Jack Campin wrote: > Or did I get the semantics wrong? I'd expect [d6z2]2 to mean the same > as [d12z4] (whatever *that* meant)
Sorry, you are wrong. If the ]2 is just multiplied to the length of the notes inside the chord, there would be no benefit of the [..]2 notation. You can write better the same way you did: [d12z4] I meant that each note *in* the chord has the length as specified there and the length after the ] doesn't change that. The length after the ] gives the time when the *next* note after the chord starts. So with M:4/4 and L:1/4 [A4C4E4]2 a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4 means play the AMinor for 4 beats but on the 3rd beat start a tremolo on the note a until the end of the bar. You can not write this with any of the discussed chord-length-rules because each note in the chord has length 4. Of course you can whrite the same as [z2A4C4E4] a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4a/4 suppossed the the chord-length is taken from the 1st note and rests in chords are allowed. Which one is more readable or easier to maintain is a matter of taste. But just now came in my mind: what if you could write this [A4E4C2]0 ab[C,2]0c'd' Supposed the length zero is allowed, this whould mean start A4 E4 C2 on beat one change the C to a C, one beat three. And on top play a melody abc'd' for the whole bar. Ok, take this as a joke. But why not allow the syntax. It's consistent whith the single note length modifier so it seems to me its easy to understand. There are no ambiguities in what it means so any software can easy figure out what to print or to play. Toni To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
