Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
59 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

Plmcky
Hi
I can't help thinking that this has probably been suggested before, but in case it hasn't I've set out my thoughts here. In the past I've used Sibelius and I like the way that it applies sharps and flats from the key signature automatically. This really doesn't seem to conform to the way Lilypond does things, but my suggested change, I think, should do much the same. I habitually use English as the Lilypond \language, so please bear with me.

If I'm writing music in F, then I suggest that I be able to use bF  as a pitch instead of bf. The F would indicate that all subsequent bs would be flattened until one is encountered with a different accidental or until the end of the current music expression. It should have the same scope as \stemUp or similar.

As I see it, the changes in the parser would be small: we would need to introduce an explicit 'natural' indication and to recognize capitalized  accidentals. (In the case of accidentals with more than one letter, then I leave it to the implementors to decide whether all need to be capitalized or just one.) 

You will notice that although the key signature will be the most probable reason for using this idea, I'm simply suggesting an  extension to the way of expressing which pitches I want in a way which is independent of key signature and in keeping with the way Lilypond does this (at least the way I use it 🙂 ) It also means that all current scores continue to work without modifications.

Paul McKay
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Wright
On Wed 13 May 2020 at 14:59:10 (+0100), Paul McKay wrote:

> If I'm writing music in F, then I suggest that I be able to use *bF*  as a
> pitch instead of *bf*. The *F* would indicate that all subsequent *b*s
> would be flattened until one is encountered with a different accidental or
> until the end of the current music expression. It should have the same
> scope as \stemUp or similar.

The problem with that is that to find out what any particular "b"
represents, you have to search backwards, note-by-note, looking for
any such modification that might have been made to a "b" earlier.

Any copy-and-paste manipulations become potential nightmares.

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

Valentin Villenave-3
In reply to this post by Plmcky
On 5/13/20, Paul McKay <[hidden email]> wrote:
> If I'm writing music in F, then I suggest that I be able to use *bF*  as a
> pitch instead of *bf*. The *F* would indicate that all subsequent *b*s
> would be flattened until one is encountered with a different accidental or
> until the end of the current music expression.

Interesting.  It’s never been The LilyPond Way® too assume what the
user means (much like you wouldn’t expect a simple notepad to fix your
spelling for you, although I’m sure Microsoft has thought of it at
some point).

Something similar to what you’re suggesting could be implemented
without modifying the parser, for example with a fairly simple music
function or a Scheme engraver:

%%%%

persistentAccidentals =
#(define-music-function (music) (ly:music?)
   (let ((alt-alist '())
         (m (ly:music-deep-copy music)))
     (music-map
      (lambda (note)
        (let ((pitch (ly:music-property note 'pitch))
              (force? (ly:music-property note 'force-accidental)))
          (if (ly:pitch? pitch)
              (let* ((alt (ly:pitch-alteration pitch))
                     (n (ly:pitch-notename pitch))
                     (o (ly:pitch-octave pitch))
                     (mem-alt (assoc-get n alt-alist)))
                (if (eq? force? #t)
                    (set! alt-alist
                          (assoc-remove! alt-alist n))

                    (if (= alt 0)
                        (if mem-alt
                            (ly:music-set-property!
                             note 'pitch
                             (ly:make-pitch o n mem-alt)))
                        (set! alt-alist
                              (assoc-set! alt-alist n alt))))))
          note))
      m)
     m))

\persistentAccidentals \relative c' {
  c des e fis g f e f! e d' g, d
}

%%%%

#(define Persistent_accidentals_translator
   (lambda (context)
     (let ((alt-alist '()))
       (make-engraver
        (listeners
         ((note-event engraver event)
          (let ((note (ly:prob-property event 'music-cause)))
            (if (ly:music? note)
                (let ((pitch (ly:music-property note 'pitch))
                      (force? (ly:music-property note 'force-accidental)))
                  (if (ly:pitch? pitch)
                      (let* ((alt (ly:pitch-alteration pitch))
                             (n (ly:pitch-notename pitch))
                             (o (ly:pitch-octave pitch))
                             (mem-alt (assoc-get n alt-alist)))
                        (if (eq? force? #t)
                            (set! alt-alist
                                  (assoc-remove! alt-alist n))
                            (if (= alt 0)
                                (if mem-alt
                                    (ly:music-set-property!
                                     note 'pitch
                                     (ly:make-pitch o n mem-alt)))
                                (set! alt-alist
                                      (assoc-set! alt-alist n alt))))))
                  note)))))))))

\score {
  \new Staff \relative c' { c des e fis g f e f! e d' g, d }
  \layout {
    \context {
      \Voice
      \consists #Persistent_accidentals_translator
    }
  }
}

%%%%

V.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Kastrup
In reply to this post by Plmcky
Paul McKay <[hidden email]> writes:

> Hi
> I can't help thinking that this has probably been suggested before, but in
> case it hasn't I've set out my thoughts here. In the past I've used
> Sibelius and I like the way that it applies sharps and flats from the key
> signature automatically. This really doesn't seem to conform to the way
> Lilypond does things, but my suggested change, I think, should do much the
> same. I habitually use English as the Lilypond \language, so please bear
> with me.
>
> If I'm writing music in F, then I suggest that I be able to use *bF*  as a
> pitch instead of *bf*. The *F* would indicate that all subsequent *b*s
> would be flattened until one is encountered with a different accidental or
> until the end of the current music expression.

<< \new Staff \new Voice { b { b \repeat unfold bF b } b } { b } >>

What is the current music expression?  Where does it end?

> It should have the same scope as \stemUp or similar.

\stemUp does not have a scope.  It is an override.  Its effects are
bound to the current _context_ which may extend into music expressions
defined arbitrarily far behind or before the current music expression.

The effects of a \key statement extend to the current _Staff_ context
even if given only in a single Voice.  It decides during iteration which
of the pitches in the music is in need of an accidental and which not,
according to accidental rules.

> As I see it, the changes in the parser would be small: we would need
> to introduce an explicit 'natural' indication and to recognize
> capitalized accidentals. (In the case of accidentals with more than
> one letter, then I leave it to the implementors to decide whether all
> need to be capitalized or just one.)

Before one even states "the changes in the parser would be small", one
has to figure out whether it is in the interest of the user to implement
this kind of thing in the _parser_: typesetting transposition is
implemented as a music function and thus basically operates during
parsing parser, midi transposition happens during iteration, repeat
chords and pitching of unpitched rhythms happens during scorification,
relative mode works via a music function and consequently during
parsing, pitches without duration get the default duration
parser-internally and so on: this is half a dozen can of worms that is
comparatively tricky to distribute across LilyPond in a manner where it
tends not to interfere with user expectations all too much.


What's with

music = { b a c bS }

{ b bF \music b b }

for example?  Which b should be natural? Which b should be sharp ?
Which flat?

> You will notice that although the key signature will be the most
> probable reason for using this idea, I'm simply suggesting an
> extension to the way of expressing which pitches I want in a way which
> is independent of key signature and in keeping with the way Lilypond
> does this (at least the way I use it 🙂 ) It also means that all
> current scores continue to work without modifications.

Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
make this kind of proposal.

I will not rule out that at some point of time LilyPond's notename
implementation will be flexible enough that one could implement one
basic version of that idea on top of it.  It would not make it less of a
bad idea, however.

--
David Kastrup

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

antlists
On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
> somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
> key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
> make this kind of proposal.

Are these the same ones who call b an h?

Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT American) I'd
never call b-flat a b because how would I tell whether it's flat or not :-)

Cheers,
Wol

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Nalesnik
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM antlists <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> > Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
> > somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
> > key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
> > make this kind of proposal.
>
> Are these the same ones who call b an h?
>
> Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT American) I'd
> never call b-flat a b because how would I tell whether it's flat or not :-)
>

! hear it a lot in the US.  (And it's often correlated with losing
sight of the key signature...)

Interestingly, a separation between "note name" and "alteration" is
part of LilyPond internals:

Function: ly:make-pitch octave note alter
octave is specified by an integer, zero for the octave containing
middle C. note is a number indexing the global default scale, with 0
corresponding to pitch C and 6 usually corresponding to pitch B.
Optional alter is a rational number of 200-cent whole tones for
alteration

David N.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Wright
On Wed 13 May 2020 at 16:35:48 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:

> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM antlists <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
> > > somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
> > > key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
> > > make this kind of proposal.
> >
> > Are these the same ones who call b an h?
> >
> > Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT American) I'd
> > never call b-flat a b because how would I tell whether it's flat or not :-)
> >
>
> ! hear it a lot in the US.  (And it's often correlated with losing
> sight of the key signature...)

Assuming ! stands for "I" and not negation, I can't say that I've met
English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

Hans Åberg-2

> On 14 May 2020, at 03:38, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I can't say that I've met
> English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
> players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?

In general, there is a divide in musical notation in Europe, one is Germany, and to the north and south and east, and the other, the countries to the west, France, England, etc.

One difference is the note names, H and B in the Germanic tradition [1], and J.S. Bach used it [2].

Another is how to name meters, duple and triple.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_(musical_note)
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BACH_motif




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Nalesnik
In reply to this post by David Wright
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:39 PM David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Wed 13 May 2020 at 16:35:48 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:
> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM antlists <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > > Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
> > > > somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
> > > > key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
> > > > make this kind of proposal.
> > >
> > > Are these the same ones who call b an h?
> > >
> > > Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT American) I'd
> > > never call b-flat a b because how would I tell whether it's flat or not :-)
> > >
> >
> > ! hear it a lot in the US.  (And it's often correlated with losing
> > sight of the key signature...)
>
> Assuming ! stands for "I" and not negation, I can't say that I've met
> English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
> players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
>
> Cheers,
> David.

Hi David Wright,

Once again the name "David" rears its head!  You are mixing my
response with David Kastrup's

This all reminds me of my undergraduate days in the late 80s/early
90s.  I remember feeling a little affronted by a flyer for a party
that started "Hey Dave!" since of course I turned to look...  There
were so many "Davids" on campus.  (Apparently it was the most common
US name in my birth year.)

Best,
David Nalesnik

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[OT] Camp David (was "Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent")

Kieren MacMillan-4
Hi David(s),

> Once again the name "David" rears its head!  You are mixing my
> response with David Kastrup's
>
> This all reminds me of my undergraduate days in the late 80s/early
> 90s.  I remember feeling a little affronted by a flyer for a party
> that started "Hey Dave!" since of course I turned to look...  There
> were so many "Davids" on campus.  (Apparently it was the most common
> US name in my birth year.)

I attended the Interlochen Arts Camp. One summer, in the late 1970s (before my time there), the office manager in the High School Boys Division decided to play a joke on a cabin counselor named David: they filled his cabin entirely with campers named David! If I remember correctly, there were 16 Davids (17, if you count the counselor). They called it "Camp David". There’s still a board mounted in that cabin signed by all the Davids.

Cheers,
Kieren.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] Camp David (was "Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent")

Karlin High
On 5/14/2020 8:12 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> If I remember correctly, there were 16 Davids (17, if you count the counselor).

Only 6 more, and they could have had an enactment of the Dr. Seuss "Too
Many Daves" poem.

<https://www.best-poems.net/poem/too-many-daves-by-dr.-seuss.html>
--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] Camp David (was "Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent")

ubuntourist
In reply to this post by Kieren MacMillan-4
And this, of course, reminds me of...

(Soft knocks at the door)
CHONG: Who is it?
CHEECH: It's me, Dave. Open up, man, I got the stuff.
(More knocks)
CHONG: Who is it?
CHEECH: It's me, Dave, man. Open up, I got the stuff.
CHONG: Who?
CHEECH: It's, Dave, man. Open up, I think the cops saw me come in here.
(More knocks)
CHONG: Who is it?
CHEECH: It's, Dave, man. Will you open up, I got the stuff with me.
CHONG: Who?
CHEECH: Dave, man. Open up.
CHONG: Dave?
CHEECH: Yeah, Dave. C'mon, man, open up, I think the cops saw me.
CHONG: Dave's not here.
CHEECH: No, man, I'm Dave, man.
(Sharp knocks at the door)
CHEECH: Hey, c'mon, man.
CHONG: Who is it?
CHEECH: It's Dave, man. Will you open up? I got the stuff with me.
CHONG: Who?
CHEECH: Dave, man. Open up.
CHONG: Dave?
CHEECH: Yeah, Dave.
CHONG: Dave's not here.
CHEECH: What the hell? No, man, I am Dave, man. Will you...
(More knocks)
CHEECH: C'mon! Open up the door, will you? I got the stuff with me, I
think the cops saw me.
CHONG: Who is it?
CHEECH: Oh, what the hell is it... c'mon. Open up the door! It's Dave!
CHONG: Who?
CHEECH: Dave! D-A-V-E! Will you open up the goddam door!
CHONG: Dave?
CHEECH: Yeah, Dave!
CHONG: Dave?
CHEECH: Right, man. Dave. Now will you open up the door?
CHONG: Dave's not here

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Wright
In reply to this post by David Nalesnik
On Thu 14 May 2020 at 10:38:59 (+0200), Hans Åberg wrote:

> > On 14 May 2020, at 03:38, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I can't say that I've met
> > English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> > Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
> > players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
>
> In general, there is a divide in musical notation in Europe, one is Germany, and to the north and south and east, and the other, the countries to the west, France, England, etc.
>
> One difference is the note names, H and B in the Germanic tradition [1], and J.S. Bach used it [2].

Thank you, very useful.

On Thu 14 May 2020 at 07:45:23 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:

> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:39 PM David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Wed 13 May 2020 at 16:35:48 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM antlists <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > > > Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
> > > > > somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
> > > > > key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
> > > > > make this kind of proposal.
> > > >
> > > > Are these the same ones who call b an h?
> > > >
> > > > Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT American) I'd
> > > > never call b-flat a b because how would I tell whether it's flat or not :-)
> > >
> > > ! hear it a lot in the US.  (And it's often correlated with losing
> > > sight of the key signature...)
> >
> > Assuming ! stands for "I" and not negation, I can't say that I've met
> > English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> > Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
> > players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
>
> Hi David Wright,
>
> Once again the name "David" rears its head!  You are mixing my
> response with David Kastrup's

I think I would have as much difficulty doing that as my email client would.

AIUI David Kastrup lives in Germany, in b/h land, but without any
context, I don't know whether this meant that he thought
English-speaking LilyPond users were steeped in the Germanic
tradition, or just being polite¹, confused², confusing³, or
just plain incompetent (perhaps implied by "strange habit").

Wol gave these "b" people the benefit of the doubt as being "b/h"
people (but why was the American tongue mentioned?).

When you, David Nalesnik, wrote "! hear it a lot in the US",
I wondered where, specifically. I think the main difference
over here is note and rest lengths. As you might gather from
the combination of my email domain and my timezone (and yours),
I take an interest in such differences, even if only as
post-rehearsal pub-chat⁴.

So I was perplexed by your post about my mixing up your response with
David K's. Perhaps you might explain the referent of "it", if it's
not ‘calling a b-flat "b"’.

¹ When in Rome …
² Accidentally switching between bf/b and b/h inappropriately.
³ Calling notes by staff position without regard to key signature.
⁴ Assuming we sing again and pubs are still in business.

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

Mark Stephen Mrotek
Gentlepersons,

Without the "h" would we have Liszt's Fantasy and Fugue on BACH or Schumann's Six Fugues on  BACH?

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Wright
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 11:46 AM
To: Hans Åberg <[hidden email]>; David Nalesnik <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

On Thu 14 May 2020 at 10:38:59 (+0200), Hans Åberg wrote:

> > On 14 May 2020, at 03:38, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I can't say that I've met
> > English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> > Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and
> > orchestral players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
>
> In general, there is a divide in musical notation in Europe, one is Germany, and to the north and south and east, and the other, the countries to the west, France, England, etc.
>
> One difference is the note names, H and B in the Germanic tradition [1], and J.S. Bach used it [2].

Thank you, very useful.

On Thu 14 May 2020 at 07:45:23 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:

> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:39 PM David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Wed 13 May 2020 at 16:35:48 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM antlists <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > > > Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all
> > > > > share the somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if
> > > > > there is a flat in the key signature, it is sort of a safe bet
> > > > > that you are not the first to make this kind of proposal.
> > > >
> > > > Are these the same ones who call b an h?
> > > >
> > > > Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT
> > > > American) I'd never call b-flat a b because how would I tell
> > > > whether it's flat or not :-)
> > >
> > > ! hear it a lot in the US.  (And it's often correlated with losing
> > > sight of the key signature...)
> >
> > Assuming ! stands for "I" and not negation, I can't say that I've
> > met English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> > Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and
> > orchestral players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
>
> Hi David Wright,
>
> Once again the name "David" rears its head!  You are mixing my
> response with David Kastrup's

I think I would have as much difficulty doing that as my email client would.

AIUI David Kastrup lives in Germany, in b/h land, but without any context, I don't know whether this meant that he thought English-speaking LilyPond users were steeped in the Germanic tradition, or just being polite¹, confused², confusing³, or just plain incompetent (perhaps implied by "strange habit").

Wol gave these "b" people the benefit of the doubt as being "b/h"
people (but why was the American tongue mentioned?).

When you, David Nalesnik, wrote "! hear it a lot in the US", I wondered where, specifically. I think the main difference over here is note and rest lengths. As you might gather from the combination of my email domain and my timezone (and yours), I take an interest in such differences, even if only as post-rehearsal pub-chat⁴.

So I was perplexed by your post about my mixing up your response with David K's. Perhaps you might explain the referent of "it", if it's not ‘calling a b-flat "b"’.

¹ When in Rome …
² Accidentally switching between bf/b and b/h inappropriately.
³ Calling notes by staff position without regard to key signature.
⁴ Assuming we sing again and pubs are still in business.

Cheers,
David.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Nalesnik
In reply to this post by David Wright
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:47 PM David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Thu 14 May 2020 at 10:38:59 (+0200), Hans Åberg wrote:
> > > On 14 May 2020, at 03:38, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I can't say that I've met
> > > English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> > > Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
> > > players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
> >
> > In general, there is a divide in musical notation in Europe, one is Germany, and to the north and south and east, and the other, the countries to the west, France, England, etc.
> >
> > One difference is the note names, H and B in the Germanic tradition [1], and J.S. Bach used it [2].
>
> Thank you, very useful.
>
> On Thu 14 May 2020 at 07:45:23 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:
> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:39 PM David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On Wed 13 May 2020 at 16:35:48 (-0500), David Nalesnik wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM antlists <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > On 13/05/2020 16:38, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > > > > Given the number of English-speaking LilyPond users who all share the
> > > > > > somewhat strange habit of calling a b-flat "b" if there is a flat in the
> > > > > > key signature, it is sort of a safe bet that you are not the first to
> > > > > > make this kind of proposal.
> > > > >
> > > > > Are these the same ones who call b an h?
> > > > >
> > > > > Certainly for someone who's mother tongue is English (NOT American) I'd
> > > > > never call b-flat a b because how would I tell whether it's flat or not :-)
> > > >
> > > > ! hear it a lot in the US.  (And it's often correlated with losing
> > > > sight of the key signature...)
> > >
> > > Assuming ! stands for "I" and not negation, I can't say that I've met
> > > English speakers in either the UK or US who use b and h for Bflat and B.
> > > Under what circumstances do you hear it: amateur choirs and orchestral
> > > players, professionals, or in academic duscussions of German music?
> >
> > Hi David Wright,
> >
> > Once again the name "David" rears its head!  You are mixing my
> > response with David Kastrup's
>
> I think I would have as much difficulty doing that as my email client would.
>
> AIUI David Kastrup lives in Germany, in b/h land, but without any
> context, I don't know whether this meant that he thought
> English-speaking LilyPond users were steeped in the Germanic
> tradition, or just being polite¹, confused², confusing³, or
> just plain incompetent (perhaps implied by "strange habit").

I know that David Kastrup has commented more fully on this topic on
this list before.
>
> Wol gave these "b" people the benefit of the doubt as being "b/h"
> people (but why was the American tongue mentioned?).

I think the choice of b and b-fIat has something to do with the
confusing nature of this thread.  I read Wol's comment about calling
b-flat "b" as a reflection on speakers of English, nothing to "b" and
"h" in German.   David Kastrup's observation about the "somewhat
strange habit of calling a b-flat 'b' if there is a flat in the
key signature" likewise--nothing to do with German practice.
>
> When you, David Nalesnik, wrote "! hear it a lot in the US",
> I wondered where, specifically. I think the main difference
> over here is note and rest lengths. As you might gather from
> the combination of my email domain and my timezone (and yours),
> I take an interest in such differences, even if only as
> post-rehearsal pub-chat⁴.
>

I can really only speak of the Midwest, and of undergraduate music
students.  It is my observation that the habit of calling F-sharps "F"
goes along with mistakes in sight-reading and in chord spelling.

> So I was perplexed by your post about my mixing up your response with
> David K's. Perhaps you might explain the referent of "it", if it's
> not ‘calling a b-flat "b"’.

Sorry!  I misinterpreted you and only added to the confusion!

> Cheers,
> David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

David Kastrup
David Nalesnik <[hidden email]> writes:

> I can really only speak of the Midwest, and of undergraduate music
> students.  It is my observation that the habit of calling F-sharps "F"
> goes along with mistakes in sight-reading and in chord spelling.

Let's talk about sharps in order not to think b/h is involved.  I think
it is noteworthy that you can ask "is the F sharp?" in English, but
there is no way you could ask "Ist das F ein Fis?" in German in the same
way.  You can ask that question, but it is like "Is David actually
Paul?" rather than "Is David David Nalesnik?".  Basically the question
is not asking for what kind of F is there but whether mistakenly F had
been written instead of F sharp.

--
David Kastrup

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

antlists
In reply to this post by David Wright
On 14/05/2020 19:46, David Wright wrote:
> Wol gave these "b" people the benefit of the doubt as being "b/h"
> people (but why was the American tongue mentioned?).

Because Americans like to think they speak English (but they are
mistaken!). I play crotchets, not quarter-notes. I don't know what other
weird language habits the Americans have ... :-)

Cheers,
Wol

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

Karlin High
On 5/14/2020 5:32 PM, antlists wrote:
> Because Americans like to think they speak English (but they are
> mistaken!). I play crotchets, not quarter-notes. I don't know what other
> weird language habits the Americans have ... :-)

You really don't know? I'm almost certain you'd have some good guesses,
though. ;-)
--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

antlists
On 14/05/2020 23:38, Karlin High wrote:
> On 5/14/2020 5:32 PM, antlists wrote:
>> Because Americans like to think they speak English (but they are
>> mistaken!). I play crotchets, not quarter-notes. I don't know what
>> other weird language habits the Americans have ... :-)
>
> You really don't know? I'm almost certain you'd have some good guesses,
> though. ;-)

I'm sure they'd love to table our eraser ... :-)

Cheers,
Wol

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent

Hans Åberg-2
In reply to this post by Karlin High

> On 15 May 2020, at 00:38, Karlin High <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 5/14/2020 5:32 PM, antlists wrote:
>> Because Americans like to think they speak English (but they are mistaken!). I play crotchets, not quarter-notes. I don't know what other weird language habits the Americans have ... :-)
>
> You really don't know? I'm almost certain you'd have some good guesses, though. ;-)

The Americans live in an apartment, whereas the British live in A♭!



123