----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Morley" <[email protected]>
To: "Sven" <[email protected]>
Cc: "lilypond-user" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: Accidentals tied over a system break
2015-10-08 15:40 GMT+02:00 Sven <[email protected]>:
Reading my way through Behind Bars by Elaine Gould, I'm trying to
replicate
some of the examples in LilyPond. One of them contains a tie over a
system
break:
\version "2.18.2"
\relative c'' {
r2. fis,4~ | \break
fis8 a16 fis r8 r2 \bar "|."
}
LP puts a sharp in front of the first f# in measure 2 as well as the
second
one. According to Gould repeating an accidental twice in a bar in close
succession is redundant (and I think I agree with her). To hide the
second
sharp, I've put \once \override Accidental #'transparent = ##t in front
of
it. Is this the preferred way of doing hiding that sharp?
I don't consider this a bug per se, but maybe LP can programmed to avoid
repeating accidentals in close succession in upcoming versions?
Sven
Is a tied note with Accidental after line-break "in close succession"?
Opinions differ.
Anyway, the documented method to use:
\override Accidental.hide-tied-accidental-after-break = ##t
I don't believe the OP is complaining about the sharp after the break:
rather the sharp on the last sounded note. That doesn't appear needed,
since we already have a sharp shown on the first note in the bar.
--
Phil Holmes
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
