> On 3 Feb 2022, at 19:04, Knute Snortum <ksnor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 9:32 AM Leo Correia de Verdier > <leo.correia.de.verd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 11:51 AM Kieren MacMillan >> <kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>>> Speaking as a keyboard player (and lilypond novice) I would recommend >>>> re-spelling the a flat as a g sharp! Sometimes, theory has to take a >>>> backseat to readability. >>> >>> If theoretical correctness (or, say, accuracy to a previous source) isn't a >>> requirement, then I agree with Charlie: this is a moment in which, as a >>> keyboard player, I'd much rather see two different notes [by pitch name]. >>> >>> Otherwise, I'd say the split-stem convention is [perhaps >>> counterintuitively?!] more readable for me. If you want to do this in >>> Lilypond, I'm pretty sure Harm has solved this particular issue (see e.g., >>> https://archiv.lilypondforum.de/index.php/topic,1176.msg6932.html#msg6932). > > Ok, the first attachment is using Harm's splayed stem chord function. > Better? Worse? > > Respelling the chord using a "gs" for the "af" is a possibility, but > what about respelling the "a" as a "bff"? The second attachment shows > how that would look.
This seems to be the theoretically correct, as you have a number of persistent A♭, and above a B♭ which is lowered chromatically, so it becomes a B𝄫 then. One example of a playability concern is for an orchestral harp, which can set pedal flats and sharps as in a key signature, but can not change the pedals fast enough during performance. Then it must be a G♯ and an A; letting the harpist do the respelling costs money (according to Blatter).
