From: Vladimir S. <vl...@ro...> - 2004-04-23 10:02:42
|
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 09:32:45 +0100, Chris Cannam <ca...@al...> wrote: > On Thursday 22 Apr 2004 1:56 pm, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 13:04:35 +0100, Chris Cannam >> What's rg doing wrong? Interpretation? Signs? > > I was really just thinking of the articulations -- the bowing marks > that should be above the staff, staccatissimo marks that should be > the other way up (that one's now fixed) etc. I'll surely watch the topic! One more thing. Maybe, but just maybe, you should detect double or triple articulation marks?! If there is staccato and tenuto mark on the same note, tenuto should take effect on half of the pause made by staccato. But if there is tenuto and stacc. that would be only staccato-ed note. That's my logic! (elderness of signs - closer to note to interpret first, and then others) >> > We could do with some more test/example files. >> >> What you have in mind here? > > Well, really we could do with files that exercise all the notation > that Rosegarden can do -- obviously that's a big job. I made > exercise_notation.rg but it's a lousy test case really because it's > just nonsense -- it's got no relationship to real music. The file > you just made is far better because you can actually listen to it. > Something similar that tested out obscure combinations of things like > accidentals would be very welcome too. This one was really easy in comparation to an accidentals demonstration. I find it's hard to write (harmonicaly) an short example describing that kind of feature. Don't rush me (day = month to me, that's the reason) and I'll be glad to contribute something else. > btw it's nice to see someone using the annotations feature! Hm, that are internal notes... Not sure I understand reading own annotations in notation! Ok, there's always reason, but thay're much more needed in studio (maybe as markers?!). Vladimir > > Chris > -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ |