[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: clef change confuses manual key signature
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: clef change confuses manual key signature |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:24:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
james <address@hidden> writes:
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 9:54 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Keith OHara <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> That image does not make sense to me at all. Notes appear in key
>>>> signature (though in a different octave) and still carry an accidental.
>>>> How do you distinguish a normal key signature (valid across all octaves)
>>>> from a restricted-octave one (valid only in one octave)? They look the
>>>> same.
>>>
>>> Lilypond docs do not seem to explain any way to print the key signature
>>> accidentals on different lines than standard, except for this crazy method
>>> where the alterations count for just one octave.
>>>
>>> <speculation>
>>> There was no way to alter the printing of the key signature,
>>> someone needed to do so, found the data structure for the local key
>>> signature that tracks transient accidentals, including octave, used
>>> that as a way to serve his need, and posted to the snippets list.
>>> <end speculation>
>>
>> And composers all over the land adopted "this notation". Sounds like a
>> Microsoft success story.
>>
>>> It would be better to use standard key signatures with custom scales
>>> wholetone = #`((0 . ,NATURAL) (1 . ,NATURAL) (2 . ,NATURAL)
>>> (3 . ,SHARP) (-3 . ,NATURAL) (-2 . ,FLAT) (-1 . ,FLAT) )
>>> { \key d\wholetone bes1 }
>>> and adapt the print routine
>>> key-signature-interface::alteration-position
>>> to allow for more flexible printing.
>>
>> No idea. At any rate, I am going for the "valid in all octaves even if
>> octave is given" angle. Of course that is incompatible with current
>> behavior, but current behavior is incompatible with common sense or
>> logic. It is not even possible to guess the pitches one is supposed to
>> play.
>
> Honestly, I don't know what the original intent of lilypond's behavior
> was supposed to be.
I consider Keith's theory that somebody poked LilyPond internals with a
stick and made a snippet from the resulting thrashing quite plausible.
LilyPond's code clearly has not been written with the intent of
supporting octave-fixed signatures.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, (continued)
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, Keith OHara, 2012/08/14
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, james, 2012/08/14
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, David Rogers, 2012/08/14
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2012/08/15
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, David Rogers, 2012/08/14
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, David Kastrup, 2012/08/14
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, Keith OHara, 2012/08/15
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, David Kastrup, 2012/08/15
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, james, 2012/08/15
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, james, 2012/08/15
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2012/08/15
- Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, David Kastrup, 2012/08/15
Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, Colin Hall, 2012/08/17
Re: clef change confuses manual key signature, Mats Bengtsson, 2012/08/15