|
From: | Joseph Rushton Wakeling |
Subject: | Re: [GLISS] differentiating pre/post/neutral commands |
Date: | Wed, 12 Sep 2012 01:07:09 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120827 Thunderbird/15.0 |
On 11/09/12 13:04, David Kastrup wrote:
Basically every construct that we would be tempted to use <> or s1*0 for occasionally is one that is not really attached to a note, but rather to a moment in time. You can put it in parallel music without changing results. Most articulations with a shorthand can be attached to individual notes in a chord: those are really intrinsically attached to the note before, and it makes sense keeping that even if per-chord articulations can be placed into parallel music. But things like ( ) \( \) [ ] \p \< \! \> all happen at a moment in time in a voice. Why is a tempo change a separate event, but a dynamic change isn't?
This is starting to sound a bit like SCORE's approach, where various different aspects of the music (notes, phrasing, dynamics, ...) are described by separate, parallel sequences: see,
http://www.ccarh.org/courses/253/handout/scoreinput/Since you mentioned articulations: one of my personal bugbears with Lilypond has been the case of an articulation that occurs part-way through a given note. Consider e.g. the case of a half-note with a \turn that should occur on the second beat of that half-note. It's something which (unless things have changed in more recent versions, which I'm not aware of) is surprisingly difficult to achieve _effectively_ in Lilypond, because the presence of the offset articulation is not taken into account when calculating horizontal spacing.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |