Re: [tablatures] Re: \set predefinedDiagramTable in a TabStaff

[Patrick Schmidt <p.l.schmidt@xxxxxx>]

Am 18.11.2010 um 05:36 schrieb Carl Sorensen:

> On 11/17/10 4:51 AM, "Patrick Schmidt" <p.l.schmidt@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi Carl (et al.),
> >
> > the command \set predefinedDiagramTable used in a TabStaff leads to
> > the following error:
> >
> > .../Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/share/lilypond/
> > current/scm/translation-functions.scm:232:10: In procedure filter in
> > expression (filter (lambda # # ...)):
> > /Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/share/lilypond/current/
> > scm/translation-functions.scm:232:10: Wrong number of arguments to
> > #<primitive-procedure filter>
> > Processing time: 1 seconds
>
> I've located and fixed this bug in the latest git.  Thanks for the  
> report!
Wow, you are way too fast for me. I wanted to post my bug report this  
morning but you had already fixed it. Thank you very much!
> > I also wanted to show how I use your new
> > function of different predefined diagram tables. BTW I have defined
> > loads of "custom" chord shapes (not attached). Is there any chance
> > that these predefined-diagram-table-files could become part of the
> > LilyPond-package one day. They might reduce the need to define chord
> > diagrams including fingering and barre indications for other users.
>
> I've looked at your definitions, and they seem to me to be very  
> interesting.
> I think they're also more complicated than I'd like them to be.
>
> I've attached a revised version of your files that shows how I  
> think it
> ought to work.  Of course it doesn't work now, because the notes in  
> the
> regular staff don't match either the fretboard or the tablature.
You seem to have forgotten to attach your revised version?!
> I think it should be possible to modify the note-head-engraver so  
> that it
> does the same thing the tablature engraver does, that is, if there's a
> predefined fretboard for the chord in chordmode, it replaces the  
> notes that
> came from the chord parser with the notes from the fretboard.  It  
> might be
> difficult to do well, because of enharmonic spellings.  But it  
> would be
> really nice in my opinion if we could just call it a C chord, and  
> let the
> predefined fretboard in the desired table spit out the notes that  
> we need.
>
> What do you think?
Hm, on the one hand this sounds very user-friendly. On the other hand  
I am having difficulties to imagine how  LilyPond could possibly  
choose the desired fretboard diagram from various alternatives. Most  
chords (with the same pitches) can be fretted in at least two  
(sometimes even three) different ways on the guitar, e.g.:

Chords = \chordmode {
  \set minimumFret = #2
  e,1:1.5.8.10
  \set minimumFret = #7
  e,1:1.5.8.10
  \set minimumFret = #12
  e,1:1.5.8.10
}

When I use fretboard diagrams I normally prefer to choose a specific  
chord shape (in this case either a d-, a- or e-shape). My definitions  
are based on the CAGED-system as all chords on the guitar can be  
derived from these five chord shapes. I admit that in some cases it's  
not always easy to "see" the underlying chord shape. So in the worst  
case my definitions might result in someone having to try out up to  
five chord shape commands to get the desired fret diagram. In the  
best case the definitions could be useful for users being familiar  
with the CAGED-system. [Of course this would mean brainless diligence  
for me. I have already defined c-shape-diagrams for powerchords, the  
four basic triads (in closed and open position, as well as inversions  
with three to six notes) and diagrams for the ten seventh chords. The  
c-shape-file is not finished, yet. I could add lots of alterations  
and I would still have to define all these chords for the other chord  
shapes as well.]

Does that make sense?

Thanks,

patrick
> Thanks,
>
> Carl