on the whole i find this a distraction, and would prefer to see ABC submissions in a very basic fashion.
the twiddly bits are not necessarily integral parts of the tune, and are harder/easier/impossible depending on the difference between what the original ABC was transcribed from, and what *your instrument is.
when learning, i play ABCs through a course midi sound generator, and alot of ornamentation just ends up sounding like a "spazzy flourish", which i ignore, or edit out in a sequencer.
i should point out that i'm not a big abc-er
i have only submitted one ABC here, which i hope is bereft of any spazzy flourish
Of equal importance is that a proliferation of (or for that matter any) ornaments or chord symbols in an ABC is guaranteed to make an ABC search difficult or useless. If ornaments or chords are thought necessary in the ABC of a posted tune then it would be sensible to have them placed in a separate version of the ABC in the comments, and not in the main version which is the one that is searched.
100% agree regarding not including ornamentation in abc submissions - abc can only ever act as an framework to how a tune is played.
However, (although not many people include chord symbols in abc submissions) I don't really see any harm in anybody doing so.
I've also noticed that when someone has taken the trouble to include chord symbols, they are usually good ones - in contrast to jarring chords often heard from guitarists at sessions when they clearly don't know the tune, and make up the chords as they go along ...
I've been doing quite a few ABC tune fragment searches lately and I've run up against the problem that an ABC search only returns results which match exactly. Problem is, there are several different ways of notating a given phrase, all of which sound more or less the same to the ear. Maybe at a session ten people will be playing that phrase ten slightly different ways. All blend together an in effect are the same, but an ABC search will only give a "match" if the exact detailed phrase is entered.
This most often seems to happen in "long roll" situations.
On occasion I've entered half a different ways of playing/notating a certain phrase with no matches, only to later stumble across the tune I was looking for and discovering that the phrase in question was notated in a way I would have never thought of, a way I've never heard anybody play.
But still the ABC search function is extremely valuable.
I rather like it when people submit a tune the way they play the tune. If this includes broken rhythm, phrase marks, grace notes, rolls, chords . . . all the better. If you play without ornamentation, chords . . . etc. This is perfectly fine as well. I want to know how you play the tune.
In my books I can choose to play a tune in a way which works in my session. Though I enjoy reading that some players & sessions have different versions.
Tune Section ~
Original poster may edit abcs (not sheet music or MIDI)
Other members may add their own version in the comments.
Richard D. Cook wrote: "I've been doing quite a few ABC tune fragment searches lately and I've run up against the problem that an ABC search only returns results which match exactly."
Richard, the simple solution to this is to use The Reverend's ABC Tune Search at http://abctunesearch.com/. It finds tunes on thesession.org and other sites based on similarity -- no exact matches required.
I don't know if the Rev has programmed it to ignore ornamentation, but I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.
Depends if the tune has been submitted and taken from a particular recording, or whether the tune is just a personal interpretation.
No problems with writing out ornaments in full if the tune is the former - within reason, many cuts etc. are inferred by the nture of the tune so it is overkill to notate them all.
Personally, I get fed up with tilde all over a tune, and delete them as soon as I can.
"most certainly they are. they ARE the tune" ....
But can only be true if the tune is unrecognisable as such without them. I've always understood that, although ornaments are generally used in Irish tunes, their type, placement and frequency are largely optional. It follows that an ornamented ABC is a snapshot of a particular playing on one occasion (e.g. on a CD) and is not necessarily going to be exactly repeated by that player. Such an ABC isn't very useful for precise ABC searches, although Reverend's search algorithm may be able to cope, but I'm sure we'd all like to hear from him on that.
My search engine does attempt to "normalize" a tune by taking out ornamentation, etc. And then it does a fuzzy matching algorithm against a normalized database. So no, it doesn't have to be an exact match, and in general, it doesn't care about ornamentation.
However, it really depends on how much of that stuff is in there, because each bit of notated ornamentation is another potential place for the match to get further apart. And some people choose to notate things VERY differently, for example, people often try to notate the dotted rhythm into the ABC of a hornpipe, and even though that gets normalized out, it doesn't always make for a good match if you're searching a notation that doesn't have that...
The fantastic tunepal.org site also does some wonderful fuzzy matching, I might point out. But you don't even need to be able to write ABC to do that, you can just play the tune in (with or without ornamentation), and have it find it for you...
I would also disagree that the articulation of the tune is the same as the tune. The tune has a basic structure of its own. The twiddly bits are how you express that basic structure, and the fact that you can move that stuff around within the tune would mean that they are separate things. So I would say that the twiddly bits are a significant part of what makes a sequence of notes sound like Irish music, but I wouldn't say that they "are the tune"...
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/9908 is a good example of what Rumpole and others like to see in tune submissions. The "extreme version" - more or less "as played" in the workshop - that Kenny placed in the comments would, I imagine, be quite difficult to search.
This is my proposal for notating ornamentation in ABC.
Notate Rolls as either the quarter note or dotted quarter note that they are associated with, but not with the actual notes but with a roll symbol above the staff
Except for triples with all ascending or descending notes, Notate all triplets as trebles(leaving the player the option to play up or down, or to stay on the same note, triplets on descending quarter notes (such as in a hornpipe) which might as well be notated as descending quarter notes
Some triplets are integral to the tune, for instance I have always heard Dinky's reel played with steady droning trebles throughout by players at the session I attend. Or see the tune example below. I would suppose that each instance of trebles could be replaced by triplets optionally moving up or down and back to the previous note (as a flutist would do) or one could opt to hold on a quarter note.
Regardless, I would opt to notate all optional triplets, but with a uniform treble, and not with all possible manifestations, which can be assumed by players of different instruments according to taste.
I prefer to write in any "grace" note that seems integral to the style and color of the performance, for example see the third measure in this transcription http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/9909 . This could or may be considered a roll, but since rolls are not present in the tune at any other time it seemed more appropriate to write two grace notes which sounded clearly in the recording as
a delayed cut by the leading instrument (accordion) which recurred every time this phrase was played in the third measure of the A part.
Hornpipes should be written straight
Strasthpeys and barndances should be written with dotted and cut notes.
For ethnomusicologists etc it is an important part in analysing tunes and styles ( but they will normally use te dots) but for normal people I reckon the bare bones with symbols for a roll etc is enough guidance Then it's a matter of listening and developing your own style which is often influenced by the instrument you choose
Ornamentation in ABC
Ornamentation in ABC
on the whole i find this a distraction, and would prefer to see ABC submissions in a very basic fashion.
the twiddly bits are not necessarily integral parts of the tune, and are harder/easier/impossible depending on the difference between what the original ABC was transcribed from, and what *your instrument is.
when learning, i play ABCs through a course midi sound generator, and alot of ornamentation just ends up sounding like a "spazzy flourish", which i ignore, or edit out in a sequencer.
i should point out that i'm not a big abc-er
i have only submitted one ABC here, which i hope is bereft of any spazzy flourish
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by rumpole
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Of equal importance is that a proliferation of (or for that matter any) ornaments or chord symbols in an ABC is guaranteed to make an ABC search difficult or useless. If ornaments or chords are thought necessary in the ABC of a posted tune then it would be sensible to have them placed in a separate version of the ABC in the comments, and not in the main version which is the one that is searched.
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by lazyhound
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Or, on second thoughts, have the ornamented/chorded version tacked on to the end of the main version.
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by lazyhound
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
100% agree regarding not including ornamentation in abc submissions - abc can only ever act as an framework to how a tune is played.
However, (although not many people include chord symbols in abc submissions) I don't really see any harm in anybody doing so.
I've also noticed that when someone has taken the trouble to include chord symbols, they are usually good ones - in contrast to jarring chords often heard from guitarists at sessions when they clearly don't know the tune, and make up the chords as they go along ...
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by Mix O'Lydian
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
I've been doing quite a few ABC tune fragment searches lately and I've run up against the problem that an ABC search only returns results which match exactly. Problem is, there are several different ways of notating a given phrase, all of which sound more or less the same to the ear. Maybe at a session ten people will be playing that phrase ten slightly different ways. All blend together an in effect are the same, but an ABC search will only give a "match" if the exact detailed phrase is entered.
This most often seems to happen in "long roll" situations.
On occasion I've entered half a different ways of playing/notating a certain phrase with no matches, only to later stumble across the tune I was looking for and discovering that the phrase in question was notated in a way I would have never thought of, a way I've never heard anybody play.
But still the ABC search function is extremely valuable.
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by Richard D Cook
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
that should read "half a dozen different ways"
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by Richard D Cook
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Changing the instrument (french horn is nice) and the tempo sometimes helps with this.
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by dlunney
Ornamentation in MIDI?
I rather like it when people submit a tune the way they play the tune. If this includes broken rhythm, phrase marks, grace notes, rolls, chords . . . all the better. If you play without ornamentation, chords . . . etc. This is perfectly fine as well. I want to know how you play the tune.
In my books I can choose to play a tune in a way which works in my session. Though I enjoy reading that some players & sessions have different versions.
Tune Section ~
Original poster may edit abcs (not sheet music or MIDI)
Other members may add their own version in the comments.
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by Random_notes
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Richard D. Cook wrote: "I've been doing quite a few ABC tune fragment searches lately and I've run up against the problem that an ABC search only returns results which match exactly."
Richard, the simple solution to this is to use The Reverend's ABC Tune Search at http://abctunesearch.com/. It finds tunes on thesession.org and other sites based on similarity -- no exact matches required.
I don't know if the Rev has programmed it to ignore ornamentation, but I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.
# Posted on September 20th 2009 by boxist
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
"the twiddly bits are not necessarily integral parts of the tune"
most certainly they are. they ARE the tune.
# Posted on September 21st 2009 by mtodd
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Depends if the tune has been submitted and taken from a particular recording, or whether the tune is just a personal interpretation.
No problems with writing out ornaments in full if the tune is the former - within reason, many cuts etc. are inferred by the nture of the tune so it is overkill to notate them all.
Personally, I get fed up with tilde all over a tune, and delete them as soon as I can.
# Posted on September 21st 2009 by geoffwright
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
"most certainly they are. they ARE the tune" ....
But can only be true if the tune is unrecognisable as such without them. I've always understood that, although ornaments are generally used in Irish tunes, their type, placement and frequency are largely optional. It follows that an ornamented ABC is a snapshot of a particular playing on one occasion (e.g. on a CD) and is not necessarily going to be exactly repeated by that player. Such an ABC isn't very useful for precise ABC searches, although Reverend's search algorithm may be able to cope, but I'm sure we'd all like to hear from him on that.
# Posted on September 22nd 2009 by lazyhound
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
My search engine does attempt to "normalize" a tune by taking out ornamentation, etc. And then it does a fuzzy matching algorithm against a normalized database. So no, it doesn't have to be an exact match, and in general, it doesn't care about ornamentation.
However, it really depends on how much of that stuff is in there, because each bit of notated ornamentation is another potential place for the match to get further apart. And some people choose to notate things VERY differently, for example, people often try to notate the dotted rhythm into the ABC of a hornpipe, and even though that gets normalized out, it doesn't always make for a good match if you're searching a notation that doesn't have that...
The fantastic tunepal.org site also does some wonderful fuzzy matching, I might point out. But you don't even need to be able to write ABC to do that, you can just play the tune in (with or without ornamentation), and have it find it for you...
I would also disagree that the articulation of the tune is the same as the tune. The tune has a basic structure of its own. The twiddly bits are how you express that basic structure, and the fact that you can move that stuff around within the tune would mean that they are separate things. So I would say that the twiddly bits are a significant part of what makes a sequence of notes sound like Irish music, but I wouldn't say that they "are the tune"...
# Posted on September 22nd 2009 by Reverend
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Reverend, many thanks for that explanation.
# Posted on September 23rd 2009 by lazyhound
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/9908 is a good example of what Rumpole and others like to see in tune submissions. The "extreme version" - more or less "as played" in the workshop - that Kenny placed in the comments would, I imagine, be quite difficult to search.
# Posted on September 24th 2009 by lazyhound
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
This is my proposal for notating ornamentation in ABC.
Notate Rolls as either the quarter note or dotted quarter note that they are associated with, but not with the actual notes but with a roll symbol above the staff
Except for triples with all ascending or descending notes, Notate all triplets as trebles(leaving the player the option to play up or down, or to stay on the same note, triplets on descending quarter notes (such as in a hornpipe) which might as well be notated as descending quarter notes
Some triplets are integral to the tune, for instance I have always heard Dinky's reel played with steady droning trebles throughout by players at the session I attend. Or see the tune example below. I would suppose that each instance of trebles could be replaced by triplets optionally moving up or down and back to the previous note (as a flutist would do) or one could opt to hold on a quarter note.
Regardless, I would opt to notate all optional triplets, but with a uniform treble, and not with all possible manifestations, which can be assumed by players of different instruments according to taste.
I prefer to write in any "grace" note that seems integral to the style and color of the performance, for example see the third measure in this transcription
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/9909 . This could or may be considered a roll, but since rolls are not present in the tune at any other time it seemed more appropriate to write two grace notes which sounded clearly in the recording as
a delayed cut by the leading instrument (accordion) which recurred every time this phrase was played in the third measure of the A part.
Hornpipes should be written straight
Strasthpeys and barndances should be written with dotted and cut notes.
# Posted on September 25th 2009 by Earl Cameron
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
Example of trebles
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/9876
# Posted on September 25th 2009 by Earl Cameron
Re: Ornamentation in ABC
For ethnomusicologists etc it is an important part in analysing tunes and styles ( but they will normally use te dots) but for normal people I reckon the bare bones with symbols for a roll etc is enough guidance Then it's a matter of listening and developing your own style which is often influenced by the instrument you choose
# Posted on September 26th 2009 by Michael Sam Wild