On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Paul Scott<psl...@ultrasw.com> wrote: > Which is kind of ridiculous if you're writing an ensemble piece with many > (even more than one) voices/parts. How can a midi of a multi-voice work > with any repeats be done?
I was working on a large score and originally kept the repeat structure separate from the individual parts and ran into the same unfold-not-working problem. I thought about this a bit and decided it was best just to have the repeats in each part. If you're going to make a change to the repeat structure you're almost always going to have to change each part/voice to match. Since this is the case it makes sense to have the repeat structure in each part. If for nothing else it makes it easy to find the beginnings and ends of repeats in each part. > I don't mind having a separate file for the midi output but not being able > to factor out the common timing and dynamics costs a lot of input time and > makes it a lot harder to make sure I haven't dropped a bar somewhere. Actually I found that having the repeats in each part made it easier to notice that bars were off. Lilypond throws errors where it thinks the repeat timing problem is without having to look too much at the pdf output. -----Jay _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
