Am 08.03.2018 um 02:01 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
On 08.03.2018 01:39, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote:
So I asked
around[1] and apparently it's a "harmonic delay" or a prolongation...
There is no reason whatsoever for any fancy words. It’s just a dotted
note with the dot written at the
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:26 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote:
> Rules that have evolved in the course of the 19th and 20th century and are
> certainly alien to the 18th.
I understand that the rules had changed over time and that back then
it was fine to do it that way.
> If
On 08.03.2018 02:17, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote:
it's written in a way that would break the "normal" rules about
how to use it (it wouldn't fit on the previous bar so a tie to a 8th
note starting the bar is what I would have written)
Rules that have evolved in the course of the 19th and
Edmundo,
You've encountered an earlier engraving convention for how to show pitches
that continue from a previous measure. If you look at more autograph and
earlier published scores from the 17th and 18th centuries you'll find this.
It is, essentially, what we today call a "tied" note. I'm sure
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:01 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote:
> There is no reason whatsoever for any fancy words. It’s just a dotted note
> with the dot written at the rhythmic position where it actually happens.
> I’ve never seen any realisation of this in LilyPond – would be
On 08.03.2018 01:39, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote:
So I asked
around[1] and apparently it's a "harmonic delay" or a prolongation...
There is no reason whatsoever for any fancy words. It’s just a dotted
note with the dot written at the rhythmic position where it actually
happens.
I’ve never
Hi!
You know the chaconne from BWV 1004, right? On the bar before last,
there's an apparent dot written at the position of the f at the
opening of the bar. I didn't know if it was a staccato mark or other
kind of expressive mark for the violin or a mistake but I also found
it on Anna Magdalena'