Hello,

On 16 January 2013 17:53, Mark D. Blackwell <[email protected]>wrote:

> > I am not top-posting
>
> For MIDI \unfoldRepeats, explicit \repeat volta in all voices is awkward
>
> Regarding MIDI output and \unfoldRepeats, LilyPond (I checked version
> 2.17.9)
> currently follows this statement in the documentation:
>
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/repeats-in-midi
>
> "In scores containing multiple voices, unfolding of repeats in MIDI output
> will
> only occur correctly if each voice contains fully notated repeat
> indications."
>
> I write to complain (or suggest) because:
>
> Requiring the users to add \repeat volta to all the voices is telling them
> to
> violate the DRY (don't repeat yourself) principle.
>
> This is especially awkward for choral works. Even when printing individual
> instrumental parts, it's far easier for a user to include a Dynamics
> context (as
> below).
>
> As background (as you may know), in a score's stack of staves, any single
> voice
> (such as a \new Dynamics staff-like context) can successfully contain,
> without
> duplication in other voices, all the work's LilyPond statements of the
> kinds:
>
> * \repeat volta;
> * \time signatures; and
> * Special barlines such as \bar "|.".
>
> and the printed output won't break. A clear example of this, for a typical
> choral work, is:
>
> workTempo = {
>   \tempo "Adagio" 2 = 68
>   \time 2/2
>   \repeat volta 2 { \repeat unfold 2 s1 }
>   \bar "|."
> }
> work = <<
>     \new Dynamics \workTempo
>     \new ChoirStaff << ... >>
>     \new PianoStaff << ... >>
> >>
> \book {
>   \score \work
> }
>
>
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=769

?

James
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Reply via email to