> Things like these should be easy in Lilypond, considering it's sheer >
flexibility and hackability. And if I were a composer writing in 5/6, > i
would probably be happy if I could just write "c2 d6 e6 |".
Except when it wouldn’t be easy to notate that way. In a 4/5 time what can
easily be notated as \tuplet 5/4 { c2 d4 e4 } (an incomplete tuplet, which is
what I would expect to see in print) would have to be notated as "c2,5 d5 e5"
using this other notation. Other irrational time signatures would need such
decimal numbers for some note values as well. It doesn’t seem to be more
practical to deal with decimals than just writing what you intend Lilypond to
print, in your case "c2 \tuplet 3/2 {d4 e }".
—Martín.
www.martinrinconbotero.com (http://www.martinrinconbotero.com)
>
> On Mar 26, 2021 at 10:23 PM, <David Kastrup (mailto:d...@gnu.org)> wrote:
>
>
>
> Christian Masser <christian.mas...@gmail.com
> (mailto:christian.mas...@gmail.com)> writes: > Just adding my two cents to
> this debate. In my humble opinion it's pretty > clear what "12" in this
> context means as Lilypond's syntax is always about > the divisor. c4 is
> always a quarter of a whole note. Therefore c12 would > always be a twelth
> of a whole note, thus a third of a quarter note. You mean, an eighth triole?
> Or an eighth sextuplet? > And c7 would always be a seventh of a whole note.
> How would this print? LilyPond does not only produce MIDI, you know. > With
> this in mind, why should input like "c3" yield an error if it's > otherwise
> very consistend with the syntax and definitely unambiguous? It is
> unambiguous? Is it a half note triplet? Or a sextuplet in 2/1 time? To be
> printed with a bracket or not? > (And the dots also don't pose problems in
> a mathematical sense, as > it's clearly defined, that one dot prolonges the
> note by a half of > it's value, two dots by a half and a quarter and so
> on.) You are confusing the sonics with the visuals. LilyPond would not be
> free to replace c4. c4. with \tuplet 2/3 { c4 c4 } and vice versa even though
> the MIDI would sound the same. > Things like these should be easy in
> Lilypond, considering it's sheer > flexibility and hackability. And if I
> were a composer writing in 5/6, > i would probably be happy if I could just
> write "c2 d6 e6 |". Problem is that LilyPond is not the one playing the
> music, but it produces a print that somebody has to play. And when there is
> no notation corresponding to the input, LilyPond will have a hard time
> suggesting how to play things. -- David Kastrup
>
>
