[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: why chords with notes of different duration is not supported?

From: Jan Warchoł
Subject: Re: why chords with notes of different duration is not supported?
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 23:57:06 +0100

Hi all,

2011/1/13 Graham Percival <address@hidden>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:41:22AM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > As far as I can see, there is not much more to do than just omit the
> > > warning for parallel music when the output is sensible.  The extra
> > > angles for being allowed (and required) to put the durations inside
> > > seem like a reasonably cheap price to pay.
> >
> > There is an additional obstacle: If you do
> >
> >   \relative c {
> >     <<c g'' d''>>
> >   }
> >
> > you get three staves with single notes instead of a chord...

In my opinion we should assume that, unless there are explicit
definitions of voices or staves, everything inside << >> construct is
a one voice. Then it should work like this: << d2 g4 >> would produce
a "chord" (an object with one common stem) with hollow d notehead and
black 4 notehead. (it would work like \new Voice { << d2 g4 >> }, but
with no warnings)
>From what i understand, it's the David's suggestion.

> As a result, there are quite a number of constructs in the notation
> manual that work with artificial voices and hidden notes, clearly not at
> all being a logical representation of the composer's intention.
> That's a deficiency, not an advantage of Lilypond.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]