[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Bug in ties over barlines

From: Xavier Scheuer
Subject: Re: Bug in ties over barlines
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:28:10 +0100

On 23 January 2011 23:09, Joseph Haig <address@hidden> wrote:
> I have (I believe) found a bug in Lilypond, and I am fairly sure what
> it is, but I would like to check with people who have better knowledge
> of music theory than I before I submit it to the bug list. In the
> following code:
>  {
>    \time 4/4
>    aes'1( a')
>    aes'~ aes'
>    aes'( aes')
>  }
> I believe that the first and third ties are displayed incorrectly.

LilyPond is right!
First and third ties are not ties, they are slurs.  Hence you use '( )'
instead of '~'.

> Specifically, the first tie should have a natural in front of the
> second note,

Usual rules specify that an accidental is only valid within _one_
(the current) measure[1].  The second a') (in the second measure) is not
in the same measure, so no need to print the natural.
However it is common practice to add a reminder accidental or a
cautionary accidental (i.e., an accidental within parentheses) in the
second measure.

Hence it is important to make the distinction between a tie and a slur.
Slurs have no rhythmic meaning, contrary to ties.
There is a big warning about this in the notation reference manual.

BTW if you replace your slur by a tie you would get a warning and the
tie would not be printed!

> and the third tie should not have a flat in front of the
> second note.

That would be true if you used a tie, not a slur (like in your second,
real, tie).

> The second and third ties should be identical, except for
> the type of tie used, while the first one should be different. Am I
> correct?

Hope that helps.


Xavier Scheuer <address@hidden>

reply via email to

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