7 -8 -10 -12 -13 -15)
>  \relative c'' {
>    \time 3/4
>    \key d \minor
>    \partial 4.
>    <a-\RF #1 >8 <g-1-\RF #5 > a |
>    <f d-\RF #5 >4. <f-\RF #1 >8 < g-2 e-1 >4 |
>    <a f f-3\5-\RF #5 >4_( <a f-\RF #1 > d8) <g,-1-\RF #5 > |
>    <cis-4 a-3\4-\RF #5 >4 <a,\6>8 <g'-1-\RF #1 > <f> <e-1-\RF #1 > |
>    <d' a d,,>4 <e-2-\RF #2 >8
>    \once \override Glissando #'(bound-details left Y) = #2.3
>    \once \override Glissando #'(bound-details right Y) = #1.3
>    \once \override Glissando #'extra-offset = #'(-0.5 . 0)
>    <f-\RF #1 >16
>    \glissando <e-2-\RF #1 > <f-\RF #2 >8 <d,-\RF #5 > |
>    \break
>    <a-\RF #5 >4 <c'-4-\RF #1 >8 <e,-2-\RF #5 > <f-3\5-\RF #5 >_( 
> <c'-4-\RF #1 >) |
>    <bes-1 d, g,>4. <e,-2-\RF #1 >8 <a f f,>4 |
>    <g-2-\RF #1 c,,>4 <f-2-\RF #2 >8 <e-1-\RF #1 >16 <f-\RF #2 > 
> <e-1-\RF #1 >8 <c-3> |
>    <f d-\RF #5 >8 <g-2-\RF #1 > <a-\RF #2 > <c,-3> <bes-1>_( <g'-2-\RF 
> #1 >) |
>    <a a,>8 <bes-1-\RF #1 > <c-4-\RF #2 > <f,-\RF #1 > <bes-1 g,> 
> <e,-2-\RF #1 > |
>  }