Template talk:Music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Per the discussion on Wikipedia:Manual of style (music), I've put what was at Accidental here; moved the user box to Template:User Instruments List (discuss at Template talk:User Instruments List) and moved the newly created "Music portal" navigation box to Template:Music portal. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 15:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] alternate notation for sharps and flats

What do you think about supporting {{music|#}} and {{music|b}} (using the number sign "#" and letter "b") as alternatives to {{music|sharp}} and {{music|flat}}?--Dbolton 21:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea. The only thing we have to be concerned about is whether we might want to reserve "b" for the note--I know I've had that issue with building little music grammars before. But I think that it's fine to give it up, since if we are going to do notes, we'll probably do "note|b" or something like that. Myke
I decided to hold back on the {{music|#}} and {{music|b}}, but added support for Unicode flats and sharps, i.e. {{music|♯}} and {{music|♭}}. This should make it more convenient if you are converting a page of Unicode sharps and flats.--Dbolton 17:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I'd say let's go with # and b for now, so I can convert some pages which use that notation also. I doubt the double-flat, double-sharp notation will ever be used, but bb and ## perhaps? Reminds me to start getting the ^1 to ^8 working as well as some Roman numerals. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection?

Perhaps page protection would be appropriate for this page if most important changes have been made now? I'm sure it will have very extensive usage at some point in the near future. ck lostsword•T•C 14:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with semi-protection, but at present full protection would probably be counter productive. The template isn't yet used in that many places and hasn't had any vandalism (knock on wood). Most importantly, it's not close to finished and the major contributors to the template aren't administrators, so it would prevent further contributions. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 22:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
No problem for now - just an option for in the future :). ck lostsword•T•C 22:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Example

This is a very cool template and I applaud your efforts. My only problem is in the "sample text" under the heading "Notes and rests". That looks like a clear place where prose should be used, not characters. It's bad style to write in that way, even if one can. Can someone please think of a better example of their use? I'll ponder it as well, but nothing is immediately coming to mind. Mak (talk) 16:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to find a piece of text that would be a better demonstration that we can agree on--I just put something quickly that came to mind. If I were actually writing, I would spell out "whole note." However, there is a movement to use symbols more often within text--Edward Tufte devotes a chapter to it in both his first (?) and fourth books on design. I don't think that there's any better way to convey the syncopated rhythm in the second half of the sentence. Saying "eighth rest, half note, quarter note, eighth note" is far too bulky and would slow down a musically literate reader, while the figure is too small to justify using an external figure. The Bach font encourages such uses [1]. Looking at the book next to me, Allen Atlas's Renaissance Music, I see these uses on pp. 50 & 51. Christopher Hasty also embeds metrical examples in text in his Meter as Rhythm (Oxford; first usage, coincidentally, also on pp. 50&51). And the first theory book I looked at (Clendinning and Marvin) does also. I'm more finding these examples to satisfy my curiosity than to refute you--I've embedded rhythms within text in just about every article I've published, and wanted to make sure that I wasn't alone. In double-spaced contexts I've also embedded whole staves of music within text, but it just doesn't look right in single-spaced writing. Best, -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 22:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, when I looked at it again I realised that the latter rhythm would be awkward as prose, but the use of the whole note symbol definitely threw me off, and feels like bad style. Perhaps just change the whole note to text? I'm glad to know of other inline uses of rhythmic notation, though. Mak (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I modified the sample sentence per Mak's suggestion.--Dbolton 02:51, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Firefox change?

Has anyone else noticed a change in behavior on Firefox? Now all the music symbols that don't use this template are displaying as "?" on my system instead of the proper flats and sharps. Is it just my system? I certainly didn't uninstall any fonts. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 04:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Odd. I haven't noticed this myself. Does the behavior continue after a system restart?--Dbolton (talk) 05:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
It seems to come and go; a restart seems to help -- and actually, if I leave the page open for a few minutes, after awhile the flats appear. Maybe it's a memory leak in determining which glyphs are present and which are missing in the font. I notice that some of the ja:xxxxx links appear as ja:??????? at first and then resolve themselves into the proper characters. So it's probably not a pan-firefox problem. Phew! I did change a few articles to use the template anyhow, so that's probably a good thing.  :) -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 05:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)