Re: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 121, Issue 70

[Arle Lommel]

Thanks Joram and others

On 2012 Dec 14, at 04:18 , Joram wrote:

A few remarks to your notes:
- The last [ should probably be opened after the fisis32.

Harm caught that. Something happened in my editing in my mail program where I messed that up.

- The 32 is necessary only once

I know, but in my code I try to be explicit about the note durations everywhere so that if I copy and paste bits around I don't ever have to worry about whether I have picked up a duration from somewhere else. Having the numbers doesn't hurt anything (other than making for more verbose code), so I tend to do that.

- The marked dis actually is in the same octave as the disis.

Again, I think I messed something up in putting it in my mail and didn't catch it. The snippet was actually a reduction from a much more complex original and I made the rookie mistake of not testing it rigorously after simplifying it. In the original it was an octave higher… I'll slap my wrist with a ruler now!

- You are right, the extra natural is shown by default (same octave).

I think what you want is extraNatural = ##t as shown here. I moved the
first disis to check if it is shown even in a different octave.

\version "2.16.0"
{
 #(set-accidental-style 'modern)  % accidentals in different octaves
 \set Staff.extraNatural = ##t    % extra natural (which is not modern)
 \stemUp
 dis32[ disis' eis fis] fisis[ gis gisis ais]
 e'![ dis cis ais] fisis[ dis cis ais]
}

I do not know how to make the sharp bold (I would consider that to be a
bit exaggerated, though).

No interest in that, although I rather suspect that was written with a smile at my expense ;-)

Thanks for looking at this. I now have a couple of solutions, the ad-hoc one Harm suggested and the generalized one you suggested. Both are useful. In the case of this piece, I am trying to recreate some inconsistent 19th-century engraving (which was particularly inconsistent with accidentals, to the point that in a few cases I am fundamentally uncertain what notes were actually meant and I now need to listen to recordings and try it out myself -- I don't have access to a piano right now, unfortunately -- to figure out what in the world may have been intended), so the ad-hoc solution was ideal, but I'll certainly keep your solution in mind for other pieces by the same composer where the engraving is more consistent.

Thanks,

Arle