[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tempo mark alignment
From: |
Reinhold Kainhofer |
Subject: |
Re: Tempo mark alignment |
Date: |
Fri, 29 May 2009 09:50:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.11.3 (Linux/2.6.28-11-generic; KDE/4.2.3; i686; ; ) |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Freitag, 29. Mai 2009 05:13:28 schrieb Andrew Hawryluk:
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Neil Puttock <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Adding the context property to switch between the two alignments was a
> > quick hack with a serious limitation: if set to align with note
> > columns, tempo marks disappear completely when attached to
> > multi-measure rests.
> >
> > A proper solution should be able to determine automatically when to
> > attach the tempo mark to prefatory material (favouring time
> > signatures) or note columns.
>
> Would the 'automatic' alignment rule be something like this?
>
> if (tempo mark occurs on first beat of measure):
> align to prefatory material
> else:
> align to note column
>
> Or is that over-simplifying things?
No that's not really over-simplifying. Gardner Read says:
"Actual notation of tempo marks involves few problems. The general terms are
placed over the uppermost staff -- well above beams, flags, slurs and accents
--
at the beginning of the composition or at appropriate points during the course
of the music. The initial letter of the term (usually a capital) customarily
is aligned over the meter signature, or -- if none is present -- over the first
notational element of the measure, such as note-heads, accidentals, repeat
signs, and so on."
What Gardner Read does not describe is where it should go with mid-measure
tempo marks. I suppose the general rule should be to align to a time signature
(if present) and to the note column otherwise.
The problem with note column is the alignment on full- and multi-measure rests
(as I showed in my previous mail), since the rests are not printed at the
beginning of the measure but centered. In that case, I suppose the tempo mark
should be aligned somewhere at the beginning of the measure rather than at the
rest...
Cheers,
Reinhold
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
* Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
* http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
* LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFKH5PJTqjEwhXvPN0RAn8KAKCQApROBBlnG9hj59u2sl5NQtu+sQCgtR9o
Wo6oEXk/kK9q0MFRO9lYk3c=
=dsAm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), (continued)
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Anthony W. Youngman, 2009/05/23
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Ari Torhamo, 2009/05/23
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Tim McNamara, 2009/05/23
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Graham Percival, 2009/05/24
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Tim McNamara, 2009/05/24
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Anthony W. Youngman, 2009/05/24
- Re: Users versus developers (was: Tempo mark alignment), Graham Percival, 2009/05/24
- Message not available
- Re: Tempo mark alignment, Jay Anderson, 2009/05/23
- Re: Tempo mark alignment, Neil Puttock, 2009/05/27
- Re: Tempo mark alignment, Andrew Hawryluk, 2009/05/28
- Re: Tempo mark alignment,
Reinhold Kainhofer <=
Re: Tempo mark alignment, Valentin Villenave, 2009/05/23