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 different between the same instrument
parts)...and then it's below for the part 'extraction'
single staff file. ;) Right?
Correct! In the score: dynamics unique to Flute 1 appear above
the staff, dynamics unique to Flute 2 appear below the staff,
and shared dynamics appear [once only] below the score; in the
parts: dynamics appear below the staff.
Magic. =)
K.
________________________________
Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website:www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email:address@hidden
Question please:
Say you have a large orchestral piece, and for the majority of
one movement the flutes 1 & 2 share the same music. Suppose
they have only about 5-10 measures out of several hundred
measures in the movement that are different, requiring separate
voices.
I know you can simplify and reduce typing of the music by using
variables and such, however I am wondering: how would you go
about setting up the instrument for Flutes 1/2, as well as Flute
1 and Flute 2? If you use temporary \\ backslash polyphony in
those measures, that won't translate to partcombine of course
(because they would 'live' in the same variable, so I can't do
\partcombine fluteone and have it work)...The only way to use
partcombine then, would be to have two variables correct?
So, how can you *not* re-type or copy-paste the music into the
other flute variable for partcombine? I'm looking at this the
wrong way I know, perhaps one of you could straighten me out.
I'd like to use partcombine throughout this piece so ideally I'd
like to keep the variables separate, but one movement out of the
many do not have the need for polyphony so I am unsure how to
proceed. But is it sometimes not advisable to use partcombine if
the ratio of polyphony is low? I'm wondering what the common
consensus is of when to use partcombine vs. when to manually
single-variable input everything << >> inline.
My policy in this kind of situation is to use \quoteDuring,
\partcombine and the
\partcombine{Apart,Chords,Unisono,SoloI,SoloII} commands, like in
this sub-minimal example:
\version "2.19.82" % some recent version
fluteI = { .... flute I and unisono music ... }
\addQuote fluteI { \fluteI }
fluteII = {
\partcombineUnisono \quoteDuring fluteI {
s1*33 | % duration of common music
} \undo partcombineUnisono
... different music for flute II ...
\partcombineUnisono \quoteDuring fluteI {
s1*33 | % duration of common music
} \undo partcombineUnisono
% etc.
}
Then the separate setup for parts and score:
parts:
\score {
\new Staff { \fluteI }
}
\score {
\new Staff { \fluteII }
}
full score:
\score {
\new Staff {
\partcombine
\fluteI
\fluteII
}
}
Beware that there are limitations here. quoteDuring cannot quote
quoted music, for instance, and the partcombiner, when switching
mode (Apart, Chords, Unisono etc), gets confused by spanner-type
stuff (hairpins, text spanners, etc).
Rutger
P.S. If you require that the flute parts are sometimes on one
staff, sometimes on 2, then you would want to get familiar with
the so-called divisi engraver, which makes use of the
Keep_alive_together_engraver, the VerticalAxisGroup.remove-layer
property and the utility function targetstaff.
Where is the documentation for the "divisi engraver"?
|