[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Barcheck with full measure rests
From: |
Alexander Kobel |
Subject: |
Re: Barcheck with full measure rests |
Date: |
Tue, 21 May 2019 15:42:37 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 |
On 21.05.19 15:37, Michael Gerdau wrote:
I'm probably having some subtlety wrong. The following code creates the
attached image.
%%%%%%%%%%%
\version "2.21.0"
{ << R1 { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
{ << { \oneVoice R1 } \\ { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
%%%%%%%%%%%
The lower akkolade is what I want this to look like while the upper akkolade adds a staff
I don't wish to see. Adding "RemoveEmptyStaves" should not be required (and may
or may not create more unwanted side effects in that I may not wish for other staves to
be removed).
As I said I probably am overlooking something since Alexander Kobel made the
very same suggestion off list.
Ugh, sorry, I didn't intend to take this off-list. Feel free to repost here.
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/learning/music-expressions-explained#simultaneous-music-expressions-single-staff
explains that the number of staves this stuff is packed into depends on
whether the very first expression is a single note or a "simultaneous
music" event.
{ c1 << R1 { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
does what you expect, on a single staff.
This really shouldn't be of any noticeable impact in any non-trivial
score (read: if you have a \score { ... } block written out in your file).
Cheers,
Alex
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Barcheck with full measure rests, J Martin Rushton, 2019/05/21
Re: Barcheck with full measure rests, Alexander Kobel, 2019/05/21