Re: triple stop warnings

[Owain Sutton]

On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 09:20 +0000, Philip Potter wrote:
> 2009/12/11 Jay Anderson <address@hidden>:
> > I've done triple-stops like this in the past:
> > << c4 <g' e'>2.\fermata >>
> >
> > I'd prefer to do the triple-stop something more like this to avoid warnings:
> > <\tweak #'duration-log #2 \tweak #'dot-count #0 c g' e'>2.\fermata |
> >
> > Unfortunately I can't make the dot disappear easily (the dot-count
> > thing I was trying doesn't work). I could probably write a function to
> > remove the dot for this case (which might not be a bad idea:
> > \tripleStop <c g' e'>2.\fermata), but if there's a simple tweak to get
> > rid of the dot I'd be interested to know. Does this fall under the
> > recent \tweak nested properties changes? Thanks.
> 
> Is this notation something you've seen other music producers use? It
> sounds like you want a chord with a crotchet at the bottom and two
> fermata'd minims at the top; and you want to ignore the warning about
> the lower crotchet not being the same length as the minims. I'm not
> convinced that this is the best way to do what you want, but I'm not a
> string player so I'm not familiar with string music conventions.


This kind of thing is perfectly normal notation, as an explicit
instruction to arpeggiate a chord in a certain way - off-hand, examples
I can think of are in the last movement of Tchaik 5, and various points
in the Stravinsky violin concerto.