TAB: Baroque style under development
Following a number of requests (like this one , perhaps the latest), I am implementing a new style for tablatures, exampled on French late XVII c. scores. Eventually, I settled for Gaultier prints as main sources, as they are very clear and easily available.
This is a screen shot of the current status, with the first measures of Pavanne ou Tombeau de Mr. Raquette from D. Gaultier, Pièces de luth sur trois different modes..., Paris 1670:
There are a number of details (alignments, widths, ...) to fix yet, but to me it seems a good starting point.
About fret letters, I will probably make the 'b' (and the 'h'?) shorter than the sources (as they tend to clash with letters on the string above); about value symbols, I am probably going to narrow the 16th and the 32th flags, which in the original are very wide.
Finally, so far I have not found any example of letters above 'k'; now, 'm', 'n' and 'o' are easy (and probably legitimate) to re-construct from parts of other letters, but for 'l' and 'p', real examples would be welcome.
Any comment?
Comments
There is another source of great significance: the "Vaudry de Saizenay Ms." : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuscrit_Vaudry_de_Saizenay which is available online (almost 400 pages!)
Here: http://memoirevive.besancon.fr/ark:/48565/a011284026247S0XA9H/1/1
An example of the rendering:
![e f g.jpg]( "e f g.jpg")
- In my opinion, the main change must concern the "c" which must look like a "r" (already mentioned)
![ms late renaissance.jpg]( "ms late renaissance.jpg")
And the "g" also, which is unsuccessful (for me!) in the current implementation of historical tabs, type "late renaissance". Like this:
On current methods of baroque lute (eg Miguel Serdoura Yisrael, which is the reference now), we get this:
![méthode serdoura.jpg]( "méthode serdoura.jpg")
![serdoura suite.jpg]( "serdoura suite.jpg")
And in a broader score:
The reference is here with several sample pages: http://www.utorpheus.com/product_info.php?products_id=1987
- I watched a hundred pages into the Saizenay manuscript: I have not seen until now, "l" or "m" or "n". Then, for the "o", "p", etc., I just think that there are none (or very few, or exceptions perhaps?)
I have a baroque lute, which has 12 frets (for the octave), so from "a" to "n". So, it's unlikely, in my opinion to have "o", "p"...
But as I know that in baroque guitar, some Italian authors (eg Granata) have used 17 frets (very-very rarely ...), it is not impossible that some lutenists have used more than 12 or 13 frets ? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I have not yet seen.
In reply to There is another source of by cadiz1
Thanks for the info! Lots of things to absorb! Do you mind if I try to categorize the different aspects here?
A) Baroque style: thanks for the pointer to the Saizenay ms: it seems an interesting source, but... it is a manuscript! And manuscripts -- in particular, mss like this one, which seems written with a certain haste -- may contain any sort of idiosyncrasies or idiomatisms which should be approached with care; at first sight, taking into account the variations of the quick writing, it does not contain any letter form really different from the style I am working on. I'll look for examples of 'l' to 'n'.
Thanks also for confirming that higher letters are unlikely to be found; for the moment being, I'll drop the quest for 'o' and 'p'.
For the rest, can you spot something to improve in my example at the top? (Again, I know that alignments and widths are not perfect: I'm waiting for letter forms to be reasonably stable before tuning these details). I'm attaching a screen shot with all the glyphs defined so far:
NOT FOUND: 1
B) Late Renaissance style: I know this style is not a success; it was initially thought as an intermediate style between the Renaissance style proper and the Baroque, which however was not implemented until now. For the moment being, I would live it behind as it is; later on, it may be replaced by something more accurate and representing early XVII c. French/English styles which are not approximated by either of the other two styles now available (well, the Baroque style is not really available to the public yet, but it will soon).
C) 'Yisrael style': thanks for this pointer too: I am not familiar with lute didactics. However, am I correct in feeling that this style does not represent anything historic, but is a modern abstraction? (more or less like my "Late Renaissance"...).
There also details I do not understand in some letter forms:
- 'c' seems wrong: the second stroke should not 'turn up' at the end; this is the main difference between 'c' and 'r' and that one is definitely an 'r'; I do not remember having ever seen it.
- 'e' seems truncated: in all examples (past the very beginning of XVI c.) I have seen, the first stroke of 'e' was more or less elongated, in order to differentiate it form the 'c'; or, later, the form was entirely different, like in the Saizenay ms (matching the 'e' of my Baroque style).
- It mixes up-right Roman forms like 'e', 'f', 'l' and 'r' (I insist this an 'r' not a 'c'!), cursive forms like 'a', 'g', 'h', 'm' and bâtarde forms like the uncial 'd'.
Could you tell me more about the origin of this style and its relevance today? Would it make sense to add it as a separate style, labelled something like "Modern Lute"?
Thanks,
Maurizio
In reply to Thanks for the info! Lots of by Miwarre
First impression: mixed, if not disappointed by some glyphs. I will explain why a little lower.
1) the link indicated above involved indeed a manuscript, ie "Saizenay", but one of the most beautiful and the most representative of this period.
I own the facsimile, with, of course the same rendering. Besides, my first attached image was from this facsimile, of the famous Minkoff editions.
So what exactly are you looking for a source? No manuscript, okay, I understand, but no facsimile too?
Can I ask you what is the source of your first picture (of original message), "Pavanne ou tombeau, D. Gaultier " ?
I own one of Richard Civiol (see the web page: http://luthlibrairie.free.fr/?Baroque) that looks like this:
![Richard Civiol.jpg]( "Richard Civiol.jpg")
![exemple .jpg]( "exemple .jpg")
In this case, I think not mistaken in saying that the result was obtained with a proprietary software of tablatures: Django: http://django.musickshandmade.com/pages/old-site
Look at the tab "Show case-Pdf samples".
I prefer this style (on the same home page):
2) What I blame in your screen shot with all the glyphs defined so far ? Some glyphs are difficult to look, especially and mainly the "e", which is really painful to watch :(
And the "b" still looks too "d" but somehow reversed. This is limited to your example, but on some facsimiles, I I'm wrong and I confuse the two! I prefer a "right" b! (as on German tablature)
The "a", "c", "f", "g", "h" and "k" (too large size maybe for this one?) are better.
At this point of thinking, the question may be whether we should prioritize the rendering of the French tablature, or of the German tablature? See the difference on the same website Richard Civiol:
http://luthlibrairie.free.fr/?Baroque:Fran%26ccedil%3Baise
http://luthlibrairie.free.fr/?Baroque:Allemande
For me, the German tablature is more readable and enjoyable, in a word, more... sober (except the "d" for example!)
I continue my answer later (for points B and C)
In reply to First impression: mixed, if by cadiz1
1) Manuscripts are fine, but better if they are not alone, but rather an integration of print examples, as basing print letter forms on handwriting is very tricky.
Fac-similes are great, the best actually; if they are real fac-similes, not modern re-typesettings.
The first example quoted at the top of the thread comes from D. Gaultier, Pièces de luth sur trois differens modes nouveaux..., Gaultier, Paris 1670, p. 8. the whole reproduction is available here and that specific page here . This is also the source for the letter forms.
2) As you can see from the original, all letter forms are quite faithful to it, including their relative sizes ('k' included).
Not sure to understand your comment about 'b' and 'd': do you prefer a more upright 'b'? The original 'b' is already quite upright and I probably chose one of the more upright occurrences. Small adaptations are fine, but I would like to keep the stylistic consistency of the original (or originals, when a group of stylistically homogeneous sources exist).
About French vs. German: I have seen many French sources, but I am not as much familiar with German sources. So, for the moment being, I would prefer to stick to French styles, but this does not mean that a German style cannot be added.
In reply to 1) Manuscripts are fine, but by Miwarre
A parenthesis to begin: no sure to understand: "Fac-similes are great, the best actually; if they are real fac-similes, not modern re-typesettings." I have not a great expertise in this area, but what means "modern re-typesettings? "Your " Gaultier document (BNF) is a digital reproduction of the manuscrit, right? I do not see clearly the distinction that you establish.
Us close the parenthesis.
- Now, I understand your wish: "I would like to keep the stylistic consistency of the original (or originals, when a group of stylistically homogeneous sources exist).
But for now, your proposal is not to implement a Baroque style/or a Baroque French style, but the Gaultier style (you understood what I mean, I am sure) which is one (but only one) of the representatives of the French lute school.
As said, in the "Gaultier style", some letters are good (the criterion will always be for me both correspondence to a specific source, but also his character readability)
In this case, for me, the 'e' does not meet this criterion.
We have other sources in the French style. Look at this pdf-Minkoff fac-simile I think (an extract) of Charles Mouton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Mouton
![Mouton style.jpg]( "Mouton style.jpg")
The pdf: Mouton-luth-livre1- 30 pages.pdf
For example, this page (the "e" is better, right? )
- Other example, with Robert de Visée (and a quasi similar 'e', or close) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_de_Vis%C3%A9e
![de Visée 'l'.jpg]( "de Visée 'l'.jpg")
On this extract, you see a 'l' in the penultimate measure second staff.
- So, at this stage, I think it is important not to conform to a single source, but as you said, to stylistically homogeneous sources, and thus avoid the "quirks" of some authors.
A final example: Jacques Bittner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Bittner, with a "d" really painful to read: http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b9010048d/f8.image
EDIT: for the German sources, I will make a point later.
Finally, the method of Miguel Serdoura Yisrael: I think indeed that it is a modern abstraction, or a compromise between various sources. Rather than "modern style/modern lute," it might be called "didactic lute style". Its great interest is to be sober, to go to the essence of readability avoiding some writing peculiarities of each author. For the study the lute, it is not a thin aspect. It is for that I love it!
In reply to A parenthesis to begin: no by cadiz1
Fac-similes: my own example at the top of the thread is a modern typesetting; your examples from Yisrael are modern typesetting, as well as the Civiol and the Django reproductions; OTOH, the Saizenay image, my links to Gaultier and Demachy on Gallica, your examples from Mouton and de Visée and your link to Bittner also on Gallica are all (real) fac-similes. Is my point clearer? I thought important to precise this, as most of the examples in your first post were modern typesetting.
One or several French styles: yes, my work in progress is definitely exampled on Gaultier prints; other styles exist for sure in the same period and area. However:
- the 'Gaultier' style is followed quite closely by the Saizenay ms and by the Demachy print (for a different instrument!), so it had some diffusion and it is probably not unworthy to be included;
- the Mouton and de Visée examples you quote are, well, different styles. They are linked by the lack of the 'r'-shaped 'c' -- which was the original request at the base of this work -- and by the two-stroke 'e'. In the de Visée example, there is even the elongated 'e'; this mimics a situation found in early XVII c. moveable type prints, which used rather common-shaped 'c' and 'e', but the former often with an elongated second stroke and the latter often with an elongated first stroke to better distinguish one from another (see for instance the several books of Airs de différents autheurs [...] par G. Bataille and printed by Ballard around 1610).
My point is that mix and matching letter shapes from different styles, because someone likes this 'b' and someone else finds that 'd' more readable is an approach I do not agree with; one thing could be little tweaks (slightly shorten or lengthen a stroke, increase or reduce a 'too fancy' curve), a different thing would be creating a new (historically debatable) abstraction, pretending it is representative of some time or cultural area.
If other sources can be found clustering around a reasonably recognisable style, more styles can be added: another late XVII c. French, one or more German styles and so on. Each one needs a dozen or so glyphs, so it is not a big deal (one or two days of work).
"Didactic lute style": nice suggestion. If you suggest this might be something users expect to find and/or it may helps the learner, it may make sense to include it (or something similar, also for copyright reasons).
Thanks for your continued support, Maurizio.
Marginalia: the de Visée case is more and more interesting; I assume your example comes from the Livre de guittarre... , Pairs, Bonneuil 1682.
Now, this Bonneuil is the same who, three years later in 1685, engraved the Pièces de viole by Demachy quoted above, with 'r'-shaped 'c', "rotated" 'e' and more cursive 'h' and 'k' ('Gaultier' style).
In 1686, the same Bonneuil engraved de Visée's Livre de pièces pour la guittarre , Paris, Letteguine 1686, which also exhibits most of the 'Gaultier' style, with the exception of a plain 'e' a more sober 'k'. Perhaps, are we looking at a stylistic change point?
Finally, the Bittner example (apparently printed in Nürnberg) sports another type of 'c': neither the common one or the 'r'-shaped, but a 'hooked' shape; this in addition to the standard 'e', the extravagant 'd' (occasionally mirrored by the 'g') and 'k'. Funny, but probably a bit too idiomatic?
In reply to Fac-similes: my own example by Miwarre
- " the Mouton and de Visée examples you quote are, well, different styles. They are linked by the lack of the 'r'-shaped 'c' -- which was the original request at the base of this work "
Indeed, I have noticed that. Note also that this original request ('r' instead 'c') included the Renaissance style, right (perhaps even primarily)? Is it abandoned?
- "My point is that mix and matching letter shapes from different styles, because someone likes this 'b' and someone else finds that 'd' more readable is an approach I do not agree with"
Okay, I regret (I will never get used to the "special" shape of the 'e'), but I take note. Can I ask which specific source you used for the Renaissance style, and incidentally for the late Renaissance style?
- "If other sources can be found clustering around a reasonably recognisable style, more styles can be added: another late XVII c. French, one or more German styles and so on. Each one needs a dozen or so glyphs, so it is not a big deal (one or two days of work)."
- Ah, very good news :) I thought the opposite, ie that it would be a big deal!
- "Didactic lute style": nice suggestion. If you suggest this might be something users expect to find and/or it may helps the learner, it may make sense to include it (or something similar, also for copyright reasons) "
Again, if this is not a big deal, personally, I would like very much!
- "Marginalia: the de Visée case is more and more interesting; I assume your example comes from the Livre de guittarre..., Pairs, Bonneuil 1682."
Yes, it is that.
In reply to - " the Mouton and de Visée by cadiz1
"Note also that this original request ('r' instead 'c') included the Renaissance style, right (perhaps even primarily)? Is it abandoned?": well, modifying the Renaissance style to have the 'r'-shaped 'c' has never really been my plan; I have yet to find a printed source dating from before approx. middle of XVII c. or so (well before within the Baroque era) using that 'c' shape.
Generalizing a bit, it seems to me there is a rough correspondence between the switch from moveable type printing to engraved printing and the diffusion of the 'r'-shaped 'c'. Neither happened over night all over Europe, of course, and then there are overlaps and grey areas but, as far as I can tell, that 'c' shape is a Baroque feature, not a Renaissance feature.
" Can I ask which specific source you used for the Renaissance style, and incidentally for the late Renaissance style? ": for the Renaissance style, the sources have been mainly Le Roy/Ballard prints of mid XVI c. (Premiere livre de tabulature, Bakfark's Premier livre, Alberto da Ripa Quart livre, ...) to early XVII (Airs de différents auteurs, mis en tablature de luth...) and Windet (London) prints around 1600 (including some Dowland works).
The "Late Renaissance" style is an attempt at an abstraction (with some naivety: it dates from several years ago) and, as I should have known, it failed miserably. It is one of the reasons why I do not want to do something like this again. Possibly, it may make sense to overwrite it with some 'real' style, once more styles are added, to fill some hole which may result (I am not sure it can be simply removed or renamed, for backward compatibility reasons). But I would live this part for later.
In reply to First impression: mixed, if by cadiz1
A couple more reproductions I had a look at while designing the letter forms above:
*) Livre de tablature des pièces de luth de Mr Gaultier Sr de Nèüe, et de Mr Gaultier son cousin , Paris 1672
*) Demachy, Pièces de violle en musique et en tablature , Paris, Bonneuil 1685; which is particularly interesting in not being for lute but for viol, as it shows that this style was quite established as a 'standard' in late XVII France.
Good morning cadiz1 (as this is going to be a dialogue between us)! It is probably the time to think about some sort of a plan, so I can go on on some solid ground. This could a starting point:
1) "Renaissance": keep as it is (I am rather confident this to be a decent rendition of quite a corpus of XVI to early XVII English / French prints);
2) "Late Renaissance": overwrite with something more corresponding to styles actually used in source; it could be exampled on some XVII French source with 'r'-shaped 'c' and a normal 'e', something in between 1) and 3).
What about the second de Visée book quoted above? It is late and not so different from 3), but maybe it could go? We could be bold and rename it "de Visée" altogether (renaming existing styles require some coding trick, but I believe it is doable). Do you have other suggestion?
It could also be some early German style, if some suitable can be found.
3) "French Baroque", the one reproduced above: as it is or with minimal adjustments (slightly reduce 'b', 'h', 'k' height?, reduce the 'b' top hook?) for better layout fitting and increased legibility. Again, we can be bold and name it directly "Gaultier" or "Bonneuil" (the engraver).
4) A representative German style (later than 2), if 2) becomes a German style); for this I would welcome some suggestion for sources.
5) "Lute didactic" as discussed above.
Would this provide a decent coverage of the French tabulature history and usage? Do you have more suggestions or comments?
Important Note: By "German style" I hope you mean some French tabulature (6 lines with letters) used in Germany / Northern Europe, not the German tabulature, the one without any string line and letters/digits on separate rows, like this one:
NOT FOUND: 1
This kind of tabulature requires a completely different underlying architecture and I have no plan to implement it in any short-to-medium time frame.
In reply to Good morning cadiz1 (as this by Miwarre
Hello Miwarre and thanks so much for all this work.
It's an awesome improvement you are proposing now.
1) "Renaissance": "keep as it is (I am rather confident this to be a decent rendition of quite a corpus of XVI to early XVII English / French prints)"
Okay. Agreed.
2 "Late Renaissance":" overwrite with something more corresponding to styles actually used in source; it could be exampled on some XVII French source with 'r'-shaped 'c' and a normal 'e', something in between 1) and 3).What about the second de Visée book quoted above? It is late and not so different from 3), but maybe it could go? We could be bold and rename it "de Visée" altogether (renaming existing styles require some coding trick, but I believe it is doable). It could also be some early German style, if some suitable can be found.Do you have other suggestion?
"But maybe it could go? We could be bold and rename it "de Visée" "
Why not, I had not thought of. The idea is bold, but I like it!
Adopted for me!
3) "French Baroque": the one reproduced above: as it is or with minimal adjustments (slightly reduce 'b', 'h', 'k' height?, reduce the 'b' top hook?) for better layout fitting and increased legibility. Again, we can be bold and name it directly "Gaultier" or "Bonneuil" (the engraver).
Agree on the essentials.
No adjustement (even slight) for the "special" or unreadable 'e' of Gaultier!?
I prefer the name of the composer "Gaultier" (more consistent with "de Visée) to that of the engraver, unless known a priori, right?
4) A representative German style : (later than 2), if 2) becomes a German style); for this I would welcome some suggestion for sources.
Yes, let me a little time to search these sources. I hope soon.
5) "Lute didactic" : as discussed above. Would this provide a decent coverage of the French tabulature history and usage? Do you have more suggestions or comments?
I think it would be a decent coverage of the French tablature history and of the German tablature. The method of Miguel Serdoura Yisrael combines these two repertoires in a equally way.
It would be a "generic" baroque style (like the Renaissance one?), a little less specialized/personalized, in summary, with an access or easier reading for the user "average" and, in addition, that would highlight, in contrast, the other "custom" styles. I like that.
6) Important Note: By "German style" I hope you mean some French tabulature (6 lines with letters) used in Germany / Northern Europe, not the German tabulature, the one without any string line and letters/digits on separate rows, like this one. This kind of tabulature requires a completely different underlying architecture and I have no plan to implement it in any short-to-medium time frame.
Yes, in my mind, I thought of the German Baroque style, not the older style (pre-Renaissance) that you describe, which is the matter of a few specialists. Myself, I've tried, it's a real headache!
However, one day or the other, it could be envisaged to implement the tablatures of the English Renaissance. There is a quality prodigious literature for lute (with the famous John Dowland as a figurehead). I have no idea if practicable and feasible.
I started talking about this on the French forum (with another title not directly related): https://musescore.org/fr/node/75606
When you will have a moment, take a look: there is some images, links to web pages, and files .mscz.
This will give you an idea. And then let me a first comment.
I wanted to open a thread on the English forum in this intention, but I have not had time to do so.
In reply to Hello Miwarre and thanks so by cadiz1
For the German style, first this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_composers_for_lute
The most known lutenist of this period is Silvius Leopold Weiss: http://www.slweiss.com/an_index.html
I asked to Albert Reyerman of Tree Edition his expert opinion: http://www.tree-edition.com/
He sends me two attached files:
- 1) Seiten aus Weiss Dresden.pdf
- 2) Lauffensteiner Augsburg pdf.pdf
With the message: "I attach two files to this email, one by Weiss from the Dresden ms, and one by
Lauffensteiner from the Augsburg ms in handwritten sources.
None of these sources was written by the composer itself: all the Augsburg lute
music was written by the same anonymous copyist, cause all this music comes from the Bayreuth court.
From the other composers you mentioned [ie Lauffensteiner, Reusner, Falckenhagen, Hagen, Kellner ], we have no handwritten tablatures, only printed sources."
Notice in these documents that the 'b' is "straight". And it's probably the style (especially on the first pdf) that made me say, in a previous message, that I prefered this German style, compared to the French style, because more sober (less "flowery" if you want!)
I own some other manuscrits with a close writing:
- B-Bc-Ms-Littera-S-N°-27-885-Weiss.pdf
- less close, but with the same 'b' (page 8): 10 Pages de CZ-Bm13-268-Casimir-Comes-a-Werdenberg 1.pdf
On other some manuscrits, the 'b' is different:
- 12 pages PL-Kj-40620-MBiechteler.pdf
- pages 12 à 20 A.Hinterleithner-Lauthen-Concert-1699.pdf
I do not draw any conclusion from now. Only say that I have a slight preference for the style of the first document (but the second 'b' shape is interesting also!)
In reply to Hello Miwarre and thanks so by cadiz1
In summary:
1), 2), 5), 6) ok, deal!
3) French Baroque: ok for the name. About possible changes to its 'e', I see the current shape as belonging to a continuum which can be exemplified as:
NOT FOUND: 1
(left: Demachy, Pièces de violes 1685; centre: Saizenay ms; right: Gaultier, Pièces de luth 1670), with a variability either in the form slant and in the length and direction of the final down-stroke. Which characteristics would you choose as more representative?
4) German style: ok, take your time, I have plenty to do in the meantime ;)
7) English style 'beamed flag grid': I have answered your other post, with several comments. Feel free to open new thread(s) (either in the English or the French forum, but the English forum is likely to attract more viewers) regarding each specific point.
Soon...
Maurizio
In reply to In summary: 1), 2), 5), 6) by Miwarre
3) "French Baroque: ok for the name. About possible changes to its 'e', I see the current shape as belonging to a continuum which can be exemplified as:"
I do not really know. I really have trouble with this glyph. Not the first. Between two and three, perhaps the third to finally stick by consistency to Gautier style?
![Gaultier.jpg]( "Gaultier.jpg")
Maybe an improvement would be to have a slight higher size of this glyph? And also to "finish" to draw the line (I don't know how explain) below the staff line. So, not like this:
![gaultier bis.jpg]( "gaultier bis.jpg")
![the e.jpg]( "the e.jpg")
The same image in the context of your initial message
4) "German style"
I have already replied and argued in the previous message.
7) " English style 'beamed flag grid'":
Yes, I have seen and read on the French forum. Thanks for the detailed reply, as always. I could and wanted answer in French there is a few minutes (I found another trick, with an idea, imperfect of course, just an idea to display rythm of all voices with stems above the staff, or rather of the voice which has the shorter note values in the measures)
Howewer, I agree that is better to open later a thread on this forum about the English historical tabs, or to summarize, the "Dowland style."
In reply to 3) "French Baroque: ok for by cadiz1
- For French style: another important source to note: the Milleran manuscript (which includes various compositions of French authors)
Available in line: http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b530592370/f9.image
An example:
![milleran.jpg]( "milleran.jpg")
As we can see, the 'e' have an usual or "common" shape.
- For German style: I continue to watch. For now, comparing various manuscripts, it appears to me that there in a difference between the sources of Austria (that I designated as "other sources" in a previous message): Another example: (pretty style!): Pages de Pages de Pages 8 à 12 de A-Wn-Suppl-Mus-1078.pdf
![b aut.jpg]( "b aut.jpg")
And so, the 'b' has an other shape: with a "loop":
/ Whereas in the sources of Germany, the 'b' is straight, as explained and illustred in the same previous message.
![b al.jpg]( "b al.jpg")
I do not know if we can generalize, in any case, that's what I see now.
In reply to - For French style: another by cadiz1
Hi cadiz1, thanks for the additions and the analysis. I am filing all these references hoping to arrive at some 'consolidated' corpus.
However, as I said above, mss are fine and interesting, but tricky to work with, as the possibility of personal idioms is always lurking in the dark. Also they usually exhibit variations in the shapes: look for instance at your last 'Austrian' example: the two 'b' clearly have a common prototype, but they are quite different in proportions, so, which is the (most?) 'correct' one?
Then, it is always useful to also have printed sources of (roughly) the same time and area as references; as printed sources are intended to be sold to as many customers as possible, one can expect them to use letter forms as 'common' as possible (at least common in their context). I looked at Gallica, Munich and Dresden sites for German printed sources of -- or contemporary to -- Weiss and I could not find any yet. Do you happen to know some?
Lastly, I browsed again my collection of reproduction and I noticed a corpus I surprisingly overlooked so far: the Bathen / Phalèse prints of mid XVI; an example and another example . Aren't they different enough from all other styles considered so far, to be potentially worth including?
Note: I am currently working at the 'didactic lute' style: screen shots will be ready soon(-ish?).
In reply to Hi cadiz1, thanks for the by Miwarre
"I looked at Gallica, Munich and Dresden sites for German printed sources of -- or contemporary to -- Weiss and I could not find any yet. Do you happen to know some?"
Don't know for now. I am trying to activate my personal network!
Not sure of the result though.
PS: I take a look for other Besançon manuscrits
In reply to "I looked at Gallica, Munich by cadiz1
"Lastly, I browsed again my collection of reproduction and I noticed a corpus I surprisingly overlooked so far: the Bathen / Phalèse prints of mid XVI; an example and another example. Aren't they different enough from all other styles considered so far, to be potentially worth including?"
Wow, the "Dowland style"! Congratulations to have found this.
![grille.jpg]( "grille.jpg")
http://memoirevive.besancon.fr/ark:/48565/a011307145821XCHAfJ/1/1
Example:
Of course, it would very useful to include this style. Rather twice than once!
But I believe you said (in another post, on French forum these last days) that, I quote "you tried for a long time to achieve "grid" of English editions times in a manner that does not disrupt the architecture of the software too, so far without success."
So, how to do?
In reply to "Lastly, I browsed again my by cadiz1
Well, all the discussion so far was only for fret letter forms! Value symbols are entirely another story: different fonts, different code, different configuration parameters (the value font can be selected separately from the letter font). So, I was referring to the letter forms of this corpus of prints, which to my eye qualify as a style different enough from the other we are discussing.
(The beamed "grid" is for a future enhancement; but do not loose hope...)
In reply to Well, all the discussion so by Miwarre
Oops, sorry, I was really taken by the image of the beamed "grid", and forgot a little (well, a lot...) the letter forms! :)
Hope, one day, yes.
I take a look later now about these letter forms. I haven't yet the time to watch closer the document: in which period are we, more or less? Thanks.
In reply to Oops, sorry, I was really by cadiz1
Ooopps, I didn't notice that neither Besançon or the Österrechische Nationalbibliotek have links to the work catalogue entry (spoiled by Gallica, which is probably the best on-line catalogue...). Anyway:
- the first example is Jacques Bathen / Reynier Velpen eds., Des chansons reduictz en tablature de lut... livre premier, Lewen, Phalése 1545 (title page at scan 3)
- the second example is P. Phalése ed., Carminum quæ chely vel testudine canuntur... liber primus..., Lewen, Phalèse 1547 (title page at scan 6). The ÖNB also has a liber secundus 1546, a livre troixiesme by Pietro Teghi 1547 and a liber quartus by Francesco da Milano and others 1546; all with the same style and typographic set-up.
In reply to Ooopps, I didn't notice that by Miwarre
Pierre Phalèse: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Phal%C3%A8se_%28maison_d'%C3%A9dit…
![Phalèse.jpg]( "Phalèse.jpg")
![renaissance style.jpg]( "renaissance style.jpg")
This style :
would be an alternative to the current Renaissance style?
There are substantial differences between the two styles indeed.
In reply to Pierre Phalèse: by cadiz1
Baroque French style:
Note this Master Thesis: http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/138498/Robin%20Rolf…
Some pages may be useful. In particular pages 47-> 66, with illustrated examples for embellisments of Gallot, de Visée, Mouton, Richée, Gaultier.
And the Appendix II: pages 83 -> 88
In reply to Baroque French style: Note by cadiz1
German style: (all printed sources)
1) S.L. Weiss: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvius_Leopold_Weiss
According to my sources, it seems that nothing was published in his lifetime. However, there is a source by Telemann in his "MusikMeister" (1728): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Philipp_Telemann, with a piece of Weiss as an example of printed tablature.
- This one: telemann 1728 Musikmeister p45.pdf
![MusikMeister.jpg]( "MusikMeister.jpg")
- Sample:
2) Other:David Kellner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kellner
- PDF file: kellner.pdf
![sample kellner.jpg]( "sample kellner.jpg")
- Sample:
EDIT: More of Kellner: Kellner p8.pdf
3) Other: Esaias Reusner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esaias_Reusner
![reusner 1676.jpg]( "reusner 1676.jpg")
![Preludium.jpg]( "Preludium.jpg")
- PDF file (extract): Pages 5_11de Reusner.pdf
- Sample:
- 4) Other: E.G. Baron: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Gottlieb_Baron
![theorie gotlieb.jpg]( "theorie gotlieb.jpg")
No really tabs source available, but one on IMSLP of this Baron book:
The link (very heavy file...): http://conquest.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/8/85/IMSLP275877-PMLP447…
Even if it's a theoric book, after watching, there is some pages with illustrated examples of letter forms.
- Eg: Baron pages 158.pdf
- And: Baron pages 186 Unifoni.pdf
- Finally: Baron suite.pdf
- 5) Jacques Bittner : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Bittner
was been mentioned in a previous message with this document: http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b9010048d
That's all for today I think :)
In reply to "Lastly, I browsed again my by cadiz1
Renaissance-style French tab fonts in MuseScore so far all display a c like -- a c. Some of the Baroque fonts in MuseScore provide the r-like symbol, but what is lacking is the r-like c in a renaissance-style font, as found in arguably the most famous of all lute sources, the MSS created by the famous scribe, Matthew Holmes and others around the same time period (1590-1610) (Pickering Lute Book, Euing lute book, Herbert of Cherbury Lute Book, and other MS sources, such as the Braye Lute Book), as well as many printed works of the time, such as Varietie of Lute Lessons, all the Dowland Books of Ayres, Robert Dowland's Musicall Banquet, the John Danyel and Francis Pilkington lute song collections, William Barley Lute book, Thomas Robinson Schoole of Musicke -- all of these use renaissance-style fret marks with the r-type c. I favor a Renaissance font style as I think it is easier to read than the more florid Baroque styles, and the r is clearer than the c. So I would like to see this style represented in MuseScore. We could call it "late Renaissance", as suggested above, or "English" style (as it mainly appears in English sources). You can check to see what these sources look like on my website . Thank you.
First screen-shot of the "lute didactic" style:
NOT FOUND: 1
The example contains:
- the series of all letter (second string)
- a test for ascenders/descenders clash (fourth and fifth strings)
- an excerpt re-engraved from the Yisrael's example you quoted above
I have tried to keep the global style, the proportions and the sizes. I have modified slightly the 'c' (to remove the up-turning final hook which, with all the samples above, seems to me a German-specific feature); the palaeographer who is in me could not resist to:
- make the ascenders of 'b', 'h', 'k' ad 'l' more stylistically uniform
- give the 'i' a cursive ductus similar to the other letters
- make uniform the first two 'legs' of 'm' (the original had one leg 'upright' and one leg cursive).
Putting aside some details I would like to improve, the main concern at the moment is that, by keeping the original sizes and proportions, ascenders and descenders clashes notably with letters above and below.
Comments are welcome.
In reply to First screen-shot of the by Miwarre
Well done Miwarre!
Just a detail (that's me, maybe!): I winced a little at the first vision of the 'd'. I do not know exactly why. A history of proportions perhaps. The base is a little wide (?) and the "head" not long enough (?) Anyway, close to that of the mentioned method.
All the remaining (or all) is very good :)
For "ascenders and descenders clashes notably with letters above and below", can we really avoid them ? 'l' or 'k' under 'g' etc. are difficult cases anyway?
![ba .jpg]( "ba .jpg")
![bb.jpg]( "bb.jpg")
![ar.jpg]( "ar.jpg")
I see them also on the method of Miguel Yisrael. Not better that yours (it seems for me), and quite acceptable.
I think I can give a first summary of going on work. Things are not finalised yet, some glyphs are still missing ('l', 'm' and 'n' in several styles), alignments, width, etc. are to tune, and so on. But perhaps a global picture may be useful.
So, these are the 5 French styles being implemented (with their proposed names, in approximate chronological order). Each screen-shot shows all the glyphs on 2nd line of top system and a few collision tests in lower lines; then a short 'real' music in the second system.
Phalèse from Bathen/Phalèse mid-XVI prints (replaces "Late Renaissance"):
NOT FOUND: 1
Ballard from LeRoy-Ballard mid-XVI to early-XVII and from Windet early-XVII prints (was named "Renaissance", with no change):
NOT FOUND: 2
Bonneuil-de Visée from 1686 de Visée Livre de pièces de guittarre (slightly reduced in size):
NOT FOUND: 3
Bonneuil-Gaultier from late XVII Gaultier prints:
NOT FOUND: 4
Lute didactic from Yisrael methods (with small fine tuning from previous screen-shot):
NOT FOUND: 5
I am going on with the missing pieces, but comments and suggestions are of course welcome (a style from French-system tablatures of German origin will follow).
Maurizio
In reply to I think I can give a first by Miwarre
Well, fascinating... Words fail me! :)
Again thanks so much for this enhancement.
These five French styles are very welcome. I love the Bonneuil-de Visée style, successfull, and the more "expressive" of all (according to my taste!)
Good idea in this case to associate engraver and composer for designate the style.
After a first checking, I don't see for now examples for 'm' and 'n". No certain to find one?
I have seen the small tuning for the 'd' in Lute didactic style. Better, more balanced, nothing to add for me.
For other styles, I continue to watch, but all seems good at the moment.
For the designation "Lute didactic", it was only a first proposal. Maybe we can find better. An example: "Generic Baroque style" (or something like that, or only "Baroque style"?) in contrast with "personalized" styles (Gaultier, de Visée...) Don't know very well presently.
And so we hope now for the German (Austria?) origin style :)
In reply to Well, fascinating... Words by cadiz1
Found an other later French style (1705), Michel Brunet editor: here: http://imslp.org/wiki/Nouvelles_d%C3%A9couvertes_Sur_la_Guitarre_%28Cam…
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Campion (more important composer after de Visée)
With some differences in the letter forms: the 'c' has a shape of a 'c' ! EDIT: in parenthesis, as the first book of de Visée-Bonneuil: http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b9010055j/f8.image, and with a 'h' without loop.
And for Campion-Brunet always, the 'b' has a closed loop (ditto for the 'h')
- Sample:
![campion.jpg]( "campion.jpg")
- Always nothing for 'm' and 'n' for Bonneuil engraver.
The feeling to look for a needle in a haystack! And possibly no needle...:)
In reply to Found an other later French by cadiz1
Aha! Found another German printed source. The composer, Adam Falckenhagen (1697-1754) is a contemporary of Silvius Leopold Weiss (1687-1750) and J.S. Bach (1685-1750) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Falckenhagen
These 6 Lute Sonatas (Johann Ulrich Haffner editor) are available here: http://imslp.org/wiki/6_Lute_Sonatas,_Op.1_%28Falckenhagen,_Adam%29
- A sample:
![falckenhagen.jpg]( "falckenhagen.jpg")
I have pushed a PR with the updates so far, leaving the German style for later; it can be found at https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/2231
From the screen shots posted above, I have added 'm' and 'n' glyphs (except for "Phalèse", as they seem not to occur at that time), cleaned several glyphs and tuned glyph widths and alignments. I have indeed renamed "Late Renaiss" to "Phalèse", but I have left the name "Renaiss" instead of "Ballard", as this style is shared with the Italian (numeric) style for which the reference to Ballard prints make no sense (also, this style combine other sources in addition to LeRoy-Ballard ones).
I have also added a new value symbol style taken from de Visée prints.
In reply to I have pushed a PR with the by Miwarre
Hi Miwarre,
Some comments following the first tests (thanks to Peter for the suitable nightly)
First: all the new styles are fine, and new duration symbols, eg "headless", particularly relevant to the Baroque style. All of these styles are perfectly integrated in the environment of the MuseScore Tabs, as if they were still there from the beginning! So, congratulations to have managed that. :)
- In my first tests, everything seems to work well. Not unexpected side effects so far.
![exemple miwarre.jpg]( "exemple miwarre.jpg")
Except probably a little bug in the Lute Didactic style, about slashes (bass strings). They are very thin, and collide with the fret marks ('a').
So, instead (as an image above in this thread)
I get this:
![result.jpg]( "result.jpg")
![slashes.jpg]( "slashes.jpg")
In detail:
- Second observation: I notice that the new duration symbols (French baroque 'headless' and French baroque) are slightly offset to the left.
![left .jpg]( "left .jpg")
![centered.jpg]( "centered.jpg")
![b.jpg]( "b.jpg")
![ab.jpg]( "ab.jpg")
![collide.jpg]( "collide.jpg")
This is not the case with "earlier" styles, Tab Italian and Tab French.
And probably (?) also too closer of the top line.
Instead:
I get:
So, it leads to sensitive collisions, like this (I have seen others)
I attach the .mscz files (a Sarabande of Kühnel, which served of illustration at the beginning of this thread)
a) the first, input all almost in voice1, to display the proper rhythm: sarabande a.mscz
b) the second, in two voices, for hear the beautiful bass :) sarabande b.mscz
I observe that the style is not saved (I wanted to show the lute didactic style), but the file was created before the implementation of these new styles, so I guess this is normal.
In reply to Hi Miwarre, Some comments by cadiz1
1) Slashes in bass string: indeed!!! This uses the wrong slashes!!! When I re-scaled the glyphs, I failed to notice that now each style needs its own properly scaled and positioned slashes. I'll fix it ASAP.
2) Horizontal position of 'headless' note values: you are right, it is not good looking; the thin ones (like the vertical stroke) should indubitably be shifted to the right; for the wide ones, I need to find a balance between a better optical centring and the possible clash with a symbol on the next chord (for instance if a value symbol with 2 or 3 'bumps' is directly followed by another symbol). In the PR I tried to make those wide symbols narrower without defacing them; I'll play with them more to find the best balance (or at least a better balance than now!).
3) Vertical space between staff and note values: yes, I am aware of this; it shows up now, as the new fret mark styles are taller than the old ones. I have ideas for fixing it but I prefer to wait until the pending PR's get a stable outcome. Partly to work on a stable code base and partly because this point interacts with the wider issue of scaling in TAB's, which is not correctly managed now and also with the pending PR about 'English' beaming (which also improves the scaling). So, please stand this point for now, it will improve!
4) Style(s) not saved: they should be and they are in my local work code! Are you sure you finally saved them with the 'custom' nightly and not with a master nightly lacking this feature?
In reply to 1) Slashes in bass string: by Miwarre
4) Styles save
Yes, I have not one, but two "custom" nightlies. So I had to mix my brushes at some point in saving a file.
I checked, everything is fine.
In reply to Hi Miwarre, Some comments by cadiz1
Fixed slashes and improved centring of mensural values:
NOT FOUND: 1
The crochet symbol (the vertical straight line) seems to me acceptable; the symbols for the quaver and smaller values are centred as a whole rather than centring the stem as such; it is perhaps not very good yet, but
1) I am trying to avoid them to clash into the following symbol and
2) further improvements would affect the code itself (rather than the font only) and I prefer to wait for a more stabilized code base.
In reply to Fixed slashes and improved by Miwarre
1) The centering is better indeed. Thanks Miwarre.
2) But the slashes I fear, even there are better, should not show this result (Lute didactic style): they are not at the same distance from the bottom line, and too closer.
![slashes.jpg]( "slashes.jpg")
![trois slashes.jpg]( "trois slashes.jpg")
![de visée bonneuil.jpg]( "de visée bonneuil.jpg")
![avant.jpg]( "avant.jpg")
Hence the "three slashes" are in contact with the line. Collision risk more as probable, and arrives in fact:
- Other new styles (for the distance to the line) are adequate,
or like after the first implementation of the bass strings.
3) Another point, that has nothing to do I think with this present implementation (probably very much former, to check)
![dot.jpg]( "dot.jpg")
![carré.jpg]( "carré.jpg")
- In the Tab French, for dotted values of duration symbols, the dot is a dot!
- In the Tab Italian, this is not a dot. It's not the result expected, right?
For instance, in this extract of the First Fantaisie (Book I, Le Roy-Ballard), I see dots.
![fantaisie première.jpg]( "fantaisie première.jpg")
In reply to 1) The centering is better by cadiz1
About the slashes in the "Lute didactic" style, I agree, but I am afraid this is a consequence of the huge size of these glyphs. There is no way one, two or three slashes can be at the same height, unless they are progressively 'squeezed' together too much; also the bottom slash cannot be placed at a lower position, as it would clash (even more than it already does) with a following 'b' letter. What I can do is to shorten them a little (1/3 of their length?).
(Incidentally, it does occur also in historical sources that diapason slashes cross the bottom string line, doesn't it? As it can be seen also in some the images above.)
So, my first suggestion in the meantime is to try reducing the size of the glyph of this style ("Advanced staff properties" | "Fret marks" | "Font" "Size") to 9 or 8 pt and see if the situation improves, while keeping a good readability of the letters. If this is the case, I can then proportionally reduce the glyphs of this style in the font to provide a better default once for all.
About the dot: the result is entirely expected!!! If you look at the second dot in your example, you see that it is not a circle, but a slanted line. This is even more evident in Italian prints, like this one by Gardano (S. Gintzler, Intabolatura de lauto; Libro primo, Venice 1547):
NOT FOUND: 1
One could argue that the dot in the French style is possibly not expected; if I have the occasion to modify the font again, I will probably make the dot less rounded and more squared (or rhomboidal).
In reply to About the slashes in the by Miwarre
1) Okay, understood for the slashes size. One font size around 10-11 remains comfortable, and after testing, the question is less present after printing, as on the screen after zooming. And yes, I know that in some historical sources slashes cross the bottom string line.
![chelle.jpg]( "chelle.jpg")
![scale 10.jpg]( "scale 10.jpg")
Just to nitpick: it is possible that the numbers 4, 5, 6 are a little small, as an imbalance with fret marks (/ a), like this (with same 10 font size)
in comparison with other styles (eg Renaissance style)
2) Regarding the dot in the Italian Tab. I still think it can be improved. For now, I see a sign resembling a dot, but "distant", not clearly identifiable (and yet, zoom is here at 145%)
![zoom 145.jpg]( "zoom 145.jpg")
![confusion.jpg]( "confusion.jpg")
![bottom right.jpg]( "bottom right.jpg")
![Bianchini.jpg]( "Bianchini.jpg")
![capirola 16.jpg]( "capirola 16.jpg")
![Da Milano.jpg]( "Da Milano.jpg")
Moreover, I wonder if there are no matter for confusion. Look at this example (Gintzler), first, on the top left, then on bottom right. For this last (bottom right), one wonders if there is a dot, or if the second "tail" beam is truncated.
EDIT: the previous image was too large. Here the image focused on bottom right:
Furthermore, I see this in Bianchini (more "bold"?)
Capirola (manuscrit, yes, but the dot, round and red, is good for readibility!!)
Da Milano:
And after showing an example from Le Roy-Ballard last night, here a second example of another French composer (Guillaume Morlaye / Michel Fezandat editor, Premier livre de guiterne ). My preference, according to the criterion of legibility: a dot, round!
![morlaye.jpg]( "morlaye.jpg")
- Obviously, the comparison with the French Tab dot, as an image in previous message, is not to reason, but it is obvious (for better readability always, an essential point in my opinion)
In reply to 1) Okay, understood for the by cadiz1
Note: this thread is (was?) about Baroque fret mark style. If there are observations on note value glyphs, is it perhaps the case to start a new thread? Anyway:
Numbers: yes, they are a bit small. OR, the letters are too large; anything keeps pointing in the direction that letters of this style are too large. I am almost convinced to reduce them.
Dot: that Gardano (or his type provider) obtained the 1-tailed dotted character by cutting a 'tail' of a 2-tailed character is definitely a possibility, which emphasizes even more that those dots are not round but rectangular.
Reducing the separation between the character and the dot is possible (I believe it was smaller once upon a time, and ended up un-kerned during the troubles with Qt kern support); what is not possible is to raise the dot at different heights according to the number of tails of the main value: vertical kerning is defined in (some) font formats, but seems unsupported (or unreliably supported) by Qt.
Bold: I am sure one can find any kind of variations in sources (also depending on individual sheet inking, which was not always consistent in hand-operated presses); the current weight of those glyphs seems to me not inconsistent with the weight of the numbers. But I'll review it to see if it can be improved.
Red: this is not possible now and, I'm afraid, it will not be possible for a long time to come (note value glyphs are not editable, to avoid a number of potential complications).
Request: if, after having perused all these sources, you could come to a set of specific improvements you feel necessary or convenient, it would be a very useful and welcome contribution!!
Thanks,
Maurizio
In reply to Note: this thread is (was?) by Miwarre
This thread is about "Baroque style under development". Freight marks and secondarily glyphs are part of the same set, the same style. One is linked to the other in my mind. End of aside.
Thanks to see for the dot.
Finally, the red dot was in no way a request! This was to emphasize that the "natural" way, or handwritten, to make a dot is that it is round :)
(Starting from a new indent level...)
I am working to improve the dots in note values; this is where I am at the moment.:
1) "Italian" value style (dots shorter and 'nested' at different heights into the main value):
NOT FOUND: 1
"French" value style (dot slightly squared!):
NOT FOUND: 2
"French Baroque (headless)" value style (dots 'nested' and at different heights):
NOT FOUND: 3
"French Baroque" value style (dot 'nested'):
NOT FOUND: 4
Notes:
- For 1) sources decidedly nest the dot into the main value, as shown in examples above; for the sake of the modern reader, I have nested it very slightly less and probably, it would be wise to nest it even less, i.e. letting it to stick out (ca. half its length?) at the right of the main value.
- The other styles seem to me acceptable. Any comment?
- Dots at different heights use a font feature called 'ligatures', it works perfectly on my machine (Linux); on different platforms, nobody can say until we try! (cross-platform support of font features under Qt cannot be taken for granted).
In reply to (Starting from a new indent by Miwarre
Indeed, better, no doubt, peering through my microscope... or not! ;-)
- This (image below) is more clearer (especially for short note values - very common- in Tab Italian)
![test dots it.jpg]( "test dots it.jpg")
![dots.jpg]( "dots.jpg")
![test_tab_dots_headless.png]( "test_tab_dots_headless.png")
rather than actual result:
- Same for Baroque headless:
Better:
rather than actual result:
![dots headless.jpg]( "dots headless.jpg")
Indeed, it will be preferable to try before.
Thanks Miwarre for this work. You have really an overflowing activity since several days for Tabs and for other sections. Impressed!
In reply to Indeed, better, no doubt, by cadiz1
Hi Miwarre, I also want to say that I'm highly impressed by the work and the look of the lute tablature already. It looks very nice. I attach an example that I did, a choral by Adam Falckenhagen for solo baroque lute, where I added a melody line. I attach the pdf and the mscz-file.
Some short remarks:
It would be good, if the time sign could be bigger.
Also the bass numbers 4,5,6 would be nicer, if they would be bigger - they are too small.
For the repeatition sign it would be nice to have more points than the usual two; in most lute sources there is a point in every gap between the lines.
In the original there are some cadences where the breath signs are in the melody (I attach the original also) - I left them out, as I don't know how to do it, but it even seems possible to add some smaller grace notes in tablature already (which also exists in the Falckenhagen for instance).
BTW - Is it possible already to use some of the lute ornaments?
BTW - it is already very easy to use symbols as lute ornaments (general palette - symbols with bravura font). Probably a separate lute ornaments palette would be good (user configurable and with possibitlity to set the symbol left or right of a note).
Another thing are triplets and sextoles. Currently in partiture they are not shown at all, in the parts there is a triplet sign below the stave. But it should be above it, beside the tab flags, like in the attached example. It is a little tricky, as it should work also if signs are in the first course.NOT FOUND: 1. I think it could be nice to have the 3 in the bow like --3-- .
Also it would be nice to have for baroque lute tablature real rests, that could be shown beside the flags above the stave.
In reply to BTW - it is already very easy by MLutz
It also would probably enough to have a 3 above the middle note of a triplet. But in any case it should be above the stave beside the flags.
In reply to BTW - it is already very easy by MLutz
@MLutz read here how you can create a custom palette: https://musescore.org/en/handbook/custom-palettes
In reply to @MLutz read here how you can by Thomas
Thank you very much - I found out, after I wrote my message, that it should already possible to create custom palettes. But I didn't manage to create it then.
But now it really was very easy, step by step ...
BTW - it would be good, if such palettes (and also the general palette at all, especially with symbols) could also give the possibility to place signs e.g. to the left or right of a sign in a certain distance. Also it could be good to adjust the nearest sign/note then, so that the signs are not crossing.
I hope I didn't overlook something.
If I would be happy to hear how that is possible.
Is it possible to save and use key combinations for using symbols in these palettes?
In reply to Thank you very much - I found by MLutz
In some cases at least, if your have a symbol in your score that has a manual adjustment applied, and you add that particular symbol to your palette directly from the score, the manual adjustment is remembered. But it isn't always used; only certain element types I think.
No way to assign keystrokes to palette items currently, although more keyboard access to palettes is being considered for a future release.
In reply to In some cases at least, if by Marc Sabatella
Thank you for your answer!
I didn't manage to add a symbol directly from the score to a palette - how is that possible. But when I tried this, I noticed that it is possible to copy and paste the (some?) symbols and they will then be set to the same position to that tab sign. That is a very good feature that nearly equals the thing I have asked, as you only once have to set it to the correct position and then you simply can paste it to the other places.
The feature with keystrokes would also be very good, but it seems only senseful to me, if it sets the symbols to predefined positions.
In reply to Thank you for your answer! I by MLutz
Adding symbols to the palette from your score is accomlished the same as adding them from the master palette: ctrl+shift+drag. It has to be an element capable of being added - a symbol, or text, as opposed to something like a note or a clef.
In reply to Adding symbols to the palette by Marc Sabatella
That doesn't work for me ...
I don't come before the palette, mouse and symbol always seem to hide behind it.
BTW I only have to use dragging without any keystroke for copying a symbol to the palette.
In reply to That doesn't work for me by MLutz
Can you psot the specific score you are having problems with, and tell us which symbol you are attempting to Ctrl+Shift+drag to the palette? Does the symbol indicating you are making a copy appear during the drag? Any other feedback to indcate that the operation is proceeding normally, or not? How about when you reach the palette - does the cursor indicate the oepration is going to fail (eg, circle with line through it)?
In reply to Can you psot the specific by Marc Sabatella
If Miwarre was here, he invited you not to get away from the original topic, which is done cheerfully since the last comments. It is always better to stay in the coherence of a topic (that said, this happened to me sometimes, too ... but if we can avoid doing so, it is always best for the future readers)
The using of the palettes is an other thing, commented extensively elsewhere.
Thanks for understanding.
In reply to If Miwarre was here, he by cadiz1
Hi cadiz1, sorry for getting away from the topic, although for me it still belongs to baroque lute style.
Anyway - I have to answer once again. ;-).
In reply to Can you psot the specific by Marc Sabatella
Seems as if I moved the mouse before pressing Ctrl+Shift - that doesn't work. If I press the keys and drag it, it works fine. I use symbols from the bravura font.