You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A possible new language feature in which the composer can specify a sequence of transpositions to apply to the following melody.
Overview
This would provide a more natural options for composing with scales as well as better abstract a melody for designing functions that cover a broader scope. The idea is that a root can be specified and a phrase can be developed on top of it.
This would also make scales and chord progressions into library level features that can be written in MellowD and not the compiler.
The pattern length would not need to match the mapping source (melody or chord) as it would simply modulo extend the shorter operand. This behavior is then consistent with melody/chord and rhythm composition.
Proposed syntax
This is no where close to set in stone, but the general context that it would appear in is as follows:
/1, 2, 3/*[a]*<e, e, e>
Where the pattern is /1, 2, 3/ that would result in the melody [a#, b, c].
The pattern elements would then be literal numbers or references in favor of #4. Both positive and negative would be acceptable.
Design Considerations (Needs deciding)
The syntax needs reworking to naturally support transposing as well as chord root transpositions and type (minor, major, etc). Possibly consider using the opposite slashes for chord vs. melody patterns?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
A possible new language feature in which the composer can specify a sequence of transpositions to apply to the following melody.
Overview
This would provide a more natural options for composing with scales as well as better abstract a melody for designing functions that cover a broader scope. The idea is that a root can be specified and a phrase can be developed on top of it.
This would also make scales and chord progressions into library level features that can be written in MellowD and not the compiler.
The pattern length would not need to match the mapping source (melody or chord) as it would simply modulo extend the shorter operand. This behavior is then consistent with melody/chord and rhythm composition.
Proposed syntax
This is no where close to set in stone, but the general context that it would appear in is as follows:
Where the pattern is
/1, 2, 3/
that would result in the melody[a#, b, c]
.The pattern elements would then be literal numbers or references in favor of #4. Both positive and negative would be acceptable.
Design Considerations (Needs deciding)
The syntax needs reworking to naturally support transposing as well as chord root transpositions and type (minor, major, etc). Possibly consider using the opposite slashes for chord vs. melody patterns?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: