-- Knute Snortum
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 8:23 AM Stuart Simon <stuart...@gmail.com> wrote: > > LilyPond Users: > I'm running into a scenario where it would be useful to subtract three 128th > notes from a longer note's duration while having the longer note still appear > as a single note in the printed score. This is useful when I have a printed > score with three grace notes that I want to be played on the beat rather than > before it, but the grace notes are understood differently from both the > acciaccatura and the stereotypical "eighth-note with grace upper neighbor > plus two sixteenths equals four sixteenths" type of appoggiatura commonly > found in Classical-era music. Please do not stop reading this when I tell you > that this may be a feature request, for it may also be a simple exercise in > finding the right duration scale factor. > > When the longer note is a whole note, the case is very simple. The duration > is 1 * (1 - 3/128) = 1 * 125/128. > > When the longer note is a half note, the case is more complicated. In my > mind, the duration should be 2 * 61/64, but I don't know if that is correct. > > Similarly, when the longer note is a quarter note, the duration should be 4 * > 29/32. > > One more example, this one using a dotted duration. The duration of a dotted > quarter note is 3/8 of a measure, so the duration should be 4. * > ((1/128)/(3/8)) = 4. * 1/48. > > I still don't know if I am correct or not, but if I am, then it would ease > my mind a bit. The best way to test your theory is to create a tiny example: %%% \version "2.22.2" \relative c' { c128 d e f1*125/128 | c128 d e f2*61/64 f2 | c128 d e f4*29/32 f2. | } %%% That compiles without a barline warning, so it's correct. I didn't try your 4. duration example because I didn't understand it enough to write a good test -- but you can!