[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ottava bracket
Re: Ottava bracket
Sat, 15 Feb 2014 16:40:00 -0000
"Noeck" <address@hidden> wrote in message
considering the statement by Gould below and my personal findings,
I would like to see the following change to the ottavation bracket be
added to LilyPond like proposed in this thread:
and now updated in this mail.
Could this be added to the issues as a wish or enhancement (it is even a
Here is my wish including examples:
What does E. Gould say ...
The octave sign is written in italic, the numeral '8' is 1 1/2
stave-paces high. The optional 'va' is placed flush with the top of
_ottava sopra_ (_8^va_), flush with the base of _ottava bassa_ (_8va_).
Indicate the extent of the transposition with a line of dashes
(hereafter called a dotted line). The line extends from the top edge
of the _8_ for _8 sopra_ and the base of the _8_ for _8 bassa_, and
runs parallel to the stave.
And those 8s look bold to me.
This has something in common with the current situation, but these
points are different:
- there should be super/subscript for va etc.
- it should be bold
- the lines should be at the top edge/base and not in the middle
Here is my incomplete suggestion with some comments:
- \super does not look good
- \raise depends on the staff size (not on the font size)
- therefore \translate-scaled
- the value is a compromise for 8 and 15 which look slightly different
- should we add text for a third octave to LP? ±3 (i.e. 22va and 22vb)
(this is easy in scm/define-music-callbacks.scm)
or a general text calculated from the octavation:
|octavation|*7 + 1 and va if octavation > 0, vb if octavation < 0
- The lines are unchanged but they should go to the top line or base
- The right edge would look better if it was a solid vertical line
(without a dash gap)
- I have seen more dotted than dashed lines, but that’s debatable.
This snippet shows what I propose as default. If accepted, the markups
would have to be translated to scheme:
There's actually a large variety of possible changes in your snippet. I
assume you're not proposing all those alternatives? If not, could you state
which is the preferred solution, and not include the others? That would
make it simpler to implement.