Re: lilypond-devel Digest, Vol 26, Issue 21

[Bryan Stanbridge]

<snip>
>Since I noticed (and moaned about) format-mark-letter omitting the
>letter I a few months ago, I've been looking for examples. And I have
>yet to find ONE. Of the thirty or so pieces I've played since then, if
>they had an H, it was followed either by an I or the end of the piece.
>And while I haven't looked especially, I think the use of bar numbers
>outnumbers the use of numbers as a rehearsal mark. So that's why the
>other one's necessary.

What we see is that this engraving standard has become bastardized by
both bands and orchestras increasingly since the 60s.  If you look at
the old band scores of Holst, for instance, especially those by B&H,
you'll notice they're also missing the "I."  The Hammersmith comes
to mind immediately as one that skips from H to J (though I can't
remember if that's a Boosey score or another publisher).  Modern
orchestras are using I more and more, but from a performer standpoint
I'd much prefer none of the media have adopted I.  Does it make sense
alphabetically?  Yes.  But in the middle of a rehearsal that's being
run very swiftly it's very easy to confuse I and J if it's not typeset
well.

Now, having said all that I think it's a good idea to have as much
flexibility as we can have if it doesn't create too much confusion in
implementation.  This seems straight-forward enough and as long as I
don't have to use it -- fine by me. :)

Cheers,
Bryan...