[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > the effect of an accidental alteration is not carried into the next > > measure by a tied note. You have to restate the accidental on the 2nd > > note in the measure without the break. I agree that it looks a little > > silly when the first note also has an accidental (due to the line > > break), but technically it is correct, since the 2nd one is needed to > > determine the pitch of the note. > > This is not true accourding to stone's book. > On p. 55 (II pitch -> Accidentals -> E. Tied accidentals) this exact > situation is handled - and according to Stone the accidental on the tied > note (first note on the line) is enough - and the accidental doesn't > need to be repeated on the 2nd note. > > Comments?
Yes: this is impossible to do right with the current lily: we don't know where the line breaks are when we generate the score, so we can't automatically put in or switch off those accidentals, not without mangling up the spacing. I suggest we junk this entire "accidental on broken tie" feature -- and let the user do it by hand. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/ _______________________________________________ Lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
