[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Following voices in chords?
From: |
Carl Sorensen |
Subject: |
Re: Following voices in chords? |
Date: |
Fri, 7 May 2010 08:40:45 -0600 |
On 5/7/10 8:29 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:
> Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I recognize that it takes a different tack than you want, because it only
>> goes note for note instead of chord for chord. But it shows the way to get
>> the spacing you want and to avoid the clashing note columns.
>>
>> \once \override Glissando #'minimum-length = #5
>> \once \override Glissando #'springs-and-rods =
>> #ly:spanner::set-spacing-rods
>>
>> is the way to get the spacing.
>
> Ok, that helps. Not sure I understand this, though.
>
>> To avoid the clashing note columns, you could do
>>
>> \override NoteColumn #'ignore-collision = ##t
>>
>> before your function, and
>>
>> \revert NoteColumn #'ignore-collision
>>
>> after the function.
>
> This does not change the composition of the chord?
No -- it just ignores the collision.
>
>> It would be pretty simple for you to adjust the inner workings of
>> chord-glissando.ly to make it work by rotating the chord, rather than
>> by carving out individual notes.
>
> Well, looks like a fair piece of work. And if one invests all this
> work... I guess it would be nicer if one could write <c\glissando
> e\glissando g\glissando> <d e f> and notes got matched one by one. And
> possibly let <c e g>\glissando be the same as that spelled-out first
> chord.
>
> Putting aside the obvious "patches will be thoughtfully considered" to a
> later point of time, anybody with a hunch why this would be a bad idea
> and/or terribly complicated to implement and/or leading to a lot of
> unpredictable behavior?
I don't have any ideas why it would be a bad idea. I'd be happy to have the
behavior you describe.
The reason it doesn't work now is that \glissando inside a chord construct
creates an articulation, while \glissando outside a chord construct creates
a separate event. For me, it was much easier to create a music function
than to dive in and do the repairs necessary to get to the state you
describe. So I did it.
I appreciate your consistent questioning as to how we might be able to get
LilyPond to behave in a way that seems consistent with our expectations. I
wish I had the time to understand the internals of parsing better so I could
contribute more in this area. But I don't, so I do the best I can with the
time I have.
Thanks,
Carl
- Following voices in chords?, David Kastrup, 2010/05/07
- Re: Following voices in chords?, Carl Sorensen, 2010/05/07
- Re: Following voices in chords?, David Kastrup, 2010/05/07
- Re: Following voices in chords?,
Carl Sorensen <=
- Re: Following voices in chords?, David Kastrup, 2010/05/07
- Re: Following voices in chords?, Carl Sorensen, 2010/05/07
- Re: Following voices in chords?, David Kastrup, 2010/05/07
- Re: Following voices in chords?, Carl Sorensen, 2010/05/07
- Some engraver brainstorming (was: Following voices in chords?), David Kastrup, 2010/05/08
- Re: Some engraver brainstorming, Marc Hohl, 2010/05/08
- Re: Some engraver brainstorming (was: Following voices in chords?), Kieren MacMillan, 2010/05/08
- Re: Some engraver brainstorming, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/05/08
- Re: Some engraver brainstorming, David Kastrup, 2010/05/08
- Re: Some engraver brainstorming, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2010/05/08