Thanks Joram and others
On 2012 Dec 14, at 04:18 , Joram wrote:
> A few remarks to your notes:
> - The last [ should probably be opened after the fisis32.
Harm caught that. Something happened in my editing in my mail program where I
messed that up.
> - The 32 is necessary only once
I know, but in my code I try to be explicit about the note durations everywhere
so that if I copy and paste bits around I don't ever have to worry about
whether I have picked up a duration from somewhere else. Having the numbers
doesn't hurt anything (other than making for more verbose code), so I tend to
do that.
> - The marked dis actually is in the same octave as the disis.
Again, I think I messed something up in putting it in my mail and didn't catch
it. The snippet was actually a reduction from a much more complex original and
I made the rookie mistake of not testing it rigorously after simplifying it. In
the original it was an octave higher… I'll slap my wrist with a ruler now!
> - You are right, the extra natural is shown by default (same octave).
>
> I think what you want is extraNatural = ##t as shown here. I moved the
> first disis to check if it is shown even in a different octave.
>
> \version "2.16.0"
> {
> #(set-accidental-style 'modern) % accidentals in different octaves
> \set Staff.extraNatural = ##t % extra natural (which is not modern)
> \stemUp
> dis32[ disis' eis fis] fisis[ gis gisis ais]
> e'![ dis cis ais] fisis[ dis cis ais]
> }
>
> I do not know how to make the sharp bold (I would consider that to be a
> bit exaggerated, though).
No interest in that, although I rather suspect that was written with a smile at
my expense ;-)
Thanks for looking at this. I now have a couple of solutions, the ad-hoc one
Harm suggested and the generalized one you suggested. Both are useful. In the
case of this piece, I am trying to recreate some inconsistent 19th-century
engraving (which was particularly inconsistent with accidentals, to the point
that in a few cases I am fundamentally uncertain what notes were actually meant
and I now need to listen to recordings and try it out myself -- I don't have
access to a piano right now, unfortunately -- to figure out what in the world
may have been intended), so the ad-hoc solution was ideal, but I'll certainly
keep your solution in mind for other pieces by the same composer where the
engraving is more consistent.
Thanks,
Arle_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
