Re: Reminder accidentals with octaviation

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> a chord is repeated an octave higher, which is indicated by an
> \ottava.
> Does the repeated chord need accidentals or not?
> Both accidentals in the first chord are necessary (not reminder)
> accidentals, so the repeated chord actually has _different_ notes and
> should need accidentals of its own. But somehow it seems ridiculous to
> print them again at the same staff position.
>
> Are there rules for this? Do you have any opinions?

My gut feeling would be to treat this exactly as if the 8va indication
would not be present, namely as notes of the same pitch.

Including adding accidentals if _indeed_ notes of the same pitch were
repeated one _visual_ octave lower.

But it's likely that someone has a book available where the gut feeling
of an actual expert would be spelled out.

-- 
David Kastrup