On Nov 25, 2014, at 04:21 , Urs Liska <[email protected]> wrote: > Is the following assumption correct? > > At the beginning of m.2 the partcombiner treats the crotchet and the full > measure rests as two voices.
Yes. The part combiner directs those rests into voices “one” and “two”. > At the second crotched, when \one begins to play notes this is considered > "solo" because \two doesn't play at that moment. Yes. > When I explicitly instantiate a "solo" voice in the \score block this will be > somehow merged with the voice implicitly created by the partcombiner. Yes. You could do the same with voices “one”, “two”, and “shared”. > OK. It seems this may be a way to fix all issues with the output but as you > say it's not pretty. Actually I'd say it's inacceptably ugly. In my concrete > score this would mean I'd have to write such a dummy voice for the 800 > measure piece, for all partcombined instruments. In a work of that scale, I agree. For my own work, which is mostly vocal and mostly short, I have modified the part combiner never to create solo sections. When one part rests, both parts are engraved; when both parts rest, they are combined into one. It sounds like this is probably not what you need, but if it would help you, I could give you a patch. I do not know when I will be able to contribute it to Lilypond because I am trying to find a more general solution to part combiner limitations. — Dan _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
