Re: (de)cresendi syntax

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 06:37:50PM -0700, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>> > - \cresc, \dim, \decr, \decresc produce a text without spanner, applies
>> > only once to the previous note, no need to finish with \! or \endcresc,
>> > this could be implemented with a \markup command
>> 
>> I don't like the idea of changing current syntax so dramatically, but I may
>> be in the minority here.
>
> It would certainly make the convert-ly rule a pain, or else raise
> howls of protest from people at the changing syntax.  :)
>
> Also, how would this version of \cresc work with MIDI volume?
> Would it just be an instant increase, or spread over a fixed 4
> notes, or what?
>
> I admit that MIDI volume is a fairly minor point in lilypond.

But one should not lose sight of it.  One reason is that MIDI might be
the most honest reflection of _meaning_ for a lot of musical features
(unfortunately, not including fingerings and a few other things), and
since we want to import/export not just to PDF but MIDI/MusicXML and
whatever, and since we want to be able to meaningfully transform input
(like being able to transpose it, or, say, tone down dynamics one notch
when handing over the recorder part to a trumpet), making changes that
render MIDI interpretation difficult might mean that we are moving to
visual rather than logical markup closer than appropriate for Lilypond.
I think it is one of Lilypond's strengths that it has a better
conceptual grasp of music than, say, MusiXTeX.

So it is a bad sign in my opinion when changes in the input are hard to
consistently make it to MIDI.

Even when one does not want to see MIDI as an output device (and I _do_
use it for accompaniment), it is nice for "proofhearing".

-- 
David Kastrup