bug-lilypond
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Accidentals on repeated notes separated by rests in certain styles


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Accidentals on repeated notes separated by rests in certain styles
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:52:58 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux)

David Nalesnik <address@hidden> writes:

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: guoguocuozuoduo <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:13 AM
> Subject: RE: Accidentals on repeated notes separated by rests in certain
> styles
> To: David Nalesnik <address@hidden>
>
>
>>There should be for neo-modern, neo-modern-cautionary, neo-modern-voice,
> neo-modern-voice-cautionary, but not dodecaphonic-no->repeat.
>
> For the record, I think that all of the styles should suppress the repeated
> accidental, or none should.  It comes down to whether the same pitch
> separated by a rest should be considered an immediate repetition.  I think
> so.  Consider the following:
>
> { fis'4-. fis'-. }
>
> vs.
>
> { fis'8 r fis' r }
>
> It doesn't make much sense to me that there should be a difference in
> behavior between the two in any style which detects immediate repetition.

So what about

{ { fis'8 r8 r4 r4 r8 fis'8 } \\ { r8 cis'8 f' r2 } } ?

Should neo-modern-voice really consider the second fis'8 a repetition of
the first one?  I think that's stretching it.  A lot.

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]