Thanks for your reply. The samples from http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=954 look nice for solo pieces, but my use case is for multiple instruments. Imagine a rock band where the bass has 4 bars that will be repeated, but the rest of the instruments don't have repetitive bars. I've have seen this usage in rock songs for instance.
I understand the issue of having 2 empty bars and it seems like having a number above the percent repeat helps. Example: https://musescore.org/sites/musescore.org/files/finale%20four-bar.jpg I've found a workaround for this here: https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/11084/multi-measure-percent-repeats-in-lilypond it uses a simple ./. symbol but can be changed to a .//. by changing: 'PercentEvent to 'DoublePercentEvent still, 4 slashes would be nice. the default lilypond output was having the percent repeat symbol at the beginning of the 4 bar set and the remaining bars empty. is there a standardized approach for a 4 bar set repeat? (for a multi instrument piece) Best regards On April 4, 2016 3:10:19 AM GMT+09:00, Marc Hohl <[email protected]> wrote: >Am 03.04.2016 um 15:36 schrieb Thomas Morley: >> 2016-04-02 19:47 GMT+02:00 Daniel E. Moctezuma >> <[email protected]>: >>> Hello >>> >>> I was wondering if it's possible to have a percent repeat with 4 >>> slashes in LilyPond. Like an \override setting or similar. My use >>> case is when a set of 4 bars repeats n times, like: \repeat percent >>> 4 { c1 | d | e | f | } >>> >>> the most I can get is a double percent symbol .//. is there a way >>> to have .////. ? > >I remember vaguely that this issue has been discussed some years ago. > >The problem I see here is that you have two completely empty bars: > >| | .//|//. | | > >So it is not easy at first glance to understand what's going on here. > >I use this abbreviation for my handwritten manuscripts, but here I draw >the slashes wide and slanted enough to cover all four bars. > >These comments aside, it looks as if the underlying C++ routines could >indeed handle more than 2 slashes, but there is no way to call that >routine directly IIUC. > >>> >>> Best regards >> >> >> >> Apart from manually tweaking, I see no reasonable chance. But how >> about: http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=954 > >Looks promising and easy to read. > >Marc > > >_______________________________________________ >lilypond-user mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
