David Kastrup <[email protected]> writes:
> Marc Hohl <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Am 06.03.2014 18:00, schrieb David Kastrup:
>>> David Kastrup <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> So I'm now down to
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> and that's probably long enough I should spend on this distraction.
>>
>> What about
>>
>> << { r8 a' d e f\3 a\2 | <f\3 a\2 d\1>2\arpeggio } \\
>> { d,2.~ | d2 } >> r4
>>
>> for the final bars? The position change from the first to the tenth
>> fret remains the same but starts earlier and gives a nice line to
>> the topmost note of the final arpeggiated chord.
>>
>> Ok, just a nitpick ...
>
> Now that I was allowed to make a noise again, I checked that version.
> The basic idea is good. However, the arpeggio becomes redundant: there
> is no need to strike the notes again. If one did so, one better would
> restrike the bass note as well, but I think it's better just keeping
> them all on sustain without further notice.
>
> Definitely an improvement. I'll just have to cast this into code.
Not that hard. Except that with
<< { \set tieWaitForNote = ##t
r8 a' d e f\3~ a\2~ | <f a d>2 } \\
{ d,2.~ | d2 }
>> r4
the string indication on the first f is not really a mere matter of
style any more. So I probably should print it in the score. Which is a
nuisance as I suppressed the numbers staff-wide so far.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
