On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Urs Liska <[email protected]> wrote: > Rereading David's post I realize I haven't completely understood him yet. > First he says it's mandatory then cautionary, responding to different parts > of my message. > So obviously I'm still not really clear about it.
i think i boils down to, "put the sharp in if you want to and don't bother what you're calling it." >> this is a case where i'd normally play a gis, then realise there's a >> natural at the beginning of the measure, then become confused and then >> try to work out what's correct from situational analysis. > > > Exactly, and there's also the natural in the vocal line, which makes it even > more confusing. i assumed that came from a tie beforehand (which doesn't make sense given the lyrics). :) like i said, monophonic guy... :D >> i always try to get parts which are as least confusing as possible. >> when re-engraving, this may mean moving away from how it was >> originally engraved, making the typesetting work somewhat more >> editorial (why else would we be re-engraving though?). > > > Actually I _do_ have the editor's hat and not the engraver's on in this > situation. > As a performer I know that I want a sharp in that place. > But as an editor I have to decide whether I am adding a cautionary > accidental or whether I am 'correcting an error' of the original edition ;-) it's your call then. but call it, "clarifying an inconclusive situation" of the original edition. ;) the music in the original is almost certainly formally correct, just unclearly notated. > BTW we decided to use cautionary accidentals _without_ parentheses in this > edition, because > a) the original edition did so too > b) we are heavily modifying the OE's decision in this respect which would > c) result in a score completely flooded with parentheses, which wouldn't > help _anyone_. > When we add missing mandatory accidentals they are parenthesized, however. > We know this differs from general practice, but anything else would be soo > ugly - and of course we have documented it sufficiently. ah, ok. the snippet you posted above _does_ look really good. is the slur from d, (LH beat 1) to g' (RH beat 3) original lilypond or tweaked? regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
