Re: Accidental and clef change issue

[David Kastrup]

"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

> "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote in message
> news:address@hidden
>> "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> \relative c' {
>>>  \clef bass cis2 c
>>>  \clef tenor cis2 \clef bass c  % natural is not printed!!
>>>  \clef bass cis2 \clef tenor c
>>> }
>>
>>
>> Could you _please_ _never_ write an answer or comment in the _signature_
>> of the original posting?  Sensible mailreaders don't quote the signature
>> when replying, cutting away all of your content.
>
> Apologies. As you're probably aware, I'm a Windows man, and some
> postings don't quote properly using my mailreader.

I am sure that there are sensible configurations available also for
Windows mailreasers.

> As a result, If I want all the > signs there, I have to put them in by
> hand.  In this case, I didn't bother.

You should at the very least delete the signature marker ("-- " on a
line of its own).

>> Now to your comment:
>>
>>> It's doing what I would expect from reading the regtest - i.e. - when
>>> there is a clef change, the accidentals are reset to that which you'd
>>> expect from the key.  Therefore, in your example we return to C major,
>>> and so there's no need to print the accidental.  I'd welcome other
>>> thoughts as to whether this is correct, though.
>>
>> I don't think it is correct.  If you set the above with \key g\major,
>> you will notice that the key signature is _not_ repeated with a clef
>> change.  So there is no visual or logical reason to assume
>> "accidentals are reset".  If that was the underlying assumption for a
>> clef change, the key signature would be repeated.
>
> So I'm confused as to what the regtest text cited means.  It
> (accidental-clef-change.ly) says "Accidentals are reset for clef
> changes."

Which is likely the intent.  It is still not proper in my opinion.  I
would suppose that a conservative approach would be to mark all
non-signature accidentals in force at the time of the clef change in a
manner that will cause a (sometimes cautionary) accidental to be printed
regardless of whether the next note on the previously
accidental-equipped is in-signature or not.

That's sort of a half-reset of accidentals: it sets all non-signature
accidentals basically to "unknown".

-- 
David Kastrup