Just for clarification: as the guitar is notated one octave above its sounding pitch,
I use the following template:
\score {
\new StaffGroup <<
\new Staff {
\new Voice { \global \clef "treble_8"
\override Voice.StringNumber #'transparent = ##t
\music }
}
\new TabStaff {
\new TabVoice { \global \clef "moderntab" \music }
}
>>
}
The octavated treble clef just does the right thing, and with the override, you
remove the unneccesary string numbers.
Thanks; I'll try it. How do I turn off the little "8" symbol by the clef?
In this example, the low A is placed on the 5th fret, 6th string.
The minimum fret is the default (zero), but the tab calculator
does not choose the open-A string, even though it would be
far more convenient to play it that way. If you annotate it with
fingerings:
<a'-0 e'-1 a-1 cs-1 a'-4>1
it becomes doubly clear to the guitarist that the open-A string is
intended here, both because of the -0 fingering notation and
because it is the only physically reasonable configuration.
I see your point, but I have no idea whether a suitable algorithm
can be found to cope all possible fingerings.
Oh, I didn't mean to suggest that there is such an algorithm, although
it seems like it would make a cool research project. I was just using
this example to illustrate the need for the tab-understands-(-0) workaround.
There are actually _two_ signals here that the tab calculator
should be picking up but is not. They are separate issues.
One is that even though the TabStaff.minimumFret is zero, the
calculator is not actually using the minimum fret.
IIUC, the calculator tries to put all fret positions within a four fret interval,
so <d\5 g> would show up as
e---
b---
g---
D-5-
A-5-
E---
That makes sense. It's a really good heuristic, actually -- I've been
rather amazed at how often simply setting the minimum fret results in
generating optimal fingerings for a passage, even for relatively complex
music.
Regards,
-steve
Regards,
Marc