[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Parallel dynamics, markup, sponsor, etc.

From: Cordilow
Subject: Re: Parallel dynamics, markup, sponsor, etc.
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:18:01 -0700 (PDT)

> It's a nice idea, however i'd prefer that LilyPond would do this more
automatically (the less input user needs to type the better).

> Lily forgets about dynamics that are not related to any other dynamics,
> i.e.
too far apart (like 2 full measures apart or 30 staff spaces apart) …

It's a good idea, although I don't think it's an end-all solution. Distance
between dynamics isn't always what determines whether you want them to be
related. It's not always calculable either. So, we would still need a manual
way, too, at least. If we had an automatic way, it would be nice if we could
turn it on and off (since it could cause some unforeseen alignment issues).
I do think it's a good idea, though, as long as we can still do things
manually as well as how we do them now. Maybe we could have something like
\autoAlignOn \autoAlignOff

> * i think there is no need to vertically align dynamics from different
> systems

I agree completely with this.

> ** if dynamics are positioned above the staff and there is a very high
> note with a dynamic, it would make no sense to lift all related dynamics
> so high above the staff to match this super-high one.

If we do this, I'd rather still have the option to let it match to the high
note, even if it doesn't by default. I have a question, though: If it
doesn't put both to the highest value, would it overlap the high note or
just put non-parallel dynamics?

Thanks for you reply!
View this message in context:
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at

reply via email to

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