[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: New context modifier \CompletionRhythms?

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: New context modifier \CompletionRhythms?
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 01:13:22 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:

> On 09.04.2016 23:37, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Why would you even split note values across bars in "ancient music"?
>> I much prefer unmolested note values and bar lines_between_  staves
>> there.  Makes the motives stand out clearer and avoids boorish
>> accentuation of mid-syncopes by the singers.
> While this is completely off-topic :-), I’m still happy to answer. The
> truth is, I haven’t really made up my mind on this. There is proof
> that actually notating scores with regular bar lines, and splitting
> cross-bar notes using ties, is an authentic practice of the
> Renaissance period,

I don't really care.  Renaissance music lines from masters like Josquin
des Prez or Orlando di Lasso tend to be harmonically (like Gregorian
chant) and rhythmically self-centered rather than being subservient to a
bar-oriented harmonic progression.  Writing a thematic 1 as 4~2. or even
4~2~4 only obfuscates this and makes an adequate rendition harder for
the performer.

> However, that doesn’t touch the point if it makes _musical_ sense to
> use Mensurstriche despite them being unauthentic (which I’d consider
> perfectly valid reasoning). Also, I’m not actually sure which is
> easier for singers to read, and with what level of experience with the
> style.

"Easier to read"?  Of course with full bar lines.  But the bar lines
tend to print through into the singing where they don't belong.  It's
like reading a newspaper after a fish has been wrapped in it: sure, the
most affordable source.  Still stinks.

> Coming back on topic – these reasonings shouldn’t be the business of
> us as developers. And the thread is only about user interface, not
> about actual functionality :-)

The user interface of separate completion engravers sucks.  And they are
not maintained properly in parallel with the non-completion engravers.
The approach, however, has the advantage that one does not need to query
the respective context properties for every single note.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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