Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - Draft 3

[Thomas Morley]

2012/10/8 Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>:
[...]
> Joseph mentioned scores in which tuplet style changes all the time.  I
> think that a proper solution to this problem is to create custom
> shortcuts for overriding TupletNumber style - this way you still have
> layout separated from score (i.e. one can easily turn these functions
> off; the layout decisions aren't hardcoded in the music code itself.

+1

> In my opinion, we need a powerful function that can be used to notate
> any conceiveable tuplet - that would be \tuplet x/y {}.  In addition
> to this, we may define some shorthands, but it's crucial that they are
> distinct from \tuplet x/y.  It should be obvious for everyone,
> including all LilyPond beginners right from the start, that \tuplet
> x/y is THE way to enter tuplets, and everything else is just a
> shorthand.

+1

> For
> example, a lot of guitar music is written in treble clef *without* 8
> below the clef.  From my point of view, this is extremely confusing,
> and a foolish thing to do.  You gain nothing by omitting the 8 - why
> hide the fact that the music is transposed?

Offtopic:
Being a guitarist myself, I'm irritated every time I see this.
Must be laziness of the typesetter.
But once I saw a bigband-part for guitar, notated with changing clefs
between bass and treble.
Well, it was the real treble, no transposition. That it was the real
treble was only understandable from the context.
Aarrgh!

[...]
> So, i believe that LilyPond shouldn't always follow her users'
> intuition, even if they are professional musicians.  In this case, i
> think that \tuplet 2/3 is better than \tuplet 3/2 (for 3 notes in time
> of 2), because it corresponds to mathematical ratio, and is similar to
> scaling durations.

+1

> Whoah, that was a long email.

:)

> cheers,
> Janek
>

-Harm