On Aug 29, 2012, at 5:06 AM, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi Curt,
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Francisco Vila <
address@hidden> wrote:
>> 2012/8/29 Curt <
address@hidden>
>>> The actual question is wondering if anyone thinks there is a
>>> better/clearer way to notate the following figure. Hands alternating, with
>>> melody in the pinky. The pattern continues throughout the piece (with
>>> different notes). Right hand stays in the same general location, right hand
>>> wanders down an octave or so at times.
>>
>> Now to your actual question: at first sight, beaming on 16ths suggests
>> same hand despite of being cross staff. In this case I would indicate
>> clearly R.H. on the 16ths in upper staff. It would be more kludgy but
>> also doubtless (on how to play it) to use alternate 16ths and silences
>> instead of cross beaming.
>>
>
> I think the way you notate this is perfectly clear. Distributing
> notes between the staves depending on which hand the player should use
> is expected in notation for the piano. (You can find many instances
> of this in Debussy's Preludes, for example). Indicating R.H. and L.H.
> shouldn't be necessary if the staff distribution makes this obvious,
> whether the cross-staff notes are beamed together or not (certainly a
> good idea here).
>
> The passage itself is not hard with alternating hands and 3-4-5 on the
> melody, but it's a different story with taking the accompaniment in
> the left hand. Though doable, I don't imagine that would be a
> pianist's first impulse!
>
> -David
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user