Re: [kln2-devel] re: do-re-mi

[Marek W. <Mar...@fu...>]

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Mo wrote:
> I hate to beat the subject into the ground but I do think we should look
> beyond our group and decide what is best for our users.

OK. The problem is, that kln2 is fairly new program so solutions like:

> Or can we set up a poll on the homepage and let people vote for a
> determined period of time?

simply would not work. And I'm not sure if it is clear for us what we
would ask about in the poll (I mean, what the choice really is).

> Are we going to implement this soon?

Yeah, why not? It doesn't seem as too much work. If Fernando will have
time to do this fast - great, if not, someone else can do this. This is
really not much work. :) And most of this involves moving from using one
char to a QString - it does not depend on which Solfeggio convention is
used.

And, anyway, the most important question always is where are we aiming,
not in what order etc. So: what is the perfect final goal?

> I wrote up an elaborate e-mail explaining this system [...]
> I'm not sure if I send it now

Sure. Send it.

Just to restate the problem:
1. we need Solfeggio, because apparently this main method of naming notes
  in some parts of the world (not because it is easier to be sung)
2. movable Do doesn't solve (1.) because it is not used there (and would
  teach people things their folks would not understand)
3. fixed Do is ambiguous (see bellow).

> Is this Solfege system suggesting an *altered* Fixed Do method?

OK, OK. This needs clarifying:

> The Fixed Do system assigns the Solfege words to specific notes. The
> note "C" will alway be "Do". The note "D" will always be "Re".

Yes. So as long as there are no sharps/flats there is no problem.

> But say you have a "C#" ... in the Fixed Do system it will still assing
> "Do" to this note.

OK. But this introduces a confusion, I guess.

1. In one of his letters, Fernando suggested that the same convention is
also used for scale naming. You can call both C and C# "Do" when you see a
note in a staff. But now imagine a name-to-scale exercise. Give an user a
task, say "put appropriate number of accidentals to build up a key
signature 'Do major'". Now, how to hell the user is to figure out if she
is to put no accidentals (for C Major) or 7 sharps (for C# Major)?

2. Similar problem: we have to test if an user remembers the key signature
in the following part of the score. OK, we have G Major key signature. Now
there is a F note in the score. "Dear user, what is the name of this
note?". Well, if we don't distinguish Fa and Fa# we cannot test if the
user remembers that key signature applies to this note.

I guess, this is why the "modified Fixed Do" appeared in the discussion.

I mean, what to do about it? I think, we have to distinguish F from F#
(right?). If fixed Do doesn't do this and people have never seen anything
like Fi what else, apart from introducing "Fa#" can we do?

> ******************
> MOVABLE DO SYSTEM
> Written Solfege:
> DOb REb MIb FAb SOLb LAb TIb
>
> Sung Solfege:
> "dough flat" "ray flat" "me flat" "fa flat" "sol flat" "la flat" tea
> flat"
> *******************

:D Yep, that's the problem I meant when in one of previous e-mails I voted
for movable Do.

> Can I repeat myself here? The Solfege method was developed with intent
> of being sung. Singing an "A flat minor" scale and pronouncing each
> "flat" is not really smooth.

OK. But I suppose, we can assume that users are not complete morons. There
is a distinction between what you say/sing and what you recognize. If we
write
	Do, Do#, Re
it doesn't mean you have to sing "do, do-sharp,ray". You would rather sing
"Do,Do,Re" but REMEMBER that the second Do has a sharp. (OK, some users
will get caught in this trap - so what to do about it? Would a clear
helpfile stressing this point do?).

I mean, after all we will force users to make some mouse clicks, right?
Even if you use fixed Do you are aware that sometimes "Do" means C#.
What we would do by introducing "Do#" string would be like saying "it's
Do, but it has a sharp". Is it really different from what you THINK when
you use fixed Do?

> If so, why are we even bothering using solfege at all? We might
> as well sing A minor like this:
>
> A Flat - B Flat - C Flat - D Flat - E Flat ....

Yep. In the US - maybe. ;)

> If so, why are we even bothering using solfege at all?

Because the guys repored, that in their environment naming notes by single
letters is virtually not used. They use Do/Re/Mi for everything: naming
notes, scales, pieces of music.

Just to summarize:
* fixed Do seems too limited to be used for all kinds of questions
* movable Do is great; theoretically :( ; there is no point in forcing
  users to learn things nobody around them would understand
* fixed Do can be very simply modified by adding a #/b sign after note's
  name; it's up to a user if she pronounces it; nevertheless, everybody
  using fixed Do has this modification in their minds - you do remember if
  by saying "Re" you mean "D", "D#" or "Db".

Therefore I believe, adding a sharp/flat sign to indicate what you mean by
"Re" is not that great of unorthodoxy. Would it be really confusing?

So I suggest that the aim (and choice for users) would be four kinds of
note's names:
* English (one letter, with A-B-C)
* German  (one letter, with A-H-C)
* modified Fixed Do ( Do-Do#-Re with an explanation in docs: "Do#" is to
  be sung "Do", just remember it has a sharp)
* Movable Do (Do-Di-Re).

And, yes, I agree. We have to clarify this. No discussion is closed until
we find a satisfactory solution.

~Marek

-- 

     \/   /|\  Marek Wieckowski
  #####  | | |
 = . . =  \|/  Institute of Theoretical Physics
    U      |   Warsaw University
  / ~ \___ |
 <|   |    |
  > . <    |   http://www.fuw.edu.pl/~wiecko
 <<___>>   |   http://klearnnotes2.sourceforge.net