--
Phil Holmes
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Horgan" <phorg...@yahoo.com>
To: <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: ottava bassa
On 01/12/2011 07:42 AM, Phil Holmes wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: <l...@internet.com.uy>
> If you modify that function in scm/define-music-callbacks.scm to
'Voice
> instead of 'Staff, then \ottava only applies to the current voice
(which > is,
> however, probably now what we want by default).
i guess you meant that this is *not* what we want? it really isn't? i
mean, if you instantiate two voices and put the \ottava indication only
in one, i guess you only want the octave change only in that voice. not
uncommon in piano music, among other cases.
The problem with this approach is: if you want the ottavation to apply to
the staff, which is common, would you need to set it in each voice? And
then you'd need to detect that it had already been set and not typeset
it.
Isn't that frustrating. We know that this situation (a voice or a section
of voice that is written an octave differently than played) occurs in
written notation, not commonly, but not infrequently, and that it wasn't
in the mind of the person who first wrote this part of lilypond. Has
someone written a bug for this? Sounds like it will be a bit of work to
get it right. Would it be possible to have two functions, one for voice
ottava and one for staff ottava? i.e. if you copy the 17 lines of
make-ottava-set and change the function name to make-voice-ottava-set and
the 'Staff to 'Voice, does that solve the problem, or will there be
conflicts in the offing? I would guess that you'd either want to use one
or the other, I can't think of times that they'd both be in the offing.
Patrick
I've added this as issue 1473
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1473
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user