Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - Draft 3

[Keith OHara]

Martin Tarenskeen <m.tarenskeen <at> zonnet.nl> writes:

> I am not in favour of allowing different commands \times 2/3 and \tuplet3/2 to 
> do the same job. My voice would go to: just keep \times x/y the wayit is. I 
> can't see what makes 3/2 easier than 2/3. And having the choiceof two commands 
> doing the same job with a slightly different syntax onlymakes things more 
> confusing for me.

Currently, everyone who thinks of a triplet as a 3:2 ratio, 3 notes in the 
usual time for 2, suffers similar confusion when trying to remember \times 2/3. 
 Triplets are usually written with a simple 3, but 4-note-tuplets are often 
designated 4:3 for clarity, while LilyPond requires the reversed fraction in 
\times 3/4 {}

The likely outcome would be to document only \tuplet 3/2 (or \tuplet3 or 
\triplet depending on what we choose) and have convert-ly change \times x/y to 
\tuplet y/x, but let LilyPond accept \times x/y from users who have developed 
the habit.  Then there is only one syntax in the documentation.

If we can make \tuplet also easier to use, it might quickly become the only 
syntax in use.
I like the idea of specifying a set of triplets, each lasting the time of a 
quarter note, as:
 r4 \triplet 4 {e8\( fis cis e b, cis gis, b, fis, |
 gis,8 e, gis,} dis,2 cis,4

tuplet.ly
Description: Binary data