On 7/20/2018 9:41 AM, Rutger Hofman wrote:
On 16-07-18 17:29, Ben wrote:
On 7/13/2018 2:25 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Ben,
I probably confused you with my wording, sorry! I just meant it's
above the staff when it's supposed to be (in rare situations where
dynamics are technically differe
On 16-07-18 17:29, Ben wrote:
On 7/13/2018 2:25 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Ben,
I probably confused you with my wording, sorry! I just meant it's above the
staff when it's supposed to be (in rare situations where dynamics are
technically different between the same instrument parts)...and
On 7/13/2018 2:25 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Ben,
I probably confused you with my wording, sorry! I just meant it's above the
staff when it's supposed to be (in rare situations where dynamics are
technically different between the same instrument parts)...and then it's below
for the part
On 7/14/2018 8:50 AM, Simon Albrecht wrote:
On 13.07.2018 19:48, Ben wrote:
\version "2.19.81"
fluteone =
\relative { e'4\ff( f g a) | \once \partcombineApart r4 f4 g f |
c'2~\pp c2 | f8 f e e f r f f |r1 | f4 g g g | c c c }
flutetwo =
\relative { c'2\p( d) e f r4 e r g c2 c
On 13.07.2018 19:48, Ben wrote:
\version "2.19.81"
fluteone =
\relative { e'4\ff( f g a) | \once \partcombineApart r4 f4 g f |
c'2~\pp c2 | f8 f e e f r f f |r1 | f4 g g g | c c c }
flutetwo =
\relative { c'2\p( d) e f r4 e r g c2 c2 c,4 c c c r1 c''4 c c }
There are two in
Hi Ben,
> I probably confused you with my wording, sorry! I just meant it's above the
> staff when it's supposed to be (in rare situations where dynamics are
> technically different between the same instrument parts)...and then it's
> below for the part 'extraction' single staff file. ;) Right?
On 7/13/2018 1:37 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Ben,
You're absolutely right. Wow. I just tried it with the example I gave earlier
w/ the two flutes. Sure enough, the pp dynamic is above the staff for the
full score but both pp are below for Flute 1 and Flute 2 separately.
Hmmm… It shou
Hi Ben,
> You're absolutely right. Wow. I just tried it with the example I gave earlier
> w/ the two flutes. Sure enough, the pp dynamic is above the staff for the
> full score but both pp are below for Flute 1 and Flute 2 separately.
Hmmm… It should appear below the staff in all cases, no
On 7/13/2018 1:00 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Ben,
If you have a full orchestra score, with Flutes 1 & 2 on one staff in the score
and also separated out parts via partcombine, where/how do you place a dynamic then
so that it applies to both locations without redundant markings?
The part-
Hi Ben,
> If you have a full orchestra score, with Flutes 1 & 2 on one staff in the
> score and also separated out parts via partcombine, where/how do you place a
> dynamic then so that it applies to both locations without redundant markings?
The part-combiner actually does a great job of mergi
On 7/13/2018 10:52 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
So what's the best way to do this in your opinion? Should every instance of brief rests
like this in one part but not the other be prefaced with "once...apart"
If I recall correctly, I settled on the fact that part combinations (and the related
On 7/13/2018 9:29 AM, Ben wrote:
Is there a way to input the notes in a better way to anticipate this
'bug' in partcombine?
I won't claim a "better way," but I'm used to considering each
appearance of a partcombine text (like "Solo" or "a2") as suspicious and
calling for closer inspection to
Hi Ben,
> it does seem rather difficult to be able to predict when you'll need the
> "once partcombineapart" in the music until you go to actually *combine* the
> parts in a staff, and see the missing rest(s), correct?
That’s what I’ve found. (Disclaimer: The part combiner has been improved —
On 7/13/2018 9:59 AM, Torsten Hämmerle wrote:
Hi Ben,
Combining two parts is not a trivial task and, sometimes, automatic
\partcombine will not produce optimal results.
*What has happened in your example?*
In measure 2, Flute 1 rests, and therefore, the e' is marked "Solo II", has
neutral stem
On 7/13/2018 9:48 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Ben,
Currently I'm struggling to understand why partcombine won't work as I expected
it to...for orchestral works, it's common to have, say 2 flutes, on the same
staff in the full score but for the parts, only print flute 1 and 2 on separate
p
Hi Ben,
Combining two parts is not a trivial task and, sometimes, automatic
\partcombine will not produce optimal results.
There are different cases when combining two parts in one stave:
*1. only one part plays, the other rests*
Write the active part only and mark it "Solo" or "Solo II" (these
Hi Ben,
> Currently I'm struggling to understand why partcombine won't work as I
> expected it to...for orchestral works, it's common to have, say 2 flutes, on
> the same staff in the full score but for the parts, only print flute 1 and 2
> on separate parts without the other music included.
>
Good morning,
I wanted to create a new thread which was inspired by my previous email
about voices-staves.
I figured a new thread could help more people this way.
Currently I'm struggling to understand why partcombine won't work as I
expected it to...for orchestral works, it's common to have
18 matches
Mail list logo
