[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Feat. request: autobehaviour of \unfoldRepeats

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: Feat. request: autobehaviour of \unfoldRepeats
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:56:35 +0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 03:08:32AM -0700, MonAmiPierrot wrote:
> Graham Percival-3 wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > I *never* put \unfoldRepeats.  If you want real music, listen to
> > musicians. 
> > 
> Uhm... so, why don't we abolish \midi output?

Because you cut out the relevant part of the quote.  \midi is
useful for checking that you've entered the notes correctly.  If
you skipped over a note or something, the clashing chords will be
*really* noticeable.

> For me, I only use "\repeat percent" and most of all "\repeat
> tremolo". In both cases, audio output is important.  At least
> for tremolos, you'll perfectly agree that there's no point in
> not playing it by midi (midi only play the note(s)  that
> represent the length of tremolo, not the notes of which trmolo
> actually consists: it doesn't make sense, for me)

Ah, I didn't realize that.  Yes, it would be nice if midi played
the real notes.  If that isn't already in the google tracker, it
should be added.

> P.S. Perhaps, the \unfoldRepeats behaviour should be the default behaviour
> in case of "\repeat percent/tremolo", and not for "\repeat volta" (or
> additionally in voltas also in case of different "alternative" endings). I
> would like to know your (and all) opinions.

I could get behind that.

Of course, there won't be any action on any of these midi issues
until a Frog decides to work on midi output.  That could be 2-3
years in the future.

- Graham

reply via email to

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