Re: 3 Voices one staff

[David Kastrup]

Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 04.05.2017 um 18:47 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> Am 04.05.2017 um 18:13 schrieb Johannes Roeßler:
>>>> With the direction of the stems indicating the hand
>>> I think in order to really judge it one needs more context. From what
>>> time is the music, are you in touch with the composer, what kind of
>>> editorial policies are imposed, … ?
>>> If it were 18th century music, the voice notation and stem direction
>>> would certainly not indicate hand distribution and turning the lower
>>> two voices into chords of one voice would be a sensible editorial
>>> decision (if I played it I’d probably distribute hands like that).
>> If it were 18th century music, mushing together separate voices into
>> chords would be a complete no-no.  Even when played on a simplistic
>> one-manual keyboard (or the new-fangled pianoforte), the player would be
>> expected to keep the separate voices coherent or he could without loss
>> be replaced with an automaton.
>
> Come on, don’t exaggerate. If they’re written as chords, an
> intelligent player like you envisage would still recognise them as two
> voices and play them appropriately.
> I’m very much in favour of sticking with the original notation, but I
> agree with Urs that that’s not really feasible here.

I showed a version that looked fine without beaming, but you can even
get it to work close to the original with beaming:

\version "2.19.59"

\relative c'{
  \voices 3,1,2
  <<{a'8[ b b] }\\{\override Beam.beamed-stem-shorten=#'(-1.6 -1.4 -1.2) dis16[ 
e] e[fis] fis[gis32 a] }\\{fis,8[ g dis]}>> 
}

-- 
David Kastrup