Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> writes: > 2015-10-08 15:40 GMT+02:00 Sven <lilypond-u...@hotmail.com>: >> 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
Ah, but he was not talking about the tied accidental after the break. He was talking about the accidental following the tied accidental after the break. Namely issue 649. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user