Thanks for all your answers. Yes I understand that a Pitch bend event (like aftertouch, channel pressure, etc) is a channel thing.
I rather thought about Lilypond being able to "look ahead|behind" like (I imagine is working) the "Melody_Engraver" to harmonise (no pun intended) the pitch shift up or down decision. \language "english" In my use case <gqs bqf> : - the gqs is the note g pitched upward. - the bqf is the note b pitched downward. To homogenise the output, I think the MIDI output should transform : <gqs bqf> → <atqf bqf> or equivalently <gqs bqf> → <gqs atqs> My workaround for now is to \tag #`midiOnly. \version "2.25.6" \language "english" \score { { <g' bf' d''> <gqs' atqs' dqs''> <g' bf' d''> <atqf' bqf' etqf''> <g' bf' d''> <gqs' bqf' dqs''> % < this not ok } \layout {} \midi {} } Le ven. 19 janv. 2024, à 11 h 50, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> a écrit : > > Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes: > > >> I have a branch (from a few years ago) where I changed LilyPond's MIDI > >> microtonality from using Pitch Bends (which is a bad idea when using > >> chords) to using MIDI 1.0 tuning information. This works fine IIRC as > >> long as you don't construct chords containing really close notes > >> (e.g. c and c+5 cents). > > > > Sounds great. Given that MIDI 2.0 is still rather new it probably > > makes sense to go this route. > > Well, to put LilyPond into a bit more of a perspective, we are at GM1 > level. Supporting GM2 would mean fast-forwarding all the way into the > distant year 1999 (for GM2 v1.2a, even to 2007). > > I actually use MIDI devices regularly that don't do GM2. > > MIDI 2.0, in contrast, is from 2020. It would be overoptimistic to > expect the average established musician to work with devices developed > as recent as that. And it's not unreasonable to assume that many of > those interested in using the kind of workflow LilyPond offers would > pass as "old-school" and have a leaning towards old-school devices, > regardless of what biological age their ID might pronounce. > > So in my book, offering support for GM2 _and_ other instrument/patch > schemes beyond GM1 would be more of a priority over going MIDI 2.0. > > -- > David Kastrup -- Pierre-Luc Gauthier