Re: why does lily prints both a natural and sharp sign?

[Phil Holmes]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Xavier Scheuer" <address@hidden>
To: "Marc Mouries" <address@hidden>
Cc: "lilypond-user" <address@hidden>
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2011 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: why does lily prints both a natural and sharp sign?


> On 11 June 2011 14:57, Marc Mouries <address@hidden> wrote:
> > thanks for the info.
> >
> >
> > > This is standard typesetting rules.
> >
> > I have several copies of Debussy clair de lune in D flat and I have never
> > seen a natural sign before the g sharp
> > Here is an example on IMSLP:
> > http://imslp.org/wiki/Suite_Bergamasque_%28Debussy%2C_Claude%29#Clair_de_lune_.28No.3.29_2
> > Is there a place online where these rules can be looked up?
>
> I do not know it is "standard typesetting rules" that accidentals _at
> the key signature_ implies extra naturals, though.
> Some people have valuable (books) references, such as Ted Ross or
> Gardner Read, maybe they could check the "rules" concerning key
> signature and extra naturals.
>
> I am not aware of (free) online version of music typesetting rules
> (conventions), but again, maybe other users have advice.

I've looked at Ted Ross, Kurt Stone, Gardner Read and Elaine Gould and can't 
find any explicit mention of this.  The closest I can find is page 126 of my 
Gardner Read, where he shows the double-flat to flat transition as requiring 
a natural-flat sign to emphasise that it's a single flat.  You could argue 
that a sharp on a note which would normally be flat should have the same 
natural-sharp notation, to emphasise that you're not sharpening the note (to 
natural) but making it a sharp.

--
Phil Holmes