[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: tie over clef change

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: tie over clef change
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 19:31:35 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Hans Åberg <> writes:

>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <> wrote:
>>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <> wrote:
>>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <> wrote:
>>>> Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE
>>>> edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties
>>>> over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes...
>>>> I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like
>>>> a slur in this case.
>>> That's a very good example.  It's hard to imagine any reasonable 
>>> alternative.
>>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it
>>> connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects
>>> notes at different staff positions? (or something else?)
>> I'll answer my own question.  A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie
>> grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a
>> slur.
> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation
> system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this is
> slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur.

We are talking about a piano here.  It has no different keys for d♯ and
e♭ and only a single manual.  A slur even across the same pitch will be
executed with a separate keypress as opposed to a tie.

I seem to remember that even in Bach's B minor mass (where E12 was not
yet a thing) there is an enharmonic tie (or at least tonal repetition?)
in the transition from "Confiteor" to "Et expecto".  I mean, that
transition is a tonal center nightmare anyway.

I'd have to consult my score to pick out the details.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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