Nashville Numbers for melody as well as chords
Hi,
I've just discovered the revamped Musescore, and I'm very excited to discover that the program is this close to making a music notation dream I've had for some time come true. I see on the "Notehead Schemes" page (https://musescore.org/en/handbook/3/notehead-schemes#) that there is both support for noteheads with pitch names inside; and for Shape Note noteheads.
What I've always dreamed of would be the ability to produce scores with Nashville Number chords and Nashville Number melody notes-- probably reducing my number of staff lines from 5 to 1 (which I also see is quite easily doable). So in a slight variation on pitch named noteheads, instead of "Mary Had A Little Lamb" having noteheads with "E D C D E E E" inside, it would instead be noteheads with insides that look like "3 2 1 2 3 3 3". Or "The Simpsons Theme", instead of appearing as "C F# G" inside noteheads of the appropriate rhythmic value, would appear as "1 #4 5" inside noteheads of the appropriate rhythmic value.
This would be quite similar to a 7 shape Shape Note system, of course, but without any extra reading hurdle for those who haven't learned and practiced it. The idea would be, one could take any piece of music in any key, and "universalize" the key so it is instantly playable in any key without reference to the original.
This sort of notation would be extremely handy for:
--Gigging self-accompanied singers who want to change keys on the fly (without hurting one's brain too much)
--Studying transcribed jazz solos and transposing them in practice into different keys (without hurting one's brain too much)
--And many other various and sundry music ed purposes
Has something like this been proposed on MuseScore before? Has it perhaps even already been implemented? Or is this sort of a new-seeming idea, and it's worth dropping something over into Feature Requests?
Comments
I can't say I've heard such a proposal before. Is this something you see in published music? Right now we have solfege note names because these are standardized notehead according the SMuFL standard, and I don't think there are numbered ones. But if it's a common thing, you can require they add these, then we could support them. And as far as I can tell, the rest is already possible. Actually, just adding text to the noteheads is also already possible. Combine that with the existing "fix to line" is you really want everything on one line, but actually, I wouldn't recommend it - seeing the notes go up or down in an important visual cue as to the pitc.
In reply to I can't say I've heard such… by Marc Sabatella
Thank you for the response, Marc!
Combine that with the existing "fix to line"...
Ah, sorry, I was unclear. I envisioned a single staff line for readability but without locking the notes to feeling like they're in any particular key; but I agree, I wouldn't want to fix them to a line, their relative distance is vitally important, not only for readability, but for context. E.g. the first two notes of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" would be "1 1" but unless there is a spatial relationship, a sightreader would have no idea if the melody was supposed to go up, come down, or stay the same.
I can't say I've heard such a proposal before. Is this something you see in published music?
No, I have never seen it in published music; as I said, it's just a dream I've had for some time, and been unable to figure out how to accomplish with my old version of Sibelius. But it's something I've sorely wanted at times, gigging and transposing on the spot, practicing jazz solos in new keys, and teaching students. Although personally the mental practice required by not having such a thing has probably done me good in the long run! That said, if such a thing were actually to be made presentable and published, I am certain that many musicians would find it useful quickly.
Certainly using Shape Notes gets one most of the way there. You brought up solfege note names, but they aren't satisfactory to me for this: at least in the US, scale step numbers get way more educational support all through the process of learning music theory-- numbers, not movable "Do", are the basis behind both roman numeral chord notation and modern pop/jazz chord notation. After all, chord extensions aren't written "C7(♭Re ♯Fa)" or whatever; and in general, people transposing melodies on the spot, if they think theoretically at all, will also be thinking scale step numbers in their head rather than solfege.
Not to mention, in my own opinion, the solfege notes aren't very easy to read-- whereas I find the letter noteheads to be pretty reasonable in comparison, and I imagine numbered noteheads which could be designed along the same lines would also be quite readable.
Since as far as I know, they don't yet appear in published music, I understand nobody is probably going to design these numbered noteheads unless I do it by myself. If I were to do the legwork on making the new notehead designs, do you think it would be a reasonably doable technical hurdle to map them automatically to scale steps in the manner of Shape Notes? For instance, using the Shape Notes settings and then assigning different custom noteheads to appear in place of the Shape Notes.
In reply to Thank you for the response,… by tunesmythprod
As I said, if you feel having numbers in noteheads would be useful, feel free to suggest it to the SMuFL folks.
But FWIW, I've taught at several different universities here in the US, and I can assure you movable "do" solfege is pretty universally used in the education world. Personally, I'm not big on it either, though..
Meanwhile, the notenames plugin could probably be adapted to add numbers instead. So as I said, I think you can pretty do everything you want already.
In reply to As I said, if you feel… by Marc Sabatella
Thank you, I guess it wouldn't hurt to suggest to the SMuFl folks, certainly. And I'll have a play with the notenames plugin and see what I can do.
But FWIW, I've taught at several different universities here in the US, and I can assure you movable "do" solfege is pretty universally used in the education world. Personally, I'm not big on it either, though..
I wasn't saying nobody uses it-- I was just implying nobody is likely to use it on the bandstand to transpose in a hurry! But of course I could be wrong about that...
In reply to Thank you, I guess it wouldn… by tunesmythprod
Right, few instrumental musicians rely on solfege much in practice, but we talk numbers all the time indeed. Which is one reason I have reservations with the way solfege gets so much emphasis in the educational establishment. I know at least some vocalists do continue to use it, especially in choral settings as opposed to jazz/pop settings. But all instrumentalists go through the same ear training courses as vocalists, and it's usually mostly solfege and little scale degree, much to my chagrin.
BTW, I'm teaching such a course at a university right now, and it's my first time have to really deal with la-based minor. Just when I finally start accepting the tonic triad as do-mi-sol instead of 1-3-5, it really messes with my brain to have to think of it as la-do-mi just because I'm in a minor key. How can scale degree 5 aka the dominant not be sol? But I digress...
Of course as you say, much else about music theory is taught using numbers. We use terms like mediant and supertonic and so forth for chords, but they definitely take a backseat to Roman numerals in most formal study of theory - except, I guess, Schenkerian analysis.
In reply to Right, few instrumental… by Marc Sabatella
You were right to correct me-- I wrote something ("at least in the US, scale step numbers get way more educational support all through the process of learning music theory")-- which it seems is just not true on any level you take it. I clearly overgeneralized and ended up speaking out of my rear end. My university musical education was in pop/jazz oriented setting, and while there was some solfege involved it was mainly stuff that everyone tried to get out of the way as soon as possible. :-)
Anyway all that aside, I'm excited to try out this idea I've always had for a new way to notate music.
In reply to I can't say I've heard such… by Marc Sabatella
Actually, just adding text to the noteheads is also already possible.
Right, but it sounds like a nightmare-- I'd want it to be an automatic process like it is with Note Shapes, where the program knows and decides which scale step number goes in each note, and would also automatically use a white font on quarter notes and below, and black font for half notes and above. Anything else would be a nightmare of inefficient manual input. There would be no way one can quickly convert, say, their XML collection of vocal lead sheets to the new format.