Re: Proposed new available and recommended behavior of \relative

[Wim van Dommelen]

Regards,

Wim.

On 9 Mar 2013, at 05:45 , Keith OHara wrote:

Colin Hall <colinghall <at> gmail.com> writes:

In my early days with Lilypond I learned this to my cost. I've never

used \relative since then.

I stopped using \relative about a year ago, because absolute note entry is
vastly easier.

Not if you have a long stretch in the same "area". And then I start every page with an absolute note marks, it corrects and I see the complaints when I compile it.

When writing, I do not generally remember the previous note (more likely the
previous chord, or the first note in the previous phrase).  Even when I do,
for some reason determining whether I am moving more than a nominal fourth
takes some mental effort. LilyPond punishes a single mistake in this mental
effort by placing every following note in the wrong octave.

I do, however, have in mind the range of the instrument, and can \transpose
so that written c d e f g a b falls in the center of that range.  In
borderline cases I prefer putting the home octave a bit higher, because ,
is one keystroke for me while ' requires two.  Transposed absolute entry
puts me in control.

Agree, we should have an easy way to switch from absolute to relative (Yes, everthing inside \relative { } is relative, all other is absolute, I know), like: \absolute: from here on everything is absolute like \clef bass tells me: from here on display everything in the bass clef.

\relative c' {} might work better if applied to short passages, but I can
never remember to close the }.  Just after typing a note, I am not thinking
that I might soon forget what I just typed.  When I do forget, looking back
to remember is easier than going back to close the }.

What I alos do is the trick of reading things mentally in another clef. For example: I've re-written some (J.S. Bach) Gamba parts to a bass clarinet. Part of it is written in bass clef, part in tenor clef. I know how a tenor clef works, but I can't read it fluently. I just read it as it it where a bass clef and wrap it in a transpose block.

When I did use \relative c' {} it was a burden to think ahead "the first note
I want will probably be an f'', so the nearest C is c'' ".  The new proposal
for \relative {...} removes that burden.

I like the trick of having the first note as f=' for example and be able to use relative for the rest. That eases a lot.

David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:

Well, stuff can get rather wordy, and mixing \transpose c c''' in scores

together with \transposition was a recipe for audible surprises.  Quick:

The combination  \transpose c c, { \transposition bes \clef bass c' d' }  
means "Typed c' represents concert bes " in version 2.16.  In version 2.18
it will mean "Printed c' represents concert bes "  (the new way being more
consistent with the case where there is no \transposition setting at all).
Neither way is terribly confusing.  Both are details that I tend not to
remember, so I take a guess and adjust once after I see if the cue notes
come out right.

 Transposed absolute note entry rocks.   Relative note entry sucks.


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user