On Oct 11, 2010, at 11:22 PM, Graham Percival wrote: > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 04:32:48PM -0400, James Wilkinson wrote: >> On 9/23/10 6:00 PM, Vicente Solsona wrote: >> >>> if the dynamics are the same, it's better to write them just once. thus >>> you: >>> >>> 1) save typing >>> 2) help lilypond so it does't need to waste time guessing obvious things >>> and it can concentrate on the big stuff :) >>> >>> you just need to create a third voice with spacers and all the common >>> marks, in parallel with the other two: > > I'm not at all certain that's a good idea. The dynamics won't be > present in MIDI (which is probably no great loss), but more > importantly, it messes up the semantics for no particularly good > reason.
Maybe I misunderstand, but if I do: { << \relative c' { c4 d e f << { g a g f } \\ { e2 d } >> e4 f e d c1 } {s1\mf s4\< s\! s\> s\! s1\p s } >> } The dynamics show up in the MIDI. And if they're separated into variables, I can change the dynamics and the music independantly and easily, without fuss or muss. > >> Is there somewhere in the docs that I should have spotted this >> before doing it wrong the first time? > > If this was a good idea, it should be in (in the 2.13 docs) > Usage 5 Suggestions for writing files I extrapolated the idea from that, Using Variables to Save Typing. Or something like that. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user