[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Add chord range to make-part-combine-music (issue 144170043 by nine.

From: Keith OHara
Subject: Re: Add chord range to make-part-combine-music (issue 144170043 by nine.fierce.ballads <at>
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 04:23:51 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: Loom/3.14 (

 <dak <at>> writes:
> On 2014/10/31 22:50:35, Dan Eble wrote:
> > One thing just occurred to me.  If this option is going into the UI,
> do you
> > think the numbers should be 1-based for easier comprehension by
> musicians?  

> As a UI, numbers instead of intervals (possibly represented only by a
> pitch in relation to c' like \transposition does) do not make much
> sense.

I may be having trouble with the negative sentence construction, but
if you mean that
  \partcombine <d' c''> {} {}
would be the intuitive way to indicate seconds through octave may be
be combined into chords, then I disagree.  Or, maybe you were joking.

Numbers are very good for representing intervals; we use numerical
names to represent them.  Numbers are also good for representing
differences in staff-position as well.  Either 1-based or 0-based
should be fine, if the docs consistently speak in terms of intervals
of the chords, or in terms of the graphical separation between noteheads,

> Regarding such user interface extensions, I think we should rather go in
> the direction of
> <URL:>.
> Using context modifications makes it reasonably straightforward to add
> arbitrary named settings in arbitrary order on demand.

Well, the currently-proposed patch at your link uses optional
arguments to \partcombine, which would also be appropriate here
for the chord-range, and later for 'no-solo.  If that is the 
direction you mean, we all agree:  optional input argument #'(2 . 8)

If you mean to use context properties, they cannot be context 
properties of the output Voices because those are not created when
the chord-range needs to have its effect.  they cannot be
properties of the temporary Voices for the same reasons that idea
failed for the interface to force part-combine decisions.

Generally issue 1321 concerns how the voices output from partcombine
are set on the staff, so it should not change the input interface to
partcombine at all.

reply via email to

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