Re: Ties within chords inconsistency

[Simon Albrecht]

Sorry, I see pasting images inline has completely failed. See below and 
attached.

Am 10.09.2015 um 01:13 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
> Am 09.09.2015 um 23:41 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > Hello David,
> > >
> > > pardon if I insist another time.
> > >
> > > Am 09.09.2015 um 22:40 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > > Joram <address@hidden> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Simon,
> > > > >
> > > > > I see. The difference is: I would not have expected that to work. 
> > > > > But I
> > > > > can see the benefit if it would, now.
> > > > Sigh.  It works perfectly.
> > > Of course it works as long as you keep inside the current way of
> > > distinguishing in-chord and whole-chord ties. But, as I already said
> > > earlier this day, ‘this means reconsidering the relation and the
> > > handling of in-chord and whole-chord ties’.
> > It means no such thing unless you have built your own misconception of
> > what << >> means.
>
> I should’ve better embedded the quotation to make sure what ‘this’ is 
> supposed to mean:
> Making the examples in my first post
> %%%%%%%%%%%%
> \version "2.19.25"
>
> \new Voice << { c''^~ c'' } { a'_~ a' } >>
>
> \new Voice << { <c''^~> c'' } { <a'_~> a' } >>
>
> { <c''^~ a'_~> <c'' a'> }
> %%%%%%%%%%%%
> behave the same way, as I would have expected, would ‘mean 
> reconsidering the relation and the handling of in-chord and 
> whole-chord ties’.
> > > I do not doubt your authority in interpreting the way LilyPond thinks,
> > > but I have been using LilyPond for four years now and invested no
> > > small amount of time into understanding how it works. My point is that
> > > we shouldn’t be insisting on striking internal logics too much, if any
> > > user who has not delved into the exact internal workflow of the
> > > program will encounter problems with code that is perfectly sensible
> > > /on the surface/.
> > If you don't understand simultaneous music, don't use it for things for
> > which it is not really intended like avoiding chord notation.
>
> What do you intend by disqualifying me from this discussion? It’s my 
> turn to be upset now.
> I do have basic understanding of the concepts used in LilyPond, like 
> events and SimultaneousMusic, and as I more kindly said already, it is 
> absurd to demand of a LilyPond _user_ to fully comprehend the way Lily 
> thinks.
>
> How would you code something like

[chord-entry-1.png]

> or

[chord-entry-2.png]

> (and there are many such examples in the piece I’m engraving) in 
> LilyPond? Use <> for every single chord? As I said, I consider the 
> advantage of using simultaneous music severe, since it saves so many 
> keystrokes _and_ helps oversight.
> I recall you saying that you ‘work much more /on/ LilyPond than /with/ 
> LilyPond’. Now, there are exigencies of real-life use to face such as 
> this. Or am I the only one using << >> for this purpose? That’s why I 
> asked for more opinions – with moderate impact.
> > > To return to our particular topic: the distinction between ‘ties
> > > inside simultaneous music expressions within one voice which will be
> > > arranged into chords only later’ and ‘ties within chords’ is very
> > > subtle and far away to the musician(*). I can unfortunately not speak
> > > about technical feasibility, or rather difficulty, but how about the
> > > following approach: Any tie which is not attached to a chord in the
> > > <>~ manner is interpreted as in-chord tie. This would shift the
> > > preference from whole-chord tie to in-chord tie for ‘doubtful’ cases
> > > like a~ (as opposed to obvious cases like <a~> or <a>~), so to
> > > speak.
> > In-chord articulations stick a _lot_ closer to the notehead and
> > consequently do worse collision avoidance.
>
> I haven’t been aware of that.
> <https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/2070/#03f7> and 
> <https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/2229/#861c> provide a 
> little explanation. 
> <https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/2070/#bd41> makes 
> hints about the technical route to go.
> Concerning ties, I can see no difference:
> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
> \relative {
>   <c'' a f>4~ q
>   <c~ a~ f~> <c a f>
>
>   <c g e>~ q
>   <c~ g~ e~> <c g e>
>
>   <h g d>~ q
>   <h~ g~ d~> <h g d>
>
>   <e g, c,>~ q
>   <e~ g,~ c,~> <e g, c,>
>
>   %\break
>
>   \time 4/2
>   <c a f>2~ q
>   <c~ a~ f~> <c a f>
>
>   <c g e>~ q
>   <c~ g~ e~> <c g e>
>
>   <h g d>~ q
>   <h~ g~ d~> <h g d>
>
>   <e g, c,>~ q
>   <e~ g,~ c,~> <e g, c,>
>
>   \time 4/1
>   <c a f>1~ q
>   <c~ a~ f~> <c a f>
>
>   <c g e>~ q
>   <c~ g~ e~> <c g e>
>
>   <h g d>~ q
>   <h~ g~ d~> <h g d>
>
>   <e g, c,>~ q
>   <e~ g,~ c,~> <e g, c,>
> }
> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

[compare-ties.png]

> Carl’s comment on 2070 shows that there’s indeed need for 
> clarification, and that the field is quite larger than only ties.
> I really need to go to bed now, so I postpone further reckonings.
>
> But please, David, don’t just push aside discussion, even if it’s only 
> me with so /inferior/ technical understanding who puts it up.
>
> Best regards, Simon
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

chord-entry-1.png
Description: PNG image

chord-entry-2.png
Description: PNG image

compare-ties.png
Description: PNG image