Re: simplifying chromatic scale notation

[Sharon Rosner]

> Hmmm… Seems like this primarily works for music without accidentals.  Does
it really work when you 
> have a lot of accidentals?

Of course this practice is made for tonal music, but I've known musicians
who could sight read and transpose entire scores. It's just a question of
having the chops.

> Say a note that was a natural in the first key is a sharp in the new key… 
> in the music that note appears 
> altered by a sharp sign…  you have to read that sharp sign as if it were a
> double sharp sign.  
>
> Or, say a note was a sharp in the first key, but is a natural in the
> second key…  and that note appears in 
> the music altered by a natural sign…  you have to read that natural sign
> as a flat sign.  

> Or am I missing something?

Let me give you two examples:

A diatonic chord:

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n186483/chord_d.png> 

transposed up a semitone:

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n186483/chord_eflat.png> 

And a bit of chromatic music:

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n186483/oferring_c.png> 

transposed down a *triton*:

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n186483/offering_fs.png> 

So you see, it's quite a straight-forward a technique. Yes, accidental
translation can be tricky, but with practice it becomes second nature. And
again, 300 years ago it was considered a basic skill for any musician worth
his salt, it's just modern musicians that are handicapped.

Sharon



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/simplifying-chromatic-scale-notation-tp186415p186483.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.