At no point have I claimed to excell at reading and writing music, so it always good to check first. I want to submit this tune, but have run into a few problems. Firstly the key should be flat on B, e, and A, but the closest I can find is Cmin or Fdor.
Secondly, the grace notes on bars (lines?) 3 and 5 should be under the rests, not next to them
dubhnghaill, I think this tune is in the key of E flat (3 flats). I substituted K:Eb for the key header and plugged in into the converter on concertina.net (http://www.concertina.net/tunes_convert.html) and it made sense.
Unfortunately, thesession.org isn't set up to accept tunes in flat keys. You could rewrite it in, say, D major and post it that way with a note that you actually play it in E flat. Or complain to (plead with) Jeremy. It would be preferable, I think, to post it in D major than to post it under a false modal key.
Grace notes (ornaments) don't have any time value, so I don't understand why you want to put them under rests. But I never notate ornamentation myself -- leaving ornaments out makes the ABC cleaner and leaves their use to the imagination of the player.
There are a few things you could do to make your ABCs easier to read (and write):
1. Change the default note length via an "L: 1/4" header. Then, every note you have written with a "2" following it can be written without the 2. There are only a few places in the tune where you need eighth notes (quavers), like the pickup, which you can write this way: G/F/. You'll save yourself a lot of keystrokes by doing this.
2. Remove the space between notes that should be barred (joined), like the two A's at the end of th first line.
3. At the end of line four, you've got a short measure, followed by a partial measure at the beginning of line five. If you not separating the tune into A and B parts for purposes of repeats, I would combine those two partial measures into one complete measure.
Also, as some of us also do, if you want to add the 'clutter', which can be useful and welcomed, meaning your choice of 'ornamentation', why not add it in the 'comments'?
C minor corresponds to Eb major, so that's okay. ABCNavigator is perfectly happy with Cmin, and puts it in three flats, which is fine. Some of those rests are peculiar. If you do rewrite it in L:1/4, you can remove the spaces between the crochets, & keep it nice and tight. Sounds nice!
False keys aren't an issue if all you look at is the dots, but they're a real pain if you rely on the ABC or on tune lists, such as the search results on this site.
The problem is that false keys yield misleading results when you're searching for a tune. If I have a tune name, or a partial tune name, and go searching for a tune I vaguely recall, I'm likely to miss it if I know it's a major tune but it's listed as C minor.
Perhaps there are technical reasons why Jeremy wouldn't add a few additional keys to the ones available on this site -- if not, it seems like an easy change that would yield more accurate tune information.
- writing the fourth measure as | FA G/G/ | so the G's are barred.
- A space between adjacent quarter notes (crotchets) and eighth notes (quavers), like I inserted above between the A and the G's, makes the ABC more readable, but it's not required.
- In lines 5 and 6, change _c (c flat) to =c (c natural)
Although I don't notate grace notes, I think that if you keep them, you should move them from the ends of measures to the beginning of the next measure (adjacent to the note that is being "graced").
Recognizing that others disagree with this approach, I appreciate your pitching it in D so that the key shows up as major.
Actually, relative keys don't pose a problem in doing and ABC search...
Also, dubh, go with the usual convention for 3/4, which is L: 1/8, not L: 1/4. That way you also loose the forward slashes... Another convention, to seperate the primary beats, and there are 3 in 3/4 time, so, rather than L: 1/4 and cramming all the notes together, you get something like this, for starters ~
ceolachan: "Actually, relative keys don't pose a problem in doing an ABC search"
I disagree. Listing a tune falsely under, for example, the relative minor key tells the searcher that the mood or character of the tune is, well, minor.
Perhaps we're talking about different kinds of searches. I'm referring to searches where you have a tune name and enter it here or on JC's ABC tune finder, and you're given a list of results with the tune names and their keys. If the key is wrong, you might not find the tune you're looking for.
If the search you're talking about is looking for which tunes have a specific sequence of ABC notes, then using a related key with the same combo of sharps and flats doesn't matter.
I've got a lot of tunes in my tunebook on this site, and I sometimes print that list, *sorted by key,* as a reference for tunes I want to remember to play or work on. Many times I've been ticked off to discover that tunes are in the wrong place on the list because they were entered here with the wrong key.
ceolachan: "Also, dubh, go with the usual convention for 3/4, which is L: 1/8, not L: 1/4. That way you also loose the forward slashes"
Also disagreeing on this point. You should choose the value for L: based on the dominant note length in the tune. dubghaill's tune is nearly *all* quarter notes, and not a single note crosses a beat line. For these reasons, L: 1/4 makes sense from both readability and ease-of-entry standpoints. L: 1/8 would be better for many other waltzes.
Why do you want to get rid of the forward slashes?
"I'm referring to searches where you have a tune name and enter it here or on JC's ABC tune finder, and you're given a list of results with the tune names and their keys. If the key is wrong, you might not find the tune you're looking for."
Then you look. Yes, there are lots of 'gan ainms', but not "An Phis Fhliuch", and even if there were a few transcriptions, you look, you play a few bars... I don't judge it by the key, as some folks get that wrong anyway, and I have slipped up there too. It's first of all about melody and your ears...
"If the search you're talking about is looking for which tunes have a specific sequence of ABC notes, then using a related key with the same combo of sharps and flats doesn't matter."
Yes, that is basically what I was saying...
"You should choose the value for L: based on the dominant note length in the tune."
Sorry, I also disagree, as said previously. It is the webmasters right and idiocyncrasies to do things as he does. He does most of the work anyway in maintaining this site. We have rattled the cages many times about the key signatures, and it hasn't changed yet, so we make do. The same is true with regards to airs and marches, etc...
L: 1/8 makes better sense if you are going to be incorporating ornamentation or variations, which can be little flurries of note density that read better open than slashed to death. But, do as you like, the convention on this site is L: 1/8, and that works, it works in all cases, where L: 1/4 can be just plain daft in some...
Personally, whether you agree with it or not, I find L: 1/8 an easier read whatever the most common division is, and I read ABCs as often and as easily as the dots. ABCs are also a damn site easier to read if they follow that convention, of not cramming everything together in a mass, but spacing it to represent the given time signature, in this case 3/4 ~ 3 primary beats to the bar/measure...
But, you have your quirks, I have my preferences. We will have to just agree that we don't think along the same lines, nor do we have to... I don't have a real problem with the quirks this site represents. I value the resource and can easily make adjustments when dealing with the material on my own here.
Besides, whether you go L:1/4 or L: 1/8, the dots are the same, so why push it? Why not just let things be? As dubh has repeatedly admitted being musically illiterate, 'doesn't read music', it shouldn't matter... It just amazes me that they still submit tunes while claiming they can't read it anyway... Which somehow signifies they aren't bothering to learn either... I hope that isn't the case...
Well said, ceolachan. Believe it or not, I agree with most of what you've written.
I, too, read ABC fluently. And I agree with you on the spacing issue; I just didn't want to tell dubhghaill to go put spaces between all the beats after he took the trouble to take out out all the 2s.
Trust me that I think a lot about keys, and tunes are strongly associated in my mind with their key and, even more importantly, the character (dorian, mix, etc.) ... which is why I would like them to be right. When I find a tune that is notated in the wrong key I try to add something about that in the comments.
Yes, it's Jeremy's site, and I think I understand his reasoning regarding airs, etc. The reluctance to add keys is more puzzling because (based on my knowledge of databases like this one) I don't think it would require any structural changes, just a few additions to the table that contains the list of valid keys. But I'm not complaining, just musing ....
On 1/8 vs. 1/4: Because I've never posted a tune here, I didn't realize until I just tried it that the L: value is pre-filled in for you! I do all of my own ABC work in Barfly or on concertina.net where you have to create all your own headers. So now I'm sorry I told dubhghaill to do that. I would still use L: 1/4 to write this out for my own use, but if you want to post it here, you've got to follow the in-house conventions.
"I think a lot about keys, and tunes are strongly associated in my mind with their key and, even more importantly, the character (dorian, mix, etc.) ... which is why I would like them to be right. When I find a tune that is notated in the wrong key I try to add something about that in the comments."
~ well said...
"The reluctance to add keys ~"
~ It may just be simply the addition preceeding a letter, the flat (_) or sharp (^) preceeding the letter. Why? ~ Well, it might just simply be some of the problems with the coding, HTML, or it could be that it is just an accepted simplification, since, right or wrong, the number of flats of sharps can be chosen from a relative key?
On 1/8 vs. 1/4 ~ in house conventions ~
~ I love it, and laughing hard. It is also a matter of process, in my case, loving the minutea, I tend to work with the lowest common denominator, L: 1/8, if not exclusively, but also working with what is already here. As said, with the dots it doesn't really matter, the results in processing are the same, but it does allow me to notate and show smaller fractions of a tune more easily. This happens too even when my initial transcription may be very basic, even if all 1/4 / crotchet notes. Why, well, sometimes I'll add further comments and variations on smaller fractions in the comments. Sometimes I do this within the repetition of the melody within a part, or between the A-part and others. So, I tend to go for the 'lowest common denominator', and since this transcription has fractions of an 1/8th, that would be my choice here ~ L: 1/8... BUT, L: 1/4 works too, just less elegantly for me, visually...
It could be all down to visuals, as my species of 'dyslexia', mild, seems to focus in on such things, and I have my quirks, which I do adjust out of courtesy of others, some of the time...
This is primarily intended for dubh, and exorcising my demons ~
We all have our idiocyncrasies, like this website and its designer and maintainer, who I sometimes have referred to as 'da whiz'. Part of the proof of our humanity is in being able to allow for some quirks and hiccups, and with others, when our patience may be thin or stretched to breaking, to voice our complaint, hopefully as constructively as were able to at the time, and then move on, without having given up or having allowed it to fester and damage ourselves or our relationships with others. Sometimes the figurative 'counting', putting some time between the 'moment', can help. The joy of such humanity is being able to see the value around the small things that can irritate, to look beyond the irritation, to realize and accept some limitations to what we can do or affect change in without giving up on or condemning the source. Better, for me anyway, is that humanity that can find the humour in it, that can see ourselves in the weaknesses or curiosities of others, and if not raise a laugh, at least a smile of recognition. Sometimes all you can have is some measure of understanding, that sometimes, when you can't change a thing, you can still find ways to work with it or around it, without getting frustrated and raising your blood pressure. No, it isn't always easy. Maybe that is the test of our mettle? I try, not always successfully, to see those problems or difficult times, as challenges, opportunities to learn, to grow in understanding... Sometimes turning the binoculars around and putting it in a different perspective helps...
Music, where such passions and variety exists, is full of the idiosyncratic, the eccentric, bubbling over with characters. While I don't always manage it, I do generally embrace and celebrate it. That openness has mostly found me friends, and just maybe, allowed me to see my own part in this as curious, exculpitory, rather than something to judge and suffer the oppression of guilt over. Later I got tagged with that bin of a term 'dyslexia', but, for as long as I can remember I've had a general empathy for people with challenged ability. Mine is nowhere as near the frustration of many of those I've worked with, children and adults. I have never ceased to admire how they face their daily challenges. So, this, it is nothing. I love the music, and sometimes I get unnecssarily frustrated with petty things...like the butchering of a melody, or rehashing and fussing over a minor inconvenience...
Yes, doing notation and adding it here while professing that you can't read music, is going to eat away at my patience. Then stomping all over a potentially good melody despite your limitations, OUCH!, it's getting very thin. WORSE! ~ AN AIR!!! If you're learning, and trying to gain an understanding of notation ~ STAY AWAY FROM AIRS!!! Practice on simpler melodic units and recordings ~ polkas, jigs, waltzes, ANYTHING BUT AIRS, PLEASE!? They are difficult even for the experienced and accomplished. The only recording I could find of this was awful, operatic and not even good operatic. I'm not familiar with this one, or, maybe truer, the notes you've given aren't awakening anything in me. I have done an initial search without success, but haven't exhausted all possibilities. That has limited my ability to respond as best as I might be able, apologies, and for letting this raise a bit of ire, a symptom of irritation... As it stands, this transcription, while hinting at a melody, DOES NOT DO JUSTICE TO AN AIR... For one, it is too metronomic and rhythmically dull, lifeless. Yes, a transcription can, at least in a reasonable hint, suggest life in a melody, movement... This one is static, sorry.
"Slán Chun Carraig An Éide" / "Farewell To Castlehyde" /
"Farewell To Carraig An Éide"
Key signature: D Major
Submitted on October 5th 2007 by dubhghaill. http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/7824
Cb ? You lost me.
I glanced through the comments but will have to read it all carefully. One thing I did notice is the question about key signatures when submitting a tune.
C minor tunes cannot be submitted as such, nor Bb major, Eb major, or Ab major.
However you can generate 1, 2, or 3 flats with the following K: fields
Yes ol' friend, he even recieved emails to that effect... But, alas... We also tried to warn him, two of us, about those flats, suggesting that maybe what he was wanting to show was a natural, or =c... There is a history here...
Please check my ABC
Please check my ABC
At no point have I claimed to excell at reading and writing music, so it always good to check first. I want to submit this tune, but have run into a few problems. Firstly the key should be flat on B, e, and A, but the closest I can find is Cmin or Fdor.
Secondly, the grace notes on bars (lines?) 3 and 5 should be under the rests, not next to them
Here's the tune:
X:1
T:Slán chun Carraig an Éide
M:3/4
R:waltz
K:Cmin
GF | E2 G2 G2 | G2 B2 B2 | A2 B2 A2 | G2 B2 A A |
G2 E2 E2 | G2 B2 A2 | F2 E2 E2 | E2 E2 GF |
E2 G2 G2 | G2 B2 B2 | A2 B2 A2 | G2 B2 z2 {B} {A} |
G2 E2 E2 | G{G} G B2 AF | F2 E2 E2 | E2 E2 z|
z{E} | E2 _d2 c2 | e2 f2 e2 | =d2 B2 AF | G2 z2 z2 {E} |
E2 _d2 c2 | e2 fe =d2 | B2 c2 d2 | e2 z2 fe |
d2 B2 B2 | G2 B2 B2 | A2 c2 A2 | G2-B2 BA |
G2 E2 E2 | G2 B2 A2 | F2 E2 E2 | G2 B2 BA |
G2 E2 E2 | G2 B2 A2 | F2 E2 E2 | E2 E2 ||
Thanks!
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by dubhghaill
Re: Please check my ABC
dubhnghaill, I think this tune is in the key of E flat (3 flats). I substituted K:Eb for the key header and plugged in into the converter on concertina.net (http://www.concertina.net/tunes_convert.html) and it made sense.
Unfortunately, thesession.org isn't set up to accept tunes in flat keys. You could rewrite it in, say, D major and post it that way with a note that you actually play it in E flat. Or complain to (plead with) Jeremy. It would be preferable, I think, to post it in D major than to post it under a false modal key.
Grace notes (ornaments) don't have any time value, so I don't understand why you want to put them under rests. But I never notate ornamentation myself -- leaving ornaments out makes the ABC cleaner and leaves their use to the imagination of the player.
There are a few things you could do to make your ABCs easier to read (and write):
1. Change the default note length via an "L: 1/4" header. Then, every note you have written with a "2" following it can be written without the 2. There are only a few places in the tune where you need eighth notes (quavers), like the pickup, which you can write this way: G/F/. You'll save yourself a lot of keystrokes by doing this.
2. Remove the space between notes that should be barred (joined), like the two A's at the end of th first line.
3. At the end of line four, you've got a short measure, followed by a partial measure at the beginning of line five. If you not separating the tune into A and B parts for purposes of repeats, I would combine those two partial measures into one complete measure.
Hope this helps. Good luck!
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by boxist
Re: Please check my ABC
As most of us do, use a relative key with 3 flats ~ F Dorian...
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
A quick way to transpose tunes is to use Jens wollschläger's automatic abc transposer:
http://www.8ung.at/abctransposer/index.html
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by fidkid
Re: Please check my ABC
Also, as some of us also do, if you want to add the 'clutter', which can be useful and welcomed, meaning your choice of 'ornamentation', why not add it in the 'comments'?
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
C minor corresponds to Eb major, so that's okay. ABCNavigator is perfectly happy with Cmin, and puts it in three flats, which is fine. Some of those rests are peculiar. If you do rewrite it in L:1/4, you can remove the spaces between the crochets, & keep it nice and tight. Sounds nice!
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by Innocent Bystander
Re: Please check my ABC
False keys aren't an issue if all you look at is the dots, but they're a real pain if you rely on the ABC or on tune lists, such as the search results on this site.
The problem is that false keys yield misleading results when you're searching for a tune. If I have a tune name, or a partial tune name, and go searching for a tune I vaguely recall, I'm likely to miss it if I know it's a major tune but it's listed as C minor.
Perhaps there are technical reasons why Jeremy wouldn't add a few additional keys to the ones available on this site -- if not, it seems like an easy change that would yield more accurate tune information.
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by boxist
Re: Please check my ABC
So here's what I have so far:
X:1
T:Slán chun Carraig an Éide
M:3/4
R:waltz
L:1/4
K:Dmaj
F/E/ | DFF | FAA | GAG | FAG/ G/ |
FDD | FAG | EDD | DDF/E/ |
DFF | FAA | GAG | FAz{A}{G} |
FDD | F/{F}F/AG/E/ | EDD | DDz/||
z/{D} | D_cB | ded | =cAG/E/ | Fzz{D} |
D_cB | de/d/=c | ABc | dze/d/ |
cAA | FAA | GBG | F-AA/G/ |
FDD | FAG | EDD | FAA/G/ |
FDD | FAG | EDD | DD ||
I think that's about right, at least it looks much better!
Thanks for the help!
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by dubhghaill
Re: Please check my ABC
You're getting close! Try these ideas:
- writing the fourth measure as | FA G/G/ | so the G's are barred.
- A space between adjacent quarter notes (crotchets) and eighth notes (quavers), like I inserted above between the A and the G's, makes the ABC more readable, but it's not required.
- In lines 5 and 6, change _c (c flat) to =c (c natural)
Although I don't notate grace notes, I think that if you keep them, you should move them from the ends of measures to the beginning of the next measure (adjacent to the note that is being "graced").
Recognizing that others disagree with this approach, I appreciate your pitching it in D so that the key shows up as major.
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by boxist
Re: Please check my ABC
Actually, relative keys don't pose a problem in doing and ABC search...
Also, dubh, go with the usual convention for 3/4, which is L: 1/8, not L: 1/4. That way you also loose the forward slashes... Another convention, to seperate the primary beats, and there are 3 in 3/4 time, so, rather than L: 1/4 and cramming all the notes together, you get something like this, for starters ~
M: 3/4
L: 1/8
FE | D2 F2 F2 | F2 A2 A2 | G2 A2 G2 | F2 A2 GG | ~
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by ceolachan
_c (c flat) = B
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
ceolachan: "Actually, relative keys don't pose a problem in doing an ABC search"
I disagree. Listing a tune falsely under, for example, the relative minor key tells the searcher that the mood or character of the tune is, well, minor.
Perhaps we're talking about different kinds of searches. I'm referring to searches where you have a tune name and enter it here or on JC's ABC tune finder, and you're given a list of results with the tune names and their keys. If the key is wrong, you might not find the tune you're looking for.
If the search you're talking about is looking for which tunes have a specific sequence of ABC notes, then using a related key with the same combo of sharps and flats doesn't matter.
I've got a lot of tunes in my tunebook on this site, and I sometimes print that list, *sorted by key,* as a reference for tunes I want to remember to play or work on. Many times I've been ticked off to discover that tunes are in the wrong place on the list because they were entered here with the wrong key.
ceolachan: "Also, dubh, go with the usual convention for 3/4, which is L: 1/8, not L: 1/4. That way you also loose the forward slashes"
Also disagreeing on this point. You should choose the value for L: based on the dominant note length in the tune. dubghaill's tune is nearly *all* quarter notes, and not a single note crosses a beat line. For these reasons, L: 1/4 makes sense from both readability and ease-of-entry standpoints. L: 1/8 would be better for many other waltzes.
Why do you want to get rid of the forward slashes?
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by boxist
Re: Please check my ABC
"I'm referring to searches where you have a tune name and enter it here or on JC's ABC tune finder, and you're given a list of results with the tune names and their keys. If the key is wrong, you might not find the tune you're looking for."
Then you look. Yes, there are lots of 'gan ainms', but not "An Phis Fhliuch", and even if there were a few transcriptions, you look, you play a few bars... I don't judge it by the key, as some folks get that wrong anyway, and I have slipped up there too. It's first of all about melody and your ears...
"If the search you're talking about is looking for which tunes have a specific sequence of ABC notes, then using a related key with the same combo of sharps and flats doesn't matter."
Yes, that is basically what I was saying...
"You should choose the value for L: based on the dominant note length in the tune."
Sorry, I also disagree, as said previously. It is the webmasters right and idiocyncrasies to do things as he does. He does most of the work anyway in maintaining this site. We have rattled the cages many times about the key signatures, and it hasn't changed yet, so we make do. The same is true with regards to airs and marches, etc...
L: 1/8 makes better sense if you are going to be incorporating ornamentation or variations, which can be little flurries of note density that read better open than slashed to death. But, do as you like, the convention on this site is L: 1/8, and that works, it works in all cases, where L: 1/4 can be just plain daft in some...
Personally, whether you agree with it or not, I find L: 1/8 an easier read whatever the most common division is, and I read ABCs as often and as easily as the dots. ABCs are also a damn site easier to read if they follow that convention, of not cramming everything together in a mass, but spacing it to represent the given time signature, in this case 3/4 ~ 3 primary beats to the bar/measure...
But, you have your quirks, I have my preferences. We will have to just agree that we don't think along the same lines, nor do we have to... I don't have a real problem with the quirks this site represents. I value the resource and can easily make adjustments when dealing with the material on my own here.
C'est la vie...
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
Besides, whether you go L:1/4 or L: 1/8, the dots are the same, so why push it? Why not just let things be? As dubh has repeatedly admitted being musically illiterate, 'doesn't read music', it shouldn't matter... It just amazes me that they still submit tunes while claiming they can't read it anyway... Which somehow signifies they aren't bothering to learn either... I hope that isn't the case...
# Posted on October 5th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
Well said, ceolachan. Believe it or not, I agree with most of what you've written.
I, too, read ABC fluently. And I agree with you on the spacing issue; I just didn't want to tell dubhghaill to go put spaces between all the beats after he took the trouble to take out out all the 2s.
Trust me that I think a lot about keys, and tunes are strongly associated in my mind with their key and, even more importantly, the character (dorian, mix, etc.) ... which is why I would like them to be right. When I find a tune that is notated in the wrong key I try to add something about that in the comments.
Yes, it's Jeremy's site, and I think I understand his reasoning regarding airs, etc. The reluctance to add keys is more puzzling because (based on my knowledge of databases like this one) I don't think it would require any structural changes, just a few additions to the table that contains the list of valid keys. But I'm not complaining, just musing ....
On 1/8 vs. 1/4: Because I've never posted a tune here, I didn't realize until I just tried it that the L: value is pre-filled in for you! I do all of my own ABC work in Barfly or on concertina.net where you have to create all your own headers. So now I'm sorry I told dubhghaill to do that. I would still use L: 1/4 to write this out for my own use, but if you want to post it here, you've got to follow the in-house conventions.
# Posted on October 6th 2007 by boxist
Re: Please check my ABC
"I think a lot about keys, and tunes are strongly associated in my mind with their key and, even more importantly, the character (dorian, mix, etc.) ... which is why I would like them to be right. When I find a tune that is notated in the wrong key I try to add something about that in the comments."
~ well said...
"The reluctance to add keys ~"
~ It may just be simply the addition preceeding a letter, the flat (_) or sharp (^) preceeding the letter. Why? ~ Well, it might just simply be some of the problems with the coding, HTML, or it could be that it is just an accepted simplification, since, right or wrong, the number of flats of sharps can be chosen from a relative key?
On 1/8 vs. 1/4 ~ in house conventions ~
~ I love it, and laughing hard. It is also a matter of process, in my case, loving the minutea, I tend to work with the lowest common denominator, L: 1/8, if not exclusively, but also working with what is already here. As said, with the dots it doesn't really matter, the results in processing are the same, but it does allow me to notate and show smaller fractions of a tune more easily. This happens too even when my initial transcription may be very basic, even if all 1/4 / crotchet notes. Why, well, sometimes I'll add further comments and variations on smaller fractions in the comments. Sometimes I do this within the repetition of the melody within a part, or between the A-part and others. So, I tend to go for the 'lowest common denominator', and since this transcription has fractions of an 1/8th, that would be my choice here ~ L: 1/8... BUT, L: 1/4 works too, just less elegantly for me, visually...
It could be all down to visuals, as my species of 'dyslexia', mild, seems to focus in on such things, and I have my quirks, which I do adjust out of courtesy of others, some of the time...
# Posted on October 6th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
This is primarily intended for dubh, and exorcising my demons ~
We all have our idiocyncrasies, like this website and its designer and maintainer, who I sometimes have referred to as 'da whiz'. Part of the proof of our humanity is in being able to allow for some quirks and hiccups, and with others, when our patience may be thin or stretched to breaking, to voice our complaint, hopefully as constructively as were able to at the time, and then move on, without having given up or having allowed it to fester and damage ourselves or our relationships with others. Sometimes the figurative 'counting', putting some time between the 'moment', can help. The joy of such humanity is being able to see the value around the small things that can irritate, to look beyond the irritation, to realize and accept some limitations to what we can do or affect change in without giving up on or condemning the source. Better, for me anyway, is that humanity that can find the humour in it, that can see ourselves in the weaknesses or curiosities of others, and if not raise a laugh, at least a smile of recognition. Sometimes all you can have is some measure of understanding, that sometimes, when you can't change a thing, you can still find ways to work with it or around it, without getting frustrated and raising your blood pressure. No, it isn't always easy. Maybe that is the test of our mettle? I try, not always successfully, to see those problems or difficult times, as challenges, opportunities to learn, to grow in understanding... Sometimes turning the binoculars around and putting it in a different perspective helps...
Music, where such passions and variety exists, is full of the idiosyncratic, the eccentric, bubbling over with characters. While I don't always manage it, I do generally embrace and celebrate it. That openness has mostly found me friends, and just maybe, allowed me to see my own part in this as curious, exculpitory, rather than something to judge and suffer the oppression of guilt over. Later I got tagged with that bin of a term 'dyslexia', but, for as long as I can remember I've had a general empathy for people with challenged ability. Mine is nowhere as near the frustration of many of those I've worked with, children and adults. I have never ceased to admire how they face their daily challenges. So, this, it is nothing. I love the music, and sometimes I get unnecssarily frustrated with petty things...like the butchering of a melody, or rehashing and fussing over a minor inconvenience...
Yes, doing notation and adding it here while professing that you can't read music, is going to eat away at my patience. Then stomping all over a potentially good melody despite your limitations, OUCH!, it's getting very thin. WORSE! ~ AN AIR!!! If you're learning, and trying to gain an understanding of notation ~ STAY AWAY FROM AIRS!!! Practice on simpler melodic units and recordings ~ polkas, jigs, waltzes, ANYTHING BUT AIRS, PLEASE!? They are difficult even for the experienced and accomplished. The only recording I could find of this was awful, operatic and not even good operatic. I'm not familiar with this one, or, maybe truer, the notes you've given aren't awakening anything in me. I have done an initial search without success, but haven't exhausted all possibilities. That has limited my ability to respond as best as I might be able, apologies, and for letting this raise a bit of ire, a symptom of irritation... As it stands, this transcription, while hinting at a melody, DOES NOT DO JUSTICE TO AN AIR... For one, it is too metronomic and rhythmically dull, lifeless. Yes, a transcription can, at least in a reasonable hint, suggest life in a melody, movement... This one is static, sorry.
# Posted on October 6th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
Dubh's results, with the flat c's ~
~
"Slán Chun Carraig An Éide" / "Farewell To Castlehyde" /
"Farewell To Carraig An Éide"
Key signature: D Major
Submitted on October 5th 2007 by dubhghaill.
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/7824
# Posted on October 6th 2007 by ceolachan
Re: Please check my ABC
Cb ? You lost me.
I glanced through the comments but will have to read it all carefully. One thing I did notice is the question about key signatures when submitting a tune.
C minor tunes cannot be submitted as such, nor Bb major, Eb major, or Ab major.
However you can generate 1, 2, or 3 flats with the following K: fields
K:F major % 1 flat (Bb)
K:G dorian % 1 flat (Bb)
K:D minor % 1 flat (Bb)
K:C dorian % 2 flats (Bb & Eb)
K:G minor % 2 flats (Bb & Eb)
K:F dorian %3 flats (Bb Eb & Ab)
# Posted on October 7th 2007 by Ben Steen
Re: Please check my ABC
Yes ol' friend, he even recieved emails to that effect... But, alas... We also tried to warn him, two of us, about those flats, suggesting that maybe what he was wanting to show was a natural, or =c... There is a history here...
# Posted on October 7th 2007 by ceolachan