[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests
From: |
Brian Eve |
Subject: |
Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests |
Date: |
Mon, 2 Jun 2014 07:51:29 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) |
Urs Liska <lilyliska <at> googlemail.com> writes:
>
> Am 02.06.2014 09:33, schrieb Brian Eve:
> > {
> > \clef bass
> > \compressFullBarRests
> > \override Rest #'staff-position = #0
> > R1*6
> > <<
> > {
> > \voiceOne g4. f e4 }
> > \new Voice {
> > \voiceTwo e4. d d4 }
> >>> >>
> > \oneVoice a1
> > R1*6
> > <<
> > {
> > \voiceOne b8 }
> > \new Voice {
> > \voiceTwo e8 }
> >>> >>
> > r8 r4 r2
> > R1*6
> > R1
> > r
> > R
> > }
>
> No, it's because in that form of temporary polyphonc section the first
> of the parallel voices is continued after the >>
>
> In your example that's \voiceOne.
>
> So you have to provide a \oneVoice after the >>
> That's intended and documented behaviour.
>
> Best
> Urs
>
Thanks, Urs. I knew I was doing things too complicated. I fixed the
problem this much easier way:
\version "2.18.2-1"
{
\clef bass
\compressFullBarRests
\override Rest #'staff-position = #0
R1*6
<< g4. e >> << f d >> <<e4 d >>
a1
R1*6
<< b8 e8 >>
r8 r4 r2
R1*6
R1
r
R
}
- Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, Brian Eve, 2014/06/02
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, Brian Eve, 2014/06/02
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, Urs Liska, 2014/06/02
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, Phil Holmes, 2014/06/02
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests,
Brian Eve <=
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, Urs Liska, 2014/06/02
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, David Kastrup, 2014/06/02
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, James, 2014/06/14
- Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests, David Kastrup, 2014/06/14