Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes:
> On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 04:29:42PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Well, looks like a fair piece of work. And if one invests all this
>> work... I guess it would be nicer if one could write <c\glissando
>> e\glissando g\glissando> <d e f> and notes got matched one by one. And
>> possibly let <c e g>\glissando be the same as that spelled-out first
>> chord.
>>
>> anybody with a hunch why this would be a bad idea
>> and/or terribly complicated to implement and/or leading to a lot of
>> unpredictable behavior?
>
> How would this work for chords with a different number of notes?
> Like:
> <c\glissando g\glissando> <d e f>
> wanting to match up c-d and g-f ?
Write <c g>\glissando <d f e>
> I admit that I don't know off-hand if anybody would ever want to do
> this, nor what the musical interpretation would be... I could imagine
> it possibly happening with divisi string music, but that would be
> better written as separate voices anyway.
>
> Then again, contemporary music tends to do lots of weird stuff, so
> I wouldn't want to bet that nobody would ever want to indicate
> such a connection between two chords. Or, at the very least,
> something like:
> <c\glissando g\glissando> <d e f>
> but wanting to match up c-e and g-f (i.e. the "d" is the
> non-gliss note, instead of the "e")
Then write <e f d> as the second chord... I would also expect ties to
try working in specified order rather than doing their own sorting.
A different approach would be if
<< { c e }
{ g f }
{ s d } >>
managed to assemble chords properly (but then putting \glissando in the
individual sequences does not keep the \glissando attached to the
respective notes: the glissando basically remembers only its point of
time within the voice, not its note of attachment).
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
